Overview of US Law Book
Date of Publication:
Recommended Citation
Ellen S. Podgor and J. R. Swanegan (eds.), Overview of US Law (2nd ed., Carolina Academic Press, 2019)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
2019
Supreme Court News Article
Date of Publication:
Recommended Citation
Louis J. Virelli and David S. Rubenstein, Supreme Court News, 44 Administrative & Regulatory Law News 22 (2019)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Osha, the Opportunism Police Article
Date of Publication:
Recommended Citation
Jason Bent, Osha, the Opportunism Police, 2019 BYU L. Rev. 365 (2019)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
When is paternalistic regulation of risky work justified, and who should get to decide that question? The prevailing economic account of OSHA regulation is that market interventions are justified only by spillover and informational market failures. This article challenges that prevailing account by contending that worker safety regulations are also justified where necessary to enforce the relational expectations of employees, which are shaped not only by formal contract but also by social norms and norms internal to the employment relationship. Drawing on the relational theory of contract, this article identifies an underappreciated purpose for employment law: anti-opportunism. If preventing relational opportunism is a valid purpose for workplace safety law, then OSHA regulation is justified in a broader range of circumstances than has been generally assumed under more traditional analyses. This article contends that regulation is justified where necessary to prevent employers from engaging in self-interested behavior that runs contrary to the parties’ relational expectations. Applying this standard is a highly context-specific, fact-dependent task, which makes Congress' decision to delegate enforcement authority to OSHA appropriate.
Deregulating Corruption Article
Date of Publication:
Recommended Citation
Ciara Torres-Spelliscy, Deregulating Corruption, 13 Harv. L. & Pol'y Rev. 471 (2019)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
The Roberts Supreme Court has, or to be more precise the five most conservative members of the Roberts Court have, spent the last twelve years branding and rebranding the meaning of the word “corruption” both in campaign finance cases and in certain white-collar criminal cases. Not only are the Roberts Court conservatives doing this over the strenuous objections of their more liberal colleagues, they are also breaking with the Rehnquist Court’s more expansive definition of corruption. The actions of the Roberts Court in defining corruption to mean less and less have been a welcome development among dishonest politicians. In criminal prosecutions, politicians convicted of honest services fraud and other crimes are all too eager to argue to courts that their convictions should be overturned in light of the Supreme Court’s lax definition of corruption. In some cases, jury convictions have been set aside for politicians who cite the Supreme Court’s latest campaign finance and white-collar crime cases, especially Citizens United v. FEC and McDonnell v. United States. This Article explores what the Supreme Court has done to rebrand corruption, as well as how this impacts the criminal prosecutions of corrupt elected officials. This Article is the basis of a chapter of Professor Torres-Spelliscy’s second book, Political Brands, which will be published by Edward Elgar Publishing in late 2019.
What Does it Mean to be Sustainable: The Relationship Between Corporations and Indigenous People Book Chapter
Date of Publication:
Recommended Citation
Grant Christensen, What Does it Mean to be Sustainable: The Relationship Between Corporations and Indigenous People, in Cambridge Handbook of Corporate Law, Corporate Governance, and Sustainability (Beate Sjåfjell and Chritopher M. Bruner eds., Cambridge University Press, 2019)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Historically indigenous people have been mostly acted upon by corporations, but increasingly indigenous people are themselves emerging as corporate actors. With this emergence comes new perspectives on corporate law, corporate governance, and sustainability that reimagine the role of the shareholder, the responsibilities of the board, and the ethics of corporate action. Indigenous people enact their own autochthonous law to govern corporate behavior and enforce these laws in their own legal systems. As indigenous people emerge as corporate actors, they will learn from existing corporate behavior, but their chthonic approaches to corporate law and governance also have much to teach other communities about how to achieve sustainable corporate action. This chapter explores the unique indigenous perspective on corporations and sustainability.
Advocating for Science: Amici Curiae Brief of Wetland and Water Scientists in Support of the Clean Water Rule Article
Date of Publication:
Recommended Citation
Royal C. Gardner et al., Advocating for Science: Amici Curiae Brief of Wetland and Water Scientists in Support of the Clean Water Rule, 39 Wetlands 403 (2019)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
The Trump administration has proposed replacing the Clean Water Rule, a 2015 regulation that defined the statutory term "waters ofthe United States" to clarify the geographic jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act. Since its promulgation, the Clean Water Rule has been subjected to numerous judicial challenges. We submitted an amici curiae brief to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, explaining why the Clean Water Rule, and its definition of "waters of the United States," is scientifically sound. The definition of "waters of the United States" is a legal determination informed by science. The best available science supports the Clean Water Rule’s categorical treatment of tributaries because compelling scientific evidence demonstrates that tributaries significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of traditional navigable waters (primary waters). Similarly, the best available science supports the Clean Water Rule’s categorical treatment of adjacent waters based on geographic proximity. Compelling scientific evidence demonstrates that waters within 100 ft of an ordinary high water mark (OHWM) significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of primary waters, as do waters within 100-year floodplains and waters within 1500 ft of high tide lines of tidally influenced primary waters or OHWMs of the Great Lakes. This review article is adapted from that amici brief.
In-Lieu Fee Mitigation: Review of Program Instruments and Implementation Across the Country Book (Online)
Date of Publication:
Recommended Citation
Rebecca Kihslinger et al., In-Lieu Fee Mitigation: Review of Program Instruments and Implementation Across the Country (Environmental Law Institute, 2019)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Nationwide, in-lieu fee (ILF) programs provide a significant percentage of the compensatory mitigation available to offset permitted impacts to aquatic resources. This comprehensive report outlines the range of practice in ILF mitigation and describes innovative approaches across the country. The aim of this report is to support the development of effective mitigation programs by enhancing the capacity of state/local/tribal governments and others to develop or oversee ILF programs.
Neutralizing Access to Justice: Criminal Defendants’ Access to Justice in a Net Neutrality Information World Article
Date of Publication:
Recommended Citation
Ashley Krenelka Chase, Neutralizing Access to Justice: Criminal Defendants’ Access to Justice in a Net Neutrality Information World, 84 Mo. L. Rev. 323–70 (2019)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
This Article examines net neutrality and its impact on criminal defendants’ ability to access the courts — and justice — through access to legal information. Research in the American legal system has moved largely online, and print resources are becoming increasingly expensive and, therefore, scarcer. The move to online legal research presents difficult issues in light of the recent demise of net neutrality: If meaningful and speedy access to the Internet becomes dependent upon being able to afford an Internet “fast lane,” users will be divided into the haves and the have-nots. Criminal defendants will surely fall into the latter category, rendering their access to justice completely non-existent.
This Article will examine the legislation, regulations, and cases that brought net neutrality to the attention of the American public. It will examine how net neutrality and access to information are related, particularly in the criminal justice system. It will discuss the United States Supreme Court decisions that have impacted criminal defendants and the methods that defendants use to seek the justice and access to the courts. In detailing how the demise of net neutrality will directly harm the millions of Americans who are currently impacted by the criminal justice system — either as a defendant or as a family member or friend of one — suggestions will be made to ensure that criminal defendants retain access to justice.
A Look Back at Sierra Club v. Costle: Balancing Legal, Political, and Ethical Interests in Informal Rulemaking Article
Date of Publication:
Recommended Citation
Erin Okuno, A Look Back at Sierra Club v. Costle: Balancing Legal, Political, and Ethical Interests in Informal Rulemaking, 44 Administrative & Regulatory Law News 18 (2019)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Supreme Court News Article
Date of Publication:
Recommended Citation
Louis J. Virelli and David S. Rubenstein, Supreme Court News, 44 Administrative & Regulatory Law News 24 (2019)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.