Skidaway Institute of Oceanography
DigitalCommons@University of Georgia School of LawNot a member yet
17912 research outputs found
Sort by
Quinn named director of Dean Rusk International Law Center
No full textSarah Quinn has been appointed the director of the Dean Rusk International Law Center. For the last nine months, she has led the center on an interim basis. Named after the former U.S. Secretary of State who taught at the School of Law in the last decades of his career, the center has served as a nucleus for global research, education and service for the school since 1977
Fine argues before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
No full textThird-year student and Appellate Litigation Clinic participant Allison J. Fine argued the case N\u27Jai v. Department of Education before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The clinic was appointed as amicus to address whether the government contacts exception to the D.C. long-arm statute protects only First Amendment contacts. Third-year students E. Hope Garrison and Robert G. Rob Wedge helped brief the case and prepare Fine for the argument
UGA Law finishes as regional finalists in the National Appellate Advocacy Competition
No full textCongratulations to third-year students Sarah C. Guilot and Leila Y. Harrison for finishing as regional finalists at the ABA National Appellate Advocacy Competition. The pair were also recognized for their oral skills, placing 10th and 4th (respectively) as the competition\u27s best oralists. Second-year students Garfield A. McIntyre Jr. and Taylor L. Stablein also competed and excellently represented the law school.
The teams were coached by third-year students M. Larkin Carden and Kendra Hansey Õiglane. A special thank you goes to the alumni/alumnae and professors who helped the teams to prepare for competition
School of Law captures finalists trophy in LL.M. International Arbitration Competition
No full textCongratulations to LL.M. students Agostina Calamari, Savelii Elizarov and Cornelius Bulanov for finishing the 11th LL.M. International Arbitration Competition as finalists. Dean Peter B. Bo Rutledge and second-year law student Gloria M. Correa served as the team\u27s coaches. Hosted by American University, this event was created specifically for LL.M. students to foster the study of international arbitration for the resolution of international business and investment disputes
Pruitt receives Asia-Georgia Internship Connection scholarship
No full textCongratulations to second-year student Caden S. Cade Pruitt for receiving a UGA Office of Global Engagement Asia-Georgia Internship Connection Scholarship of $6,500 to support his Global Externship Overseas this summer at KPMG Legal in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. His work will be supervised by 2011 alumnus Binh Tran, a director at KPMG Law.
In addition to the work he will complete as a legal extern, Pruitt will engage in a supervised research project with Stembler Family Distinguished Professor in Business Law Christopher M. Bruner, who also serves as a faculty co-director of the Dean Rusk International Law Center
Redmon featured on Salon.com
No full textClinical Assistant Professor & Prosecutorial Justice Program Director Melissa D. Redmon was featured on Salon.com regarding the 2020 election interference case. The article titled \u27It doesn\u27t gut the case\u27: Experts say dropped Fulton charges won\u27t help Trump \u27at all\u27 was written by Tatyana Tandanpolie and published 3/14/24
Quinn featured in Global Atlanta
No full textDean Rusk International Law Center Director Sarah Quinn was featured in Global Atlanta regarding her new leadership position. The article titled New Dean Rusk Center Director: How UGA Prepares Georgia\u27s Future International Lawyers was written by Leigh Villegas and published 3/23/24
Rodrigues featured in USA Today
No full textUniversity Professor & Kilpatrick Chair of Corporate Finance and Securities Law Usha Rodrigues was featured in USA Today regarding stock prices and company performance. The article titled Truth Social\u27s stock price is soaring. It\u27s not just Trump supporters buying in. was written by Bailey Schulz and published 3/27/24
Amann featured in Portugal\u27s Expresso newspaper
No full textRegents\u27 Professor of International Law & Woodruff Chair in International Law Diane Marie Amann was featured in Portugal\u27s Expresso newspaper regarding the challenges of holding Russian officials accountable for the war in Ukraine. The article titled Council of Europe Wants to Judge Russian Aggression in a Special Court: Is this How Moscow Will Pay the Bill for the War? / Conselho da Europa quer julgar agressão russa num tribunal especial: é desta que Moscovo vai pagar a fatura da guerra? was written by Mara Tribuna and published 5/10/24
Smith Professor Hillel Y. Levin offers his thoughts on the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision on U.S. v. Rahimi
No full textSmith Professor Hillel Y. Levin offers his thoughts on the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision on U.S. v. Rahimi:
What did the Supreme Court do in Rahimi?
As expected, the Court reversed the Fifth Circuit and held that when an individual has been found by a court to pose a credible threat to the physical safety of another, that individual may be temporarily disarmed consistent with the Second Amendment. The decision was 8-1, with only Justice Thomas dissenting.
On what basis did the Supreme Court decide the case?
The Court held that when looking for historical analogues of modern-day restrictions on firearms, it is not necessary to find a perfectly equivalent regulation from the Founding or post-Civil War eras. In the words of Chief Justice Roberts, the author of the majority opinion, the Second Amendment permits more than just those regulations identical to ones that could be found in 1791. It is sufficient that there be sufficient historical analogues that impose similar burdens or restrictions on the right to bear arms for similar reasons. Here, the Court concluded that the country has a tradition of disarming individuals who pose a clear threat of physical violence to another, even if not quite in the same manner as the law that was applied to Rahimi.
Does this clarify Bruen? How will it impact other cases?
This was a fairly narrow opinion. The Court kept the Bruen regime intact and gave little guidance to lower courts in applying it to other kinds of regulations. At most, the Court clarified that historical analogues need not be perfect in order to justify a modern restriction. However, lower courts will continue to struggle to determine just how similar a modern restriction must be to the historical analogue.
University of Georgia School of Law Smith Professor Hillel Y. Levin is available for further commentary at [email protected]