27127 research outputs found
Sort by
Labor Law, Ownership, and the Firm
No full textIn shaping economic coordination within and across both firms and markets, one significant action of law is to allocate privileges or rights between people or groups of people. These include the right to coordinate with other people or groups of people in particular ways regarding core economic decisions-a type of activity that is not always or in all circumstances legally permissible. An area that makes this more general action of law especially concrete is antitrust or competition law, with its collection of exemptions. Antitrust\u27s formal and informal exemptions quite directly allocate economic coordination rights, for particular kinds of activity, and sometimes perhaps to particular kinds of people. Competition law\u27s exemptions also inscribe in law the symbiotic relationship between economic coordination and competition that is at the heart of economic life more generally. Firms or enterprises, in particular, can be understood to enjoy a kind of firm exemption to antitrust law, one whose boundaries are expressly policed by legal doctrine. Labor organizations also involve economic coordination and correspondingly benefit from a competition law exemption as well.
Competition law often develops a kind of working theory of the social and economic activity or organization corresponding to the exemption. This is true for business firms, but also for labor organizations and, a bit more obscurely, for agricultural cooperatives. The subject-specific areas of law that affirmatively regulate the conduct of those organizations also develop working theories of the organizations they govern. All the aforementioned areas of law, even as they govern and shape key economic institutions are of course also affected and shaped by trends in economic thought to different degrees. Equally importantly, though often less obviously, they-or stylized versions of them-often play the role of providing unstated inputs or assumptions to economic thought. This includes the strand of economic and social thought known as the theory of the firm.
Labor law also has a working theory of the business firm, and that this idea of the firm is in turn quite significant in shaping labor law\u27s conception of labor organizations. This Essay thus focuses on two broadly related topics: (1) American labor law\u27s theory of the business firm, with an emphasis on the somewhat peculiar ideas about property it brings along; and (2) the way a stylized picture of labor law and labor relations has been received into an important strand of the broader debate over corporate governance
Tax Experience Isn’t Everything: A Tale of Two Justices.
No full textAny student of federal income taxation is familiar with a series of important Supreme Court tax decisions written by Justice Harry Blackmun (associate justice, 1970-1994). They would also know of three important decisions written by his contemporary, Justice Thurgood Marshall (associate justice, 1967-1991). It is interesting to compare the two, because Blackmun was the only recent justice with extensive tax practice experience, whereas Marshall had none. Yet, most of Blackmun’s tax opinions were wrong while Marshall’s opinions were right
Altering Rules: The New Frontier for Corporate Governance
No full textCorporate law has taken a contractarian turn. Shareholders are increasingly contracting around its foundational rules—statutory rights, the fiduciary duty of loyalty, even the central role of the board—and Delaware courts are increasingly enforcing these contracts. In the one case where they did not, the legislature swiftly overruled the decision and adopted a new statutory provision permitting boards to completely cede their powers to a shareholder by contract. These developments have sparked a polarized debate, with some calling for a return to mandatory rules, while others push for total contractual freedom.
We argue, however, that the best approach lies neither in rigid mandatory rules nor unchecked contractual freedom—but in recognizing the potential of corporate law’s altering rules. Altering rules define how parties can opt out of the default rules of governance. Our theory identifies corporate altering rules’ essential features, namely, whose consent is required to change a default (process) and who is bound by that decision (scope). We show that the central role of altering rules in corporate law is not simply to make changing a default more or less difficult, as is widely supposed, but rather to combine process and scope in ways that define distinct bargaining environments, shaping how insiders negotiate over governance. Corporate law can fine-tune these features in ways that both encourage contractual innovation and manage intra-corporate risks. In response to recent cases and legislation, we propose new altering mechanisms that will broaden decision-making to include non-signatory shareholders, protecting them from harmful externalities.
Altering rules, as they exist now, represent only a fraction of their potential. Rethinking their design opens the door to a vast, largely unexplored landscape of possibilities that could guide corporate governance in its new era of contractual innovation
Perception Pending: What Do Patents Signal to Consumers?
No full textPatent law encourages inventors to label their products as “patented,” to mark their legal status and potentially secure monetary damages from infringing competitors. We examine whether such labels might have a separate and direct impact on consumers, by affecting how they view patented products and influencing what they purchase. We develop and conduct two experiments to isolate the impact of patent status on consumer behavior. In an online randomized experiment, we demonstrate how increasing the salience of patent status heightens consumers\u27 beliefs that products are innovative and well made. We also reveal consumers\u27 surprisingly sophisticated understanding of the patenting process and what being patented means. Despite this informed perspective, consumers are not more inclined to buy patented products. To determine if these results hold in a real-world setting, we conduct a field experiment at a small retail pharmacy chain. Using scanner data spanning over 4 years, we find no evidence that consumers respond to increased patent salience. Our collective results suggest that while consumers view patented products as more innovative and well made, these positive attributes do not necessarily translate into heightened purchasing behavior. Our research suggests that patent marking might often serve only a legal, rather than a marketing, function. This has implications for patent policy, including the relevance of patent salience in damage analyses and litigation strategies
Retrenchment by Diversion: the New Politics of Parental Rights
Full text linkFor the past century, the Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed the importance of parents’ rights to direct their children’s upbringing and education. Yet suddenly the rhetoric of parental rights is being used to ground a broad range of claims on issues such as what can be taught in public schools, when minors can access gender-affirming care, or who will be punished for helping minors travel for abortion care. Why have parental-rights claims surged so visibly in contemporary law and politics? And are all the new arguments made under the banner of parental rights equally rooted in constitutional precedent?
This Article provides a new framework for understanding parental rights, one that differentiates an increasingly salient political practice from a longstanding constitutional law principle. We show that many contemporary efforts claimed to advance parental rights are part of a crucial but understudied social-movement tactic that we label “retrenchment by diversion.” This strategy involves retrenchment in that its goals are to stymie the future progress of equality-focused movements as well as to roll back their existing gains. To sidestep controversy, though, this strategy diverts attention from its rights-reversing motivations by supplying a more politically palatable rationale for its actions— here, the long and valued constitutional tradition of parental rights. While recent parental-rights laws are aimed at minors, we argue the ultimate goal of the retrenchment by diversion strategy in these laws is to threaten equality-focused rights for adults, as well.
This Article makes four key contributions to legal literature. First, it uncovers the relationship between the current movement for parental-rights laws and past attempts to roll back rights reforms based on the rhetoric of parental rights. Second, it elucidates retrenchment by diversion as a movement strategy and explains how parental-rights rhetoric effectuates this strategy. In doing so, we identify the ways parental-rights rhetoric effectively obscures the problematic goals that motivate these laws, the harms such laws pose to children and members of disadvantaged groups, and the damage they do to democracy and good government. Third, we offer guidance on how to distinguish legitimate claims of parental rights from uses of parental-rights rhetoric merely to accomplish the strategy of retrenchment by diversion. Fourth and finally, we consider what can be done to counter the new and damaging politics of parental rights
Toward an Economic Fair Housing Act
Full text linkThis Note evaluates the prospect of an “Economic Fair Housing Act” through the framework of antidiscrimination law. The proposed bill—a brainchild of housing expert Richard Kahlenberg—would amend the Fair Housing Act to make economic status a protected class alongside race, national origin, religion, sex, and disability. Currently, fair housing lawsuits against local governments rarely succeed. Plaintiffs must present resounding statistical evidence of blatant racial disparities directly caused by exclusionary policies. Simultaneously, many local governments deter homebuilding through restrictive zoning ordinances that prevent lower-income people from moving in.
An Economic Fair Housing Act (EFHA) could help address these twin shortcomings of antidiscrimination law and local control of zoning. The proposed Act could replace or complement the growing number of housing enforcement regimes in high-cost blue states and eventually reduce residential segregation. This Note makes the legal case for an EFHA and raises important drafting considerations for interested legislators
The Dormant Power of State Agencies to Fight Environmental Racism
Full text linkDespite repeated promises by Democratic presidents to address environmental justice (EJ), meaningful federal action on the issue remains elusive. The EJ obligations that have been imposed on federal agencies are all purely procedural, not substantive. Such procedural obligations—like filing environmental impact statements and providing forums for community feedback—may facilitate greater transparency and accountability from industry and government agencies. But in the absence of more substantive obligations—like stricter emissions caps in highly burdened communities of color—these procedural requirements are often satisfied through mere box-checking. Meanwhile, litigants pursuing relief through the U.S. Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause face closed courthouse doors unless they can show “discriminatory intent”—a nearly impossible task. And despite Title VI’s promises of anti-discrimination, litigants’ Title VI claims are subject to long delays, industry-friendly settlements, and looming existential threats by a federal judiciary and a new presidential administration increasingly skeptical of—if not even outright hostile to—both environmental remediation and race-conscious policymaking. But with the federal government on the sidelines, there is enormous opportunity at the state level. A recent fight over an asphalt plant outside Flint, Michigan, demonstrates that state environmental agencies may have expansive—though largely untapped—power to address environmental injustice through the permitting process. This Note analyzes state and federal administrative law to provide a case study on how state agencies can fill the massive gap in EJ enforcement and fulfill the unkept promises of past federal administrations
A Perfect Storm: Executive Orders and Tax Law
Full text linkSince it came into office, the Trump administration has issued a series of executive orders that affect many areas of the government. One such area is taxation. In two orders issued on his first day in office President Trump rejected the participation of the United States in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)`s global minimum corporate tax project and threatened to impose tax countermeasures on countries that adopt extraterritorial or discriminatory taxes. Two days later, the Republican members of the House Ways and Means Committee introduced legislation to the same effect. A month later, the president issued another executive order aimed at challenging regulations, and this order can have a broad impact on tax regulations that are not backed by a sufficiently clear Congressional delegation of authority. This article examines the executive orders related to taxation and their potential impact, and suggests some ways Congress can mitigate that impact in pending tax legislation
Should the United States Abandon Citizenship-Based Taxation?
Full text linkPresident Trump proposed during the election campaign to end the double taxation of American citizens living overseas. To which the answer is, what double taxation? Americans living overseas already benefit from three significant provisions that in most cases prevent any double taxation, and because of these most of them do not have any U.S. tax liability. Those who do are typically wealthier, derive income from investments or from high wages, and are not subject to foreign tax because they live in tax havens or in countries that do not tax rich immigrants on foreign source income, and they do not have any income from their country of residence
Winter 2025 - Finding Briefs & Other Court Filings
Full text linkThe judicial opinion is the last chapter of a long story. The key to a case’s history is its docket. This program will guide you through the steps to finding complaints, briefs, motions, and other filings by searching and finding court dockets. Get the whole story Underground!
Resources covered: CourtLink, Bloomberg Dockets, PACER, CourtListener/RECAPhttps://repository.law.umich.edu/legaltechseries/1003/thumbnail.jp