Global Health Research Center of Central Asia
Columbia Law School Scholarship ArchiveNot a member yet
5770 research outputs found
Sort by
Defending the Planet Ep0: Introducing Defending the Planet
Get PDFCan lawyers save the planet? To kick off the series, host Michael B. Gerrard is joined by prominent environmental journalist Andrew C. Revkin and environmental and climate justice advocate Shannon R. Marcoux ’21. They discuss the role of lawyers and combating climate change, why young lawyers should focus on climate law and policy, Columbia University\u27s commitment to addressing climate change across disciplines, and more.https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/defending_the_planet/1000/thumbnail.jp
Defending the Planet Ep4: Climate Change in the Courts
Get PDFStrategic litigation has been effective in advancing civil rights and gender equality in the United States and privacy and human rights across Europe. Can lawsuits filed by environmental groups and activists around the world compel corporations and governments to curb carbon emissions? Was an important precedent set when a Dutch court ruled recently that Royal Dutch Shell must reduce its emissions significantly by the year 2030 and to net zero by the year 2050? Do judges have more power to combat climate change by enforcing existing laws or offering new interpretations of constitutional, human rights, and common law principles?
Michael Burger ’03, executive director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, and Peter Lehner ’84 of Earthjustice and a lecturer in law at Columbia Law join host Michael B. Gerrard to discuss new developments in climate-related litigation.https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/defending_the_planet/1004/thumbnail.jp
Five Years After the Adoption of the Paris Agreement, Are Climate Change Considerations Reflected in Mining Contracts?
Get PDFDomestic laws are the ideal legal instrument to regulate the mining sector’s contribution to climate change mitigation and adaptation. Even so, as a stop-gap-measure, governments may consider updating model mining development agreements (MMDAs) or negotiating climate-related contractual provisions. This CCSI paper explores whether governments are using, and how they can use, investor–state mining contracts to advance climate goals. We synthesize our findings and recommendations for six categories of provisions: integrating renewable energy into mining products, reducing deforestation, requiring a climate risk assessment and community vulnerability assessment, regulating water use, requiring tailings dam design justifications, and integrating climate risks into closure plans
Populist Prosecutorial Nullification
Get PDFNo one doubts that prosecutors may sometimes decline prosecution notwithstanding factual guilt. Everyone expects prosecutors to prioritize enforcement based on resource limitation and, occasionally, to decline prosecution on a case-by-case basis when they deem justice requires it. Recently, however, some state prosecutors have gone further, asserting the right to refuse categorically to enforce certain state laws. Examples include refusals to seek the death penalty and refusals to prosecute prostitution or recreational drug use. When may a single actor render inert her state’s democratically enacted law in this way? If the answer is anything other than “never,” the vast reach of American state criminal law demands a pertinent framework for ascertaining legitimacy.
In offering one, this Article provides the first extended analysis of the normative import of the locally elected status of the state prosecutors who make such pledges. If legitimacy is the problem, local elections can be the solution. That is, there may well be something suspect about unilateral prosecutorial negation of democratically enacted law. Yet that same negation can be justified as distinctly democratic when the elected prosecutor can wrap it in popular sanction.
This Article first unspools a once-robust American tradition of localized, populist nonenforcement of criminal law, best seen in jury nullification. It then draws upon democratic theory to construct a normative basis for reviving that tradition in the context of state prosecutors’ categorical nonenforcement. These moves uncover a before-now unappreciated connection: At least where the prosecutor ties her categorical nullification to the polity’s electorally expressed will, she accomplishes wholesale what nullifying juries could once do retail. I thus dub that wholesale action “populist prosecutorial nullification.” Building upon that analogy and my normative analysis, I set out a novel framework for evaluating state prosecutors’ categorical nonenforcement that is keyed to the concept of localized popular will, while accounting for populism’s well-known downsides
Advancing Socioeconomic Rights Through Interdisciplinary Factfinding: Opportunities and Challenges
No full textThe human rights movement is increasingly using interdisciplinary, multidisciplinary, mixed-methods, and quantitative factfinding. There has been too little analysis of these shifts. This article examines some of the opportunities and challenges of these methods, focusing on the investigation of socio-economic human rights. By potentially expanding the amount and types of evidence available, factfinding\u27s accuracy and persuasiveness can be strengthened, bolstering rights claims. However, such methods can also present significant challenges and may pose risks in individual cases and to the human rights movement generally. Interdisciplinary methods can be costly in human, financial, and technical resources; are sometimes challenging to implement; may divert limited resources from other work; can reify inequalities; may produce “expertise” that disempowers rightsholders; and could raise investigation standards to an infeasible or counterproductive level. This article includes lessons learned and questions to guide researchers and human rights advocates considering mixed-methods human rights factfinding
DTP 03
No full textLine art image with photos of Laurence Tubiana and Sue Biniaz \u2783.https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/defending_the_planet_podcast/1010/thumbnail.jp
DTP 06
No full textLine art image with photos of Olatunde C.A. Johnson and Ruth Santiago.https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/defending_the_planet_podcast/1019/thumbnail.jp
BU S2E01
No full textLine art image of Kate Andrias, Professor of Law at Columbia Law School.https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/beyond_unprecedented_podcast/1021/thumbnail.jp
Securities Regulation: Cases and Materials
No full textThis is the nation’s first and oldest casebook on securities regulation. This edition has been streamlined for easier use, but it continues to provide instructors and students with the full range of tools for the in-depth study of securities regulation. It has been revised and updated to take into account the following: Initial coin offerings and sales of other crypto-assets Changes in the primary and secondary capital markets, including high frequency trading Certain amendments to the public disclosure requirements Amendments to the limited offering exemptions The ongoing debate around elements of Rule 10b–5 Regulation Best Interest Recent Supreme Court cases, including their implications for certain civil litigation and the SEC’s continued reliance on administrative proceedingshttps://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/books/1341/thumbnail.jp
BU S2E00
No full textPhoto of Stacey Vanek Smith, JRN ’03.https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/beyond_unprecedented_podcast/1025/thumbnail.jp