New York Law School’s Digital Commons@NYLS

February 29, 2024
March 1, 2024https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/student_organizations/1008/thumbnail.jp

New York Law School

DigitalCommons@NYLS 
Student Organizations Event Posters 
2-29-2024 
LEGAL ASSOCIATION FOR WOMEN (LAW) SYMPOSIUM 2024 
New York Law School 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/student_organizations 
WE ARE NEW YORK’S LAW SCHOOL
Since 1891
Thursday, February 29 
Events Center
10:00 a.m.–10:30 a.m. 
Check-in and Breakfast
10:30 a.m.–11:00 a.m. 
Opening Remarks and Judge Judy Sheindlin ’65  
LAW Award Ceremony
11:00 a.m.–12:00 p.m. 
Day in the Life 
12:30 p.m.–2:00 p.m. 
Lunch and Roundtable Discussions
4:00 p.m.–5:00 p.m. 
Diversity in the Legal Field 
5:30 p.m.–6:30 p.m. 
Finding Your Path 
Friday, March 1 
W300
10:00 a.m.–10:30 a.m. 
Check-in and Breakfast 
10:30 a.m.–11:30 a.m. 
She Means Business  
(Interviewing and Networking)
11:45 a.m.–12:45 p.m. 
All Things Post-Grad
1:15 p.m.–2:15 p.m. 
Lunch and Mix and Mingle 
2:45 p.m.–3:45 p.m. 
Balance and Mindfulness in the Law
3:45 p.m.–4:45 p.m. 
Keynote Speaker
LEGAL 
ASSOCIATION 
FOR WOMEN 
(LAW) 
SYMPOSIUM 
2024
Thursday, February 29, 2024 
10:00 a.m.–6:30 p.m.
Friday, March 1, 2024 
10:00 a.m.–4:45 p.m. 
Reception to follow at 
Mezcali on March 1 at 6:00 p.m.
New York Law School 
185 West Broadway 
New York, NY 10013
RSVP at  
www.nyls.edu/nylsrsvp 
THANK YOU TO OUR SPONSORS:  
NYLS Student Bar Association; Harris, Keenan & Goldfarb; NYLS Office of Diversity, 
Equity, and Inclusion; Hall Booth Smith; Malecki Law; Kathleen Law; Meryl Fiedler 
Lieberman ’81, Founding Partner Emerita, Traub Lieberman; and Troutman Pepper


English

LEGAL ASSOCIATION FOR WOMEN (LAW) SYMPOSIUM 2024

https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/viewbooks/1016/thumbnail.jp

New York Law School,

Viewbook 2024

Our community turned up today to participate in an on-campus blood drive for New York Blood Center
October 9, 2024https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/photos_other_events/1005/thumbnail.jp

On-Campus Blood Drive

NYLS Law Review 
Volume 68 Issue 1 Article 1 
January 2024 
Title Page 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/nyls_law_review 
Recommended Citation 
Title Page, 68 N.Y.L. SCH. L. REV. (2024). 
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@NYLS. It has been accepted for 
inclusion in NYLS Law Review by an authorized editor of DigitalCommons@NYLS. For more information, please 
contact camille.broussard@nyls.edu, farrah.nagrampa@nyls.edu. 
New York Law School Law Review
VOLUME 68 • 2023/24
68 N.Y.L. Sch. L. Rev. 1–82 (2023–2024)
https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/nyls_law_review



Title Page

Rosenberg, Melissa F.

CoreCivic, Inc. v. Candide Group, LLC

NYLS Law Review 
Volume 68 Issue 2 Article 3 
January 2024 
Masthead Page 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/nyls_law_review 
Recommended Citation 
Masthead Page, 68 N.Y.L. SCH. L. REV. (2024). 
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@NYLS. It has been accepted for 
inclusion in NYLS Law Review by an authorized editor of DigitalCommons@NYLS. For more information, please 
contact camille.broussard@nyls.edu, farrah.nagrampa@nyls.edu. 
New York Law School Law Review
VOLUME 68 • 2023/24
EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
Melissa F. Rosenberg
MANAGING EDITOR
Mikayla Ullrich
EXECUTIVE EDITORS
Leah R. Gold Lillian Hatzenbeler Jacqueline Lacovara Aleksandra Petrovic
STAFF EDITORS 
Jenna Aasen
Sandy Abiad
Rebecca Armstrong
Syma Birenbaum
Cyrus Breese
Michael Brod
Michal Chait
Marco Denaro
Jillian Dreusike
Leslie Dupré
Hassan Elsebai
Bethany Friedman
Sarah Glassman
Holly Habyan
Rachel Horowitz
Alexandra Hough
Katherine Howard
Danielle Keller
Anahita Khorsand
Christopher Kipiniak
Ron Kort
Rialda Kuc
Dong-Gun Daniel Lee
Benjamin Newman
Michael Raschilla
Michael Salvo
Eric Spiniello
Phoebe Steinfeld
Daniel Sullivan
Robbie Webster
FACULTY PUBLISHER
Michelle E. Zierler
JUNIOR STAFF EDITORS
Hussain Abidi
Keehle Amicon
Julia Applefeld
Logan Arlen
Vanessa Belford
Rebecca Bliss
Joseph Capio
Morgan Celentano
Ryen Cinski
Elizabeth Cox
Megan Crocco
Emilie Delannes-Molka
Brianna Evans-Sheehan
Monica Fainshtein
Jake Finkelstein
Jeremy Gonzales-Gottlieb
Natalie Halpin
Ariana Hartnell
Ross Hayatgheybi
Taylor Hein
Carmen Huang
Megan Johannesen
Zachary Kimmick
Samuel Krull
Gabriella Landicino
Kyle Lometti
Gabriella Magras
Mikaela Mahaney
Brett McAllister
Alexandra McCloy
Isabelle McGovern
Caitlin McGuire
Colin McNamara
Ashlin Miller
Grady Miller
Sean O’Connor
Nicholas Pagliarulo
Cindy Park
Stephen Pepe
Zachary Re!nski
Dakota Risi
Andrea Rodriguez
Nicholas Rudolph
Ethan Schaer
Haley Schwalm
Andrew Shenberg
Dylan Shusterman
Colin Smith
Michael Sutnick
Erin Wattley
Alison Whitney
Faigy Wilmowsky
Esfandiar Zoujaji
ASSOCIATE MANAGING EDITOR
Meghan Yarussi
DIGITAL REFERENCE EDITOR
Andrei Moraru
DEVELOPMENT EDITOR
Jacqueline Karol
EXECUTIVE NOTES & COMMENTS EDITORS EXECUTIVE CITATIONS & SUBSTANCE EDITOR
Trevor Goldhush
Rashelle Jackson
Dylan Livingstone
NOTES & COMMENTS EDITORS
Carly Antonioli
Sophia Coutavas
Nikki Donohue
Dara Elpren
Elizabeth Gorman
Niko A. Gounaris
Margarita Weissman
LEGAL SCHOLARSHIP EDITORS CITATIONS & SUBSTANCE EDITORS
Jordan Lazarian
Konstantine Tettonis
"ania Hussain
Rebecca Kornhauser
Holly Summers



Masthead Page

April 26, 2024https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/tricario_institute_events_flyers/1002/thumbnail.jp

James Tricarico Jr. Institute for the Business of Law and In-House Counsel

DigitalCommons@NYLS 
James Tricario Jr Institute for the Business of 
Law and In-House Counsel Event Posters 
4-26-2024 
Tribeca Security Summit 2024 
James Tricarico Jr. Institute for the Business of Law and In-House Counsel 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/tricario_institute_events_flyers 
I 
James Tricarico Jr. Institute for the 
Business of Law and In-House Counsel 
PROGRAM 
www.nyls.edu/TribecaSummit 
RSVP (Limited Space) 
www.nyls.edu/TribecaRSVP 
Since 1891 


Tribeca Security Summit 2024

https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/library_annual_reports/1026/thumbnail.jp

Library, Mendik

Academic Year: 2023-2024

Leonard, Arthur S.

DigitalCommons@NYLS 
Other Publications Faculty Scholarship 
12-2024 
Seventh Circuit Panel Overturns Preliminary Injunction Against 
Indiana Ban on Gender-Affirming Care for Minors 
Arthur S. Leonard 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/fac_other_pubs 
December 2024 LGBT Law Notes  4 
Seventh Circuit Panel Overturns Preliminary Injunction 
Against Indiana Ban on Gender-Affirming Care for Minors 
By Arthur S. Leonard 
 
While the appeal in United States v. 
Skrmetti was pending in the U.S. 
Supreme Court, a panel of the 7th 
Circuit Court of Appeals voted 2-1 in 
K.C. v. Individual Members of the 
Medical Licensing Board of Indiana, 
2024 WL 4762732, 2024 U.S. App. 
LEXIS 28833 (Nov. 13, 2024), to 
follow the lead of the 6th Circuit in the 
Skrmetti case and reverse a 
preliminary injunction that was 
blocking the similar Indiana law from 
going into effect.  Another appointee 
of President Donald J. Trump, District 
Judge James P. Hanlon, had granted 
the preliminary injunction, 677 F. 
Supp. 3d 802 (S.D. Ind., June 16, 
2023), and the state appealed.  After 
hearing oral argument, the 7th Circuit 
panel stayed the district court’s order 
on February 27, 2024, see 2024 U.S. 
Dist. LEXIS 4706, and subsequently 
issued this decision on November 13, 
2024, a week after the general 
election. Writing for the majority of 
the panel, Circuit Judge Michael 
Brennan, a Trump appointee, found 
that there was no discrimination on the 
basis of sex.  “The key issue in this 
appeal,” he wrote, “is whether SEA 
480 classifies based on a protected 
class, and that issue requires us to 
answer two questions.  First, does 
SEA 480 classify based on sex?  If 
yes, we must determine whether it 
serves an important governmental 
objective, and the means employed 
are substantially related to achieving 
that objective.  Indiana’s justification 
for SEA 480 would have to be 
‘exceedingly persuasive.’  Second, is 
transgender status a quasi-protected 
class warranting a level of scrutiny 
higher than rational basis?  If yes, we 
must determine and apply that level of 
scrutiny.”  But the court concluded, 
contrary to the dissenter, that the 
statute’s classifications were based on 
age and medical diagnosis, and 
therefore did not “merit higher 
scrutiny.”  As to the analysis, the court 
wrote, “The law applies to minors 
only.  And because the state believes 
puberty blockers are dangerous when 
prescribed to stop puberty’s natural 
course and hormone therapy is 
dangerous when prescribed cross-sex, 
limiting access for those purposes is 
reasonable.”  The court cited the 6th 
Circuit’s Tennessee/Kentucky 
decision and the 11th Circuit’s ruling 
in Eknes-Tucker v. Governor of 
Alabama, in support of its conclusions 
on equal protection.   
Plaintiffs in this case made a due 
process argument on behalf of the 
minors, asserting that their ability to 
get gender-affirming care came under 
the umbrella of liberty protected by 
the Due Process Clause, but the court 
found no fundamental right here, 
noting that gender-affirming care was 
a relatively recent medical procedure 
with no long history of acceptance in 
American law, and under the most 
recent Supreme Court precedents was 
unlikely to prevail on a due process 
argument, so the test again was 
rational basis.The court also rejected a 
free speech argument made on behalf 
of those who would “aid or abet” a 
practitioner in giving such care.  Since 
the court found that the state could 
prohibit the procedure, it followed that 
speech aiding or abetting would not 
enjoy First Amendment protection.  
Circuit Judge Candace Jackson-
Akiwumi, a Biden appointee, 
dissented, invoking the reasoning of 
dissenting judges from other circuits 
by footnote reference but devoting 
most of her opinion to the First 
Amendment point.  She opines that as 
worded, the law’s restriction on 
speech should be interpreted to apply 
only to aiding and abetting a 
transgender minor in getting gender-
affirming care from an Indiana 
practitioner but should be interpreted 
not to apply to situations involving 
referrals to out-of-state practitioners.  
Because the aid and abet provision is 
constitutional only if it involves aiding 
and abetting criminal action, it should 
not logically apply, she concludes, to 
aiding and abetting somebody to get 
gender-affirming care from a health 
care provider whose own state does 
not outlaw it.  “I conclude that our 
First Amendment analysis should end 
where it begins because Provider-
Plaintiffs’ proposed speech falls 
outside SEA 480’s purview.”  Her 
writing on this subject goes on at 
considerable length. . .The ACLU of 
Indiana represents plaintiffs in this 
case, which drew thirteen amicus 
briefs.  Chase Strangio, who argued 
before the Supreme Court in the 
Skrmetti case, is listed among 
plaintiffs’ counsel in this one.  The 
second judge in the majority, Senior 
Circuit Judge Kenneth Ripple, was 
appointed by President Ronald 
Reagan.   
 
 
L    G     B    T  
LAW NOTES 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
DECEMBER 2024 
Supreme Court Arguments in U.S. v. Skrmetti:  
Limited Prospects for 6th Circuit Ruling 
Reversal 
 


Seventh Circuit Panel Overturns Preliminary Injunction Against Indiana Ban on Gender-Affirming Care for Minors

DigitalCommons@NYLS 
Other Publications Faculty Scholarship 
12-2024 
Oregon U.S. District Court Denies Preliminary Injunction to Former 
High School Track Coach Who Voiced Objections to Transgender 
Student’s Participation in a State Championship Meet 
Arthur S. Leonard 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/fac_other_pubs 
December 2024 LGBT Law Notes  18 
Oregon U.S. District Court Denies Preliminary Injunction 
to Former High School Track Coach Who Voiced 
Objections to Transgender Student’s Participation in a 
State Championship Meet 
By Arthur S. Leonard 
John Parks, an experienced track and 
field coach who was employed on a 
temporary assignment as a track and 
field coach at Lake Oswego High 
School in Oregon, was notified his 
contract would not be renewed after 
he had created a fuss about the 
participation of a transgender girl on 
another school’s team at the state 
championship matches.  Parks 
appealed the decision, but the school 
district stood behind it, stating its view 
that the transgender girl was entitled 
to participate in the women’s track 
competition and that Parks was 
insubordinate about raising the issue 
with various officials after being 
instructed by his supervisor not to 
discuss it at the meet.  Among other 
things, Park’s allegedly attempted to 
stimulate a boycott of the winner’s 
podium if the transgender girl won a 
trophy.  He was overheard saying “the 
fucking dude lost” after the 
transgender girl failed to win her big 
race.  When his internal appeal was 
turned down, he filed suit in federal 
court alleging violations of his First 
Amendment and Procedural Due 
Process rights, and also asserted 
common law defamation claims 
against some of the school officials for 
statements they had made about him.  
After filing suit, he sought a 
preliminary injunction for 
reinstatement as the Oswego High 
School coach, which was denied by 
U.S. District Judge Michael H. Simon 
in Parks v. Lake Oswego School  
 
District, 2024 WL 4879360, 2024 
U.S. Dist. LEXIS 213920 (D. Ore., 
Nov. 25, 2024). 
Judge Simon’s preliminary injunction 
ruling makes extended and detailed 
factual findings, including substantial 
quotations from an investigative 
report by a school official who 
engaged in fact-finding before the 
decision was made to not renew 
Parks’ contract.  The school’s 
response to Parks’ allegation that he 
was terminated in retaliation for his 
statements was countered by the 
observation that his existing contract 
had expired before the decision was 
taken not to renew it.  The defendants 
quickly advertised an opening for 
somebody to be hired in his place.   
Parks also put his objections into 
emails he sent to school officials.  
Judge Simon quoted from them at 
length.  He criticized the school’s 
policy of allowing transgender girls to 
compete with cisgender girls as 
having “major flaws that are inviting 
the discrediting of the entire existence 
and value of female athletics.  
Personally,” he continued, “it will 
impact my athletes in the 400 meters 
directly and play a role in who 
qualifies for finals and is awarded 
team trophies.”   
The court determined that Parks was 
seeking a mandatory injunction, a type 
of interim relief that is particularly 
disfavored unless  
 
“extreme or very serious damage will 
result and [is[ not issued in doubtful 
cases or where the injury complained 
of is capable of compensation in 
damages.”  Judge Simon found that 
under the circumstances of this case, 
the usual factors examined by courts 
in ruling on motions for mandatory 
injunctions “all counsel against 
issuing the mandatory preliminary 
injunction that Parks requests.  
Neither extreme nor even very serious 
damage will result if such relief is not 
granted between now and the end of 
trial on the merits,” he continued.  
“Also, if Parks were to prevail after a 
trial on the merits, his injury would be  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
December 2024 LGBT Law Notes  19 
compensable in damages, whether in 
the form of back pay, front pay, or 
noneconomic compensatory damages 
(or even, possibly, reinstatement).  
Finally, no one is restricting Parks’ 
right to exercise free speech as this 
case progressed.” 
The court found that some of Parks’ 
speech was likely protected by the 
First Amendment, and his retaliation 
claim might have some merit, stating 
that Parks “has shown a sufficient 
likelihood of success that he will be 
able to prove that a reasonable person 
could believe that the investigation 
and the subsequent decision not to 
rehire him were at least in part 
motivated by his May 15th email and 
would therefore be deterred from 
making this sort of protected speech in 
the future.   
Thus, Parks has sufficiently 
demonstrated a likelihood of success 
in showing that he suffered an adverse 
employment action.”  But, Parks lost  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
out based on the evidence concerning 
his calling the transgender athlete a 
“fucking dude.”  The defendants 
presented evidence that “another 
coach reported hearing, after LOHS’s 
athlete beat the McDaniel athlete for 
first place in the women’s 400-meter 
event final, Parks exclaim, ‘she beat 
the fucking dude!’ and that Parks’ 
exclamation was loud enough to be 
heard 50 meters away.”  The court 
credited testimony by Lake Oswego 
administrators that they would have 
“opened up” Parks’ coaching 
positions at LOHS to other applicants 
based solely on the report that Parks, 
while coaching the track and field 
team at the State Finals, had referred 
to a female transgender competitor in 
that way.”  Thus, defendants would 
likely succeed on their affirmative 
defense, tipping the scale against 
Parks on the sine qua non issue for 
getting injunctive relief: a likelihood 
of success on the merits of his claim.   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Further, as quoted above, denying 
reinstatement could be compensated 
with money.  The court also found that 
ordering restoration of Parks to the 
coaching position would adversely 
affect the school, as “the School 
Defendants would then face the 
possibility that their students, as well 
as student-athletes competing against 
the LOHS, may feel unsafe, 
unwelcome, discriminated against, or 
harassed.”  Thus, the court concluded 
that the balance of equities did not tip 
in favor of Parks. 
An organization called the “Liberty 
Justice Center” represents Parks, and 
Hart Wagner LLP represents the 
school district defendants.  Judge 
Simon was appointed by President 
Barack Obama.  An appeal to the 9th 
Circuit is possible.  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
L    G     B    T  
LAW NOTES 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
DECEMBER 2024 
Supreme Court Arguments in U.S. v. Skrmetti:  
Limited Prospects for 6th Circuit Ruling 
Reversal 
 


Oregon U.S. District Court Denies Preliminary Injunction to Former High School Track Coach Who Voiced Objections to Transgender Student’s Participation in a State Championship Meet