14041 research outputs found
Sort by
Essentially Expendable: The Failure of Preemptive Agency Space to Protect Farmworkers from Dangerous Pesticides
Get PDFRepresenting the United States in the Supreme Court: A Conversation With U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth B. Prelogar
No full textThe Sumner Canary Memorial lecture was established to honor the memory of the late Judge Sumner Canary, a pillar of the Cleveland legal community. Canary served on the Ohio Court of Appeals for the Eighth District and as U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Ohio. In addition to his public service, Canary was a partner at the firms of Canary & Walsh and Arter & Hadden.
This lectureship, which was made possible due to the generosity of Canary’s widow, Nancy Canary, has featured numerous federal judges, scholars, academics and six U.S. Supreme Court Justices.
Lecture Description
The Solicitor General is responsible for representing the United States government in the U.S. Supreme Court. Sometimes referred to as the “tenth justice,” the Solicitor General’s office is involved in approximately two-thirds of the cases before the Supreme Court. Among other things the office determines whether to seek High Court review of lower court decisions, whether to intervene or submit amicus curiae briefs in pending cases and what positions the federal government should take. As the nation’s 48th Solicitor General, Elizabeth Prelogar has argued more than twenty cases before the Supreme Court, on issues ranging from the Second Amendment and race-conscious college admissions, to the scope of federal regulatory authority and the constitutionality of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. In this wide-ranging discussion with Jonathan Adler, Elizabeth Prelogar will discuss the nature of her office, how it has changed over time, her views on Supreme Court advocacy, what it is like to represent the federal government at the highest levels and broader legal trends in the Supreme Court and American law. Speaker Bio
Elizabeth Barchas Prelogar is the 48th Solicitor General of the United States and serves as the fourth-ranking individual at the Department of Justice. As Solicitor General, she is responsible for conducting and supervising all Supreme Court litigation on behalf of the United States.
Prelogar previously served in multiple roles at the Department of Justice, including Acting Solicitor General, Principal Deputy Solicitor General and Assistant to the Solicitor General. During her prior tenure as a career attorney at the Department, she was detailed to Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and obstruction-of-justice issues, where she served as an Assistant Special Counsel.
Prelogar was born and raised in Boise, Idaho. She received her bachelor’s degree from Emory University, a master’s degree in creative writing from the University of St. Andrews and her law degree from Harvard Law School. After graduating from law school, Prelogar clerked for Judge Merrick B. Garland of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. She then completed consecutive Supreme Court clerkships for Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Justice Elena Kagan. After her clerkships, she worked as an associate in the appellate group at Hogan Lovells LLP. She later became a partner at Cooley LLP focused on Supreme Court and appellate litigation, and she also served as a Lecturer on Law at Harvard Law School, where she co-taught a course on Supreme Court and appellate advocacy
Appeal No.1023: Genesis Resources, LLC & National American Insurance Co. v. Division of Oil & Gas Resources Management
No full textReview of Chief\u27s Order 2022-319 Gant Florence/ Ohio Power Co. 17-6
Incorporating Unicorns: An Empirical Analysis
Get PDFThere is a growing concern among regulators and academics about how to regulate unicorns - entities large enough to have a public impact yet remaining in the private domain. An examination of corporate charters within a selected sample of unicorn firms reveals an important finding: 97% of these entities are incorporated in Delaware. This concentration provides Delaware with significant leverage to shape regulatory frameworks, especially concerning the protection of parties who may lack the ability to safeguard their interests through contractual means.
This groundbreaking discovery on the dominance of Delaware showcases a substantial deviation from incorporation trends in other business segments. While 79% of public firms and 67% of early-stage venture-backed private firms are incorporated in Delaware, only 2% of small private enterprises do so. The overwhelming preference for Delaware among unicorn firms is a distinct and unprecedented trend, raising intriguing questions about the specific factors driving this exceptional pattern. As unicorns evolve and continue to develop as market movers, Delaware\u27s position as their incorporation venue of choice will only grow in importance and relevance, especially due to the recent debate over changes to Delaware law and the competition among states to attract businesses
Unprincipled Delegation: The Health Resources and Services Administration and Future of the Nondelegation Doctrine
Get PDFThis paper explores the intricate interplay between the nondelegation doctrine and the administrative state, with a specific focus on the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) and its delegated authority under 42 U.S. Code §300gg-13(a)(4). It delves into the historical context of the nondelegation doctrine, analyzing Supreme Court precedents and recent trends that have shaped the boundaries of congressional delegation of legislative power. By examining the practical implications of potential nondelegation violations and the impact on women\u27s healthcare, the article advocates for a nuanced approach that balances the need for administrative flexibility with constitutional principles. It proposes solutions to clarify and strengthen the nondelegation doctrine, emphasizing the importance of maintaining a stable regulatory framework while safeguarding against overbroad delegations of authority
Judicial Review of Public Health Laws: From Deference to Indifference
No full textThe Elena and Miles Zaremski Law Medicine Forum presents Judicial Review of Public Health Laws: From Deference to Indifference with Wendy E. Parmet.
For most of American history, courts granted significant deference to public health officials. This deference, which could be and was at times abused, was justified by numerous factors including the broad authority that legislatures granted to health agencies, respect for scientific expertise, and the high value that the law gave to public health, as expressed by the maxim salus populi suprema lex.
This tradition of judicial deference to public health authorities eroded during the COVID-19 pandemic as courts heard thousands of challenges to COVID-19 related public health orders. Although most courts upheld most uses of public health powers during the pandemic, many courts, including the Supreme Court, replaced deference with deep skepticism of expertise and indifference to the public health effects of their decisions. This shift was especially apparent in Free Exercise challenges to public health orders, as well as cases reviewing the scope of authority of federal officials under the novel major questions doctrine.
Building upon the book, Constitutional Contagion, COVID, the Courts and Public Health, this talk will review the shift from deference to indifference during the pandemic and discuss its post-pandemic spillover, including in challenges to the authority of the FDA and EPA and childhood vaccine laws. The talk will also examine the connections between the decline of deference and threats to democracy and consider what this new judicial era may augur for public health. Speaker Bio
Wendy E. Parmet is the George J. and Kathleen Waters Matthews Distinguished Professor of Law and Professor of Public Policy and Urban Affairs at Northeastern University, where she is the faculty director of the Center on Health Policy and Law. An associate editor for the American Journal of Public Health, her most recent book is Constitutional Contagion: COVID, The Courts and Public Health (Cambridge University Press, 2023)
Lincoln School Marchers
No full textThis event will educate attendees about the legal and historical significance of the Lincoln School Marchers of Hillsboro, Ohio. Gain valuable insights into the profound impact their protest had on education in the immediate aftermath of Brown v. Board of Education, which was decided 70 years ago this May.
Embedded in this event will be a screening of “The Lincoln School Story,” a compelling short documentary produced by Ohio Humanities, where a group of African American mothers in Hillsboro, Ohio, tried to enroll their children in the local white schools. When the school board refused, they took their case to the streets and the courts.
Following the screening, a distinguished panel of community and legal experts will engage in a thought-provoking discussion on both the historic and contemporary implications of Brown v. Board of Education. Don\u27t miss this enriching experience that combines legal discourse with the art of storytelling to illuminate the past and its relevance to the present. Panelists
Melvin Barnes, Jr., Ph.D., Historian and Ohio Humanities Program Officer
Barnes was born and raised in Toledo and initially joined Ohio Humanities as a summer research fellow in 2019, before rejoining the team permanently as a Program Officer in 2020. In addition to his work at Ohio Humanities, Barnes teaches history at The Ohio State University and has been a guest lecturer at Spellman College. Barnes completed his doctorate in Chinese and East Asian history and African American History. He lives in Clintonville with his wife, young son, and a tuxedo cat named Titus.
James Hardiman, Esq., Civil Rights Attorney
Hardiman has an extensive career history, including working at Legal Aid Society of Cleveland, office of the Cleveland police prosecutor, national NAACP as special counsel, managing partner of Hardiman, Buchanan, Howland & Trivers, adjunct professor of political science at Baldwin-Wallace University and legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio.
Marilyn Sanders Mobley, Ph.D., Emerita Professor of English and African American Studies, Case Western Reserve University
Marilyn Sanders Mobley is an emerita professor of English and Africana Studies at Case Western Reserve University (CWRU) where she served as the university’s first Chief Diversity Officer from 2009-2019. A Toni Morrison scholar, Mobley is the author of Folk Roots and Mythic Wings in Sarah Orne Jewett and Toni Morrison: The Cultural Function of Narrative and “Toni Morrison’s Beloved: The Scandal that Disturbed Domestic Tranquility” in Scandalous Fictions: The Twentieth Century Novel in the Public Sphere. Her forthcoming book is Toni Morrison and the Geopoetics of Place, Race and Be/longing (Temple University Press, 2024).
Dr. Carlotta Penn, Daydreamers Press founder and author of Step by Step: How the Lincoln School Marchers Blazed a Trail to Justice
Carlotta Penn is the founder of and author at Daydreamers Press. She is a Daydreamer who believes in justice and in the power of arts and literature to activate change in the world. Daydreamers Press is the public vehicle for her personal passions, and commitments. She brings her experience creating as a songwriter, poet and writer, and in teaching and developing community programs nationally and internationally, to her work as lead curator of content and programming at Daydreamers Press
Employers and the Privatization of Public Health
Get PDFThis Article focuses on the role of employers in public health and argues that they constitute increasingly important actors in the U.S. public health arena. In the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, a series of judicial decisions and newly enacted statutes enfeebled the public health powers of the federal and state governments. In a 2023 statement, Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch clearly articulated his antagonism towards government-initiated COVID-19 interventions, describing them as “the greatest intrusions on civil liberties in the peacetime history of this country.” All too many share his views.
Employers may be highly motivated to safeguard their workers’ health. Without healthy staff members they cannot keep their doors open, and without visible pandemic protections they cannot reassure concerned customers that their premises are safe. During COVID-19, many employers established mask, testing, social distancing, and vaccine rules even in the absence of government mandates. Employers’ profit motives, however, do not diminish their contributions to public health. These contributions can significantly reduce health disparities by protecting vulnerable individuals who otherwise face health care access barriers and economic challenges that exacerbate their risks.
The Article posits that in future public health emergencies, the United States will increasingly rely on those with a financial stake in individuals’ health. Federal and state government authorities should therefore embrace employers as public health partners. To that end, the Article develops recommendations concerning guidance and funding support that should be available to assist employers in their emergency response efforts
Access Repository Dashboard
Do you manage Open Research Online? Become a CORE Member to access insider analytics, issue reports and manage access to outputs from your repository in the CORE Repository Dashboard! 👇