Professor Sanders's latest publication, Uncapping Compensation in the Gore Punitive Damage Analysis, is now in print in the William and Mary Bill of Rights Journal. In this piece, Professor Sanders explores the effect of compensatory damage caps on the three part analysis announced in BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore, 517 U.S. 559 (1996). Professor Sanders focuses on the second Gore guidepost, the ratio between compensatory and punitive damages. Professor Sanders argues that Gore's reasoning is based on a false premise as it applies in states that have capped compensatory damages: that the plaintiff has been fully compensated for actual losses. Professor Sanders also notes that Gore fails to designate which compensatory damage award constitutes the proper starting point for inquiry -- the jury's award or the legislature's capped award. Professor Sanders advocates uncapping Gore where a state's procedures do not allow the trial judge the opportunity to review a civil jury's award for reasonableness or where the civil jury has no opportunity to affirm an award that exceeds the cap. Professor Sanders concludes that without such protections, Gore fails to advance its dual obligation in civil litigation to (1) protect defendants against unreasonably high awards and (2) guard severely injured plaintiff's against arbitrarily low awards. The citation to Uncapping Compensation is 24 Wm. & Mary Bill Rts. J. 31 (2015).