iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Reposted by Victor Y. Wu

Stanford Law Review @stanlrev.bsky.social · 01/09/2026

Ralph Richard Banks, Guy-Uriel Charles, Spencer Overton, and Victor Y. Wu argue that the principal framework for addressing AI-driven discrimination is disparate impact law, which is threatened by the Supreme Court’s embrace of colorblindness. www.stanfordlawreview.org/online/antid...

stanfordlawreview.org

Antidiscrimination Law in an AI-Pervaded World | Stanford Law Review

In their Essay introducing the Special Collection on Technology, Artificial Intelligence, and the Future of Civil Rights, Ralph Richard Banks, Guy-Uri

021

Reposted by Victor Y. Wu

Yusaku Horiuchi @yusakuhoriuchi.bsky.social · 18/06/2026

🎉 New article in Journal of Law and Courts with @victorywu.bsky.social, my former Dartmouth student and now a PhD/JD student at Stanford. It began as his independent study at Dartmouth. 👏 We show that Supreme Court composition shapes how Americans evaluate nominees. DOI: doi.org/10.1017/jlc....

0216

Victor Y. Wu @victorywu.bsky.social · 17/06/2026

New Paper 🚨 Journal of Law and Courts — with @yusakuhoriuchi.bsky.social We find that the public assesses SCOTUS nominees in light of the Court’s partisan composition: people weigh a nominee's party more heavily when their side is losing the Court, and less when it holds a secure majority. (1/2)

110

Reposted by Victor Y. Wu

Cambridge University Press Political Science & IR @cambup-polsci.cambridge.org · 17/06/2026

#OpenAccess from the Journal of Law and Courts - The Supreme Court’s Partisan Composition Affects How Americans Evaluate Nominees: Evidence from a Conjoint Experiment - cup.org/4xGjmOT - @victorywu.bsky.social & @yusakuhoriuchi.bsky.social #FirstView

042

Reposted by Victor Y. Wu

Victor Y. Wu @victorywu.bsky.social · 04/11/2025

New Paper 🚨 @natcomms.nature.com Three findings: 1️⃣ Co-partisan elites can boost climate-action intentions without increasing belief in climate change. 2️⃣ Climate frames work just as well for Republicans—no “backfire” effect. 3️⃣ Elites leading by example (CREDs) aren’t more persuasive.

Image of a Nature Communications article titled “Messages from co-partisan elected officials can increase climate mitigation intentions without changing climate beliefs.”

151

Victor Y. Wu @victorywu.bsky.social · 04/11/2025

151

Reposted by Victor Y. Wu

Victor Y. Wu @victorywu.bsky.social · 27/05/2025

New Paper 🚨 in the Stanford Law Review EPA has been violating the #CleanWaterAct for decades by approving 30+ state programs with inadequate criminal liability. EPA's new rule (effective 1/17/25) only continues to weaken environmental enforcement. papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....

031

Victor Y. Wu @victorywu.bsky.social · 27/05/2025

031

Reposted by Victor Y. Wu

Joshua Basseches @joshuabasseches.bsky.social · 31/03/2025

Excellent study from @victorywu.bsky.social, with an important implication for political strategy: " ... Communicating financial incentives and cost savings is crucial for promoting renewable energy adoption among Republicans and Independents." www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...

sciencedirect.com

Partisan energy preferences in the United States: Republicans prioritize price, Democrats also consider renewables

How does partisanship affect energy preferences in the United States? Using a nationally representative conjoint experiment (n = 1,862) to simulate Am…

073

Reposted by Victor Y. Wu

Adam Bonica @adambonica.bsky.social · 18/03/2025

1/🧵 Judges across ideological lines are ruling against Trump at strikingly similar rates (84% liberal, 86% centrist, 82% conservative). This isn't partisan opposition to Trump—it's the judiciary functioning as intended by cutting across partisan lines to uphold the Constitution.

Title: Both Liberal and Conservative Judges Rule Against Trump
Description: A scatter plot showing the rulings of judges against or in favor of Trump, categorized by ideology using the DIME score. The x-axis represents Judge Ideology (DIME Score), ranging from liberal (-1) to conservative (1), and the y-axis represents the case outcome (against or for Trump).
• Blue dots represent liberal judges, purple dots represent moderate judges, and red dots represent conservative judges.
• Some judges are labeled, including Rudolph Contreras, Lauren King, John Coughenour, and James Emanuel Boasberg on the liberal to moderate side, and Carl Nichols, Richard J. Leon, and Joseph N. Laplante on the conservative side.
• A note mentions that Boasberg, though slightly right-leaning, was initially appointed by George W. Bush.
• The visualization suggests that judges from both ideological backgrounds ruled against Trump.

188114993810

Victor Y. Wu @victorywu.bsky.social · 14/03/2025

New Paper 🚨 at ERSS How does partisanship affect energy preferences? My conjoint experiment shows that Republicans’ choice of energy mix is determined mostly by price, whereas Democrats’ choice is determined equally by price and by % of renewables. doi.org/10.1016/j.er...

031

Reposted by Victor Y. Wu

Victor Y. Wu @victorywu.bsky.social · 12/02/2025

New Paper 🚨 forthcoming at the Stanford Law Review EPA has been violating the #CleanWaterAct for decades by approving 30+ state programs with inadequate criminal liability. EPA's new rule (effective 1/17/25) only continues to weaken environmental enforcement. papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....

021

Victor Y. Wu @victorywu.bsky.social · 12/02/2025

021

Reposted by Victor Y. Wu

Brendan Nyhan @brendannyhan.bsky.social · 01/05/2024

New from @victorywu.bsky.social and my colleague Joe Bafumi blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/20...

051