Gaza Shoah

This is a working paper describing the ideological work that US zionism does to enable the unfolding genocide in Gaza

Tort Liability and Unawareness

We explore the implications of unawareness for tort law. We study cases where injurers and victims initially are unaware that some acts can yield harmful consequences, or that some acts or harmful consequences are even possible, but later become aware. Following Karni and Vierø (2013), we model unawareness by Reverse Bayesianism. We compare the two basic liability rules of Anglo-American tort law, negligence and strict liability, and argue that negligence has an important advantage over strict liability in a world with unawareness—negligence, through the stipulation of due care standards, spreads awareness about the updated probability of harm

The Rule of Law under Challenge: The Enmeshment of National and International Trends

In a period of rising threats to constitutional government within countries and among them, it is a crucial time to study the rule of law in transnational context. This framework paper defines core concepts, analyzes the relation of national and international law and institutions from a rule-of-law perspective, and assesses the extent to which rule-of-law practices are shifting at the domestic and international levels in parallel. Part I explains our conceptualization of the rule of law, necessary for the orientation of empirical study and policy responses. Following Martin Krygier, we formulate a teleological conception of the rule of law in terms of goals and practices, which, in turn, calls for an assessment of institutional mechanisms to advance these goals, given varying social conditions and contexts. Part II sets forth the ways in which international law and institutions are important for rule-of-law ends, as well as their pathologies, since power also is exercised beyond the state in an interconnected world. Part III examines empirical indicators of the decline of the rule of law at the national and international levels. It notes factors that could explain such decline, and why such factors appear to be transnationally linked. Part IV discusses what might be done given these shifts in rule-of-law protections. We then conclude, noting the implications of viewing the rule of law in transnational context for conceptual theory, empirical study, and policy response

Race and Entrepreneurship: Reclaiming Narratives

This essay makes the case for engaging in counter-narratives and inclusive storytelling within the transactional clinic curriculum. The authors leverage lessons from Critical Race Theory to amplify the voices and experiences of underrepresented entrepreneurs and marginalized communities in both clinic seminar and selected casework. In doing so, we challenge hegemonic narratives of entrepreneurship and expose our law students to the presence and impact of interlocking systems of subordination that minimize the existence and contributions of entrepreneurs of color. We challenge our law students and ourselves to become more creative and thoughtful lawyers to a more inclusive and diverse set of client-entrepreneurs

Hatch-Waxman’s Renegades

No intellectual property rights impact society more forcefully than patents on pharmaceuticals. But as a practical matter, only a handful of jurists resolve disputes involving them. Two neighboring federal districts, Delaware and New Jersey, adjudicate the vast majority of patent contests between brand-name drug companies and generic manufacturers. And in contrast to Eastern Texas, which has been persistently derided as a renegade jurisdiction, the authority of the mid-Atlantic courts has seldom been questioned. The complex workings of the Hatch-Waxman Act, the compromise legislation that governs pharmaceutical patent litigation, go a long way to explaining such distinct shareholder reactions to highly similar judicial behaviors. Yet the dominance of Delaware and New Jersey in pharmaceutical patent litigation may have come to an end. A recent decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Valeant v. Mylan, has narrowed the rules for venue in Hatch-Waxman cases. We are now poised to see multiple, parallel trials involving the same patented pharmaceutical proceeding in courts across the country. The new order of pharmaceutical patent litigation affords an opportunity to reconsider an intellectual property environment that aims to promote pharmaceutical innovation but also increase public access to medications. Venue determinations are puzzling in pharmaceutical patent cases due to a concept originating within the Hatch-Waxman Act, the tort of “artificial” infringement. Artificial infringement occurs when a manufacturer petitions the federal government to obtain permission to market a generic drug. But the federal government both issues patents, and awards regulatory approval to sell a drug, with effect across the entire nation. Congress gave no thought towards situating artificial infringement at a certain place, and judicial efforts to do so have amounted to a facile and strained exercise. Venue is not artificial infringement’s only problem. Artificial infringement also creates disconnects with personal jurisdiction principles, incorporates obsolete remedial provisions, and fails to comply with the international commitments of the United States. Courts should instead recognize their authority to accept declaratory judgment actions to resolve pharmaceutical patent infringement cases, with legislative abolition of artificial infringement presenting another, preferred possibility

Making the World Safer and Fairer in Pandemics

Global health has long been characterized by injustice, with certain populations marginalized and made vulnerable by social, economic, and health disparities within and among countries. The pandemic only amplified inequalities. In response to it, the World Health Organization and the United Nations have embarked on transformative normative and financial reforms that could reimagine pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response (PPPR). These reforms include a new strategy to sustainably finance the WHO, a UN political declaration on PPPR, a fundamental revision to the International Health Regulations, and negotiation of a new, legally binding pandemic agreement (popularly called the “Pandemic Treaty”). We revisit the cavernous shortcomings of the global Covid-19 response, explain potentially transformative legal reforms and the ethical values that underpin them, and propose actionable solutions to advance both health and justice

How to Interpret a Vending Machine: Smart Contracts and Contract Law

A smart contract is software designed to do the job of a legal contract: ensuring the performance of parties who might not otherwise trust one another to do so. By running a smart contract on blockchain, users can lock themselves into future performances without relying on a third-party enforcer or platform host, thereby realizing a “fully trustless” exchange. This new technology has wide range of potential applications, and contracts are likely to become an increasingly common part of the economy. Some have argued that smart contracts represent a new type of legal contract, analogizing the software’s code to a contractual writing. Others have suggested that smart contracts might in some transactions replace legal contracts. But the relationship between smart contracts and legal contracts is more complex than either claim acknowledges. Although using a smart contract can figure into the formation of a legal contract, it is a mistake to analogize a smart contract’s code to a contractual writing. Unlike writings, code should rarely figure into to the interpretation of a legal contract; and when it does, its interpretation is different in kind. And though some have tried to use incorporation, integration or TINALEA clauses to substitute smart contracts for traditional contractual protections, it is not clear that courts would or should always enforce such provisions. And even if they do, governance by code rather than law comes at a significant cost to the parties. Smart contracts work better when they supplement, rather than supplant, legal contracts. This article analyzes the many ways a smart contract might interact with the law of contracts by taking seriously the comparison, common in the literature, of smart contracts to vending machines. A series of thought experiments is used to explore when and how the mechanisms inside a machine, analog or digital, can affect the terms of a legal contract between its users. The resulting detailed doctrinal analysis provides support for a broader thesis about the relationship between technology, law and society. Smart contracts, though useful tools, instantiate an anemic form of human sociability as compared to the complex, even trusting, relationships for which contract law is designed

Surveillance, State Secrets, and the Future of Constitutional Rights

The Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in Federal Bureau of Investigation v. Fazaga heralds a worrying trend. Over the past 15 years, as more information about how the government wields its foreign intelligence collection authorities on U.S. soil has become available, it has become clear that the government has repeatedly acted outside its constitutional and statutory limits, and at times, in flagrant disregard for judicial orders. As a result, dozens of cases challenging surveillance have been making their way through the courts. Unlike in prior eras, in certain cases it has become easier for litigants to establish an injury-in-fact in light of the information available and the programmatic nature of collection. In response, the government has crafted a new state secrets analysis, raised the privilege early in litigation to have suits dismissed, broadened its assertion to encompass entire categories of information, and claimed as an Article II constitutional power what for centuries has been a common law rule. Because of the government’s shift, what is now at stake is the possibility of any litigant to ever challenge illegal and unconstitutional surveillance. Fazaga represents the tip of the iceberg in terms of the risks to individual rights that would follow should the government ultimately prevail

Creditor Courts

One of the largest institutional creditors in the United States is perhaps the most unexpected: the criminal court system. Each year, creditor courts collect more than $15 billion in revenues from criminal defendants. These fees are the lifeblood of the modern criminal legal system. In this Article, we shed new light on the legal and economic framework under which myriad stakeholders operate in these creditor courts. By analyzing new survey data from clerks of court and 102 contracts with debt collection agencies in Florida, we provide general insights how creditor courts distort incentives and teem with conflicts of interest. These inefficiencies regularly disrupt the financial stability of the judiciary as well as the lives of the largely indigent criminal defendants who remain indebted to this system. As we show, legislators, clerks of court, and the judiciary writ large subject criminal defendants to unconstrained coercion through the use of so-called “user fees.” Leveraging campaign finance data and publicly available litigation material, we also find suggestive evidence of possible quid pro quo rewards between collection agencies assigned to collect debt on behalf of courts and the clerks of court tasked with administering them. We argue that state constitutional reforms that eliminate creditor courts and mandate courts be funded from general state revenues are the only meaningful ways to permanently redress the social costs generated by criminal monetary sanctions

Breaking the Rules

“Breaking the Rules” is a legal research and writing assignment that I crafted for students completing their first year of law school. The assignment honors new students’ desire for skills that will allow them to effectively challenge the status quo of settled but discriminatory legal rules. Part I of this article is an essay that contextualizes and explains the assignment; Part II provides the assignment itself