Date of Publication:
Ashley Krenelka, Put Your Library on the Map, Part 3: Surrender and Success, AALL Spectrum Online (2013)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Will Bunting, Litigated Conflict over Fundamental Rights: A Static Model, 8 Economic Peace and Security Journal 5 (2013)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
This article introduces a static, within-country, game-theoretic model of litigated conflict over fundamental rights. The static model suggests that increased judicial interference in the determination of fundamental rights through democratic elections is never social welfare-increasing, even if judicial and political biases run in opposite directions (i.e., if the judicial process is biased in favor of one interest group and the political process is biased in favor of an ideologically-opposed interest group). In addition, the analysis identifies a set of parameters where social welfare increases if the extent to which the litigated conflict over fundamental rights in the society is constitutionalized is decreased (i.e., if litigation effort becomes more expensive and/or less effective). A few real-world examples of the implications of this static analysis are examined, including gun control and the possible future reconstitution of the judiciary in Syria.
Date of Publication:
Kirsten K. Davis, Inspecting, Not Just Expecting: Florida Supreme Court Adopts Code for Resolving Professionalism Complaints, AALS Professional Responsibility Newsletter (2013)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Jaclyn Lopez, The New Normal: Climate Change Victims in Post-Kiobel United States Federal Courts, 8 Charleston L. Rev. 113 (2013)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Christine E. Cerniglia, Is Experiential Education Simply a Trend in Law School or Is It Time for Legal Education to Take Flight?, 60 Federal Lawyer 42 (2013)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Peter Lake, Welcome to Compliance U: The Board’s Role in the Regulatory Era, 21 Association of Governing Board's Trusteeship Magazine (2013)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Peter Lake, What the New Campus Safety Center Can Accomplish, Chronicle of Higher Education (2013)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Ciara Torres-Spelliscy, Taking Opt-In Rights Seriously: What Knox v. SEIU Could Mean for Post-Citizens United Shareholder Rights, 74 Mont. L. Rev. 101 (2013)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
This article will explore the implications of the Supreme Court’s disparate treatment of similarly-situated, politically active corporations and unions. Two paths lead to more equitable treatment of these two groups: either (1) corporate political speech should be regulated more or (2) union political speech should be regulated less. This piece argues in favor of the former. In particular, corporate political spending lacks the transparency and consent mechanisms present in union political spending. Policymakers should address both of these failings in the corporate context.
The Roberts Supreme Court’s asymmetrical treatment of corporations and unions was on full display in the 2011–2012 term. American Tradition Partnership, Inc. v. Bullock coupled with Knox v. Service Employees International Union, Local 1000 demonstrates that a double standard persists between corporations, who are now privileged speakers in the Court’s eyes, and unions, who are currently disfavored speakers. The Supreme Court imposes different degrees of consent from corporations’ and unions’ constituent parts before they electioneer. Under U.S. law, corporations are not required to get consent from their shareholders before the corporate entity speaks politically using corporate funds. By contrast, public-sector unions must receive nonmembers’ consent before political spending in certain circumstances.
With the Supreme Court unlikely to change legal positions on this issue until the Court’s composition itself changes, the responsibility to foster more equitable regulations for corporations is left to the American electorate, Congress, the States, and executive agencies, such as the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), which must work within the boundaries of current precedent. The Supreme Court’s ruling in Knox requiring opt-ins for union political expenditures provides an additional basis for arguing that publicly traded American corporations should likewise marshal shareholder consent before corporate political expenditures are made.
Date of Publication:
Peter Lake, The College ‘Court’ Phenomenon, NASPA's Leadership Exchange (2013)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Roy Balleste and , Signs and Portents in Cyberspace The Rise of Jus Internet as a New Order in International Law, 23 Fordham Intell. Prop. Media & Ent. L.J. 1311 (2013)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Today, having sufficient access to the Internet's information has arguably become a prerequisite for the enjoyment of human life. The Internet has become a center for human literacy and has the potential to offer numerous kinds of instruction at lower costs and with higher quality than previous media could offer. This Article will argue that the concept of a "cybered Westphalian age," as a cure to all threats in the Internet, has the potential to do more harm than good. The international community is now faced with a possible policy shift from the current state of the Internet, which is one of shared knowledge, toward the active practice of censorship and filtered content, which will have devastating consequences.