Commenting and Conversation Article
Date of Publication:
Recommended Citation
Kirsten K. Davis, Commenting and Conversation, 22 Second Draft 14 (2007)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Kirsten K. Davis, Commenting and Conversation, 22 Second Draft 14 (2007)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Ellen S. Podgor, The Impact of Criminal Sanctions on Corporate Misconduct, 2 J. Bus. & Tech. L. 119 (2007)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Kristen David Adams, Blaming the Mirror: The Restatements and the Common Law, 40 Ind. L. Rev. 205 (2007)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Kirsten K. Davis, The Rhetoric of Accommodation: Considering the Language of Work/Family Discourse, 3 U. St. Thomas L.J. 530 (2007)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
The language used to describe work-family issues reflects certain ways of thinking about the interconnectedness and segmentation of work and family. "Accommodate" or "accommodation" is a word that is often used in discussions about policies that apply to work and family. This article uses a cluster method of rhetorical analysis to look at the history of "accommodation" in legal discourse. It concludes that the use of the word "accommodation" in other legal contexts can constrain the ways of envisioning the roles, relationships, and possibilities for work and family in discussions about work-family policies.
Date of Publication:
Peter Lake, Higher Education Called to Account: Colleges and the Law after Virginia Tech, Chronicle of Higher Education 53 (2007)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Kristen David Adams, The American Law Institute: Justice Cardozo’s Ministry of Justice?, 32 S. Ill. U. L.J. 173 (2007)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
This paper explores an influential reform agenda - the notion of a Ministry of Justice - advanced by Justice Benjamin Nathan Cardozo, one of the American Law Institute's founding members. The article in which Justice Cardozo introduced the concept of a Ministry of Justice was published in the Harvard Law Review the very month that the exploratory committee was formed that ultimately recommended the formation of the American Law Institute, and two years before the Institute itself was founded. This article explores the extent, if any, to which the reform agenda that Justice Cardozo propounded in this famous article was fulfilled by the founding of the Institute.
Date of Publication:
Joseph F. Morrissey, Rhetoric and Reality: Investor Protection and the Securities Regulation Reform of 2005, 56 Cath. U. L. Rev. 561 (2007)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Amidst all the recent publicity surrounding government action in combating corporate wrong-doing (passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the prosecution of the top brass at Enron and other scandal-ridden companies) little attention has been focused on the dramatic reform of the securities regulations that was enacted in late 2005. This article attempts to survey and assess the merits of that reform.
The new regulations essentially provide that most companies no longer have to comply with basic restrictions on the securities offering process that have been the cornerstone of the securities regulatory regime since its inception in 1933. Chief among these restrictions are those pertaining to communications. Where communications have traditionally been widely curtailed during a new offering of securities to the public, the new reforms now allow most companies to communicate with the public relatively freely. Further, the heightened liability that attached to communications prior to the reforms will not apply to the new free communications. In the name of efficiency the restrictions and heightened liability have been eliminated. At the same time, I will argue, investors actually are being left more vulnerable to potential manipulations of corporate wrongdoers. In addition, the article will directly call into question whether the SEC has in fact exceeded its rule making authority by altering so dramatically the very character of the regulatory regime that the Securities Act sought to construct.
Date of Publication:
Michèle Alexandre, Lessons from Islamic Polygamy: A Case for Expanding the American Concept of Surviving Spouse So As to Include De Facto Polygamous Spouses, 64 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. 1461 (2007)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
While polygamy. is illegal in the United States, forms of it are still practiced either overtly, pursuant to religious traditions, or covertly, by the maintenance of two or more family units. As a result, any claims, disputes, or abuses that arise in the context of de facto polygamous unions remain irremediable. My focus, in this Article, is not to advocate that polygamy should be legally recognized. Nor is it my purpose to debate the viability or of polygamy. Instead, I am concerned with affording legal remedies for vulnerable individuals living and operating in de facto polygamous unions. In light of the thousands of individuals living in some form of multi-party unions, I propose that it is imperative to construct adequate legal options remedies for the parties involved in these unions. In this Article, I evaluate how a women-centric interpretation of the Qur'anic treatment of Islamic polygamy might help us assess how to best protect American women involved in de facto polygamous unions. In addition, I advocate a redefinition of the concept of the surviving spouse in American estate distribution will help to legally protect de facto spouses in the inheritance context. Finally, I further propose that the common law marriage doctrine be used to help prove the existence of de facto polygamous unions.
Date of Publication:
Paul Boudreaux, Biodiversity and a New Best Case for Applying the Environmental Statues Extraterritorially, 37 Envtl. L. 1107 (2007)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
The federal courts have applied a presumption that environmental statutes do not apply to conduct overseas. Efforts to overcome this presumption through the supposed intent of Congress have largely failed. This Article argues for a new best case for applying environmental laws extraterritorially, focusing on the Endangered Species Act's powerful section 7. This best case would assert that (1) the overseas action affects interests within the United States, such as the interest in preserving biodiversity for future needs, and (2) the action would not create a clash with the expectations of foreign governments or culture.
Date of Publication:
Paul Boudreaux, A New Clean Water Act, 37 Envtl. L. Reporter News and Analysis 10171 (2007)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
The Supreme Court’s new federalism has struck its strongest blows so far on the Clean Water Act. In 2007, a sharply divided Court nearly struck down a large chunk of the Act’s protection of wetlands and other small waterways – five years after an earlier decision had narrowed the reach of the Act because of its supposed overreaching into state prerogative. Why has the Clean Water Act been the Court’s favorite target? One reason is that the statute was fatally flawed when enacted. Congress chose to cover "navigable waters," but its practical definition has never been clear. The result is a statutory and jurisprudential mess, with lessons that extend across issues of constitutional law, statutory construction, and, of course, federalism. This article proposes to jettison the Act’s reliance on the misguided term "navigable waters." Instead, the statute should directly regulate activities that substantially affect interstate commerce, such as fisheries, migratory birds, floods, and agriculture. An Act whose limits are tied to the law of the commerce power would be shielded from the federalist ax.