The Faculty Lounge

Not Only Bastille Day

Also Woody Guthrie's birthday. These are the only known videos of Woody:

 

Updated Guide for Submission of Law Review Articles to Specialty Law Reviews and Journals in Gender, Women & Sexuality

I have updated my "Information for Submitting to Specialty Law Reviews and Journals in Gender, Women & Sexuality." The most recent version dated July 13, 2021 is here.

The guide is modeled after the chart prepared by Professor Allen Rostron and Professor Nancy Levit at the University of Missouri Kansas City School of Law, and after my Information for Submitting to Online Law Review Companions. It contains information about twenty-seven (27) U.S.-based law reviews and journals classified under the subject “Gender, Women and Sexuality and Law” by the Washington & Lee Law Journal Rankings (here) or that are broadly related to social justice and five (5) additional journals that contain the word “gender” in their title, but are not listed in the Washington & Lee Law Journal Rankings.  Within each category (W&L-ranked journals, then non-ranked journals) journals are listed in the order of the “rank” of the school, if any (as determined by the most recent US News overall ranking, not because that system merits endorsement, but because it is convenient).  Specifically, the chart derives from the journals’ websites the following information:

• Name of the specialty journal
• Word count limitation, if any
• Preferred submission method
• Whether articles from online journal are included in HeinOnline’s Law Journal Library
• Other information of possible interest to authors
• US News ranking of affiliated school, if any
• W&L Law Journal Ranking within category of “Gender, Women and Sexuality,” by “combined” score for 2020 (most recent year available).

Corrections and updates are welcome.

University of Mississippi School of Law Faculty Hiring Announcment

University of Mississippi School of Law

Assistant/Associate/Full Professor (Tenure Track)

Position Description

The University of Mississippi School of Law invites applications from entry-level and lateral candidates for multiple tenure-track faculty positions beginning August 2022. We welcome applications from outstanding candidates in all curricular areas, including (in no particular order) tax, employment law, health care law, disability rights, voting rights, real estate law, data privacy, civil procedure, bankruptcy, and business law (including foundational classes such as corporations and secured transactions). All applicants should have a distinguished academic background, and either great promise or a record of excellence in both scholarship and teaching.

Located among the rolling hills of Northern Mississippi, the University of Mississippi’s main campus is centered in Oxford, Miss., about 70 miles south of Memphis, Tenn. Oxford has been listed among the 20 Best Small Towns in America by Smithsonian Magazine. Oxford boasts great independent bookstores, excellent restaurants, and a vibrant arts community and is home to one of the best public school districts in the state of Mississippi.

The University of Mississippi encourages applications from candidates who would enhance the diversity of our community, including women and other gender identities, minorities, and LGBTQ+ candidates. As stated in our recently adopted strategic plan on diversity, equity, and inclusion: “The University of Mississippi School of Law is committed to creating an educational experience that affirms diversity, inclusion, and equity. We welcome the contributions of a diverse student body, faculty, and staff. Diversity, inclusion, and equity are vital to the education of our students and to the role we play in shaping the legal profession.” To read more about the University of Mississippi School of Law’s Diversity, Inclusion and Equity plan please visit the following link: https://law.olemiss.edu/about/diversity/strategic-plan-for-diversity-inclusion-and-equity/.

Questions?

Contact: Professors Antonia Eliason and Richard Gershon

Co-Chairs, Faculty Appointments Committee,

University of Mississippi School of Law

481 Chucky Mullins Drive

University, MS 38677

aeliason@olemiss.edu igershon@olemiss.edu

Position Details

Appointment: 9 Month Assignment Type: Tenure Track

Minimum Qualifications

J.D. from an accredited law school

Application Procedures

To apply online go to:

https://careers.olemiss.edu/job/University-AssistantAssociateFull-Professor-MS-38677/765194600/

Please include the following when prompted during the application process:

1. A detailed CV (including a list of publications),
2. a list of three references,
3. a cover letter including a statement concerning preferred courses and a statement concerning the candidate’s research interests.

Regent University School of Law Faculty Hiring Announcement

Regent University School of Law in Virginia Beach is hiring a full-time tenure-track assistant professor on a 12-month basis with an anticipated start date in the fall of 2021 to teach in the clinical law program and one or more of the law school’s core instruction areas.  We particularly encourage applicants from diverse backgrounds to apply. We are asking candidates to submit their application no later than July 30.   

Interested candidates may obtain more information about the position and submit an application at https://regent.csod.com/ats/careersite/JobDetails.aspx?site=9&id=755. 

No, Israel Is Not a "Settler Colonial" State

UCLA's Jonathan Zasloff and I have an essay on Haaretz explaining why the “settler colonial” trope is tendentious and wrong, even though it has become routine in academia and has increasingly shown up in the mainstream media. You can read it here – paywalled, but with six free articles if you register.

Here is the gist:

When academics call Israel a "settler colonial" state, it is not meant as a mere descriptor. Rather, the phrase is a deliberately pointed charge, part of an ongoing campaign to undermine Israel by challenging its very founding – akin to the now-revoked UN General Assembly declaration that "Zionism is racism." Its aim is to isolate the Jewish state from the legitimate family of nations. 

One might expect the mainstream media to avoid presenting such a controversial and politically charged theory as historical fact. Unfortunately, it has long been all too tempting to blur the crucial distinction between fact and opinion when writing about the Middle East, and the temptation is only intensifying now. 

When applied to modern-day Israel, advocates of "settler colonialism" do not engage in scholarly analysis but rather the political contention that Zionism is morally illegitimate. That is their right, but the mainstream press must not be fooled (or intimidated) into presenting it as a purely scholarly conclusion.

Consider [North Carolina State University Professor Kristen] Alff’s justification that "the Jewish Colonization Association was the first major land purchaser." This not only erases the crucial difference between "colonization" and "colonialism," but it also ignores the historical context of terms and the way they have been used over the years.

The "Amana Colonies," for example, comprise seven Amish villages in Iowa, founded in 1856 by pietists who escaped persecution in Germany. The "Oberlin Colony" was the original name for both the college and the town, founded in 1833 by Presbyterians seeking to establish a utopian community of "selected, consecrated souls." Wikipedia lists 65 "Arts Colonies" in the United States, dating back to the MacDowell Colony, established in Peterborough, Vermont, in 1907. The escaped slaves Henry Bibb and Josiah Henson founded the "Refugees’ Home Colony" in Canada in 1851.

The "Jewish Colonization Association" – founded in the 1890s in response to Russian pogroms – had no more connection to the colonialism of empires than any of these other nominal colonies. Prof. Alff singled out one word – which in fact, meant "refuge" rather than outpost – to make a political argument.

That is how the corruption of language works, embedding false characterizations one small step at a time, and it is a bad precedent for American journalism’s future coverage of the Middle East.

Again, the entire essay is here.

Asian Journal of Law and Society 2021 Graduate Student Paper Competition (October 1 Deadline)

From an email I received:

"To support the next generation of socio-legal scholars studying topics related to Asia, the Asian Journal of Law and Society (AsianJLS) is launching an annual competition for the best paper in the field of law and society written by a graduate student. The author must be a student enrolled in a postgraduate program in law, social sciences, or other related disciplines when the paper was submitted. Coauthored papers with one or more faculty members are not eligible, but coauthored papers by two or more graduate students are eligible. Papers focusing on law and society in Asia are especially encouraged, and excellent papers on other socio-legal topics will also be considered.

All submissions will be evaluated by a committee consisting of AsianJLS editors and invited experts. The winning paper will be published in the Asian Journal of Law and Society and the author(s) will receive a book award of up to $300 Cambridge University Press e-books.

Please submit your article as a Microsoft Word document to student-award@asianjls.org by October 1, 2021. In the submission email, please indicate that (1) you intend to be considered in the competition, (2) you are currently a student in a postgraduate program, and (3) you have not submitted your article to the AsianJLS or any other journals for publication. Submissions are limited to one paper per student.

Submissions must include a title page with the author’s institutional affiliation, mailing address, email address, an abstract of no more than 200 words, and a word count of the paper. The total length of submissions, including footnotes and references, must not exceed 10,000 words.

The Paper Selection Committee will be organized by the Editorial Office of Asian Journal of Law and Society."

Virtual Law & Rurality Workshop at U. South Dakota this Fall

Abstracts are due 8/20. See below:

Call for Papers

Law and Rurality Workshop

 

 

The University of South Dakota Knudson School of Law along with the Rural Reconciliation Project at the University of Nebraska College of Law will host a workshop this fall for scholars whose work engages with rural issues and the law. The workshop will be held via Zoom on Friday, October 29, 2021, from approximately 9 am until 4 pm CST, with the final schedule to be determined by participant interest.

 

This workshop will provide a forum for a range of scholars to share and receive feedback on works-in-progress about legal issues viewed through the lens of rurality or rural-urban difference. There will also be at least one incubator session for scholars to receive feedback on nascent ideas, and other thematic discussion sessions may be organized. Submissions may encompass any topic that addresses or investigates rurality and the law. To the extent possible, participants will be expected to attend the full day of Zoom sessions and read and comment on other works. If you are interested in workshopping an in-progress paper, please submit a title and abstract to Hannah Haksgaard at hannah.haksgaard@usd.edu no later than Friday, August 20.

 

In your submission, please indicate whether you want to be slotted to (1) workshop a work-in-progress draft paper (however early stage), or (2) present more briefly an idea only at an incubator session.

 

Final drafts for workshop sessions will be due October 8 so they may be circulated to other participants. 

 

We invite participants to attend even without workshopping a paper or presenting an idea for future work. If you wish to attend all or part of the conference – either as a general participant or as a paper-specific commentator – please also e-mail hannah.haksgaard@usd.edu by August 20.

NCCU Faculty Hiring Announcment

North Carolina Central University School of Law is seeking to hire a lateral professor at the Associate or Full rank to serve as the inaugural Intel Technology and Social Equity Endowed Chair. The person hired will be expected to teach two upper level technology law courses and one first year course. The areas of first-year course need include Contracts, Civil Procedure and Torts. The position will start July 1, 2022. Applicants should be willing and available to teach using in-person, remote, or hybrid formats, depending on the needs of the particular classes.

Applications will be considered until the position is filled. For priority consideration, please apply by July 1, 2021. Application materials should include a cover letter, CV, and the names and contact information of at least three references. Application materials and general inquiries should be submitted to April Dawson, Associate Dean of Technology and Innovation at adawson@nccu.edu.

North Carolina Central University School of Law was founded in 1939 to provide an opportunity for legal education to African Americans. The School of Law now provides this opportunity to a more diverse student body than any other in the nation, as it pertains to race and gender. This environment of diversity better prepares our students to effect positive change in the broader society. The student body consists of approximately 400 students and 31 full-time faculty members.

North Carolina Central University, an EEOC/AA employer, complies with the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986.  All new employees must provide original documents verifying identity and employability within the first three (3) days of employment with the University. Accommodations for applicants who qualify under the Americans with Disabilities Act or Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, are available upon request.

University of Detroit Faculty Hiring Announcement

Hiring Announcement

University of Detroit Mercy School of Law

Tenure-Track Faculty Positions for 2022-2023

 University of Detroit Mercy School of Law is seeking two to three entry-level, tenure-track faculty for the 2022-2023 academic year. Our primary hiring needs are in the areas of Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, Business Law, and Legal Writing, though we welcome inquiries from interested candidates in other areas, including clinicians. Detroit Mercy Law has a unified tenure track regardless of one’s area of teaching focus and supports scholarship from all tenure-track faculty.

Candidates should have a Juris Doctor degree and send a current CV or resume, along with a cover letter expressing their interest and qualifications, to Prof. Erin R. Archerd, Chair of the Faculty Recruiting Committee, at archerer@udmercy.edu. Candidates may also submit additional materials such as research statements, prior publications, and teaching evaluations. Applications will be reviewed on a rolling basis, with initial, online interviews to begin in Summer 2021.

About Detroit Mercy Law

Led by our new Dean, Jelani Jefferson Exum, Detroit Mercy Law offers a curriculum that complements traditional theory- and doctrine-based course work with intensive practical learning. Students must complete at least one clinic, one upper-level writing course, one global perspectives course, and one course within our Law Firm Program, an innovative simulated law-firm practicum. Detroit Mercy Law also offers a Dual J.D. program with the University of Windsor in Ontario, Canada in which students earn both an American and a Canadian law degree in three years and gain a comprehensive understanding of two distinct legal systems.

Detroit offers a dynamic variety of culinary, cultural, entertainment, and sporting attractions. Detroit Mercy Law is located one block from the riverfront in Downtown Detroit, within walking distance of federal, state, and municipal courts, the region’s largest law firms, and major corporations such as General Motors, Quicken Loans, and Comerica Bank.

Michigan’s largest, most comprehensive private university, University of Detroit Mercy is an independent Catholic institution of higher education sponsored by the Religious Sisters of Mercy and Society of Jesus. We seek qualified candidates who will contribute to the University's urban identity, social justice mission, commitment to diversity and inclusion, and tradition of scholarly excellence. University of Detroit Mercy is an Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer with a diverse faculty and student body and welcomes persons of all backgrounds.

It is the policy of the University of Detroit Mercy to provide equal opportunity to all employees and applicants for employment. The University will not discriminate in employment on the grounds of race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, age, sex, height, weight, marital status, sexual orientation, veteran status, medical condition or disability. This policy applies to all terms, conditions and privileges of employment including recruitment, hiring, placement, employee development, promotion, transfer, compensation, benefits, discipline and termination.

Standing to Enforce Public Rights—First of a Series

As summer approached, Steve Lubet generously posted about the publication of our new book, Lakefront: Public Trust and Private Rights in Chicago (Cornell University Press), long in the making. We are grateful for the opportunity now to present a series of guest posts with some reflections based on Lakefront. Last month, the Volokh Conspiracy hosted us for a five-part series focused on the public trust doctrine (the posts are collected here). In the five posts in this series (three this week and two next), we will examine standing to enforce public rights.

1. Introduction—Article III and Common-Law Standing

Standing is nearly always discussed in terms of the Supreme Court’s doctrine governing who may sue in federal court consistently with Article III of the Constitution. This is unfortunate. A wider array of standing rules comes into the picture when one considers common-law doctrines governing who may sue to enforce public rights.

This makes Lakefront—which unpacks a century and a half of controversies over public rights along the Chicago lakefront—an especially useful vehicle for considering standing. We will see that many of these controversies reveal judicial conceptions about standing very different from the Supreme Court’s Article III doctrine.

The boilerplate version of the Article III doctrine goes like this: The Constitution gives federal courts power to adjudicate only “Cases” and “Controversies.” A dispute is of this nature only where a plaintiff has standing—that is, only where the plaintiff can allege (1) injury in fact that is (2) fairly traceable to the defendant’s allegedly unlawful conduct and (3) likely to be redressed by the requested relief. DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. Cuno, 547 U.S. 332, 342 (2006). Injury in fact, the most critical requirement, has been further spelled out to mean an invasion of a legally protected interest that is “concrete and particularized” and “actual or imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical.” Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 578 U.S. 330, 338–39 (2016) (internal quotation marks omitted).

The roots of the Court’s three-part test are unclear. The most plausible account is that it is based on a generalization about the requirements of private law. The common law of torts requires that the plaintiff establish “injury” “caused” by the defendant’s breach of a legal duty. And if equitable relief is sought, it must provide effective redress for the alleged injury; in other words, it cannot be a futile exercise.

Given that standing in federal court is an issue primarily when persons sue to vindicate some public right, such as environmental protection, it is not clear why Article III standing should be limited to those who satisfy requirements derived from private law. But this is what the Court has held. The doctrine has a certain family resemblance to the Court’s understanding that federal adjudication of private rights of contract and tort must be by Article III courts, whereas “public rights” (to forgo here their definition) can be heard by non-Article III courts, including administrative agencies. See, e.g., Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC, 138 S. Ct. 1365, 1372–73 (2018) (discussing cases such as Stern v. Marshall, 564 U.S. 462 (2011)).

Let us leave aside (for now) Article III and any exclusive focus on federal courts: Lakefront reveals a variety of common-law standing rules that have been employed to determine who may sue to enforce public rights. In our series of five posts, we will compare and contrast these rules, making some suggestions about their relative merits and demerits.

2. Standing vs. Whether a Plaintiff Has a Cause of Action

Before proceeding, we must note that, in the preceding paragraph, we have defined our term, nearly enough at any rate: By “standing,” we mean the ability to assert, as a plaintiff, an alleged violation of a restriction that the law imposes on someone else (the defendant). We appreciate that whether a plaintiff has “standing” and whether the plaintiff has a cause of action can seem the same thing in some contexts.

In our own series of posts, for example, we will consider the public dedication doctrine (discussed below in this first post and at length in the forthcoming fourth post). In its traditional form, the doctrine’s enforcement has been limited to the government, to a dedicator with a continuing interest, or (for the important point) to an abutting property owner. In this context, no one doubts that the law imposes a restriction on future use, but not everyone can sue to enjoin deviations from this public dedication. We are confident that such a limitation on who may act as a plaintiff can, for purposes of a useful discussion, be fairly characterized as one of standing.

3. A Primer on Standing in the Context of the Public Trust Doctrine and the Public Dedication Doctrine

So let’s get on with the discussion of the merits and demerits of the different rules of standing—the promised comparison and contrast.

Cuba in Crisis: Domestic Media Needs to Raise Awareness....

Cuba is facing its largest mass demonstrations in three decades.  Thousands have taken to the streets in cities throughout the country, protesting against food shortages, high prices, and communist rule. Upon hearing of these events during the weekend, I could not find a single story on television covering the matter. Perhaps I need to change my cable provider? More importantly, this is a major human rights issue occurring just to our South, and domestic media is simply not covering the matter sufficiently. Kudos to some outlets some like Reuters,  Guardian , NY Times,  and CNN for starting to focus on the matter. I hope teenagers and college students that too often wear trendy tee-shirts of Che, an idealist but an admitted killer and human rights violator, will begin to think about human rights and democracy for our neighbor just 90 miles away. 

Jens Ohlin Named Permanent Dean of Cornell Law

As seems ever the case, I'm a few weeks behind.  Last month, Cornell University named interim dean Jens David Ohlin to the position permanently. He holds a JD and Ph.D from Columbia. 

Drake Law School Faculty Hiring Announcement

Drake University Law School invites applications from entry level and lateral candidates for tenure-track or tenured Assistant/Associate/Professor of Law positions beginning in the 2022-23 academic year.  We are especially interested in candidates with demonstrated interest or experience in Civil Procedure, Tax/Commercial Law/Bankruptcy, Professional Responsibility, Intellectual Property, and Family Law. Applicants must hold a J.D. degree (or the equivalent) and should have a record of academic excellence, substantial academic or practice experience, a passion for teaching, and a record of, or potential for, accomplishment in scholarship. Appointment rank will be determined commensurate with the candidate’s qualifications and experience.

Drake University Law School sustains a vibrant intellectual culture, and Des Moines has been recognized as one of the top ten Best Places to Live (US News) and Best Places for Business and Careers (Forbes), with a robust and growing economy (Wall Street Journal). The Law School features innovative and nationally recognized programs in agricultural law, constitutional law, legal writing, and practical training.

Drake University is an equal opportunity employer and actively seeks applicants who reflect the nation’s diversity.  No applicant shall be discriminated against on the basis of race, color, national origin, creed, religion, age, disability, sex, gender identity or expression, sexual orientation, genetic information or veteran status. Diversity is one of Drake’s core values and applicants need to demonstrate an ability to work with individuals and groups of diverse socioeconomic, cultural, sexual orientation, disability, and/or ethnic backgrounds.

Confidential review of applications will begin immediately. Applications (including a letter of interest, a complete CV, teaching evaluations (if available), a diversity statement, and the names and addresses of at least three references) should be sent to Professor Ellen Yee, Chair, Faculty Appointments Committee, Drake University Law School, 2507 University Ave., Des Moines, IA 50311 or e-mail: ellen.yee@drake.edu

The Young Rascals and the Youngbloods

The Young Rascals (later simply the Rascals) were among the original "Blue-Eyed Soul" acts, and they were the first all-white group signed by Atlantic Records. Among other distinctions, they were among the few Rock group of the Sixties without a full time bass player, which was possible because Felix Cavaliere could carry the bass line on the organ, just as Ray Manzarek handled bass lines for The Doors. Also distinctive was the four-person lineup with a non-instrument playing vocalist who did not sing lead, which was also mostly handled by Cavaliere. The Doors had the same lineup, but Jim Morrison of course was the the lead singer.

At one point, The Young Rascals were promoted as the American answer to the British invasion. Their hits beginning  in the mid-'60s included "Good Lovin'," "People Got to Be Free," and "Groovin'."

The Rascals were also known for their commitment to civil rights and Black empowerment, as explained by Cavalieri in the first clip below. He could never have imagined that the Supreme Court would neutralize the Voting Rights Act in two stages, culminating in 2021.

The Youngbloods had a relatively small but dedicated following in the late 1960s, when they were known as the most "East Coast" of the San Francisco bands. The lead vocalist was Jesse Colin Young (real name Perry Miller, of Queens) and the most versatile instrumentalist was "Banana" (real name Lowell Levinger III, of Cambridge, MA). Their only Top 40 hit was "Get Together," which was originally recorded by the Kingston Trio (!) and later covered by Jefferson Airplane (pre-Grace Slick) among others.

The Youngbloods eventually relocated to Marin County where they wrote their most memorable song, at least in my circles, "Hippie from Olema," which was an answer to Merle Haggard's "Okie from Muskogee." Be sure to check out two renditions at the bottom of the post.

Prediction comes true...

A few days ago, I penned an essay regarding the recent political attacks on CRT. In it I predicted politicians would likely soon go after professors for teaching CRT. It happened. Senator Tom Cotton has called for the firing of U.S. Air Force Academy Professor, Lynne Chandler García for teaching CRT. Cotton argues, "We should not be teaching and indoctrinating our cadets to believe that our military is a fundamentally racist institution. Who exactly is going to want to raise their hand and take an oath to defend our Constitution if you believe what Professor Garcia is teaching about it?" A Washington Post op-ed responds, noting Garcia does not claim the military is a fundamentally racist institution. It further observes: "This is a strange argument. One assumes most people defending the Constitution today do so in the full understanding that it had to be amended a bunch of times to improve on some of its original defects, a capacity for rebirth and renewal that they see as a positive, one that makes it all the more worth defending."

The WaPo op-ed also rejects Cotton's argument that Garcia's teaching CRT will hurt the military: "García says she teaches critical race theory as an 'academic framework' to analyze the fact that the founding and its documents harbored a 'duality' between ideals of equality and realities of inequality and slavery. She also uses it to better understand 'structural racism' that “has been endemic in American society, and employs it for 'deconstructing oppressive beliefs.'" "All this is of a piece with critical race theory’s basic idea that we need to better grasp how racial disparities are perpetuated in law and institutional structures. In truth, García’s expression of this is mild, even boilerplate-like." The WaPo op-ed further observes that Garcia does not claim "the United States as fundamentally irredeemable. It treats prejudice as something that can be overcome and institutions as subject to improvement, through analysis and understanding." The op-ed concludes with: "Yes, there are serious excesses associated with critical race theory. But while its critics pretend otherwise, its academic defenders do call out these excesses." Personally, I would only slightly change the emphasis of the last WaPo quote, and conclude: much of the recent attacks to condemn CRT use as their basis for assault diversity trainings typically occurring in employment settings undertaken by consultants that are not critical race scholars. These training exercises, if engaging in excesses, should be subject to examination, debate, and criticism. However, such trainings are different than the scholarly undertaking known as CRT.

New books...

As part of an ongoing effort to promote new books, here is the most recent work of Robert Barsky, who happens to be perhaps the best writer I have ever read. This is what others have sad about his latest: 

In this novel approach to law and literature, Robert Barsky delves into the canon of so-called Great Books, and discovers that many beloved characters therein encounter obstacles similar to those faced by contemporary refugees and undocumented persons.

The struggles of Odysseus, Moses, Aeneas, Dante, Satan, Dracula and Alice in Wonderland, among many others, provide surprising insights into current discussions about those who have left untenable situations in their home countries in search of legal protection.

Law students, lawyers, social scientists, literary scholars and general readers who are interested in learning about international refugee law and immigration regulations in home and host countries will find herein a plethora of details about border crossings, including those undertaken to flee pandemics, civil unrest, racism, intolerance, war, forced marriage, or limited opportunities in their home countries.

Here's the publisher’s site: Clamouring for Legal Protection: What the Great Books Teach Us About People Fleeing from Persecution: Robert F Barsky: Hart Publishing (bloomsbury.com)

Or amazon: https://www.amazon.com/Clamouring-Legal-Protection-Fleeing-Persecution/dp/1509943153/ref=sr_1_3?dchild=1&keywords=robert+barsky&qid=1625767152&sr=8-3

 

To readers here, please send me updates on your own books. Looking forward to reading and promoting them. 

Doug Sylvester Stepping Down as ASU Law Dean

Dean Doug Sylvester has stepped down after a very successful decade leading the law school at Arizona State University.  He is replaced by interim co-deans  Zachary Kramer and Adam Chodorow.  The school will conduct a dean search this coming year.

Michelle Drumbl Takes Over as Interim Dean of W&L Law

This is one I missed this past fall .  Washington and Lee Law Dean Brant Hellwig stepped down on July 1.  Michelle Drumbl has been named to a one year term as interim dean, while the school conducts a search this coming academic year.  Drumbl joined the W&L faculty in 2007.  She holds a JD from George Washington Law and and LLM in Tax from NYU.

When Justice Amy Coney Barrett Should Have Recused Herself but Didn't

As explained by me in The American Prospect.  Here is the gist: 

The Supreme Court’s Inadequate Recusal Policy

BY STEVEN LUBET 

JULY 7, 2021

 U.S. Supreme Court justices can use concurring opinions to clarify, amplify, or even distance themselves from the majority opinion of the Court. Sometimes, the simple fact of concurrence, without any explanation, can tell us a great deal—perhaps more than intended—about a justice’s outlook and approach to the law. That is what happened when Justice Amy Coney Barrett joined Chief Justice Roberts’s 6-3 majority opinion in Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta, a case in which she should have recused herself.

Americans for Prosperity went all in for Justice Barrett, “launching a significant national ad campaign” on her behalf, focused on “eleven key states.” Its “grassroots activists” made or sent over 750,000 telephone calls and letters to senators urging her confirmation. Although the seven-figure operation was officially conducted on behalf of the parent organization, rather than the foundation, there is no doubt that the two are virtual alter egos, essentially separated by nothing more than tax status. They operate out of the same office suite in Arlington, Virginia, where both outfits receive contributions. Two of the nonprofit foundation’s three board members are also officers of Americans for Prosperity.

It has been the Supreme Court’s “historic practice” to leave recusal questions to the determination of each individual justice, rather than submit them to the full court. The unfortunate consequence of that approach is fully evident in this instance, where Justice Barrett has seemingly disregarded both a federal statute and a previous SCOTUS decision.

In our highly polarized era, we must look to the courts more than ever for neutrality, independence, and objectivity. A justice who sufficiently valued the appearance of impartiality would not have participated in Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta.

You can read the entire piece at The American Prospect.

Seton Hall Faculty Hiring Announcment

Seton Hall University School of Law welcomes applications for tenure-track positions to begin July 1, 2022. Candidates must have a J.D. or equivalent degree and a record of academic excellence. Candidates should demonstrate (i) scholarly promise, (ii) the ability or potential to be an outstanding teacher and mentor who can prepare students for the practice of law, and (iii) leadership in service toward building an equitable and diverse academic community.

We will consider entry-level and junior-lateral candidates in a variety of subject areas but are particularly interested in healthcare finance, civil procedure/complex litigation, contracts, employment, torts, and clinical education (criminal justice and entrepreneurship & community development).

Candidates should apply here. The following documents should be uploaded with your application: CV (with references), cover letter, scholarly agenda, and job talk paper (or abstract with expected date for completion of the draft).

Questions should be sent to Professor Margaret Lewis, Chair, Faculty Appointments Committee, at lawfacultyappointments@shu.edu.