Dean Nora Demleitner speaks this week in Boulder, Colorado at two events.
On Thursday, April 17, 2014, Silicon Flatirons Center at the University of Colorado sponsored “The Future of Law School Innovation“. Dean Demleitner joined panelists Melissa Hart (University of Colorado Law School), William Henderson (Indiana University) and Michael Moffitt (University of Oregon School of Law) in a discussion titled “Change Management: How Can Law Schools, Law Students, and Employers Develop a New Model.
On Friday, April 18, 2014 at the 2014 Associate Deans’ Conference Dean Demleitner participated in a panel titled “The Many Law School Constituents and the Role of an Associate Dean from the Dean’s Perspective.” The panel also included Barry Currier (ABA section of Legal Education) and Dean Dan Rodriguez (Northwestern University School of Law). It was moderated by Dean Kelly Testy of the University of Washington School of Law
Washington & Lee law professor Brian Murchison’s scholarship is cited in “Breathless and Burdened: Dying from Black Lung, Buried by Law and Medicine“. The report from the Center for Public Integrity won a Pulizer Prize in the Investigative Reporting category for its detailed analysis of controversial denials of black lung benefits to coal miners.
Professor Murchison’s 2002 article “Due Process, Black Lung, and the Shaping of Administrative Justice” is cited in Part 3 of the investigative series as it chronicles of the case of former coal miner Ted Latusek.
Read more of Professor Murchison’s scholarship here.
Washington & Lee law professor Timothy Jost published a new article in the New England Journal of Medicine titled “Obama’s ACA Delays – Breaking the Law or Making it work?” (with S. Lazarus). The article, published on April 2, 2014, discusses the legality of the Obama administration’s Affordable Care Act implementation delays.
Professor Jost also recently presented on the topic of health policy and the Affordable Care Act at the University of Pennsylvania, Harvard Medical School, Yale University, the National Conference of Insurance Legislators and The National Association of Insurance Commissioners.
Read Professor Jost’s contributions to Health Affairs Blog for his current analysis of implementing health reform.
Washington & Lee law professor Mark Drumbl spoke as a panelist at the recent annual meeting of the American Society of International Law. On Friday, April 11, 2014, Professor Drumbl joined other international criminal law scholars for a discussion entitled “Punishment and Sentencing in International Criminal Law”.
From the program:
International criminal law (ICL) has sought to establish effective mechanisms to hold accountable perpetrators of atrocity crimes and grave breaches of international humanitarian law. ICL sentencing, however, remains under-examined doctrinally, conceptually, and empirically. This panel will address various aspects of ICL sentencing, including an empirical assessment of the sentencing jurisprudence, the relevance and viability of the domestic experience with punishment, and the advancement of new theories and doctrinal frameworks sui generis to international criminal justice.
This is a subject Professor Drumbl explored in his book Atrocity, Punishment and International Law and continues to address in his scholarship. Read more of Professor Drumbl’s scholarship here.
Washington and Lee law professors Christopher Bruner and David Millon will speak on theories of the corporate form at the UCLA School of Law on April 11-12, 2014. Titled “Competing Theories of Corporate Governance,” the conference is sponsored by UCLA’s Lowell Milken Institute for Business Law and Policy and organized by Professor Stephen Bainbridge, UCLA’s William D. Warren Distinguished Professor of Law.
Over recent decades, a number of theories have been advanced to describe the balance of power between shareholders and boards of directors, on the one hand, and the aims toward which corporate decision-making ought to be directed, on the other. Professor Millon will critique one such theory, the “team production” model, and Professor Bruner will discuss the implications of various theories for judicial review of director decisions.
Director of the Law Library and Professor of Legal Research, Caroline Osborne is elected as Vice President/President-Elect of the Southeastern Association of Law Libraries.
Professor Osborne formally took office at the SEAALL Annual Meeting in Knoxville, TN on April 5, 2014. The position is a two year term during which Professor Osborne will serve as Vice President in 2014-2015 and President in 2015-2016.
Washington & Lee law professor Lyman P.Q. Johnson participated in an online symposium hosted by The Conglomerate on the topic of Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. and its companion cases. Professor Johnson was invited to join fellow corporate law scholars to debate both sides of the issues presented at the Supreme Court on March 25, 2014.
Professor Johnson’s contributions include:
Corporate Law in the Supreme Court, March 24, 2014
Religious Obligations in the Corporation, March 25, 2014
Corporate Law in the Arguments, March 26, 2014
The Supreme Court and Corporate Purpose, March 27, 2014
Read more of Professor Johnson’s scholarship here.
Washington & Lee law professor David Baluarte will speak at the Harvard Kennedy School on Tuesday, April 8, 2014. Professor Baluarte will participate in a panel discussion titled “Migrant Descendants in the Dominican Republic, Nationals or Foreigners?” with Jacqueline Bhabha and Bridget Wooding. The panel will address the impact of recent constitutional law reform on Sept 26, 2013, in the Dominican Republic that has effectively removed the right to nationality of over 200,000 Dominicans of Haitian descent.
Professor Baluarte joined Washington and Lee as an Assistant Clinical Professor of Law in 2013. He is the Director of the Immigrant Rights Clinic. Read more about Professor Baluarte’s scholarship here.
A review of Washington and Lee law professor Christopher Bruner’s recent book, Corporate Governance in the Common-Law World: The Political Foundations of Shareholder Power, has been published by the Texas Law Review. The review was authored by David Skeel, S. Samuel Arsht Professor of Corporate Law at the University of Pennsylvania Law School.
Professor Bruner’s book, published in 2013 by Cambridge University Press, examines the corporate governance powers possessed by shareholders in the U.S. and other common-law countries. Bruner finds, contrary to popular belief, that shareholders in the U.K. and other common-law jurisdictions are both more powerful and more central to the aims of the corporation than are shareholders in the U.S. Bruner’s theory is that relatively robust social welfare protections in countries like the U.K., Australia and Canada have freed up their corporate legal systems to focus more intently on shareholder interests without giving rise to “political backlash” – because other legal structures accommodate the interests of employees.
While “playing devil’s advocate” in his review, Professor Skeel concludes that “Bruner’s insights are a revelation,” and that the book “has identified a critical, new dimension of our understanding of corporate law.” Skeel adds:
Bruner’s claim that strongly shareholder-oriented governance—which sniffs of Wall Street rather than Main Street—is associated with robust social welfare protections—which sounds much more like Main Street—is both counterintuitive and plausible. Even if Bruner had not marshaled extensive supporting evidence, it would be a thesis that corporate law scholars, and perhaps social welfare experts as well, would need to grapple with. The elaborately detailed case that Bruner presents adds to its importance.
In the January 2014 issue of PS: Political Science & Politics, Washington & Lee visiting professor of law Todd Peppers was recognized for his article “Picking Federal Judges: A Note on Policy and Partisan Selection Agendas” (with M. Giles & V. Hettinger). Authors Salmon A. Shomade, Roger E. Hartley, and Lisa M. Holmes, in their article “Lower Federal Court Judicial Confirmation Fights: A Critical Review of the Empirical Literature and Future Research Directions” identified the work as the second-most influential political science article on lower court confirmation politics in the last twenty years. It has been cited over 200 times.
Professor Peppers co-authored and published “Picking Federal Judges: A Note on Policy and Partisan Selection Agendas” in Political Research Quarterly in 2001.
From the abstract:
The importance of lower federal courts in the policymaking process has stimulated extensive research programs focused on the process of selecting the judges of these courts and the factors influencing their decisions. The present study employs judicial decisionmaking in the U.S. Courts of Appeals as a window through which to reexamine the politics of selection to the lower courts. It differs from previous studies of selection in three ways. First, it takes advantage of recent innovations in measurement to go beyond reliance on political party as a measure of the preferences of actors in the selection process. Second, employing these new measures it examines the relative effects of the operation of policy and partisan agendas in the selection process. Third, a more complex model of selection is assessed than in most previous studies-one that expressly examines the role of senators and senatorial preferences in the selection process. The results clearly suggest that the politics of selection differ dramatically depending upon whether or not senatorial courtesy is in operation. The voting behavior of Courts of Appeals judges selected without senatorial courtesy is consistent with the operation of a presidential policy agenda. Among judges selected when senatorial courtesy is in play, the linkage between presidential preferences and judicial outcomes disappears.