The Faculty Lounge

Reactions to Judge Barrett's Nomination

One would be challenged to find an academic without an opinion on Judge Amy Coney Barrett's impending nomination to replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. On Saturday morning Politico Magazine featured the views from several leading constitutionalists on the pick. As one might imagine, the range of views was great.

Dean Tomiko Brown-Nagin observed, "If confirmed, Judge Amy Coney Barrett will consolidate the conservative majority and shift the balance of power on the court decidedly to the right."

Professor Saikrishna Prakash wrote, "Judge Amy Coney Barrett has all the qualities of a first-class Supreme Court justice: intellect, wisdom, temperament and restraint."

As one might imagine, those leaning right would champion the pick, and several did: Ilya Shapiro noted, "Judge Amy Coney Barrett has displayed a seriousness of purpose and is dedicated to finding and applying the Constitution’s original public meaning. Her thoughtful opinions and academic writings show a willingness to hold government officials’ feet to the constitutional fire. But for those on the left, the nomination was reason for concern as Chancellor Howard Gillman observed, With the appointment of Amy Coney Barrett — an undoubtedly qualified jurist with rock-solid conservative credentials — the court will revert to the role it performed for most of our history, with an ironclad majority of conservative justices who have dedicated their careers to taking back the courts....In short, once again, the court will be a conservative bulwark against democratic forces."

I had the great honor to be included in this group of luminaries, and finished my assessment with the following, "As I write these words, I am watching my 10-year-old on her computer studying American history, and I can’t help but wonder how much my Bella will be inspired by our recently passed icon and how much she will learn of the battles the “Notorious RBG” fought for her. How different equality may look like in a world led by those who appear to reject it — the epitome of being selectively principled."

Southwestern Law Seeks Dean & CEO

This just in:

Southwestern Law School in Los Angeles, California Seeks Dean and Chief Executive Officer

Southwestern is a private, non-profit, secular, independent law school. Inspired by a sense of social responsibility, Southwestern was founded in 1911 with a mission to provide access to legal education for those historically underrepresented persons who were otherwise excluded from law school. Ever since, Southwestern has earned a reputation for public service, innovative programming, and trailblazing alumni. Our community is intellectually vibrant, with faculty who are committed to teaching and who are highly productive scholars and leaders on the local, state, and national levels.

Our beautiful mid-city campus provides the ideal setting for law study, fostering an emphasis on community, diversity, and engagement. Situated at the heart of the entertainment industry, Southwestern is home to the nationally acclaimed Donald E. Biederman Entertainment and Media Law Institute. Our emphasis on experiential learning through the Institute, skills courses, and robust clinical and externship opportunities produces practice-ready graduates. Our alumni number 14,000 strong across the country and are inspired advocates who are versatile and entrepreneurial.

From its first day, Southwestern actively encouraged the enrollment of women and people of color. Our first graduate was Betty Trier Berry, who became the first woman in the United States to serve in a public defender's office—before women were permitted to vote in federal elections.

Further Thoughts on BDS Pledges and Conflicts of Interest, Part One

Professor Ilana Feldman probably did not anticipate creating a national controversy when she accepted the interim deanship of the Elliott School of International Relations at The George Washington University. Her outspoken support for the BDS movement against Israel (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions), however, drew immediate protests, leading the university provost to announce that Feldman would not be a candidate for the permanent position.

Most of the opposition to Professor Feldman was premised on her political views, arguing for example, that “her record of dismissing terrorism, advocating for academic boycotts, and delegitimizing the State of Israel” was indicative “political bias.” Others objected that “The BDS movement does not support a two-state solution, seeks to exclude Israel and the Israeli people from the academic, economic and cultural life from the rest of the world, and undermines direct peace negotiations between the two parties.” These protests, however, squarely raised the issue of Professor Feldman’s own academic freedom, as they called for her disqualification on the basis of her protected speech and political associations. One of Feldman’s defenders called the opposition “the new McCarthyism on campus.”

In this essay, I will explain the application of viewpoint-neutral conflict of interest principles to the Feldman case, and thus more broadly to the appointment of university administrators. Although it is generally wrong and unacceptable to impose politically-based disadvantages on faculty or administrators, who should have the freedom to express their opinions without fear of consequences, there can also be situations in which an individual has voluntarily undertaken commitments that are incompatible with a deanship. Thus, it is the irreconcilability of the individual’s conflicting obligations, without regard to their substance or content, that may be disqualifying for a position of trust.

Teaching the Breonna Taylor Grand Jury Announcement in Real Time

"Justice failed us today. It failed us in a way that's been failing us for generations."

-Kentucky State Rep. Charles Booker

The Breonna Taylor grand jury announcement started immediately before my criminal adjudication class this past Wednesday, and while I knew the announcement would be disappointing and painful, I also knew I couldn’t ignore it. Rather than moving forward with class as usual, I decided to livestream the announcement of the grand jury’s decision as well as the Kentucky State Attorney General’s press conference with my class.

I was shocked and angered: By the grand jury’s decision to indict only one of the LMPD officers, Brett Hankinson, with three counts of first degree wanton endangerment, not for killing Ms. Taylor or endangering her or her boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, but for endangering their neighbors in surrounding apartments. By Daniel Cameron’s press conference, which made it plain that prosecutors presented exculpatory evidence to the grand jury, which prosecutors only ever seem to do for cops. By Cameron’s continuing defense of the officers and of law enforcement in general. By his suggestion that many of the ills in the execution of search warrants could somehow be remedied by the formation of a new task force, likely to be headed by police officers and to accomplish nothing. 

My students were just as angry, confused, and heartbroken as I was. I let my students ask whatever questions or express whatever thoughts they felt comfortable sharing. They had astute questions about the operation of the grand jury, about the types of evidence allowed, about the meaning of “wanton endangerment,” and about whether grand jury transcripts would be released. A student remarked that, for the first time, they were having to confront the fact that “the law” and “justice” are not one and the same. Another asked, “Why do we keep using the grand jury when it seems fundamentally broken?”

I was honored and grateful to be able to discuss the grand jury’s decision, in real time, with my students. I’ve recently adopted a more thematic and problem-centered approach to my criminal procedure teaching as advocated by Lanni and Steiker in A Thematic Approach to Teaching Criminal Adjudication, rather than the traditional, strictly chronological approach. The class is more flexible and more immediately relevant to my students by incorporating more supplemental readings and materials outside of our traditional casebook, reflecting more recent developments in the field. This adaptability made it easier for us as a class to depart from the syllabus altogether to focus on the Taylor case, yet another important chapter in the story of criminal law, procedure, and police violence that unfolded that day before us. 

With the upcoming fight over the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court, Election Day only a few weeks away, and the COVID-19 pandemic wearing on, we as law professors should be mindful not just that our students may feel spread thin, but that their law school experience--oftentimes tons of reading and discussion of often fusty old cases and other materials--may feel completely disconnected from their everyday lives. All our students likely have strong feelings about much of the recent news. Using current events in the law school classroom gives students the opportunity to connect what they’re learning with the world around them in concrete fashion, and can help to illustrate the importance of what they’re studying in a much more immediate and relatable way. Students have so many important questions and observations about the current political and legal environment; giving them the opportunity to voice them provides important opportunities for them to learn from each other anad for us, as professors, to teach and learn from them, even if doing so pushes us outside our pedagogical comfort zones.

Frankie Valli and the Four Seasons

Tommy DeVito, the original baritone and lead guitarist of the Four Seasons, died on September 21, at age 92, of Covid-19. According to his obituary on the site Best Classic Bands,

DeVito first teamed with Frankie Valli in a New Jersey-based group that ultimately chose the name the Four Lovers in the mid-1950s. With Bob Gaudio and Nick Massi, they changed their name to the Four Seasons and scored their first hit with “Sherry,” a #1 single in 1962. . . . DeVito left in 1970, selling his share of the group’s rights to Valli and Gaudio. The four reunited at their 1990 induction into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame

Important Article on Proposal for So-Called “Health Freedom” Legislation

Once again, the invaluable Science Based Medicine blog has news of an alarming trend in state legislatures. This time, in an article by Florida attorney Jann Bellamy, the subject is so-called “Health Freedom” legislation proposed by a group called National Health Freedom Action. If enacted, the statutes would make it effectively impossible for states to enforce any mandatory public health measures, even during epidemics and pandemics. Here is the gist:

An organization calling itself “National Health Freedom Action” (NHFA) is promoting state legislation that would block public health measures designed to prevent the spread of communicable diseases like COVID-19. If enacted, the legislation would prevent both government and private businesses from instituting public health measures, like mask requirements and social distancing, by making compliance with those measures voluntary.

The “Right to Refuse” model act gives all individuals the “right” to refuse health-related “countermeasures” including, “but not limited to”, refusing

1. 1. medical treatments or procedures;
   2. testing;
   3. physical or mental examination;
   4. vaccination;
   5. experimental procedures and protocols;
   6. collection of specimens;
   7. participation in tracking or tracing programs;
   8. the wearing of masks;
   9. the maintaining of measured distance from other humans and animals that is not otherwise unlawful;
   10. the involuntary sharing of personal data or medical information; and
   11. other recommended or mandated countermeasures.

All existing laws, regulations, and orders addressing outbreaks or potential outbreaks of contagious, infectious, or communicable diseases, to the extent they impose the disease countermeasures listed above, are overridden. More broadly, if a law, regulation, or order was created in response to an emergency, whether it relates to disease spread or not, including national security emergencies and “any peacetime emergency”, provisions conflicting with the “Right to Refuse” are also overridden.

The article also includes information on NHFA supported “’Quack Protection Acts’ passed in 11 states.”

You can read the entire post here.

Taboo Trades Podcast, featuring Nicola Lacetera and Mario Macis

I’ve uploaded a new and very special episode of the Taboo Trades podcast, featuring Mario Macis and Nicola Lacetera.

Mario Macis is a Professor of Economics at Johns Hopkins Carey Business School. Nico Lacetera is a Professor of Strategic Management at the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto.

They joined me this week to discuss their empirical and experimental work on incentives for blood donation, as well as their recent surveys of public attitudes toward a variety of taboo trades, including payments to living kidney donors. It’s a fun and informative episode (thanks to the guests, not the host :-)

You can listen on Apple and spotify, as well as below.

 

 

American University Law Seeks Dean

This just in:

American University (AU) seeks a strategic, entrepreneurial, and energetic leader to serve as Dean of the Washington College of Law (WCL), commencing no later than July 1, 2021. This is an exceptional opportunity to lead a large, vibrant, creative, and forward-looking law school in the nation’s capital. WCL’s global preeminence and distinctive brand are anchored in the quality of its academic programs, the scholarly achievements of its faculty, the diversity of its community, and its impact on the challenges facing the legal professions and society today.

AU is a private doctoral university chartered by Congress in 1893. Today, AU enrolls about 14,000 students from every U.S. state and more than 140 countries. Among the university’s more than 900 full-time faculty and 700 adjunct faculty are policy makers, diplomats, journalists, artists, scientists, and business leaders. AU offers a rich array of undergraduate and undergraduate programs through eight colleges and schools.

Categorizing Justices

Jack Balkin, in conversation with Sandy Levinson, has proposed dividing SCOTUS justices into two categories. The first is those whose "primary achievement was that they sat on the court," and who would not otherwise be much remembered. The second group comprises those who "led noteworthy lives before they became Supreme Court Justices," and who would be biography-worthy had they never been appointed to the Court. The late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg obviously belongs in the second category, as her accomplishments as a pioneer women's rights litigator would alone establish her greatness.

The shortcoming I see in the Balkin/Levinson approach is that there are so few justices other than Ginsburg who belong in the second category. Balkin's post names no others. Writing on Prawfs, Howard Wasserman adds the obvious names Thurgood Marshall and William Howard Taft, to which I would add Louis Brandeis. But that's about it. Many other justices had notable pre-judicial careers -- Robert Jackson was attorney general; Roger Taney held three cabinet posts; Hugo Black was a U.S. senator -- but nothing that would likely be called personal greatness. Perhaps Salmon P. Chase qualifies. He was Secretary of the Treasury during the Civil War, and before that he was known for his abolitionist law practice as the "attorney general of fugitive slaves," but that still brings us only to five. John Jay and Joseph Story would make seven, out of 114. That is not so much a categorization as the identification of an elite few.

In a book review for The New Rambler, I proposed a different, and potentially more even, division between justices whose lives had been interesting in various ways, and those who were just basically high-achievers. I called them "way-makers" and "path-takers." The review compared recent biographies of Sandra Day O'Connor, a classic way-maker whose determination and initiative took her from an Arizona ranch childhood to the Supreme Court, overcoming obstacles all the way, and John Roberts, who essentially succeeded at everything he attempted on a consistent upward path. The categories don't break down by ideology. Clarence Thomas is an exceptional way-maker, while Stephen Breyer is a classic path-taker. Nor does the distinction say anything about the quality of their judging once on the Court. Rather, it is simply a readers' guide to potential judicial biographies.

Where the Balkin/Levinson classification is meant to determine whether someone would hypothetically merit a biography other than as a justice, I think my proposal describes whether a post-judicial biography, however much merited, would be fascinating to read. For Sandra Day O'Connor the answer was a resounding yes; for John Roberts, let's face it, the answer was not so much.

 

Peking University School of Transnational Law Seeks Faculty

Peking University School of Transnational Law (“STL”) invites applications for tenure track positions.  STL also invites inquiries from established scholars interested in a joint appointment or in a two or three-year residential appointment during a leave of absence from your home university.

Peking University is one of the world's leading research universities, ranked 23^rd worldwide in the Times Higher Education rankings.  STL is the only law school in the world to offer an integrated dual degree program that includes an American Law J.D., taught in English, and a China law Juris Master (J.M.), taught largely in Chinese.  STL is located on Peking University's Shenzhen Campus, minutes from Hong Kong.   Shenzhen is renowned as China’s leading center of technological innovation, advanced financial services, and internationalization, home to such innovative giants as Tencent, Huawei, BGI, Ping An, BYD, and DJI Drones.  Together, Shenzhen and Hong Kong form the hub of the world’s most populous metropolitan area, China’s Pearl River Delta, where Chinese and Western legal and commercial traditions meet and merge in ways likely to preview future legal and commercial developments throughout China and the rest of the world. 

STL values diversity and inclusion and is committed to both in appointing, mentoring and retaining faculty.

Inquiries should be addressed to Professor Nitzan Shilon, Chair, Faculty Appointments Committee, at [email protected]. 

Hiring Announcement: Louisiana State University, Paul M. Hebert Law Center

From an email I received recently:

LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY, PAUL M. HEBERT LAW CENTER seeks to hire a tenure-track faculty member in commercial law, including, but not limited to, bankruptcy. Applicants should have a J.D. from an ABA-accredited law school, superior academic credentials and publications or promise of productivity in legal scholarship, as well as a commitment to outstanding teaching.

We additionally seek to hire a full-time faculty member with security of position to direct the Immigration Law Clinic as part of LSU Law’s Experiential Education Program. The Immigration Law Clinic is a fully in-house, one-semester, 5 credit clinic in which students represent non-citizens in their defensive proceedings before the Executive Office of Immigration Review (EOIR) and affirmative applications with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Applicants must have a J.D. from an ABA-accredited law school, superior academic credentials, substantial experience in Immigration practice and be admitted and in good standing in a U.S. jurisdiction. Prior clinical teaching experience and fluency in Spanish is preferred. We may consider applications from persons who specialize in other areas as additional needs arise.

We also seek to hire a full-time Assistant Professor of Professional Practice to teach legal analysis and writing. A successful candidate will teach the fundamentals of legal reasoning and writing by way of predictive and objective memoranda in the fall semester and advance those skills by teaching persuasive writing of an appellate brief and appellate oral advocacy in the spring semester. The legal writing faculty collaboratively develop the course materials that are used across the 1L curriculum. Applicants must have a J.D. from an ABA-accredited law school, superior academic credentials, and should have at least two to three years of post-J.D. experience in a position or positions requiring substantial legal writing.

UNT Law Seeks Faculty/Senior Administrator

This just in:

The UNT Dallas College of Law welcomes applications for a full time, senior administrator, with significant experience in academic success and bar readiness in legal education, with the ability to oversee the operations of a law school academic success and bar readiness department. This administrator will also teach bar readiness courses, and substantive courses, depending on interest and needs of the College of Law, and hold faculty rank as a tenured or tenure-track Professor of Law. This administrator will serve as advisor to the Dean and to the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs in matters relating to student success and the Academic Success Bar Readiness Program.

Further information is available here: http://jobs.untsystem.edu/postings/39602

Driving Dixie Down

As a historian of slavery and abolitionism, I have never considered using “The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down” for one of my Saturday music posts. It’s a beautiful song, with haunting vocal renditions by Levon Helm and Joan Baez, among others, but nostalgia for the Confederacy ruins it for me. The idealization of the “Lost Cause” has done tremendous harm in American politics. Although the song is not as offensive as Confederate flag waving, or veneration of Nathan Bedford Forrest and Jefferson Davis, it still serves to soften the image of the Confederacy as something other than what it was – treason in defense of slavery.

Recently, however, I have slightly reconsidered. A couple of weeks ago, the Alabama singer-songwriter Early James performed “The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down” in a tribute show to The Band’s Last Waltz. Well aware that the song has been regarded as a Confederate anthem, ill-suited in the current anti-racist moment, Early re-wrote the lyrics to eliminate reverence for the Confederacy.

“I hope we piss off the right people by changing these words,” he said when he introduced the number on a Nashville stage. Instead of “a time I remember Oh so well,” Early substituted “a time to bid farewell.” And he changed the very title, and chorus, to “tonight, we drive old Dixie down.” The most important change was in the closing verse:

Unlike my father before me, who I will never understand
Unlike the others below me, who took a rebel stand
Depraved and powered to enslave
I think it’s time we laid hate in its grave
I swear by the mud below my feet
That monument won’t stand, no matter how much concrete.

Friendly Reminder....

many law reviews have either closed or are soon closing their submission seasons. For instance, I understand the Yale Law Journal closes its season this Wednesday--the self-interested part of me was almost tempted to say it closes on Thursday. But that would be so not nice. :P

Thus, get your submissions in ASAP, and if you have a piece for the Yale folks, please get it in by Wednesday. 

 

L'Shana Tova

 

 

When Will I Be Loved

"When Will I Be Loved" is most closely identified with Linda Ronstadt, who had a number two hit with it in 1975, but it was originally released by the Everly Brothers in 1960 (written by Phil) when it charted at number eight. Where the Everly Brothers version might be called soft country. The Ronstadt version, which is definitely a torch song, has been the basis of most of the subsequent covers (as you can tell from the sequence of the verses, which Ronstadt changed to good effect).

Olivas Faculty Recruitment Initiative....

While currently in the  midst of writing, teaching, and being my usual annoying self, of late I have also been in the throws of helping law faculty candidates with their upcoming AALS faculty recruitment applications---reviewing CVs, FAR forms, reading draft articles, and holding mock interviews. While several of you may already know of the Olivas Faculty Recruitment Initiative, I suspect most of you don't. Over a year ago, a few of us at the FIU COL started a program to follow in the footsteps of Professor Michael Olivas and his Herculean efforts to diversify the legal academy. Our goal was to create a network of legal academic mentors willing to assist non-traditional candidates enter and succeed in the academy.

In our short period of existence, we have over 50 faculty and law dean mentors, and have over a dozen mentees. Several of our mentees are in the market this year, and more are sure to come.  I suspect a few of you have or will soon interview some of our young superstars. The Olivas FRI seeks to provide general mentoring for any and all interested non-traditional candidates, which include law students, recent grads, and foreign lawyers. While I do not turn away any interested mentees, my goal in starting the program was to increase the numbers of ethnic and racial minorities in our profession. If any legal academics here are interested becoming a mentor, please email me at [email protected]. If you know of promising upper-level students or recent grads, have them look us up at our page.

Interested mentees can of course can then email me at [email protected]. I typically have phone conference with them, and then pair them with a mentor.

I am also happy to chat with any and all recent grads and upper-level law students. They do not have to be certain academia is their path. As part of of our outreach efforts, we have sent mailings to  BLSA, LLSA, and Native-American student organizations at the top 50 law schools, and will be expanding our efforts in the future. I personally work with any and all takers--but am brutally honest regarding the possibility of having to attain an LLM or other advanced degrees.

I hope some of you will find this program rewarding, and will consider forwarding our information to others. If you fundamentally disagree with what we are doing, as a potential mentor once told me when I was interested in the academy decades ago.... "oh well...." ;)

 

 

Results of Law Professor Twitter Census 2020-2021 Edition - 9/17/20

Below the fold are the results of the 2020-2021 Law Professor Twitter Census. You can also download the raw data here. The list includes areas of academic interest, for faculty who self-identified with that information. The list is arranged by school, instead of individual users' last names.

Of the 1368 faculty members on this list, 759 (55.4%) are male; 609 (44.5%) are female; 1024 (78.9%) are affiliated with U.S.-based law schools; 262 (19.2%) are affiliated with law schools outside the U.S.

Here are responses to some anticipated questions from inquiring minds who want to know:

1. How was the census developed?

The list is based on previous censuses, conducted in 2012, 2015, 2018 and 2019. It was amended and updated by contributions from blog readers in response to this post. I added additional or deleted very few names myself, based on law prof accounts that I have happened to encounter (typically because they follow me on Twitter or I follow them) or if I knew someone had changed schools, left the academy, etc. I made no concerted effort to update the list myself.

2. How accurate is the census?

Not at all. If there are corrections, additions, etc., please feel free to email me directly at bcrawford at law dot pace dot edu.  I'll republish from time to time based on new data I receive, but likely not until next year.

3. Why isn't my information listed in the census? Why isn't my colleague's information listed?

The census relies almost exclusively on self-identification. To be included in the list, you had to actively add yourself to it (as indicated here.

4. How does this year's data compare to the numbers from prior years?

For an historical comparison, here's the data from prior years:

	2020-2021 Version (9/17/20)	2019-2020 Version (9/13/19)	2018-2019 Version (8/15/2018)	2015 Version (1/23/2015)	2012 Version (7/26/2012)
Total  Number Users	1368	1310	1105	553	204
Male	759	709	636	330	142
Female	609	601	469	223	62

It looks to me like the number of law professors using Twitter has reached a leveling-off point. My sense is that those who are interested in the medium have adopted it and we won’t see big increases in numbers in future years.

5. Who is included in the census?

The list is meant to cover only individual tweeters who are full-time faculty members at law schools.  The list is not meant to be a comprehensive account of everyone (adjuncts, librarians, practitioners, programs, institutes, students, group blogs) publishing law-related tweets. Consistent with past practice, emeritus faculty are included in the census.

6. What good is this information?

Either not at all or not much.  It might be a handy reference for quickly finding someone's Twitter handle, but I don't put any stock in the completeness or "meaning" of the info.

Touro Law Seeks Faculty

This just in:

The Touro College Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center is pleased to announce that it is currently seeking applicants for two tenure-track appointments or its full-time faculty starting in August 2021.  The Touro Law Center has curricular needs in Torts or Property. While our primary needs are in these areas, we will consider candidates in a variety of other areas, including in Contracts, Business Organizations, Commercial Law and Evidence.

A candidate must have a J.D. degree from an ABA accredited law school and a commitment to teaching in an environment dedicated to excellence in teaching and mentoring of students. We will consider both lateral and entry level applicants. We look for innovative faculty with a preference for both practice and teaching experience, and with either an established record or promise of legal scholarship. Applicants must demonstrate a commitment to service to legal education and to the wider community as well as a desire to engage in the intellectual life of the Law Center. With one of the most diverse student bodies in the country, Touro Law Center is dedicated to the aims of diversity and strongly encourages applications from women and minorities.
Touro Law Center, a member of the Association of American Law Schools (AALS), is part of the Touro College and University System. Established in 1970 to focus on higher education for the Jewish community, the Touro College and University System has grown to serve a widely diverse population of over 18,000 students across thirty-five schools. We are uniquely attuned to the importance of an education for students of all backgrounds and circumstances.

Located in beautiful and historic Long Island with its many beaches, coastlines, and parks, Touro Law Center is part of a state and federal court campus, providing substantial opportunities for teaching and learning. Within the New York City metropolitan area, we are a train ride to the City and an even shorter train ride to JFK Airport.
Please direct any questions about the positions to Professor Meredith R. Miller at [email protected] and Professor John Linarelli at jlinarell[email protected], Co-Chairs of the Faculty Appointments Committee.

Application Procedure

Please apply for the position here. Please upload your cover letter including areas of teaching interest, your curriculum vitae, and a list of three references. Please email the same to Professor Meredith R. Miller at [email protected] and Professor John Linarelli at [email protected].

Touro College and University System is committed to providing all persons equal opportunity in education and employment, and to ensuring a safe and non-discriminatory educational and work environment in compliance with Title IX of the Higher Education Amendments of 1972 (“Title IX”), Title VI and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Violence Against Women Act (“VAWA”), the New York State Education Law, and other applicable laws. It is the policy of the College to prohibit unlawful discrimination in employment and in the administration of College programs, services, activities, and admissions on the basis of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, age, disability, marital status, genetic predisposition, sexual orientation, gender identity, pregnancy, veteran status, or citizen status or any other status protected by law.

Pakistani Feminist Judgments Project (CFP)

The Pakistani Feminist Judgments Project is looking for writers who can re-write pivotal legal opinions of the Supreme Court of Pakistan from a feminist perspective and provide commentaries on the impact it can have on judicial jurisprudence. The Project is initiated and led by Ms. Orubah Sattar Ahmed and Ms. Marva Khan, with the support of Shaikh Ahmad Hassan School of Law at LUMS. 

Submission Deadline: September 20, 2020 (11:59 pm)

The Pakistani Feminist Judgments Project is inspired by the Feminist Judgments Projects conducted and initiated in Canada, United Kingdom, United States, New Zealand, Australia, Scotland, Ireland, South Africa, and India to bring together female academics, practicing lawyers, judges and legal researchers to rewrite alternative feminist judgments in significant legal cases. It aim to highlight how the judicial jurisprudence could have practically changed if the cases had been written or decided from a feminist perspective.

To that end, it seeks Authors who will rewrite judicial opinions from a feminist perspective and Commentators who will provide brief commentary on the original case, before analysing the virtues and limitations of the rewritten judgment and exploring its future impact. Authors have to be practicing lawyers, legal academics, legal researchers, judges, or related to the legal profession in a substantive and meaningful capacity. The Commentators can also belong to the legal fraternity, but applicants from other disciplines will also be considered. All participants will attend workshops to familiarise themselves with feminist legal theories and judicial writing. The rewritten opinions and commentaries will be published in the form of a book.