The Faculty Lounge

I Love Paris

Congratulations, President Macron. 

 

Christiana Ochoa Named Interim Dean of Indiana-Bloomington Law

Indiana University Bloomington’s Maurer School of Law dean Austen Parrish will step down to become dean of UCI Law.  Executive Associate Dean Christiana Ochoa has been named interim dean beginning on July 1st until a new dean is selected.  Ochoa joined Indiana-Bloomington in 2003 and holds a JD from Harvard.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose -- Freshwater Edition

A Washington Post headline reads, "California declares historic water emergency measures amid drought." According to the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, WaPo reports, “The past three years are projected to be the driest in our state’s history, leading to drought conditions unlike anything we’ve experienced before." Moreover, "Scientists have determined that the extremely dry conditions over the past three years are part of a longer megadrought, which has persisted since 2000."

This put me in mind of a column I wrote for the Chicago Tribune in 2015 (I did not write the headline):

Let us pour some cold water on that California sunshine

By Steven Lubet

Chicago Tribune

Apr 06, 2015

When I woke up this morning, the outside temperature was a brisk 36 degrees, which was not unusual along our chilly lakefront. The calendar said April, but the weather did not remotely resemble spring — a season that seems to last only about a weekend in these parts.

We Chicagoans have long since made our peace with crummy weather — subzero temperatures, blizzards, ice storms and the potential for killing frosts that cannot be ruled out until Memorial Day. Nonetheless, we don't complain. The frigid environment builds character, we mutter as we freeze. So what if I can't put away my parka until June?

It would be fine if we could simply shiver in silence, as Abraham Lincoln probably did during his years in New Salem. But ever since the advent of instantaneous communication, that has been impossible. Just try phoning — or texting, or emailing or Skyping — someone in California any time between November and March. No matter what the purpose of the call, the subject will sooner or later turn to weather. "So how cold is it in Chicago?" your friend or relative will eventually inquire. "I went to the beach yesterday," every Los Angelino will be sure to let you know, whether you are interested or not.

Getting Away with Taboo Trades with Gabriel Rossman, Pt. 2

Welcome to part 2 of my interview with Gabriel Rossman, Associate Professor of Sociology at UCLA, and co-host, UVA Law 3L Autumn Adams-Jack.  We continue our discussion of sex, drugs, and Islamic finance, among other taboo trades. 

It’s also our final episode of season 2. Please listen to the end of the episode for a special goodbye from America’s favorite law students. Thank you to Gabriel for helping us wrap up this season with a great episode. And thanks to all of you for listening. 

 

The AAUP Gets Antisemitism Wrong

Cary Nelson and I have a new essay on Inside Higher Ed explaining the problems with the AAUP’s recent statement on antisemitism:

The AAUP Explains Antisemitism and Gets It Wrong

The AAUP compromised its political neutrality in taking sides in the contested debate over the definition of antisemitism.

Cary Nelson and Steven Lubet

April 27, 2022

The American Association of University Professors for a hundred years has protected its political neutrality by not taking positions on controversial topics unrelated to academic freedom. Academics on both sides of current political debates could thus see the organization as a defender of the core principles undergirding the academy, not as an advocate for a position that would otherwise divide its membership. But the organization has recently compromised the tradition that has served it well for so many decades. Worse, the very AAUP committee that has guarded and sustained that tradition—Committee A on Academic Freedom and Tenure—has now taken sides on a hotly contested topic it should have scrupulously avoided: the definition of antisemitism.

For more than a decade, the AAUP has had both national staff and faculty appointees with strong views on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but both staff and faculty leaders have largely avoided actions or statements that aligned the organization with their personal political views. No more. In the guise of opposing intrusive legislation, Committee A has needlessly decided to reject the widely adopted International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, especially as it relates to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, a stance completely superfluous to the actual problem of legislative interference. The national AAUP as a result has now officially endorsed the political assault on the IHRA definition.

Committee A’s March 2022 statement “Legislative Threats to Academic Freedom: Redefinitions of Antisemitism and Racism” frames its critique as an objection to legislative efforts to restrict teachings on antisemitism and critical race theory in universities, citing Florida legislation as a key example. The project of protecting the university curriculum from legislative intrusion is both laudable and entirely in keeping with AAUP tradition. We agree with Committee A that state legislatures should refrain from interfering in school curricula at any level, and that the IHRA definition should not be written into law. But Committee A’s decision to link the very different topics of antisemitism and critical race theory is misguided and appears to serve an ideological goal the committee should not have advanced.

The committee inaccurately claims that the IHRA definition “equates criticism of the policies of the state of Israel with antisemitism.” In fact, the IHRA definition unambiguously specifies that criticism of Israeli policies comparable to those levied against other democratic nations is not antisemitic. IHRA only stipulates that demands the Jewish state be eliminated can qualify as antisemitic, depending on the exact circumstances. Eliminationist demands, of course, address Israel’s right to exist, raising issues of self-determination, not its government policies.

Committee A adds that IHRA “privileges the political interests of the state of Israel and suppresses discussion and activism on behalf of Palestinian rights.” That is untrue. There are nearly infinite human rights abuses throughout the world that are available for comparison and potential application to Israel and other Middle East nations under the IHRA principle. In any case, the IHRA definition itself was never intended to be law, but only an educational aid. The debate about Palestinian rights is not inhibited by IHRA’s examples of the many forms contemporary antisemitism can take.

Committee A further asserts, without links or citations, that the IHRA definition has led to the “cancellation of university courses and conferences” and “targeting faculty members in Middle East studies.” If true, that would be a basis for objecting to the weaponization of the definition (as we do), but not a valid criticism of the definition itself. Any statement of principles can be misused by extremists.

Idaho Law Seeks Visiting Professors

This just in:

The University of Idaho College of Law is seeking visiting faculty for next academic year at both of its campuses (in Moscow, Idaho and in Boise, Idaho) in a variety of subject matters. Moscow is the quintessential college town, located in northern Idaho, surrounded by nature’s beauty with unlimited outdoor activities. Boise, the state capital, is the economic and governmental center of Idaho. Boise has been named one of the Top 100 Best Places to Live and is presently the fastest growing city in the United States. Established in 1909, the University of Idaho College of Law is the sole law school in the state.

We appreciate that most faculty are already committed for the fall, but we would appreciate it if you would share these postings with colleagues who might be interested and available. In addition, we welcome applications from entry-level faculty candidates who might want to gain this experience.

Candidates should apply via the below postings. Please direct any questions to me at wgcouture@uidaho.edu and my fellow Associate Dean Rich Seamon at richard@uidaho.edu.

At our Moscow campus (Business Associations, Contracts, Property, Torts):  

The University of Idaho College of Law seeks up to three entry-level or experienced faculty members interested in serving as full-time, temporary faculty members for the Fall 2022 semester at our Moscow campus. The College of law is particularly interested in candidates to teach the following courses: Business Associations, Contracts, Property, and Torts. Other possible courses include, but are not limited to, Bankruptcy, Energy Law, Environmental Law, Sales, and Public Lands and Natural Resources Law.

Moscow Posting: https://uidaho.peopleadmin.com/postings/35675

At our Boise campus (Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure, Constitutional Law):

The University of Idaho College of Law seeks up to two entry-level or experienced faculty members interested in serving as full-time, temporary faculty members for the 2022-2023 academic year at our Boise campus. The College of Law is particularly interested in candidates to teach the following courses: Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure: Investigations, Constitutional Law II (individual rights and liberties), and Advanced Criminal Procedure: Adjudications.

Boise Posting: https://uidaho.peopleadmin.com/postings/35676

Duquesne Seeking a Business Associations VAP

Duquesne is looking for a VAP to teach Business Associations and related courses next year. BA is a required course taught to second year (day) and third year (evening) students. Here is the announcement.

Visiting Assistant Professor (VAP) – 2 Positions

Position Number: 350124 / 20-256
Apply to: http://apply.interfolio.com/105805

Duquesne University School of Law, located in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, invites applications and nominations for a Visiting Assistant Professor of Law to teach during the 2022-2023 academic year. This position is a nine-month visiting position, beginning in the summer of 2022 with the possibility of one additional nine-month term. The successful candidate will be responsible for teaching three courses: one course during the fall semester and two courses the spring semester. The successful candidate will have ample time to focus on scholarship, be afforded to the Law School's library and related resources, have no administrative or faculty committee duties.

DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES:

Our curricular needs include: Business Associations, Property, Contracts, Emerging Technologies, Intellectual Property, Health Law, and related elective courses. Candidates must be available to teach in-person, although the public health situation may require occasional remote and/or hyflex teaching.

REQUIRED QUALIFICATIONS:

Juris Doctor from an ABA-accredited law school.

University of Montana Law Announces Three Dean Finalists.

University of Montana School of Law announced that their three dean finalists are Rosa Brooks (Georgetown), Norman Bay (Willkie Farr & Gallagher), and Johanna Bond (Washington & Lee.)

Getting Away With Taboo Trades With Gabriel Rossman, Pt. 1

Want to buy sex, bribe a politician, or get your dumb kid into an Ivy League school? I discuss how to get away with taboo trades with Gabriel Rossman, an Associate Professor of Sociology at UCLA, and my co-host, UVA Law 3L Autumn Adams-Jack.

Rossman studies cultural industries (such as radio and film) and economic sociology (including diffusion and disreputable exchange). He is interested in how people structure immoral exchanges like bribery to make them more subtle and therefore less obviously immoral.

I’ve been an admirer of Rossman’s work for a number of years and was so happy to have this opportunity to talk to him about his research that I kept him longer than normal and have divided his podcast into two parts. In this part, we talk about sugar babies, college admissions, Bill Cosby, and Islamic finance. We also discuss a forthcoming book manuscript on the obfuscation of disreputable exchange that Gabriel generously shared, currently titled “How to Get Away With Paying Bribes, Buying Sex, and Selling Corpses.

 

 

Suggested Readings

· “It’s Only Wrong If It’s Transactional.” 2018. (with Oliver Schilke) American Sociological Review.

· “Obfuscatory Relational Work and Disreputable Exchange.” 2014. Sociological Theory.

· “The Diffusion of the Legitimate and the Diffusion of Legitimacy.” 2014. Sociological Science.

· Climbing the Charts: What Radio Airplay Tells Us about the Diffusion of Innovation. Princeton University Press. 2012.

Judge Mizelle's Decision in the Mask Mandate Case Rested on a Tortured Definition of "Sanitation"

As I explained at NBC News.  Here is the gist:

Judge’s decision to scrap mask mandate rests on her tortured reading of one word

Her decision rests almost entirely on a tortured misreading of one word, “sanitation,” implying a restricted definition that defies linguistic conventions and eviscerates the plain meaning of the 1944 Public Health Service Act, which established the federal government’s authority to combat infectious diseases. Mizelle’s supporting citations are misleadingly selective, bordering on outright deception.

While Mizelle declared that the health service act “could have referred to active measures to cleanse something or to preserve the cleanliness of something” (her italics), that is a false dichotomy. The two definitions are most naturally read as complementary, not alternatives. “Sanitation” can mean either cleaning or prevention or both, depending on the context, which in this case is the prevention of a communicable disease. It is bizarre to contend that Congress intended to authorize the CDC to clean up a mess but not to prevent it. As the conservative blogger (and THINK contributor) Ilya Somin observed, Mizelle’s reasoning would prevent the CDC from enforcing a regulation against defecating on an airplane floor, limiting it to wiping up afterward.

Even worse, Mizelle simply ignored more expansive dictionary definitions from the same time period as the law’s enactment. The 1949 Merriam-Webster Pocket Dictionary, for example, has only one definition of sanitation: “Use of scientific sanitary measures to prevent disease.” Similarly, the 1937 Oxford English Dictionary (which happens to be on my bookshelf) defines sanitation as “the devising and application of means for the improvement of sanitary conditions.” Webster’s 1936 Collegiate Dictionary has words to the same effect, defining sanitation as “the use of sanitary measures.” 

These definitions obviously include both cleaning and prevention, and there was no legitimate judicial reason for Mizelle to omit them from her opinion. A lawyer who pulled that stunt would be reprimanded, and perhaps sanctioned, for misleading the court. It is inexcusable from a judge.

You can read the entire piece here.