LARC Cardoso Law (Yeshida Univ)
Not a member yet
9951 research outputs found
Sort by
JLSA x Congregation Rodeph Shalom x West Side Campaign Against Hunger: Food Drive
No full textAccepting Donations November 4-7th.
Please donate canned or dried goods in room 207https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/flyers-2025-2026/1038/thumbnail.jp
Cross-Talk
No full textThe symposium examines the Supreme Court\u27s recent trend of overturning precedent, arguing that this practice undermines the principle of *stare decisis* and the Court\u27s legitimacy. Historically, the Court has used precedent to protect marginalized groups, but recent decisions suggest a shift toward benefiting non-marginalized interests, such as big businesses and conservative groups. This change is seen as a departure from the Court\u27s traditional role and raises concerns about judicial humility and the politicization of the judiciary
“Going Once, Going Twice, Sold!” The Case for Resale Rights for Visual Artists in the United States
No full textResale rights can be understood to be a form of royalty payments that compensate visual artists for subsequent sales after the initial sale of their artwork. In contrast to the schemes available to music artists in the United States, who receive payment for subsequent use of their works through licenses for public performance, synchronization licenses, or mechanical licenses, visual artists lack the ability to profit from the resale of their creations. This discrepancy separates the United States from the approaches to resale rights in many European countries and other countries that have adopted this system. Countries that recognize resale rights for visual artists largely follow the droit de suite system, which extends beyond the finance-focused intentions of intellectual property protections to recognize moral rights in artistic creations. While there have been attempts to bring resale rights to visual artists in the United States, these efforts experienced limited success. For example, California is currently the only state to recognize resale rights for visual artists, limiting their applicability to in-state sellers and transactions. However, resale rights do exist in the non-fungible tokens (NFTs) industry. Smart contracts have built-in options for the implementation, calculation, and payment of resale royalties. While resale rights can be implemented via the initial sale contracts for the visual art industry, protection for this kind of right on a federal level could ensure that visual artists are protected economically and also send a message that artists are not valued simply for their ability to turn a profit, but also that the art they create is beneficial just by being art
The Good Lawyers of January 6
No full textMuch of the response by the community of legal ethics and professional responsibility scholars to the 2020 presidential election has been focused on the wrongs committed by lawyers like John Eastman, Jeffrey Clark, and Kenneth Chesebro, who created the alternate elector scheme to throw the decision regarding the election to the House of Representatives. Yet there was a group of lawyers, that I will refer to as “the good lawyers of January 6,” who forcefully and unequivocally opposed this plan, refused to cooperate in its execution, advised Vice President Mike Pence that it was not legally supportable, and in some cases threatened to resign in protest if President Trump went forward with it. What accounts for the behavior of these lawyers? The hypothesis explored in this article is that a commitment to the rule of law is central to the professional identity of the lawyers who refused to lend their assistance to Trump’s “Stop the Steal” efforts. Of course, each of these lawyers may have acted for his own unique reasons, but the normative commitment shared by all of them is fidelity to the rule of law. The actions of the good lawyers of January 6 serve as a kind of ostensive definition of the ideal of the rule of law as a principle of ethical lawyering
Defending U.S. Citizenship-Based Taxation in Theory and in Practice: An Essay on Fiscal Citizenship in a FATCA World
No full textFor some Americans, a surprising aspect of the saga of Meghan Markle, also known as the Duchess of Sussex, was learning that, as a U.S. citizen living in the United Kingdom, the Duchess was obligated to pay U.S. income taxes on her worldwide income.[1] President Donald Trump has echoed concerns raised in this controversy about the United States’ worldwide income taxation of its citizens living abroad. In particular, during his 2024 presidential campaign, President Trump called for “ending the double taxation of overseas Americans.”[2] I found myself drawn into this debate about the United States’ citizenship-based taxation by virtue of a 2011 article I had written in the Iowa Law Review.[3] In that article, I responded to criticism of the United States’ citizenship-based taxation and, in particular, defended the United States’ taxation of its overseas citizens on their respective worldwide incomes.[4] A key component of the then-prevailing critique held that the United States cannot in practice enforce its income tax against U.S. citizens living abroad.[5] In contrast, I argued for citizenship-based taxation on enforceability grounds, contending that citizenship is an administrable proxy for domicile. Like domicile, citizenship reflects permanent allegiance to the home nation. Many nations tax individuals residing abroad on their respective worldwide incomes based on such individuals’ continuing domiciles at home while they live overseas. U.S. taxation of its overseas citizens by virtue of U.S. citizenship is a more efficient way of obtaining similar results without engaging in the fact-intensive inquiries necessary to determine a taxpayer’s residence or domicile. This analysis raises a question which, among others, I now address: why should an individual’s domicile (or residence) in a nation be the basis for taxing that individual’s worldwide income while she is living in another nation? The answer, I argue, is to be found in the notion of “fiscal citizenship,” an individual’s obligation to support the national political community of which she is a member, even if living outside the borders of that nation
The Power of Public Vision in ADR
No full textMediation, a form of alternative dispute resolution (“ADR”), resolves disputes outside of court with a neutral third party that facilitates negotiations. Its confidentiality promotes fairness, neutrality, and candor. This is appealing to parties when litigation could result in bad publicity, and is common in labor disputes, especially during union strikes, where open dialogue is essential.
The print edition of the issue has also been released. This post was originally published on the Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution website on November 24, 202
Cardozo Bail Project
No full textGeneral Body Meeting, Learn about the process for posting bail.https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/flyers-2025-2026/1014/thumbnail.jp
The Bro-Economy and the Bro-Democracy
No full textCardozo’s Professor Michael Pollack will host Michael Abramowicz (Professor, George Washington University Law School), Jennifer Lawless (Professor, University of Virginia), and Craig Holman (Government Affairs Lobbyist, Public Citizen) to discuss the manosphere, election betting, and prediction markets, and how these forces shape our democracy for good and for ill.https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/flyers-2024-2025/1062/thumbnail.jp
Time For a Clean Finish? Analyzing a New Path to Collective Bargaining at the WWE
No full textThe note argues that professional wrestlers in the WWE face significant challenges in achieving fair compensation and better working conditions due to their classification as independent contractors, which denies them protections under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). It proposes that leveraging antitrust law could provide an alternative and effective strategy for wrestlers to collectively bargain and improve their circumstances, drawing parallels to successful efforts by UFC fighters
Ensuring That Neutrals Reflect the Diversity of Claimants
No full textThe legitimacy of arbitration depends not only on fair procedures, but also on the credibility of the decision-makers themselves. Yet many arbitral rosters fail to reflect the diversity of the parties who appear before them. This panel, moderated by Andrea K. Schneider, will examine why representation among neutrals matters, how a lack of diversity can perpetuate systemic imbalances, and what steps can be taken to broaden the pool of arbitrators in the decades ahead. Panelists Homer La Rue, Ama-Birago Fosu, and Imre Szalai will share perspectives on expanding pathways to the profession and promoting more inclusive systems of dispute resolution