11929 research outputs found
Sort by
2024 Immigration Law Teachers & Scholars Workshop
No full textThe Binger Center for New Americans at the University of Minnesota Law School hosted the 2024 Immigration Law Teachers & Scholars Workshop on May 29-31, 2024 in Minneapolis, Minnesota. This conference provides a forum for immigration law scholars to receive and provide constructive feedback on scholarship in a supportive setting; attend panel discussions that focus on teaching, scholarship, and other issues relevant to a career as an immigration law scholar; and connect with colleagues from across the country. The conference will include a clinic workshop on Wednesday afternoon and two full days of plenary and concurrent sessions, including works in progress sessions on Thursday, May 30, and Friday, May 31
A Perilous Senate Hearing on Bill to Sanction the International Criminal Court
No full textDuring a business meeting this upcoming Wednesday, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee will consider legislation that would impose financial and travel sanctions on an expansive number of people and organizations, potentially including key U.S. allies, in the name of condemning the International Criminal Court (ICC)
Addressing Base Erosion: Impact of the No Tax Breaks for Outsourcing Act on Tax Inversions and Profit Shifting
Get PDFThe modern landscape of international taxation presents complex challenges arising from cross-border transactions and diverse tax regimes. This Comment delves into the intricate world of tax inversions, a process whereby U.S. firms shift their corporate headquarters abroad, thereby exploiting different tax jurisdictions. The implications of tax inversions are significant, and some scholars estimate there are substantial global tax revenue losses.
This Comment examines the mechanics of tax inversions, analyzing the tools employed by multinational corporations to reduce their tax liabilities, such as debt concentration and earnings stripping. This Comment also explores legislative responses, including the No Tax Breaks for Outsourcing Act, designed to curb inversions and profit shifting.
This Comment will assess the effectiveness of these approaches and offer recommendations for refining legislation to close transnational tax loopholes, clarifying definitions, and addressing issues related to jurisdiction and taxation. In conclusion, this Comment will argue for a more comprehensive and cohesive approach to combat tax inversions and ensure equitable revenue distribution in the global tax landscape
Fiscal Equity: The Non-Profit Model of Corporate Ownership
Get PDFIn an era of excessive executive compensation, the non-profit corporation serves as an exemplary alternative. Voluntarily, some brand-name manufacturers operate under existing law that permits non-profit ownership. Virtually all corporations could become non-profits under a legislative reform potentially more effective than past redistributive measures. Twentieth-century progressive taxation has waned, while initiatives to endow impoverished children with personal accounts have not expanded beyond pilot programs. Instead, economic inequality widens with global industrialization. Traditionally, deprivation led to the call for the abolition of private ownership of the means of production, yet this proved impracticable under revolutionary regimes. A review of the evolution of enterprise from artisanal workshops to nationwide firms leads to the non-profit organization. Currently focused on charity and other mutual benefits, the non-profit is a form of corporation constrained from the distribution of net earnings, operating not only in the traditionally charitable sectors, such as education and healthcare, but also the typically capitalist sectors, such as finance and manufacturing. Non-profit executives receive reasonable compensation for work combined with the satisfaction of a mission accomplished. Meanwhile, state, federal, and foreign legislators have enacted corporate reforms to reduce the tyranny of the profit motive. Even if legislatures cannot extinguish for-profits altogether, they can focus on abuses such as those among for-profit colleges. Reform of stockownership can promote equality, where private property consists of the juridical exclusion of economically undesirable persons. Yet the underlying impulse to exclude those who are culturally marked may persist in civil society
Grasping the Third Rail: Restorative Justice and Violent Crime
Get PDFRestorative justice is a means of responding to harm— including criminal offenses—through active accountability and repair, rather than through passive punishment and isolation. While restorative justice has demonstrated potential to meaningfully improve processes and outcomes for individuals and communities, the implementation of restorative justice programs to address crime—both within and alongside the American criminal system—has been slow, limited, and misplaced. Programs are often directed at low-level, nonviolent offenses that involve little if any cognizable harm. This approach creates two problems. One, it risks net-widening: bringing more citizens under criminal surveillance and carceral control for minor offenses—further diluting the constitutional and procedural protections already watered-down in our misdemeanor courts. Two, it ignores the research showing that restorative justice is more necessary and more effective in cases where serious harm has occurred.
As restorative justice offerings across the country expand, legislators and prosecutors continue to exclude crimes of violence, particularly domestic and intimate partner violence and sexual offenses, from their initiatives. These offenses have become the “third rails” of restorative justice. Yet it is precisely in these cases that conventional criminal system responses are failing. It is also in these cases that restorative justice has the greatest potential to meet the needs of involved parties and reduce rates of reoffending. So why are they considered off-limits? This is partly due to pervasive misunderstandings and misconceptions of what restorative justice is and how it operates, both in theory and in practice.
It is time to grasp restorative justice’s third rail: to reconsider how and where it is being used in the criminal system and explore what restorative justice could offer in the pursuit of more effective and equitable responses to violent crime
Adultery Provisions in Matrimonial Agreements
Get PDFCan a contract discourage your spouse from cheating or compensate you for a broken heart? Adultery penalties in marriage contracts seek to do exactly that. An adultery penalty is a financial penalty in a marriage contract triggered by a spouse’s infidelity. While many practitioners advise clients against adultery provisions in marriage contracts, some clients demand them. However, are adultery provisions enforceable? Should they be? This Article considers the sociolegal history of adultery and provides new insight into the enforceability and wisdom of adultery penalties. This Article also provides novel arguments that adultery provisions should not be enforced and calls upon courts to consider the issue more thoughtfully
Copyright and COVID
Get PDFDuring the COVID-19 pandemic it became widely recognized that speedier access to patent rights should be enabled to speed global scale-up of vaccine production. This understanding was expressed in a proposal by India and South Africa that the World Trade Organization suspend multilateral intellectual property rules on COVID vaccines, treatment and containment. The original waiver proposal proposed a suspension of WTO rules on all forms of intellectual property needed for a broad range of COVID-19 response measures, including “vaccination,” “treatment,” and “containment.” The final “TRIPS Waiver,” however, was ultimately limited to a minor provision of TRIPS permitting greater use of compulsory licenses on patents for vaccine production. Other intellectual property issues, such as the many copyright barriers to responding to COVID, were left unaddressed in the waiver and also largely unexamined in the academic literature
Legal Risk and Accountability in Development Finance: Lessons from Jam v. International Finance Corporation
Get PDFIn a landmark decision in 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Jam v. International Finance Corporation that international organizations like the International Finance Corporation (IFC), the private lending arm of the World Bank Group, can be sued in U.S. courts, ending the “absolute immunity” from suit that they had long claimed. The Jam lawsuit arose out of IFC’s gross mishandling of the Tata Mundra coal-fired power plant project in Gujarat, India, which has destroyed the livelihoods, environment, and way of life of local communities living in its shadow. The lawsuit, and especially the clash between IFC’s sweeping assertions of jurisdictional immunity on the one hand, and its role in harming communities and the need for remedy to the communities on the other, brought substantial international attention and public scrutiny to the broader accountability crisis at IFC. In particular, the suit revealed that too often IFC-funded projects result in harm to the poorest and most vulnerable – the very people IFC is meant to help – and when this happens, neither IFC nor its borrowers take meaningful action to remedy that harm
[quote] New England Patriots\u27 Promotion of Jerod Mayo Important for Black Coaches
No full text“The Patriots hiring Jerod Mayo is a huge deal,” said Duru, a professor of sports law at American University in Washington and one of the nation’s foremost experts on the NFL’s hiring practices. “This is an iconic franchise replacing the greatest coach in NFL history. Historically, those jobs have rarely gone to Black candidates.
The Triumph of Three Big Ideas in Fair Use Jurisprudence
Get PDFIn two recent cases, Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc. (“Google v. Oracle”), and Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts v. Goldsmith (“Warhol”), the Supreme Court ratified its 1994 holding that transformative use is the appropriate analytical framework for applying copyright law’s fair use provision. In doing so, the Court withstood significant pressure from industry participants in these cases to change course. This Article argues that the Court’s decisions, which represent one third of the Court’s total merits decisions on fair use, are historic. The principal contribution this Article makes is to demonstrate to courts and parties in future fair use disputes how the holdings in these cases readily synthesize to provide useful guidance that will be relevant, for example, in disputes about generative artificial intelligence. This Article disagrees with those who argue that Warhol represents a retreat from transformativeness, demonstrating instead that the Court in Warhol simply rejected a caricatured version of this form of analysis.
This Article also makes an original argument that shows how these cases reflect the hardwon triumph of three big ideas that were hotly contested in the evolution of the fair use doctrine. First, this Article summarizes how courts disagreed about whether fair use was distinct from the question of substantial similarity in infringement analysis. This Article shows that this issue was not fully resolved until Congress codified fair use as a distinct doctrine in the Copyright Act of 1976. Second, this Article summarizes how legislators resolved the debate over whether to codify fair use or to leave it as a judicially-implied limit on exclusive rights. In doing so, this Article credits Barbara Ringer, the Copyright Office’s point person in the legislative process, as the primary draftsperson of the core of codified fair use in § 107. Finally, this Article shows how codification facilitated increased Supreme Court review of fair use disputes, which led the Court to adjudicate fair use issues in four cases decided within a single decade, culminating in its adoption of transformative use