11929 research outputs found
Sort by
Brief of Professors of Administrative Law as Amici Curiae in Support of Plaintiff-Appellant
Get PDFAmici are professors of law who teach and write in the field of administrative law. They have an interest in how this Court’s decision will affect administrative law, especially the judicial review of agency action. While individual amici’s views on judicial review of agency action may differ, all agree that the panel opinion’s denial of judicial review of the Federal Election Commission’s dismissal of complaints brought under the Federal Election Campaign Act, 52 U.S.C. § 30101 et seq., is incorrect
Lunch n Learn focused on Educational Equity Under Attack: From \u27Anti-Wokeness\u27 to Affirmative Action bans
No full textOur Fall 2023 Lunch n Learn focused on Educational Equity Under Attack: From \u27Anti-Wokeness\u27 to Affirmative Action bans. Speakers included AU Professors Kenjus Watson and Lia Epperson, accompanied by student leader Josiah Carolina
D.C. Bar IP Community Honors Professor Victoria Phillips and Judge Pauline Newman
No full textThe D.C. Bar Intellectual Property Community gathered at the Bar’s headquarters on May 14 to honor law professor Victoria Phillips with its annual Champion of Intellectual Property Award and Judge Pauline Newman with its inaugural Lifetime Achievement Award for their outstanding accomplishments in the field of IP law.
Phillips is a professor at American University Washington College of Law, where she also serves as director of the school’s Glushko-Samuelson Intellectual Property Clinic and founded its Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property. Newman, a pioneer in the IP community, is the longest-serving judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, joining the court in 1984 following her appointment by President Ronald Reagan
The Chicken or the Egg: The Proper Order of Analysis when Determining the Enforceability of a Delegation Clause and the Broader Arbitration Agreement in Consumer Contexts
Get PDFFirst, this Comment will provide pertinent background on the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) to better understand the intent of the legislation and how it has historically been applied. Second, this Comment will seek to not only explain the underlying cause of the circuit split but also offer a framework for the proper order of analysis in situations with both a delegation claim and an unenforceability claim. Specifically, this Comment will argue that although a delegation clause’s enforceability must be analyzed separately from the entire agreement’s enforceability, the delegation clause must be examined within the context of the arbitration agreement to ensure a plaintiff can truly pursue their rights, rather than be forced into a rigged arbitration game.
This Comment will then recommend that future courts follow the example set by the Second, Third, and Fourth Circuits. Each found that agreements that waive a borrower’s federal statutory rights are unenforceable. Additionally, this Comment will argue that should the Supreme Court take on a future appeal by the Brice plaintiffs, it should reject the Ninth Circuit’s reasoning and bolster the prospective waiver doctrine. Finally, this Comment will set forth a framework to alter current FAA rules regarding arbitration between a company and a consumer
The Domestic and International Limitations of the Third-Party Doctrine in the Digital Age
Get PDFThis Comment argues that the third-party doctrine further alienates EU-U.S. partnerships because the doctrine subverts privacy interests as binding legal precedent. Part II will explore the history of the third-party doctrine up until the Carpenter decision and explain why U.S. privacy rights are linked with access to third-party information. This Comment will further outline EU data protection laws, EU legislation, and the CJEU’s Schrems II decision. In Part III, this Comment will also analyze the new data protection framework, Executive Order 14086, and discuss whether it fails to overcome the CJEU’s concerns over U.S. privacy laws for EU subjects. By comparing Carpenter to the Schrems II decision, this Comment will gauge what steps are needed to reconcile the third-party doctrine with EU standards. Finally, Part IV of this Comment will recommend that Congress codify privacy rights for U.S. citizens modeled after the GDPR, or alternatively, offer an updated test for data protection under the law
The Very Interstate Nature of the Internet? Establishing Uniform Requirements for Internet Transmissions Within Interstate and Foreign Commerce
Get PDFThis Comment argues that federal statutes, including the jurisdictional nexus of “transmission in interstate or foreign commerce,” should require evidence that a transmission actually traveled through interstate commerce to establish the required federal nexus. Part II of this article describes what threatening internet speech is, the development of the circuit split, and the statutory criteria at issue. Part III analyzes each side of the split and examines when statutory language permits an assumption of interstate or foreign transmission. Part III also proposes adopting a strict definition of “transmission in interstate and foreign commerce” for Internet-based speech and requiring evidence that the transmissions crossed state or national lines. Part IV recommends that Congress amend the statutes in question to include unambiguous wording to utilize this test and to continue to amend as internet and social media use evolves. Part V concludes and looks at future unresolved questions
On the Field of Equity: The Rooney Rule Unveiled
No full textThe William S. Boyd School of Law and the Sports and Entertainment Law Association present The Rooney Rule Unveiled.
Jim Rooney (Pittsburgh Steelers Ownership) and Jerami Duri (American University Washington College of Law Professor of Law & Director, WCL Sport & Society Initiative) will present on diversity, equity, and inclusion in NFL hiring.
The event will take place on Thursday, February 8, 2024, from 5-7 p.m. at the Thomas and Mack Moot Courtroom. 5-6:30 p.m. will be the lecture and discussion with networking to follow from 6:30-7 p.m
Cardozo AELJ’s Spring 2024 Symposium Explores the Implications of the Warhol and Bad Spaniels Decisions on Copyright and Trademark Law
No full textThank you to everyone who attended and participated in the Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal’s spring symposium, “Barking Up the Wrong Tree: An Exploration of Intellectual Property Law Protections Following Bad Spaniels and Andy Warhol.” AELJ is proud to have hosted such a successful event, highlighting a range of thoughtful and engaging scholarship.
Amy Adler kicked off the event with a captivating keynote address that provided an overview of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. Goldsmith. Professor Adler highlighted that this decision underscores the broader issue of courts determining the meanings and messages of visual art, whether courts should discern such meaning, and if so, how courts should go about this.
The first panel, focusing on copyright law, discussed how the Warhol opinion should have been structured while also acknowledging the correctly decided elements of the decision. The panelists presented arguments for how antitrust law can better inform the transformative use assessment when determining fair use of copyright, how the Court incorrectly conflated commercial licensing with the fair use defense, and why its decision in Warhol was right to reject an application of patent law’s prospect theory to copyright’s derivative work right.
Turning our attention to trademark law, the second panel dove into the implications of the Supreme Court’s recent Jack Daniel’s Properties, Inc. v. VIP Products LLC decision. The panelists discussed the intersection of the Court’s Jack Daniel’s and Abitron decisions, the Rogers test’s now-limited applicability, and parody.
We extend our sincerest thanks and utmost gratitude to all our panelists and moderators: Amy Adler, Michael Carroll, Stacey Dogan, Christine Haight Farley, Peter Karol, Jacob Noti-Victor, Jessica Silbey, Christopher Sprigman, Rebecca Tushnet, and Felix Wu.
We look forward to seeing you all at next year’s symposium!
More information on “Barking Up the Wrong Tree: An Exploration of Intellectual Property Law Protections Following Bad Spaniels and Andy Warhol” can be found here
Cultural Appropriation in Design
No full textWe live in a great country. But there are real threats to it. Three-quarters of all voters – left, right, center – believe our democracy is in peril. Extremism, anti-Semitism, racism, violence against LGBTQ people, and political violence persist. It is part of the reason I chose “Defending Democracy” as the theme for my tenure as AALS President.
Law schools can play a critical role in the future of our country and our democracy. The legal profession has never had a higher profile and greater exposure than over the last few years. Lawyers are everywhere in places of prominence, power, and policy. Lawyers have shaped and will continue to shape our democracy.
What, then, is our responsibility as educators of future lawyers? What role do we play in helping to ensure that our democracy endures? Our work begins with three pillars that define every law school: curriculum, scholarship, and culture. We are teaching the courses, writing the scholarship, and shaping the cultures that propel legal education.
When we raise our collective voice, people listen. Defending democracy is not about politics. It’s about what we can do together. Throughout the next year and beyond, I look forward to working with all of you to advance this ever-important work
Moving Beyond Yoga: An Exploratory, Qualitative Study of Public Defenders’ Solutions for Improving Work-Life and Effective Assistance of Counsel
Get PDFThis study employs a thematic analysis of public defenders’ responses to open-ended questions concerning their lived experiences, motivations, and challenges, and their proposed solutions for improving their work-life balance and the criminal legal system