A Lawyer\u27s Duty to Uphold the Rule of Law - Revisiting Rule of Law Foundation Ethics and 21st Century Security Challenges

Speaker: Prof. Adam Oler, Col, USAF (Ret.), National Defense University Speaker: Ms. Erin Wirtanen, Foreign Service Officer, Department of Stat

Keynote Address

Professor Richard Revesz’s Keynote Addres

Interplanetary Risk Regulation

Space exploration promises new opportunities but also new risks. After centuries of national settlements and international conflicts on Earth, and the Cold War era of two great power states racing to the Moon, today we see a rapidly proliferating arena of actors, both governmental and non-governmental, undertaking bold new ventures off-Earth while posing an array of new risks. These multiple activities, actors, and risks raise the prospects of regulatory gaps, costs, conflicts, and complexities that warrant reconsideration and renovation of legacy legal regimes such as the international space law agreements. New approaches are needed, beyond current national and international law, beyond global governance. We suggest that interplanetary risks warrant new institutions for risk regulation at the interplanetary scale. We discuss several examples, recognizing that interplanetary risks may be difficult to foresee. Some interplanetary risks may arise in the future, such as if settlements on other planets entail the need to manage interplanetary relations. Some interplanetary risks are already arising today, such as space debris, space weather, planetary protection against harmful contamination, planetary defense against asteroids, conflict among spacefaring actors, and potentially settling and terraforming other planets (whether to conduct scientific research, exploit space mining, or hedge against risks to life on Earth). These interplanetary risks pose potential tragedies of the commons, tragedies of complexity, and tragedies of the uncommons, in turn challenging regulatory institutions to manage collective action, risk-risk tradeoffs, and extreme catastrophic/existential risks. Optimal interplanetary risk regulation can learn from experience in terrestrial risk regulation, including by designing for adaptive policy learning. Beyond national and international law on Earth, the new space era will need interplanetary risk regulation

SB 86/HB 99: Navigating Alaska’s Digital Renaissance – A Strategic Approach to Virtual Currency Regulation

Alaska is navigating a transformative phase in its regulatory approach to virtual currency transmission, driven by the rapid growth of the fintech industry and the unique economic and geographic challenges faced by its residents. As the number of virtual currency transactions in Alaska has surged dramatically over recent years, the State’s existing money transmission framework—rooted in laws designed before the rise of cryptocurrencies and internet-based financial services—has proven insufficient to address this evolving landscape. In light of the wide adoption of virtual currency by consumers, Alaska has implemented targeted amendments to its Administrative Code and proposed the Alaska Uniform Money Transmission Modernization Act (the “AUMTMA”) through Senate Bill 86 and House Bill 99 (collectively, “SB 86/HB 99”). These regulatory developments aim to provide clarity on virtual currency activities, streamline licensing processes, enhance consumer protections, and align the regulation of money transmission in Alaska with the Model Money Transmission Modernization Act (the “Model Law”). Alaska’s adoption of SB 86/HB 99 would enable a more seamless approach to regulation than the status quo of conflicting laws, as well as help preserve Alaska’s limited resources with respect to licensing and supervisory efforts. Currently, inconsistencies in and across state money transmission regulations function as a barrier to market entry. In effect, slow market entry deters product innovation, which hinders the ability for Alaskans to keep up with an evolving economy and the digitally connected world. Despite market advancements, the legislative process for broader reforms, such as the adoption of SB 86/HB 99, remains uncertain. This Article provides an in-depth examination of Alaska’s regulatory history, the reasons for change, and the ongoing efforts to harmonize state regulations with national standards while addressing the distinct needs of Alaskan consumers and businesses. Furthermore, this Article explores the implications of virtual currency bankruptcies, such as Voyager Digital and Celsius Network, which underscored the vulnerabilities of unregulated or under-regulated markets and led to frozen assets for Alaskan investors. It also evaluates the role of fintech innovations like mobile payment systems in bridging gaps for rural communities with limited access to traditional banking services. This Article highlights Alaska’s efforts to strike a balance between fostering innovation in the digital economy and safeguarding consumers and investors from potential risks. As the State moves forward, the success of these initiatives will depend on effective legislative support, robust stakeholder engagement, and the ability to adapt to the dynamic and fast-paced nature of the fintech ecosystem. Alaska’s experience offers valuable insights into the challenges and opportunities of integrating virtual currencies into traditional regulatory frameworks and positions the State as a potential leader in navigating the digital financial revolution

The Credit Markets Go Dark

Over the past generation, conflicting trends have reshaped the ownership of corporate equity on the one hand and corporate debt on the other. In equity, the two great trends have been the shift from public markets to private ownership and the consolidation of American companies’ stock in the hands of powerful investment funds. In debt, by contrast, the great trends have been a shift from private loans to quasi-public markets and dispersed ownership. In this Article, we chronicle the recent and dramatic reversal of these trends in the debt markets. Private investment funds executing a “private credit” strategy have become increasingly important corporate lenders, bringing into corporate debt the same forces of privatization, concentration, and illiquidity that have been reshaping the equity markets. We offer new data that illustrate the meteoric rise of the now $1.5 trillion private credit industry, and we explore the allure and implications of private credit. For many corporate borrowers, private credit offers a faster, more efficient, and more accessible source of financing than either banks or the public (and quasi-public) debt markets. Yet the transition from bank-intermediated finance to private credit will transform not only corporate finance, but also firm behavior and economic activity more generally. First, as the corporate debt markets follow the equity markets in going dark, information about many large firms will be lost to the investing public. For better or worse, these firms will act with unprecedented discretion—having been shielded from the discipline and scrutiny of regulators, the trading markets, and the general public. Second, corporate debt—like corporate equity—will become the dominion of investment funds, some of which are already unimaginably large. These funds will influence everything from firm operations and strategy to corporate distress, with uncertain consequences