The Faculty Lounge

Northern Illinois Seeks Professor in Critical Race Theory

Northern Illinois University seeks an Assistant Professor with expertise in Critical Race Theory.  The successful candidate will be a joint appointment tenure-track faculty member in the Center for the Study of Women, Gender, and Sexuality, with a possible tenure home in the College of Law.  The faculty member will begin in Fall 2019.

Northern Illinois University Center for the Study of Women, Gender & Sexuality

Job Ad

Assistant Professor – Critical Race Studies (#33609)

Function of the Job

The interdisciplinary Center for the Study of Women, Gender, and Sexuality at Northern Illinois University is looking for a dynamic scholar to fill the position of Assistant Professor to begin in the fall of 2019, with expertise in Critical Race Theory. The successful candidate will be a joint appointment tenure-track faculty member in the Center for the Study of Women, Gender, and Sexuality, with a tenure home in an appropriate academic department (open). The candidate will be expected to teach courses to both undergraduate and graduate students in both units, as well as engage in an active research agenda and perform professional service in keeping with rank and position. Applications are invited from those whose research and teaching interests focus on Critical Race Theory in the context of any of the following: A) intersectional feminist, queer, and/or trans* theories, B) women, gender, and/or sexuality in social and political movements, or C) feminist, queer, and/or trans* research methods. The typical teaching load is two courses per year in the Center, and two courses per year in the tenuring department.

Tennessee Commission Rejects Valpo Transfer

The Tennessee Higher Education Commission voted 8-5 yesterday to reject the proposed transfer of Valparaiso's law school to Middle Tennessee State University. Nashville Public Radio has the details:

"Technically, Valparaiso was going to transfer its American Bar Association accredited J.D. program and curriculum to MTSU as a gift. The institution announced last fall that it would no longer admit new students after only 29 enrolled. It began looking for merger options. But Mike Krause, executive director of THEC, says the commission is required to approve or disapprove of all proposals for new degree programs at public institutions. And for this particular case, they even hired an outside consultant to conduct a feasibility study on the transfer. . . . 

The biggest critics of the transfer came from lawyers and law schools in Memphis and Knoxville, where the state’s only other public law schools are located.  Comments generally regarded concerns of a watered down law school market for the state, since Nashville is already home to three law schools — Belmont University, Vanderbilt University and Nashville School of Law. Another school in the city, many said, would take away from other schools’ ability to compete, even if it’s a public option. And with higher education excellence often tied to career attainment outcomes, it would also saturate an already dense legal labor market, they said. MTSU’s transfer of a law school would make it even more difficult for law school graduates to find work."

Here's a link to the full NPR story.

John Marshall Chicago Seeks Spring 2019, 2019-20 Visitors

This just in:

The John Marshall Law School in Chicago seeks one or two full-time visiting faculty members for the Spring 2019 semester. We need coverage in the areas of Civil Procedure (evening course), Secured Transactions, and Estates & Trusts. The appointment is for one semester, but we will be seeking visitors for the 2019–2020 academic year in these areas plus some combination of Evidence, Criminal Law, and Property.

Candidates should have taught full-time at an ABA-approved law school.

To Apply:

Submit a current CV, cover letter, and three professional references to Associate Dean David Sorkin at 7sorkin@jmls.edu. The review will begin immediately and continue on a rolling basis until one or both positions are filled. We may request a Skype or in-person interview and submission of prior teaching evaluations.

The John Marshall Law School, finding any invidious discrimination inconsistent with the mission of free academic inquiry, does not discriminate in admission, services, or employment on the basis of race, color, sex, religion, national origin, ancestry, age, disability, veteran status, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, genetic characteristics, or any other characteristic protected by applicable law.

Affirmative Action for White People

David Leonhardt has a column in todays New York Times  titled "The Senate: Affirmative Action for White People," in which he explains how the votes of racial minorities are today undervalued in the Senate, which originated as a form of affirmative action for small states. Here is the gist:

The biggest racial preferences in this country have nothing to do with college admissions or job offers. They have to do with political power. And they benefit white Americans, at the expense of black, Asian and Hispanic Americans.

These racial preferences are the ones that dictate the makeup of the United States Senate. Thanks to a combination of historical accident and racism, the Senate gives considerably more representation to white citizens than to dark-skinned ones. It allows a minority of Americans — white Americans — to wield the power of a majority.

You can read the entire column here.

As it happens, I made more or less the same point in a 1995 column for the Chicago Tribune titled "Affirmative Action Is as American as the Constitution." You can read it after the jump:

Publishing Oppotunity: University of Dayton Law Review

The Dayton Law Review is looking for an article to complete its next issue.  If you are interested, please contact the editors at udlawreview@udayton.edu by Oct. 19th.  The Law Review prefers submissions of 10,000 to 15,000, but an article of any length will be considered.

You've Got to Walk that Lonesome Valley

[Note to Chicago old-timers: be sure to check out the bottom clip]

Mississippi John Hurt (with Pete Seeger watching)

Me with Brian Frye on Ipse Dixit

I just did a short and fun podcast with Brian Frye (University of Kentucky College of Law) about repugnant markets ranging from kidneys to football, boxing, sex, and blood.  You can listen below.  Brian was a wonderful and generous host, and I’m so grateful for the opportunity to discuss my work with him (and with you!)

Comments are closed, but if you want to argue with me on Twitter (why not, everyone else does) I'm @KimKrawiec 

 

Links to some of the papers discussed in the podcast:

If We Allow Football Players and Boxers to be Paid for Entertaining the Public, Why Don't We Allow Kidney Donors to be Paid for Saving Lives?(with Philip Cook)

Repugnance Management and Transactions in the Body(with Kieran Healy)

Kidney Exchange to Overcome Financial Barriers to Kidney Transplantation(with Michael A. Rees et. Al)

Lessons from Law About Incomplete Commodification in the Egg Market

American Student, Admitted to Grad School at Hebrew University, Denied Entry to Israel

I am a signatory to the following statement, protesting Israel's denial of a student visa to Lara Alqasem:

DENIED ENTRY

We the undersigned members of the Alliance for Academic Freedom (AAF) stand in solidarity with the presidents of all Israeli universities in urging the Israeli authorities to permit the American student Lara Alqasem to enter the country to pursue her studies at Hebrew University. We join with the many faculty members and organizations throughout the US that have endorsed her right to study at any university to which she gains admission. As a last resort, we urge the Israeli Supreme Court to intervene and reverse the government’s decision.

We recognize that Israel has the independent right and responsibility to apply its security concerns in evaluating any individual’s entry into the country. We do not, however, believe that support of the BDS movement in itself poses a security threat. Though we condemn many of the statements and actions of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), we do not believe student activism in SJP rises to that level of threat either.

Undergraduate student political opinion is often very much in flux and typically lacks the documentary evidence available in evaluating the views of older persons. We are also very much concerned with the government’s reported reliance on the Canary Mission website to inform itself about this case. Canary Mission routinely condemns students without a sound basis for judging where students stand.

We also understand that, unlike colleges and universities, governments are not obligated to honor academic freedom. While not, therefore, technically a violation of Alqasem’s academic freedom, the decision to deport her and prevent her from studying in the program to which Hebrew University has admitted her clearly abridges her academic freedom. It also undermines the right a university has to admit students of its choice.

The AAF has consistently opposed academic boycotts of Israeli universities. We are also dedicated to supporting Israeli democracy. Democracies benefit from supporting freedom of speech and the right to dissent. Universities cannot thrive without those freedoms. We believe those rights mandate permitting Lara Alqasem to enter Israel and attend Hebrew University.

 

MTSU College of Law?

In a press release I first saw last night on Paul Caron's TaxProf Blog, Valparaiso University's Board of Directors and Middle Tennessee State University's Board of Trustees have announced an agreement to transfer Valparaiso's law school to MTSU.

The transfer agreement, however, still needs the approval of the ABA and the Tennessee Higher Education Commission before it can go into effect. 

Here is a Nashville Public Radio Story on the move:

"The Middle Tennessee State University board unanimously approved plans Wednesday to transfer Indiana-based Valparaiso University’s law school to its Murfreesboro campus. The school’s leadership says the move makes sense for its mission and the region’s needs.

But before the transfer can officially occur, MTSU has to convince the state the law school is actually necessary. It’s now moving forward to the Tennessee Higher Education Commission and Valparaiso’s accreditor, the American Bar Association, for final review.

They will determine whether the school is necessary in Middle Tennessee, given that three other law schools already exist in the region. But, those schools are all private, says MTSU Provost Mark Brynes, and the region needs a public law school option."

Law Profs on Trump and Taxes

Twitter law prof talk on Trump and taxes has been robust in the wake of publication by the October 2, 2018 publication by the New York Times of an extensive story on the Trump family's long history of complex intra-family wealth transfers.  Here are some links to law prof commentary that has appeared in more traditional venues:

Goldburn Maynard, Jr. (Louisville) published an op-ed in the Baltimore Sun: Trump Family Wealth: A Case Study in How to Work the System (Oct. 5, 2018) (also blogged by Paul Caron, here)

Goldburn Maynard, Jr. (Louisville) published an op-ed for TheHill.com: Trump's Taxes and You: Five Questions Answered (Oct. 7, 2018), including this excerpt:

Are all wealthy people doing this?

Yes and no. Wealthy individuals like Warren Buffet and Bill Gates will also avoid the estate tax in a perfectly ordinary way: giving their money away to charity. Any wealthy person can avail themselves of this opportunity.

On the other hand, estate planning schemes are well known, and a substantial number of wealthy families utilize them. This creates a two-tiered system where the super-wealthy and those who are more sophisticated engage in the most aggressive planning.  The less sophisticated or unaware then tend to pay a much higher effective tax rate.

Will electing Democrats in November make a difference?

Not necessarily. These schemes and loopholes have been around for decades and have been well known to experts and legislators. This covers time periods where both parties were in power. Lest we forget, there are wealthy donors of all political stripes.

Jennifer Bird-Pollan (Kentucky) appeared on WHYY's RadioTimes show (Oct. 9. 2018) on the "Trump Family Tax Schemes."  Audio + a transcript of the show are here.

Dan Shaviro (NYU) and I had a few comments for NPR's Jim Zarroli here (Oct. 3 2018).

My guess is that this story will inspire additional  follow-ups and stories. Talk to your local tax prof for the latest hot take!

Howard Law Journal Symposium

I am excited to participate in an election law symposium at Howard University School of Law on Thursday. If you are in the Washington D.C. area, please join us. Professor Guy-Uriel Charles is giving the keynote address. Here are the details:

 

Fifteenth Annual Wiley A. Branton/Howard Law Journal Symposium

Howard University School of Law
2900 Van Ness Street Northwest
Washington, DC 20008

Moot Court Room | 9:00AM-5:00PM

The Howard Law Journal Presents the 15th annual Wiley A. Branton Symposium. For the past 14 years the Branton Symposium has been a way to commemorate Dean Branton's legacy. This year's theme is our ailing electoral process, where our esteemed panelists discuss the wider range of conduct that has affected our electoral process.

This Year's Symposium Is Entitled:

"We The People? Internal and External Challenges to
The American Electoral Process" 

Thursday, October 11, 2018 - From 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM

---

General Outline of Symposium Day Program

8:00am – Continental Breakfast
9:30am – Program Begins - Introductions

PANELS

This year's Symposium will feature two panels. Below is a complete list of our distinguished panelists.

CFP: The Renewed Civil Rights Movement

This just in:

We are pleased to announce 2019 Thurgood Marshall Law Review and American Constitutional Society Symposium on “The Renewed Civil Rights Movement.”
Thurgood Marshall Law School was founded on the premises of separate but equal was inherently unequal. The law school history can be traced back to the civil rights efforts to integrate law schools in Sweatt v. Painter, 339 U.S. 629 (1950), which sought equal protection for racial minorities under the U.S. Constitution. Since the same urge of the 1940s to achieve equality and social justice continues to this very day, the Thurgood Marshall Law Review invites and welcomes scholarship in the form of legal manuscripts addressing issues of equality and social justice including:

• Police brutality and Mass Incarceration
• Voter rights;
• Gerrymandering;
• Racial profiling and related Civil Liberties
• Immigration or human rights
• First Amendment freedom of speech, press and religion
• Equality and Equity in Education
• Gender equality
• A Social Justice and Equality Issue Not listed

Thurgood Marshall Law Review requests that contributions submit original pieces between 10,000 and 20,000 words. If you would like to apply to participate in the 2019 Symposium, please submit an abstract of no more than 500 words by October 19, 2018 to tmlawreview@gmail.com, with “Attn: Lead Article Editor – Manuscript Submission” in the subject line. The deadline for the completed paper will likely be in December of 2018. Selected papers will be published in a limited-edition issue of the Thurgood Marshal Law Review in 2019, and selected authors will be invited to present their paper at the 2019 Thurgood Marshall Law Review Symposium on Friday, February 8, 2019. If you have questions about article submission or the Symposium, please contact our symposium editor Chinyerum Okpara or Editor-In-Chief, George Oginni.

Can Police Reports Ever Be Trusted for Anything?

Chicago police officer Jason Van Dyke was convicted last Friday of second degree murder for shooting and killing Laquan McDonald in 2014. Reports of the incident were filed by McDonald and three other officers, all of whom claimed that McDonald had made threatening gestures with a knife just before the shooting. A year later, however, a dashcam video was released showing that Van Dyke had started shooting only six seconds after arriving on the scene, and that McDonald had actually been backing away at the time.

At trial, Van Dyke testified that he shot McDonald because he felt his life was in danger. The jury evidently believed that Van Dyke was in fear, but found that it was unreasonable,which accounts for the conviction of second degree murder, as well as sixteen counts of aggravated battery with a firearm (one for each shot).

The other three police officers were indicted for filing false reports, but they have not yet come to trial. One of them was given use immunity and compelled to testify at Van Dyke's trial.

Both the video and the outcome of the Van Dyke trial provide powerful evidence of the common phenomenon -- to put it as plainly as possible -- of police lying.

Marty Balin (1942 - 2018)

The co-founder, songwriter, and vocalist for Jefferson Airplane (and later with Jefferson Starship) died last week at 76. You can see him in this clip, to the left of Grace Slick, playing tambourine and singing backup at Woodstock: 

Otis Rush (1934-2018)

 Chicago blues musician Otis Rush passed away last week.

Active Measures

My movie recommendation for the weekend is “Active Measures,” a new documentary by Jack Bryan. The title refers to the Russian government’s use of covert warfare against its adversaries, especially in the United States but also in Britain, Estonia, Georgia, and Ukraine.

The film’s focus is on the three-decade-long financial relationship between Donald Trump and Russia, which Bryan argues is the key to understanding the connection between Moscow and the Trump campaign during the 2016 election. The documentary is riveting, fast-paced, and includes interviews with John McCain, Hillary Clinton, Evan McMullin, Michael McFaul, and many others. It is available on Amazon Prime and the movie trailer for Active Measures is available here.

On a related note, the Justice Department on Wednesday filed yet another indictment of Russian military intelligence officers. Here is a copy of the latest indictment, which charges 7 GRU officers with conducting “persistent and sophisticated cyber criminal intrusions” that targeted American, Canadian, and European entities for hacking and disinformation campaigns. According to the Justice Department, the Russian government attacked a range of western institutions, including the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency and the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. Interestingly, the Justice Department filed the indictment in the Western District of Pennsylvania, which reflects the expansion of the Russia investigation beyond the Special Counsel’s office to include a number of U.S. Attorneys’ offices. 

Here is FBI Director Christopher Wray’s statement regarding the most recent Justice Department indictment of Russian government officials:

“The actions of these seven hackers, all working as officials for the Russian government, were criminal, retaliatory, and damaging to innocent victims and the United States’ economy, as well as to world organizations. Their actions extended beyond borders, but so did the FBI’s investigation. We worked closely with our international partners to identify the actors and disrupt their criminal campaign - and today, we are sending this message: The FBI will not permit any government, group, or individual to threaten our people, our country, or our partners. We will work tirelessly to find them, stop them, and bring them to justice.”

And here is a link to the Justice Department page that includes all of the indictments filed thus far by Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s office in its investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. 

The Millions Spent for Judge Kavanaugh

In Roll Call, Kate Ackley has an interesting piece on the millions spent in favor of Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the Supreme Court. Here’s an excerpt:

“Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh denounced the ‘millions of dollars in money from outside left-wing opposition groups’ during his testimony Thursday about sexual assault allegations, but he didn’t mention the millions spent by groups backing him.

The Judicial Crisis Network, the leading conservative nonprofit that is running advertisements in support of Kavanaugh’s confirmation, has spent about $12 million on the effort, according to sources familiar with the group — already more than the $10 million it spent in last year’s confirmation of Justice Neil Gorsuch.”

In addition, the Judicial Crisis Network spent $7 million in a successful effort to block Merrick Garland’s Supreme Court nomination in 2016. 

Million-dollar campaigns have also become a routine feature of the selection process at the state supreme court level.

A study by the Brennan Center for Justice found that outside groups spent $27.8 million during the 2015-16 state supreme court election cycle. Consequently, the authors note, “As of January 2017, one-third of all elected justices sitting on the bench had run in at least one $1 million-plus election. These figures highlight that across the country, politicized state supreme court elections are no longer the exception, but the rule.”

One of the reforms the Brennan Center report advocates is to:

“replace elections with a publicly-accountable appointment process, where a nominating commission with diverse membership recruits and vets judicial candidates, and then presents a slate from which the governor can choose. Such a system, some version of which is already used in 22 states, ensures that democratically accountable actors retain a role in choosing judges, while reducing special interest pressures and the risk of cronyism.” 

I wholeheartedly support replacing judicial elections with some form of a publicly-accountable selection and confirmation process. It is hard enough to keep politics out of the judiciary without having judges’ names appear on ballots at polling places. 

But the Kavanaugh confirmation fight reminds us that even when judges are appointed and not elected, the role of money in shaping public opinion has become an inescapable feature of the American political landscape.     

Chief Justice Roberts and the post-Kennedy SCOTUS

Mark Joseph Stern has an interesting piece on Slate about a death penalty case that hints at the new ecosystem of the post-Kennedy Supreme Court. The case is Madison v. Alabama and the justices heard oral argument yesterday. The issue before the Court is whether the Eighth Amendment permits the state of Alabama to execute Vernon Madison, a 68-year-old, legally-blind inmate whose vascular dementia prevents him from remembering his 1985 murder of a Mobile police officer.

Tribe on Kavanaugh and Judicial Recusal

In a New York Times op-ed, “All the Ways a Justice Kavanaugh Would Have to Recuse Himself,” Laurence Tribe asserts that statements Brett Kavanaugh made during his nomination hearing should disqualify him from hearing cases involving left-of-center litigants.

Professor Tribe focuses in particular on this passage in Judge Kavanaugh’s opening statement:

“Since my nomination in July, there’s been a frenzy on the left to come up with something, anything to block my confirmation. . . . This whole two-week effort has been a calculated and orchestrated political hit, fueled with apparent pent-up anger about President Trump and the 2016 election, fear that has been unfairly stoked about my judicial record, revenge on behalf of the Clintons and millions of dollars in money from outside left-wing opposition groups.”

Accordingly, Tribe argues that canons of judicial impartiality demand that Kavanaugh recuse himself from any future case involving Democrats or liberals. Here’s the heart of Tribe’s argument:

There Are Both Honorable and Dishonorable Ways to Boycott Israel

As I posted here last week, Prof. John Cheney-Lippold, of the University of Michigan, belatedly rescinded his commitment to write a study-abroad reference for one of his students, once he realized that she planned to attend Tel Aviv University. Cheney-Lippold explained that he participates in the “academic boycott against Israel in support of Palestinians living in Palestine. This boycott includes writing letters of recommendation for students planning to study there [and] for reasons of these politics, I must rescind my offer to write your letter.”

There has been considerable discussion of Cheney-Lippold’s decision. BDS advocates have predictably endorsed his stance, while critics have focused on his contravention of obligations to his student(s). In brief, Cheney-Lippold’s supporters assert that he has the right to stand on his principles, as asserted in this statement from the U.S. Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel:

 A letter of recommendation is not a right but is written at the discretion of faculty members. Professors, like any other individual, are entitled to hold firm positions on a matter of conscience and act in regard with those principles. Prof. Cheney-Lippold endorses the academic boycott of Israel. In declining to write a letter of recommendation for a study abroad program in Israel, he is aligning his actions with his stated views.

Others believe that a professor should not allow his political views to impede a student’s educational path. The University of Michigan’s faculty Senate Advisory Committee on University Affairs unanimously issued a statement criticizing Cheney-Lippold, and holding “faculty should let a student’s merit be the primary guide for determining how and whether to provide such a letter.” Likewise, Henry Reichman wrote on the AAUP’s Academe Blog, that Cheney-Lippold had violated “professional ethics and responsibility” to his student.  John Wilson, editor of the Academe Blog (and no friend of Israel) told Inside Higher Ed that “it is morally wrong for professors to impose their political views on student letters of recommendation.”