Skip to content
Stetson Law Logo

Stetson Law plays role in Supreme Court decision on Clean Water Act case

A Stetson contingent attended oral arguments before the United States Supreme Court in November 2019. Pictured, from left: Stetson Professor and Director of the Institute for Biodiversity Law and Policy, Royal Gardner; attorney Kathleen Gardner of Pollack Solomon Duffy LLP; attorney David Henkin from Earthjustice who argued the case; 3L Kate Welch; and Erin Okuno, assistant director of Stetson’s Institute for Biodiversity Law and Policy.

Stetson Law professors and students can stake a claim in a Clean Water Act (CWA) case recently decided by the U.S. Supreme Court that has nationwide implications.

Last summer, Stetson Law’s Institute for Biodiversity Law and Policy filed an amici curiae (“friend of the court”) brief in the U.S. Supreme Court in County of Maui v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund et al. on behalf of aquatic scientists and scientific societies. On April 23, the Court referenced that brief in its 6-3 decision, which held that the CWA covers the functional equivalent of direct discharges of pollutants to navigable waters.

The ruling emphatically rejected the County of Maui and the Trump administration’s attempt to restrict the CWA to direct discharges of pollutants, which would have categorically excluded pollutants conveyed through groundwater, said Royal Gardner, director of the Institute for Biodiversity Law and Policy. It also validated and elevated the importance of science and its role in determining when and how the CWA applies.

“From our perspective, the decision emphasized that science matters,” Gardner said.

Background

The Clean Water Act is a federal law that regulates the discharge of pollutants to the nation’s waters, including lakes, rivers, streams, wetlands and coastal areas. At issue in the Maui case was whether the CWA requires a permit for the discharge of pollutants when the pollutants leave a source and travel through groundwater before reaching navigable waters. 

The Lahaina Wastewater Reclamation Facility in Lahaina, Hawaii (Maui County), discharges treated wastewater into the ground with its injection wells, which utilize the earth’s soil as a filter to further clean treated wastewater before it reaches a water source. However, a 2013 study confirmed the pollutants flowed underground from the treatment plant and reached the Pacific Ocean.

Environmentalists sued Maui County and prevailed in the U.S. District Court and Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Maui County requested the U.S. Supreme Court to hear and review the case. The county acknowledged the wastewater treatment facility is polluting the Pacific Ocean but argued the CWA covers only discharges directly to a surface water source and not a discharge to a surface water source through a groundwater pathway.

Connecting researchers with decisionmakers

Professor Gardner and Erin Okuno (assistant director of the Institute for Biodiversity Law and Policy) co-authored the brief with a team of attorneys that included Kathleen Gardner (Pollack Solomon Duffy LLP), Christopher Greer (White & Case LLP), and Dr. Steph Tai (University of Wisconsin Law School). The brief sought to explain basic hydrologic concepts, as well as the methods and tools scientists use to track pollutants in groundwater and surface water back to their source. The brief argued that science should inform the courts and agencies’ legal interpretation of when and how the CWA applies to pollutants that reach navigable waters.

Mark Rains, professor and director of the School of Geosciences at the University of South Florida, was one of several scientists who helped write the amici brief. His research is focused on hydrological connectivity and the role that science plays in informing water-related law, policy, and decision-making. He said water laws, in particular, can be challenging to understand because so much of what transpires with water is not visible because it is happening underground.

Rains said he was glad to be part of a team of experts who worked to illuminate that process so that the Supreme Court justices would be armed with the knowledge they would need to make an informed decision in the case. Ultimately, the decision was so well written and nuanced, Rains said, it was clear the justices understood and internalized much of the data in the amici brief.

“I told my students that it was a win for science,” he said.

Real world learning

The entire process—from collaborating on scientific and legal research, to blending scientific and legal writing, and observing the oral arguments before the Supreme Court in the fall—was also a win for students, both at Stetson and the collaborating universities. It created and will continue to provide a wellspring of learning opportunities.

“There’s tremendous value for students to see how the legal system plays out in real life and real time and how their professors play an active role,” Gardner said, adding that he provided updates on the case as part of the regular classroom coursework.

Justice Stephen Breyer’s decision also will provide a good example for legal research and writing classes on the use of text, structure, purpose, and legislative history in statutory interpretation, Gardner noted.

For Rains, he and his graduate students were able to see how traditional scientific prose could be tweaked and blended with legal writing to produce a finished product that was both accurate and effective. There may perhaps have been an even greater professional lesson: many in the scientific community believe they must remain disengaged from civic discourse to maintain the purity of their work. But impartiality and civic engagement don’t have to be mutually exclusive, Rains said. Scientists can contribute to civic discourse by sharing their work and thereby educating decisionmakers on how science can inform their efforts.

Domestic cats an invasive species? The last biodiversity lecture of spring 2020 examines the issue

Professor Arie Trouwborst’s presentation was titled, “Domestic Cats and International Wildlife Law – Turning a Blind Eye to One of the World’s Worse Invasive Alien Species?”

Arie Trouwborst, associate professor of environmental law at Tilburg University in Tilburg, the Netherlands, gave the final Edward and Bonnie Foreman Biodiversity Lecture of the spring semester on April 1 as part of the 20th International Wildlife Law Conference. The event, originally planned for two days on Stetson Law’s campus in Gulfport, switched to an entirely virtual platform because of the COVID-19 pandemic, so Trouwborst delivered his lecture via GoToWebinar.

His topic is a controversial one: Domestic Cats and International Wildlife Law – Turning a Blind Eye to One of the World’s Worse Invasive Alien Species?

Regardless of how one feels about Trouwborst’s research conclusions, one fact is indisputable: “Cats hunt and kill wildlife,” he said.

In the United States alone, cats kill billions of mammals and birds every year – much more than are killed by human-related causes such as wind turbines, power lines, and automobile collisions. A global study released in March 2020 found that pet cats kill between 4-10 times more wildlife per hectare than comparable native predator species.

“So forget that line that you often hear that pet cats are just playing the same role in the ecosystem that would otherwise be played by natural, native predators,” Trouwborst said.

Statistics on cat predation show they kill more than a billion birds in the United States alone.

The negative impact of domestic and feral cats goes beyond just killing. Other damaging effects include:

  • Disturbance or fear effects – for example, one study showed that briefly placing a taxidermied cat near a blackbird nest reduced subsequent feeding of their young by 1/3;
  • Competition – cats compete with other wild animals such as owls for small prey;
  • Disease – cats introduce rabies, feline leukemia and other diseases to native wildlife; and
  • Hybridization – cats mate with some wild species of cats, thereby affecting the gene pool.

What are the possible remedies? There are a few, but each has its own shortcomings.

  • Sterilization – It can stop cats from reproducing but does not halt many of their other damaging effects listed above;  
  • Fit cats with bells, brightly-colored bibs, etc. – Those may alert adult birds and mammals to a cat’s presence but are less effective on baby birds and mammals; and
  • Cat-proof fencing – It can be effective in protecting specific areas inhabited by vulnerable native wildlife, but it can also be expensive, impractical at a large scale, and still has a high failure rate.

The only thing that really works is simply keeping cats indoors at all times, Trouwborst explained. This has added advantages that pet cats won’t get diseases, be hit by a car, attacked by a coyote, or face other such risks when roaming free.

Statistics on annual bird mortality from various causes shows cats are responsible for more bird deaths than collisions with buildings or any other human cause.
Statistics on annual bird mortality from various causes shows cats are responsible for more bird deaths than collisions with buildings or any other human cause.

How do international wildlife laws address the issue? That’s what Trouwborst and his colleagues set out to learn. They quickly realized that laws are often unequally applied when it comes to cats. In the Netherlands, for example, the Egyptian goose is considered an invasive species and subject to eradication, but the feral cat may not be killed. A human must have a hunting license to kill certain birds, but there are no such restrictions against that same human’s pet cat killing said birds.

Trouwborst explained that dozens of international legal instruments have some applicability to cats, and they fall into three main categories: 

  1. Rules concerning invasive alien species – to prevent and control those that are harmful to native populations. Most such laws prevent the introduction of and/or control or eradication of those alien species that threaten ecosystems, habitats or other species.
  2. Rules concerning site protection – areas important to the conservation of specific species and protect them from damage or disturbance, including that caused by cats. Such obligations can be triggered when domestic cats pose a threat to any wildlife which the site in question is meant to protect.
  3. Rules concerning species protection – for example, Article 5 of the European Union’s Birds Directive prohibits the deliberate killing or capture of native birds by any method, the deliberate destruction of or damage to their nests or eggs, the taking of their eggs from the wild, and the deliberate disturbance of these birds during periods of breeding a rearing.

Trouwborst and his colleagues found that pet owners and decision makers have had no qualms about restricting essentially all other companion animals. Dogs, snakes, ferrets, etc. all must be under the owner’s control at all times. Yet cat owners are unwilling to restrict their pets, and government officials are unwilling to admit domestic cats are a problem, much less address it. Trouwborst and his colleagues hypothesized this reticence was motivated by fear of becoming unpopular with parts of their constituencies. They were proven right when they published their findings in November 2019 and February 2020.

Images of domestic cats with various prey, including birds, rabbits, mice and bats.
One of the slides from Trouwborst’s presentation shows the myriad prey domestic cats catch.

The researchers gave one exclusive interview, and soon after the story circulated, their phones wouldn’t stop ringing. Local, national and international media and social media went crazy. Their published research papers got more online traffic than all other law literature published last year, including papers on gun laws.

Aggression, ridicule and dismissal out of hand were the primary reactions. They also received vicious criticism and even death threats. Government officials in the Netherlands and the EU completely dismissed the scientific findings and even went so far as to dub Trouwborst and his colleagues “lunatic pseudo-scientists.”

Despite the backlash, Trouwborst remains confident in the research and conclusions. It is difficult to tackle most drivers of biodiversity loss, such as habitat degradation, climate change, and unsustainable agriculture. By comparison, addressing the free ranging cat problem is easy, he said.

“This is low hanging fruit, and it’s a shame not to pick it.”

Trouwborst likens people who are used to being able to let their cats out with people who were accustomed to being able to smoke cigarettes indoors. The change in practice was an annoyance for smokers, but it required balancing the individual’s freedom with that of others and the greater good. Smoking indoors was banned because of increased knowledge of public health effects. Trouwborst argues similar restrictions should be placed on cats because we now know their devastating effect on biodiversity.

20th International Wildlife Law Conference draws speakers from around globe despite pandemic

The 20th International Wildlife Law Conference was entirely online this year because of the coronavirus pandemic. All presentations are available on Stetson Law’s YouTube Channel.

By George Thurlow
Second-year Law Student
Stetson University College of Law

Stetson Law hosted the 20th International Wildlife Law Conference (IWLC-20) on April 1- 2, 2020, and the two days were packed with presentations from a variety of professionals involved in wildlife conservation, including lawyers, academics, and scientists on topics such as invasive species, trophy hunting, marine biodiversity, and climate change and its impact on wildlife treaties.

The COVID-19 outbreak forced the conference to move to an online-only format, but it kicked off with an opening presentation from Stetson’s own Paul Boudreaux, followed by the final Edward and Bonnie Foreman Biodiversity Lecture of the spring, and a mix of panels and keynote speakers.

The first keynote speaker, Dr. Mar Campins Eritja from the Universitat de Barcelona, discussed ITLOS’ Judicial Interpretation of the Precautionary Principle Within the Framework of the UNCLOS. (Acronyms are very common in the field of environmental law, so for the uninitiated, ITLOS is the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, and UNCLOS is the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.) Dr. Eritja discussed how these interact with the precautionary principle—essentially, if the impacts of something are unknown, a high degree of caution should be taken.

A slide from one of the panel presentations; all of the participants were great sports who adapted graciously to the online version of the conference.
A slide from one of the panel presentations; all of the participants were great sports who adapted graciously to the online version of the conference.

A law student panel on Wildlife and Animal Welfare followed Dr. Eritja’s presentation. It consisted of four presentations from law students in the United States and Canada, including one from Stetson student Kate Welch, J.D. ’20. These topics generally touched on threats to species that are facing some form of endangerment, from seals in Canada, to critical animals that are often seen as “vermin” on farms, to sharks, to trafficked animals (Welch’s topic). Welch’s interest in trafficked animals comes from experience she had at an elephant sanctuary in India the summer after her 1L year and subsequent involvement in Stetson’s environmental law programs.

Another panel featuring Professor Volker Mauerhofer of Mid Sweden University and Stetson student Emily Preu J.D. ’20 tackled the Challenges with Invasive Species and Other Wildlife.  The afternoon concluded with two presentations—one on China’s Wildlife Law and Public Health by Prof. Dr. Tianbao Qin and another on climate geoengineering by Dr. Wil Burns.

The title slide for Professor Dr. QIN Tianbao's presentation on China's wildlife law.
Professor Dr. QIN Tianbao’s presentation on China’s Wildlife Law in the Context of Public Health was of particular relevance. It begins at 3:20:28 on the Day 1 afternoon YouTube link.

Dr. Qin’s presentation was especially pertinent given the current theory that COVID-19 originated from animals in China and has since posed the greatest global public health threat in a century, while Dr. Burns’ topic was especially relevant in Florida. All of the day’s presentations, as well as the second complete day of the conference, can be viewed in three parts on Stetson Law’s YouTube channel.

Overall, it was an information-packed afternoon. When asked about the conference, Preu said it was “an awesome experience” and that “everyone really put together very thought-provoking presentations” despite the last-minute move online.

IWLC-20 was coordinated by the Institute for Biodiversity Law and Policy at Stetson University College of Law and co-sponsored by the Environmental Law Center at the University of Cologne, the Institute of Environment Education and Research at Bharati Vidyapeeth University, Tilburg University, and the University of Barcelona Faculty of Law. Stetson last hosted the conference in 2016; it was held in Barcelona last year. When this event is hosted at Stetson, it occurs in conjunction with the Stetson International Environmental Moot Court Competition.

View the entire conference on YouTube

Conference Agenda

Duo from India wins 24th Annual Stetson IEMCC in first all-virtual version of contest

Shilpa Prasad and Pranav Valiathan Pillai from National University of Advanced Legal Studies (NUALS) in Kochi, India, won the 24th Annual IEMCC. They are pictured here with the competition judges and Stetson Dean Michèle Alexandre.
Shilpa Prasad and Pranav Valiathan Pillai from National University of Advanced Legal Studies (NUALS) in Kochi, India, won the 24th Annual Stetson IEMCC. They are pictured here with the competition judges and Stetson Dean Michèle Alexandre.

The 24th Annual Stetson International Environmental Moot Court Competition (IEMCC) looked a little different this year because of the coronavirus pandemic, but 17 teams from 10 jurisdictions participated virtually over the course of three days, April 2-4, 2020.

Shilpa Prasad and Pranav Valiathan Pillai from National University of Advanced Legal Studies (NUALS) in Kochi, India, emerged as champions. Rayana Mukherjee and Aaditya Shankar Dixit from National Law Institute University in Bhopal, India, were runners-up.

NUALS also received the award for the best memorial, and all of the teams that participated in the virtual rounds received the Spirit of Stetson Award. The full results are below.

The competition was held in conjunction with the International Wildlife Law Conference this year, and both events were moved online in light of travel restrictions and social distancing. The conference presentations can be viewed in their entirety on Stetson’s YouTube Channel, and clips from the IEMCC are available on its Facebook page.

Students logged on at all hours as they competed from around the globe.
Students logged on at all hours—even 3 a.m.—as they competed from around the globe.

It was a community-wide effort involving many people and departments from Stetson Law, including Media Services, Communications and the Web Team, Faculty Support, International Programs, the Advocacy Center, the Office of Professional Education, and the Business Office to make the virtual versions of the events a success, said Royal Gardner, director of the Institute for Biodiversity Law and Policy.

“The students were very much appreciative,” he said, and shared an excerpt of an email from one of the competing teams.

After having booked our flights and made plans to meet you all in Florida, we were extremely disappointed to find out that the rounds had been canceled due to the pandemic. We were rather hesitant to even take part in the virtual rounds.

But after having gone through this unique virtual experience, we are truly overwhelmed with the kind of resilience, support, and patience your organizing team displayed. We cannot even imagine how difficult it must have been for you to coordinate with the judges, teams, and volunteers and take such tireless efforts to conduct this moot so smoothly. We had a wonderful time and every single moment was perfect. Please thank all the volunteers on our behalf.

Once again, thank you for spearheading these efforts and giving us this chance. It truly means the world to us.

24th Annual Stetson International Environmental Moot Court Competition

International Finals – Virtual Rounds

April 2–4, 2020

Oralist Awards for the Preliminary Rounds: 

  • Fifth Place Oralist: Rayana Mukherjee, National Law Institute University, Bhopal – 2000
  • Fourth Place Oralist: Lin Shi Yuan, National Taiwan University – 2083
  • Third Place Oralist: Beatriz Anna S. Balbacal, University of the Philippines College of Law – 2039
  • Second Place Oralist: Shilpa Prasad, National University of Advanced Legal Studies, Kochi – 2099
  • Best Oralist in the Preliminary Rounds: Urania Estrellita Amelia Remedios P. Lindo, University of the Philippines College of Law – 2039

Memorial Awards: 

  • Third Place Memorial: National Taiwan University – 2083
  • Runner-up Best Memorial: Ateneo de Manila University School of Law – 2040
  • Best Memorial: National University of Advanced Legal Studies, Kochi – 2099

Semifinalists: 

  • George Washington University Law School – 2009
  • Law Society of Ireland – 2032

Final Round: 

  • Runner-up: National Law Institute University, Bhopal – 2000
  • International Finals Champion: National University of Advanced Legal Studies, Kochi – 2099
  • Best Oralist in the Final Round: Rayana Mukherjee, National Law Institute University, Bhopal – 2000

Spirit of Stetson Award:

  • All teams that participated in the virtual rounds of the competition

View photos from the competition

A gallery of photos from the virtual rounds of the competition is available on Zenfolio.

Stetson Law ranked best school for Trial Advocacy in the U.S. for the 22nd time in 26 years

Stetson Law is ranked number 1 in Trial Advocacy and number 3 in Legal Writing from U.S. News & World Report 2021.

For the 22nd time, Stetson University College of Law is ranked the No. 1 school for Trial Advocacy in the United States, according to U.S. News & World Report. Stetson is ranked No. 3 for Legal Writing.

“It is a remarkable accomplishment to be ranked number one in Trial Advocacy for the 22nd time,” said Stetson University President Wendy B. Libby, Ph.D. “This steadfast dedication to excellence underlines Stetson’s commitment to a rigorous education where innovative faculty are deeply invested in ensuring our law students become outstanding legal advocates in their communities.”

This year marks Stetson Law’s 120th anniversary, and since its inception, the college has required its students to enroll in a practice court advocacy course. In fact, it is believed to be the first academic course of its kind at a law school. Through the Center for Excellence in Advocacy, Stetson continues to take seriously that legacy of molding practice-ready lawyers every day.

dean michele alexandre
Dean Michèle Alexandre

“Stetson has remained among the top programs in the country for Trial Advocacy for more than a quarter of a century and in legal writing for more than a decade,” said Stetson Dean Michèle Alexandre. “We are incredibly proud of these accolades, as they reinforce that our mission – to transform students into advocates who are compassionate, ethical, powerful, persuasive and overall committed to excellence, not only in the legal profession, but in service to their communities – continues to thrive.”

Just as important as trial advocacy, legal writing is a bedrock skill for any practicing lawyer. Stetson’s legal research and writing curriculum provides students the tools to hone their ability to complete sophisticated legal analysis and to write clearly and persuasively. The faculty, through Stetson’s Institute for the Advancement of Legal Communication, pursue scholarship and leadership in legal writing.

Kirsten K. Davis
Dr. Kristen K. Davis

“Our mission has always been to lead the way in legal communication,” said Dr. Kirsten K. Davis, director of the Institute for the Advancement of Legal Communication. “That Stetson ranks among the top legal writing programs in the country is feedback that our program is forward-thinking and our curriculum robust. We are thrilled.”

More information about Stetson’s nationally distinguished specialty programs is available online https://www.stetson.edu/law/academics/advocacy/home/ and https://www.stetson.edu/law/academics/lrw/.

Stetson BLSA competition teams place in top 3 in national contests

The Stetson BLSA Trial Team and Dispute Resolution Team with their coaches.
The Stetson BLSA Trial Team and Dispute Resolution Team members with their coaches. From left: Whitany Lewis, Abigail Dean, Emeraude Lerebours, Professor James Sheehan, Coach Justin Scott, Noel Gonzalez, Jasmine Mattear, and Conklin Howard.

Stetson Law’s BLSA Trial Team and Dispute Resolution Team extended the long green line of Stetson success with second and third places, respectively, in competitions at the 52nd National Black Law Student Association (NBLSA) Convention in Cincinnati, Ohio, March 6-8, 2020.

The Trial Team placed second overall out of 17 teams in the Constance Baker Motley (CBM) Mock Trial Competition, missing the title by a single point. The Dispute Resolution placed third out of 12 teams in the Nelson Mandela International (NMI) Negotiation Competition. The NBLSA hosts three competitions during the convention, and Stetson was the only school to place in the top 3 in more than one contest.

BLSA Trial Team
Noel Gonzalez, Emeraude Lerebours, Coach and alumnus Justin Scott, Jasmine Mattear, and Conklin Howard placed second in the trial team competition.

The students had to overcome some distinct hurdles: All of the team members were competition rookies; though Stetson BLSA teams have attended the CBM Trial Competition in the past, they made never made it to Nationals; and this was the first time Stetson BLSA competed in the NMI Negotiation Competition.

Trial Team members were Noel Gonzalez, Emeraude Lerebours, Jasmine Mattear, and Conklin Howard. Dispute Resolution Team members were Abigail Dean and Whitany Lewis. Stetson Alumnus Justin Scott and Professor James Sheehan served as coaches.

“I am grateful for the opportunity to coach this talented group of advocates – it makes coaching easy! None of this would have been possible without the vision and dedication of BLSA President Forest Sutton and the unrelenting support and dedication of Professor Julia Metts and the Advocacy Center,” Scott said.

BLSA Dispute Resolution Team
Stetson BLSA Dispute Resolution team Whitany Lewis and Abigail Dean took third at nationals.

It was Sutton, a veteran of Stetson’s Trial and Dispute Resolution teams, who sought to revive a Stetson BLSA contingent of competition teams, said Julia Metts, director of trial programs. 

“I couldn’t have been more excited to help,” Metts said. “I knew we could do great things, but I had no idea that the team would make it to Nationals in their first competition. And then be a finalist at Nationals!”

“Great things are possible when we give students, who have the courage to dream, the support to accomplish those dreams,” she continued. “Forest and the BLSA board organized tryouts, found a coach, supported the team during practices, and helped make this moment possible.”

Sutton, for his part, was just as pleased with the teams’ results this year and believes future students can build on the momentum.

“I couldn’t be more proud of each competitor who dedicated so much time and effort into developing their advocacy skills, but also representing BLSA at a national competition,” Sutton said. “To have gone out and made Stetson’s name known in a brand new setting is simply remarkable. Additionally, the support BLSA received from other students, faculty members, and alumna Brielle Tucker makes me optimistic about the success BLSA can build upon in the coming years.”

New Tax Innovators Exchange brings national tax experts to Stetson Law

EDITOR’S NOTE: This event was postponed due to COVID-19 and rescheduled to Nov. 13, 2020. Read about the new event here.

GULFPORT, Fla. – The Tax Law Society at Stetson University College of Law will present the Stetson Tax Innovators Exchange (S.T.I.X.) on March 31, 2020, featuring IRS Deputy Director Sunita Lough and renowned tax attorney Marc Simonetti.

S.T.I.X. is a new and forward-thinking tax law collaboration event focused almost exclusively on tax practitioners – those working in the trenches every day.  The nation’s top tax attorneys will dive into bleeding edge approaches to the practice of tax law and lead group discussions where practitioners can share challenges they face…and have a room full of the greatest tax minds in the country grab a white board and work the problem out with them.

This interactive seminar will feature topics that run the gamut, but the overall goal is to ensure attendees leave armed with useful new techniques to advance not only their practice, but the field itself.

The first event in this innovative annual series will feature presentations by:

  • Sunita Lough, the new IRS Deputy Commissioner of Enforcement and Services –  A graduate of George Mason University Law School with an LLM in Taxation from Georgetown University School of Law, Lough has filled a variety of roles in her 25 years with the IRS.
  • Marc Simonetti, partner with Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP – Recognized by Chambers USA: Guide to Leading Business Lawyers in the area of tax, Simonetti is well known for his expertise in state and local taxation.

This event is sponsored by the Tax Section of The Florida Bar. Cost is $40 and includes two CLE credits and refreshments, followed by a networking opportunity with open bar.

Register online at https://cvent.me/9aOW57?RefId=TAX                                                   

For more information, contact Stetson Tax Law Society board member Eric Allen Kauk, at [email protected] or by phone at (813) 203-0208.

Florida panther’s dramatic tale subject of latest biodiversity series lecture

Watch the complete lecture online here or on Stetson Law’s YouTube channel.

By Taylor Allyn

On Feb. 27, the Stetson Law community welcomed writer Craig Pittman to speak as a part of the Foreman Biodiversity lecture series. Pittman is a native Floridian and an environmental reporter for the Tampa Bay Times. He has written five award-winning books– his most recent work is titled Cat Tale: The Wild, Weird Battle to Save the Florida Panther.

Pittman has covered the Florida panthers for years in his capacity as a reporter, and the more he learned, the more he became fascinated by the animals. He began his talk by describing what he believed to be a statue of a panther in the State Archives in Tallahassee. It was only later that he realized the statue was a real stuffed panther and what’s more, it had a name – Florida Panther 3. Its death was a tragedy and would be the catalyst for a radical conservation effort.

But before completing that tale, Pittman explained the earliest inhabitants of the state regarded these panthers as divine beings – cats of god. In the Seminole tribe, all medicine men are members of the panther clan. Early settlers in Florida called them lions and catamounts and were deeply scared of them. In the 1800s, sportsmen came to Florida just to shoot and kill panthers. They became so rare they were only ever seen in roadside zoos. By 1958, state officials banned panther hunting, but not before the damage had already been done.

Roadside zoos in Florida were some of the only places left to see a live panther after hunters and development drove them to the brink of extinction, Pittman explained.
Roadside zoos in Florida were some of the only places left to see a live panther after hunters and development drove them to the brink of extinction.

In the later part of the century, state officials focused on saving the panthers. The Florida panther was on the first endangered species list promulgated by the Endangered Species Act. Environmental activists rallied to oppose the construction of an airport in Big Cypress Swamp because it was one of the only place where panthers still lived. However, many believed the animals to be completely gone – hunted to extinction. A tracker from Texas was hired to see if he could find any surviving panthers in Florida. He found one scrawny female and signs of more, estimating there to be about 20 left.

After that, the state Game Commission designated a biologist to lead studies about the panthers, publicizing the search and raising awareness. In the 1980s, the state Education Commissioner wanted local schoolchildren to pick the official state animal, and the children overwhelmingly voted for the panther.

Pittman then explained where Florida Panther 3 fit into the story. It’s predecessor, Florida Panther 1, was the first panther to have a radio collar installed as part of an initiative to track their travels. Florida Panther 3 was fitted with a collar whose batteries began to malfunction. When the animal was recaptured to replace the batteries, a tranquilizer dart pierced its femoral artery, and the panther died. According to Pittman, this changed the public sentiment toward panthers – at least one person suggested, “just stop bothering them and let them go extinct.”

Tampa Bay Times reporter Craig Pittman explains how Nathaniel Reed was a Florida native and co-author of the Endangered Species Act.
Tampa Bay Times reporter Craig Pittman explains how Nathaniel Reed was a Florida native and co-author of the Endangered Species Act.

Instead, a veterinarian was assigned to tag along on some of these captures, and she began to notice oddities in the animals – genetic defects as a result of their small population. She noticed the panthers had tails kinked at a 90 degree angle, and later examinations uncovered reproductive issues and holes in their hearts.

After that, faced with the prospect of the extinction of the newly crowned state animal, state officials took more aggressive action. A captive breeding program was initiated and subsequently halted by a lawsuit filed by animal activists. The lawsuit was settled on the condition that only six kittens be captured – three male and three female. Unfortunately, all the kittens had the same genetic defects.

That’s when officials decided to try something drastic: to bring in another type of cougar to breed with the Florida panthers. That same hunter who located the remaining panther population was tasked with capturing and transporting eight female cougars from Texas to release in Florida. Meanwhile, the federal government was handing out permits to developers “the way they toss beads out at Gasparilla,” resulting in further destruction of panther habitats, Pittman said. The permits were later exposed by a whistleblower to be based on junk science.

The battle to preserve panther habitat, protect them from automobile deaths on Florida highways, and maintain continued population growth, is ongoing. Pittman wrapped up his talk by sharing a bit of positive news. Thanks to the breeding program, panther populations now are estimated to be 10 times their original number of 20. It’s not nearly enough to say the animals are recovered, and they still face threats, including from the proposed toll road that would cut right through their habitats. However, the animals remain extremely adaptable, and they are constantly surprising those who study them, he said.

Stetson Law’s Vis International Arbitration Moot team advances to competition in Vienna

Stetson Law’s Vis International Arbitration Moot team won the Richard DeWitt Memorial Vis Pre-Moot competition in Miami on Feb. 29, 2020. From left: Huda Awan, Audrey Gangloff, Melissa Micceri, Prof. Stephanie Vaughan (coach), Joe Cuffel, Devin Dudley, Pedro Aranguez Diaz, Clare McQueen (student coach) and Prof. Joseph Morrissey (coach).

Stetson University College of Law’s Vis International Arbitration Moot team won the Richard DeWitt Memorial Vis Pre-Moot on Saturday, Feb. 29, 2020, in Miami. The victory prepares the team to advance to the Willem C. Vis International Commercial Arbitration Moot competition in Vienna in early April.  

Team members are Huda Awan, Melissa Micceri, Devin Dudley, Audrey Gangloff, Pedro Aranguez Diaz, and Joe Cuffel. This was the first competition for Awan, Diaz, Dudley, and Micceri, and the first dispute resolution competition for Gangloff, who is also a member of the Moot Court Board. Cuffel was the lone veteran on the team. 

Professor Joseph Morrissey, Professor Stephanie Vaughan, and student Clare McQueen coached the team. McQueen was part of last year’s team that advanced to the Elite 8 in Vienna. They said the competition was especially fierce this year, with international (Finnish Lapland University) and out-of-state (American University Washington College of Law and Tulane Law School) teams joining the usual Florida schools. 

The Florida Bar International Law Section hosts the Richard DeWitt Memorial Vis Pre-Moot for teams competing in the Willem C. Vis International Commercial Arbitration Moot competition in Vienna and Hong Kong. The day-long event includes four rounds between the competing law schools with seasoned practitioners serving as arbitrators. The event gives students an opportunity to practice and sharpen their skills by presenting and defending their legal arguments and receiving feedback from some of the best practitioners in international law. 

Students must argue the jurisdictional, procedural and substantive issues raised by the case before a panel composed of practitioners, under the applicable international treaties and rules. The subject matter of the competition is typically a controversy that arises out of a dispute governed by the United Nation’ Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods.   

Town hall meeting lets students, staff weigh in on Campus Climate Survey

Dean Michèle Alexandre, far left, takes a question from Stetson Law student Kia Tolbert during the town hall meeting on the Campus Climate Survey.
Dean Michèle Alexandre, far left, takes a question from Stetson Law student Kia Tolbert during the town hall meeting on the Campus Climate Survey.

By Molly Kaelin

Dean Michèle Alexandre hosted a town hall meeting to discuss the Campus Climate Survey with students, faculty, and staff in the Great Hall on Feb. 18. The informal gathering gave participants a chance to express concerns and exchange ideas.

The Campus Climate Survey is currently open for students faculty and staff; the deadline for completion is March 6. The purpose is to gauge the institution’s progress on becoming a more diverse, equitable and inclusive community and identify new initiatives that could be implemented or any action areas that should be addressed.

Wonderful changes can come from our collective voice, and we need continued participation in the survey for this reason, Dean Alexandre said.

“This is something that can be meaningful, and you can tell your honest truth.”

The survey is confidential. Submitted surveys go directly to neutral third party provider, Pryor Education Insights, which will compile and analyze the data. Results will be available in the fall, and Dean Alexandre hopes to have representatives from the company on campus to explain the findings.

The last campus climate survey was conducted in 2016, and it led to such programs as the Food Pantry and Sexual Health Resource Area and the identification of gender-neutral bathrooms on campus, as well as the creation of a Diversity and Inclusion Committee and Staff Advisory Committee. That year, the response rate from the College of Law (including students, staff and faculty) was 34 percent. This year, Dean Alexandre said she hopes to have at least 50 percent participation.

Professor Lance Long said they hope to have robust student participation in the Campus Climate Survey.

Professor Lance Long, a member of the Diversity and Inclusion Committee, beseeched students to take the time to complete the survey.

“We really want more input from the students,” he said. “They’re why we exist.”

During the meeting, students expressed the need for more involvement in the community – specifically, the school’s need to reach out to local organizations such as the St. Petersburg Bar Association and other similar organizations. The emphasis was on going out in the legal community and not merely inviting people to speak or network on campus. More visibility will only lead to more opportunities for Stetson Law students and the College of Law overall, students said.

Other student concerns included greater support for students that commute and students with families, as well as easier access to member of the administration. Faculty and staff concerns centered on tension between different departments and staff changes. There was a request to have staff change information available in real time. With these needs voiced, the College of Law can now work to address them.

Dean Alexandre reiterated the best way to have your voice heard in a confidential manner is to fill out the survey before the March 6 deadline. Check your email for a link to the survey or pick up a paper copy in the Student Affairs office.

Photos by Law Student Emmanuel Bonilla.

Culverhouse Chair Devon Carbado hosts class on critical race judgements

Culverhouse Chair and UCLA Law Professor Devon Carbado lectures on critical race judgements in a special class for students on Saturday, Feb. 8, 2020.
Culverhouse Chair and UCLA Law Professor Devon Carbado lectures on critical race judgements in a special class for students on Saturday, Feb. 8, 2020.

By Brittany Given
Stetson Law 3L
Feb. 14, 2020

Devon Carbado, distinguished UCLA law professor and author, returned to Stetson Law on Feb. 8, 2020, as the new Culverhouse Chair to teach “Critical Race Judgments: Critical Race Theory and Supreme Court Decision making.”

Carbado launched the Saturday morning class with a racial determination exercise where he first described one parent as black and another parent as white. He then asked students to classify the child as black, white, biracial, multiracial, or other. He repeated this exercise multiple times with different combinations of the child’s parents including white, black, Latino, and Asian. The takeaway from this exercise was to see that society does not take into account how a person identifies himself or herself. Rather, society primarily views people based on their physical features.

At the end of the exercise, Carbado posed the question: Should people have the right to choose their own race? It was a topic he would circle back to at the end of the class.

This icebreaker segued into a discussion on the landmark 1954 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education, which declared that racial segregation in public school was unconstitutional. It was a decision that went against the will of the majority Americans and an achievement that was not without controversy. Carbado explained that progress has not been linear, but rather can be described as ebb and flow. When slavery was abolished, there was a backlash and Jim Crow laws were enacted. After the victory in Brown v. Board of Education, more lynchings started to occur. When the Civil Rights Act was passed, many people and businesses resisted integration.

Students participated in a special Culverhouse Chair lecture.
Students participated in a special Culverhouse Chair lecture.

The class discussion about the ebb and flow of progress led Carbado to explain the concept of “racial math.” Slavery produced racial inequality. Then there was some civil rights intervention during the period of Reconstruction. If you take the racial inequality and subtract the civil rights intervention during Reconstruction, Carbado explains that you can only get two possible answers: The first answer is that there is zero racial inequality. The second answer is that there is still some racial inequality. After Reconstruction, most everyone agrees there was still some racial inequality, and Jim Crow laws increased the divide, but Brown v. Board of Education helped offset some of the inequality. Still, society was left with some racial inequality rather than zero racial inequality.

Carbado continued in this vein, going through much of the history of the United States and giving examples of when more racial inequality was added and when some racial inequality was subtracted. His point was that there has never been a moment in our history when the intervention has been enough to completely clear the slate or to have zero racial inequality. The accumulation of racial inequality has been a problem over hundreds of years.

After providing students this historical context, Carbado then broached how race is a social construction. He broke it down into five parts: The first part is the moment when people say that race matters now. People agree that race is a thing that is recognized. The second part is when people decide the relevant categories of race, such as black, white, or yellow. He encouraged students to look at the U.S. census over the years because there have been different racial categories over time. The third part is to determine what criteria to employ to stick people in the categories. Phenotype hasn’t been the only criteria used. Language, accent, and demeanor also are used to place people into racial categories. The fourth part is to map some experience such as slavery, freedom, or internment. The final part is to assign meanings to the different groups, such as those enslaved are inferior. Race, he said, is bound up with questions of social meaning.

Carbado will return to Stetson and continue teaching this course over spring break. Anyone interested in learning more about the topics can read his book, Acting White? Rethinking Race in “Post-Racial” America.

Superior Court Judge Tangela M. Barrie receives Wm. Reece Smith, Jr. Public Service Award from Stetson

The Hon. Tangela M. Barrie was the 2020 recipient of the Wm. Reece Smith, Jr. Public Service Award.
The Hon. Tangela M. Barrie was the 2020 recipient of the Wm. Reece Smith, Jr. Public Service Award.

The Hon. Tangela M. Barrie received the Wm. Reece Smith, Jr. Public Service Award during the annual Inns of Court Banquet at Stetson University College of Law on Feb. 5, 2020.

The prestigious Wm. Reece Smith, Jr. Public Service Award recognizes individuals who have provided outstanding contributions to public service, the justice system, and the community.

Judge Barrie, a 1997 Stetson Law alumna, is the youngest Superior Court judge ever elected to the circuit court in DeKalb County, Georgia. Elected in 2008 at the age of 35, Judge Barrie handles felony cases ranging from theft to murder and a civil case load that includes adoptions, divorces, and more. In 2015, she was selected as Chief Judge for DeKalb County Superior Court and continues to serve as the presiding judge of Division 10 of the Stone Mountain Judicial Circuit.

With her strong family roots and commitment to community safety, Judge Barrie has dedicated herself to educating and empowering the community. She is an ardent advocate for young lawyers, offering an active Intern in Chamber Program.

“She has mentored me and other young lawyers active with the bar, teaching points of law and a commitment to professionalism in our field,” wrote Marisa Cioffi Dunn, a 2017 Stetson Law graduate who works as a staff attorney in Judge Barrie’s chambers and who nominated her for the award.

Judge Tangela Barrie speaking during the annual Inns of Court Banquet.
Judge Tangela M. Barrie speaks during the annual Inns of Court Banquet.

Prior to taking the bench, Judge Barrie was assigned to the DeKalb County District Attorney’s Office Domestic Violence/ Sexual Assault Unit. There, she worked vigorously advocating for the safety of women and other victims and was selected the 2007 Prosecuting Attorney of the Year for the successful prosecution of her cases.

Judge Barrie has received many other accolades throughout her career, all marking her devotion to bettering her community. For example, she earned:

  • The Boundless Commitment to the Community Award from the DeKalb County District Attorney’s Office in 2006;
  • The Bensonetta Tipton Lane Award in 2009 from the Georgia Association of Black Women Attorneys for her tireless dedication to family safety;
  • The DST 2016 Public Policy Change Agent Award from Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc.; and several others.

She is an active member of numerous service organizations, such as Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc. and the National Council of Negro Women. She is also on the board of various professional organizations, including the Wade Walker YMCA of Decatur and the Georgia Association of Black Women Attorneys.

“As a law clerk, I observe Judge Barrie’s courtroom almost daily,” Dunn wrote. “She is an excellent jurist with a  deep  knowledge  and understanding of the law. My favorite attribute of Judge Barrie is that she always does what she believes is right, never compromising her integrity to take an avenue that may be easier. Judge Barrie has taught me what it means to be a public servant, as she has committed her life and career to public service.” 

Dean Michele Alexandre with The Hon. Judge Tangela Barrie.
Dean Michèle Alexandre with The Hon. Tangela M. Barrie

Judge Barrie’s tireless work in her community is truly in keeping with the spirit of and inspiration for the Wm. Reece Smith, Jr. Public Service Award. Smith was a legendary Florida lawyer who dedicated more than 60 years to the legal profession, working to increase the legal services available to people who could not afford them. He was a member of the Stetson University College of Law Hall of Fame, joined the Stetson University College of Law faculty in 1954, and was named a distinguished professorial lecturer in 1991.