This year, Maret students Evan Hernandez ’27 and Thomas Houghton ’27 achieved national recognition for outstanding legal scholarship. Their legal note, “The Alien Tort Statute and America’s Betrayal of Universal Justice,” was selected for publication in the National High School Law Review (vol. II, Summer 2026).

Evan and Thomas are among a core group of Maret students who have been deeply engaged in studying the law. The local Maret volume of the review includes six additional legal notes:

“Chatrie v. United States: Geofence Surveillance, the Third-Party Doctrine, and General Warrants in the Digital Age” — Aarosh Das ’27 and Evan Hernandez ’27

“Cruel Developmental Punishment: Harm to the Adolescent Brain Renders Juvenile Life Without Parole Unconstitutional” — Ayelet Magder ’27 and Francesca Russo ’28

“Cruel and Unusual Punishment and the Death Penalty” — Kathleen Hoppin ’27

“What ‘The People’ Should Mean in the American Constitution” — Kate Gerney ’28

“Shifting Sands: The Erosion of Trust in the Supreme Court” — Nina Lee Turner ’29

“Suspicion, Flight, and Police Power: The Erosion of Fourth Amendment Protections” — Violet Augustine ’29

The goal of the National High School Law Review program is to help students analyze complex societal issues and practice “agreeable disagreement” through legal writing. It offers numerous learning resources and hundreds of primary sources that allow students to explore constitutional law and Supreme Court precedents. The culminating competitive publication process celebrates the top student legal writing from across the country.

Evan and Thomas were particularly well prepared for this challenge. They were already involved in Debate Club and Model UN, which offered them opportunities to explore topics related to international law and to conduct the kind of involved research necessary for writing their note. Both also took the Civil Liberties Class taught by Assistant Head of School for Student Life Lynn Levinson.

Their legal note explores the relationship between international and domestic law in the United States and the consequences of not recognizing the fundamental principle of international law: "that some crimes are so awful that any country must punish them, or itself be considered complicit." 

Their note reviews the creation of the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) of 1789 under the Offenses Clause of the US Constitution, from which Congress derives its power to integrate international law into the US legal system. Their extensive research tracks the hesitancy of US courts to apply the ATS in numerous cases such as Filartiga v. Peña Irala in 1980, Kadic v. Karadzic in 1995, Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain in 2004, Nestle v. Doe in 2021, and Cisco v. Doe in 2026. 

Their note concludes:

In once again recognizing that international law is a universal obligation, and that crimes against humanity cannot be ignored, we fulfill the highest ideals of our founding: that humanity is equal and sacred, and justice and the rule of law are inalienable rights of humankind everywhere. If we as a nation are truly exceptional, that should not make us exempt from international law, rather it should make us its fiercest upholders.

The High School Law Review engages students at the highest level of legal inquiry, analysis, and writing, and a panel of Constitutional scholars selects the 12 finest notes from the many outstanding submissions. “To be chosen from this crowd is a truly impressive honor,” says Lynn Levinson. The summer 2026 volume of the review will be distributed to Justices of the US Supreme Court and legal experts.