Washington and Lee School of Law professor Mark Drumbl is an invited speaker at the 7th annual International Humanitarian Law Dialogs, co-sponsored by the Robert H. Jackson Center at the Chautauqua Institution.
The Dialogs are a historic gathering of renowned international prosecutors and leading professionals in the field of international criminal law. This three-day event, held August 25-27, will allow participants and the public to engage in meaningful dialogue concerning past and contemporary crimes against humanity, and the role of modern international criminal law.
The topic for this year’s Dialogs is “The Hot Summer After the Arab Spring: Accountability and the Rule of Law.” Prof. Drumbl will address the work of all the international criminal tribunals this year, focusing on accomplishments and challenges.
Drumbl notes, “It is also important to view as challenges those places where international criminal law does not yet reach, for example Syria, where the Security Council’s efforts have been bogged down with politics. On the other hand, it is also important to be mindful that a couple of criminal prosecutions will not deliver justice and create peace. To assume otherwise is wishful thinking.”
THE CENTER FOR LAW, ECONOMICS & FINANCE (C-LEAF)
THE GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL
Fourth Annual JUNIOR FACULTY BUSINESS AND FINANCIAL LAW WORKSHOP
AND JUNIOR FACULTY SCHOLARSHIP PRIZES
Sponsored by Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP
CALL FOR PAPERS
The Center for Law, Economics & Finance (C-LEAF) at The George Washington University Law School is pleased to announce its fourth annual Junior Faculty Business and Financial Law Workshop and Junior Faculty Scholarship Prizes. The Workshop and Prizes are sponsored by Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP. The Workshop will be held on February 7-8, 2014 at GW Law School in Washington, DC.
The Workshop supports and recognizes the work of young legal scholars in accounting, banking, bankruptcy, corporations, economics, finance and securities, while promoting interaction among them and selected senior faculty and practitioners. By providing a forum for the exchange of creative ideas in these areas, C-LEAF also aims to encourage new and innovative scholarship.
Approximately ten papers will be chosen from those submitted for presentation at the Workshop pursuant to this Call for Papers. At the Workshop, one or more senior scholars and practitioners will comment on each paper, followed by a general discussion of each paper among all participants. The Workshop audience will include invited young scholars, faculty from GW’s Law School and Business School, faculty from other institutions, practitioners, and invited guests.
At the conclusion of the Workshop, three papers will be selected to receive Junior Faculty Scholarship Prizes of $3,000, $2,000, and $1,000, respectively. All prize winners will be invited to become Fellows of C-LEAF.* C-LEAF makes no publication commitment, but chosen papers will be featured on its website as part of the C-LEAF Working Paper series.
Junior scholars who have not yet received tenure, but have held a full-time academic appointment for less than seven years as of the submission date, are cordially invited to submit summaries or drafts of their papers. Although published work is not eligible for submission, submissions may include work that has been accepted for publication. C-LEAF will cover hotel and meal expenses of all selected presenters.
Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP, one of the leading law firms serving the financial services industry and known for its premier practice in the area of private investment funds and private equity M&A, generously sponsors the Junior Faculty Scholarship Workshop and Prizes and provides other financial assistance to C-LEAF.
Those interested in presenting a paper at the Workshop should submit an abstract, summary or draft, preferably by e-mail, on or before October 4, 2013. To facilitate blind review, your name and other identifying information should be redacted from your paper submission. Direct your submission, along with any inquiries related to the Workshop, to:
Professor Lisa M. Fairfax
Leroy Sorenson Merrifield Research Professor of Law
George Washington University Law School
2000 H Street, NW
Washington, DC 20052
Papers and Junior Faculty Scholarship Prizes will be selected after a blind review by members of the C-LEAF Executive Board. Authors of accepted papers will be notified by November 15, 2013. Please feel free to pass this Call for Papers along to any colleagues who may be interested.
On August 22, Prof Brian Murchison lectured on the 2012-13 U.S. Supreme Court Term at a meeting of the Federal Bar Associaction’s chapter in Roanoke. Murchison discussed some of last Term’s leading cases, including the split decisions on California’s Proposition 8 and the Defense of Marriage Act; the challenge to the constitutionality of the Voting Rights Act of 1965; the University of Texas affirmative action case; and the challenge to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
In addition, Murchison previewed the Recess Appointments Clause case that the Court will hear in the coming Term, and discussed another case the Court may review, involving a Free Exercise Clause attack on the Affordable Care Act. This was Murchison’s second visit to an event sponsored by the FBA, which includes members of the Roanoke bench and bar.
Earlier this month at the blog Concurring Opinions, Danielle Citron reviewed Washington and Lee law professor Margaret Hu’s article, Biometric ID Cybersurveillance, 88 Indiana L.J.__ (forthcoming 2013), available at SSRN. Here is an excerpt of the review:
Professor Margaret Hu’s important new article, “Biometric ID Cybersurveillance” (Indiana Law Journal), carefully and chillingly lays out federal and state government’s increasing use of biometrics for identification and other purposes. These efforts are poised to lead to a national biometric ID with centralized databases of our iris, face, and fingerprints. Such multimodal biometric IDs ostensibly provide greater security from fraud than our current de facto identifier, the social security number. As Professor Hu lays out, biometrics are, and soon will be, gatekeepers to the right to vote, work, fly, drive, and cross into our borders. Professor Hu explains that the FBI’s Next Generation Identification project will institute:
a comprehensive, centralized, and technologically interoperable biometric database that spans across military and national security agencies, as well as all other state and federal government agencies.Once complete, NGI will strive to centralize whatever biometric data is available on all citizens and noncitizens in the United States and abroad, including information on fingerprints, DNA, iris scans, voice recognition, and facial recognition data captured through digitalized photos, such as U.S. passport photos and REAL ID driver’s licenses.The NGI Interstate Photo System, for instance, aims to aggregate digital photos from not only federal, state, and local law enforcement, but also digital photos from private businesses, social networking sites, government agencies, and foreign and international entities, as well as acquaintances, friends, and family members.
Such a comprehensive biometric database would surely be accessed and used by our network of fusion centers and other hubs of our domestic surveillance apparatus that Frank Pasquale and I wrote about here.
Biometric ID cybersurveillance might be used to assign risk assessment scores and to take action based on those scores. In a chilling passage, Professor Hu describes one such proposed program:
FAST is currently under testing by DHS and has been described in press reports as a “precrime” program. If implemented, FAST will purportedly rely upon complex statistical algorithms that can aggregate data from multiple databases in an attempt to “predict” future criminal or terrorist acts, most likely through stealth cybersurveillance and covert data monitoring of ordinary citizens. The FAST program purports to assess whether an individual might pose a “precrime” threat through the capture of a range of data, including biometric data. In other words, FAST attempts to infer the security threat risk of future criminals and terrorists through data analysis.
Under FAST, biometric-based physiological and behavioral cues are captured through the following types of biometric data: body and eye movements, eye blink rate and pupil variation, body heat changes, and breathing patterns. Biometric- based linguistic cues include the capture of the following types of biometric data: voice pitch changes, alterations in rhythm, and changes in intonations of speech.Documents released by DHS indicate that individuals could be arrested and face other serious consequences based upon statistical algorithms and predictive analytical assessments. Specifically, projected consequences of FAST ‘can range from none to being temporarily detained to deportation, prison, or death.’
Data mining of our biometrics to predict criminal and terrorist activity, which is then used as a basis for government decision making about our liberty? If this comes to fruition, technological due process would certainly be required.
Here is a note regarding the 2013 LatCrit conference:
The LatCrit 2013 conference, “Resistance Rising: Theorizing and Building Cross-Sector Movements,” is shaping up to be an intellectually vibrant event. Our community’s very own María Pabón López, Dean and Judge Adrian G. Duplantier Distinguished Professor of Law at Loyola University New Orleans College of Law, will present the Jerome Culp Jr. Lecture, headlining a conference featuring three plenary sessions, approximately forty concurrent sessions, and multiple works-in-progress presentations. Plus, LatCrit and the Society of American Law Teachers are once again teaming up to present the Junior Faculty Development Workshop (FDW) to assist our junior colleagues to enter and thrive in the legal academy. The FDW will take place on October 3, with the LatCrit conference following on October 4 and 5. We hope you will attend both events.
To ensure that we will see you in Chicago in October, please register soon by visiting the LatCrit web site (http://www.latcrit.org/content/2013-latcrit-conference-registration-information/). Please note that early registration ends on September 15. Also, be sure to reserve your room at the Hilton Chicago O’Hare Airport Hotel, where all conference events will occur, by visiting http://www.hilton.com/en/hi/groups/personalized/C/CHIOHHH-LCR-20131002/index.jhtml. The discounted conference rate will be available only until our block of rooms fills.
For your convenience, the draft program is attached. If you have any questions, don’t hesitate to contact Andrea Freeman at email@example.com.
See you in Chicago!
Visiting Assistant Professor
University of Denver Sturm College of Law
The 71 Most-Cited Law Faculties
Gregory Sisk, Valerie Aggerbeck, Debby Hackerson & Mary Wells (all of the University of St. Thomas), Scholarly Impact of Law School Faculties in 2012: Applying Leiter Scores to Rank the Top Third, 9 U. St. Thomas L.J. 838 (2012):
This study explores the scholarly impact of law faculties, ranking the top third of ABA-accredited law schools. Refined by Professor Brian Leiter, the “Scholarly Impact Score” for a law faculty is calculated from the mean and the median of total law journal citations over the past five years to the work of tenured members of that law faculty. In addition to a school-by-school ranking, we report the mean, median, and weighted score for each law faculty, along with a listing of the tenured law faculty members at each ranked law school with the highest individual citation counts.
11. Pennsylvania, Duke
16. Virginia, George Washington
19. Minnesota, Texas
21. Boston University, George Mason
24. USC, Cardozo
26. Emory, Washington University
28. Illinois, Colorado
30. Ohio State, University of St. Thomas, Washington & Lee
33. Hofstra, Arizona, Indiana, North Carolina, Florida State
38. UC-Hastings, Notre Dame, Case Western
41. Brooklyn, William & Mary
43. Fordham, Maryland
45. Houston, UNLV
47. Utah, American, Alabama, Pittsburgh, Iowa
52. Hawaii, San Diego, Chicago-Kent, Arizona State, Boston College
57. New York Law School, BYU, Georgia, Tulane, Florida, Missouri, Temple
64. Seattle, Wake Forest, Seton Hall, Penn State, Rutgers-Camden, Chapman, Wisconsin, Cincinnati