Football in the Jamestown district of Accra, Ghana (CC BY-SA 4.0 RJ Peltz-Steele) |
Tuesday, January 28, 2020
Football is universal
[January 28, 2020] Greetings, readers. I am on sabbatical in the spring semester 2020, working on a couple of projects in law and development. Watch below for occasional shares while I visit some parts of the world about which I have researched and written. Watch later for a project on teaching litigation with Donald Trump materials, anticipated in time for the fall semester and election.
Happy year of the rat!
Happy year of the rat!
Monday, December 23, 2019
Comparative law papers span globe, round out 2019
Comparative Law is so rewarding to teach that I'm probably overcompensated to do it.* The inherently diverse nature of the course content, co-instructor Dean Peltz-Steele and I find, inspires students to creativity in their work in a way that much of law school never manages to do. Moreover, I think, that opportunity to be creative is why students respond favorably to the class, an oasis in the monotonous sea of bar courses. We learn so much from their projects in Comparative Law, which adds in turn to the rewards of teaching the class.
At risk of pride, I wish to share, with students' permission, the impressive range of projects generated in our class this semester in 2019. The following excerpts are of my construction, so any roughness in the editing is my fault. No need to call for reference checks on any of these students; every one has our informed endorsement. Let the hiring begin!
Markus Aloyan (Instagram), Executive Powers: Rebirth of a Soviet State [Armenia and the United States]. Therefore, the
current political climate and constitutional crises in Armenia contain a
historically driven, Soviet-Communist basis and more modernly developed Russian
influence that came to fruition in the young Republic's 2015 Constitutional
Amendments. The Russian-influenced reforms will be compared to the executive
powers vested by the American Constitution, and analyzed for their causes and
effects on the region. [Footnotes omitted.]
Tyler Hicks, England and United States Fishing and Hunting Laws. The purpose of this paper is to compare the very different histories of England and the United States for wildlife management, and then show how even though these countries have different systems, their overall goal to protect and further wildlife is generally the same in effect. England and Massachusetts generally face the same issues when it comes to enforcement of their laws as well. Both countries value the ability to be able to hunt and fish but understand that they have a duty to hunt and fish both ethically and humanely. In particular, I will compare the fishing and hunting laws of England and the laws of the United States, including Massachusetts.
William McGuire, Prostitution and Human Trafficking [Sweden, UK, US]. Prostitution and human trafficking are two intertwined issues that have prevailed throughout the course of modern history, and an analysis of the different approaches taken by different societies articulates a quadripartite view of prostitution as a whole. The four views are the moralizing view, normalizing view, the patheticizing view and the victimization view. These four views have produced three categories of legal systems, the absolute or partial criminalization of prostitution, the regulation and legitimization of prostitution, and the abolition of prostitution.... In this paper, I will articulate the three different legal systems through example. I will use the Swedish Model to show how the partial criminalization of prostitution has affected Swedish society as a whole. I will use the United States to show the American model of abolition of prostitution, with the exception of the state of Nevada. Finally, I will use The Netherlands to show the regulation of prostitution. I will then discuss the social pressures that led to the adoption of the legal system used in each country, specifically, whether the impetus was to combat human trafficking or not. Finally, I will conclude by discussing whether there is convergence or divergence on a regional and global level.
Daniel Picketts, [Civil Rights in United States and Contemporary Afghanistan]. The evolution of civil rights has been driven by changing societal sentiments and ultimately cemented in different civilizations through changes in their laws. Currently in the United States, civil rights are the buzzword of the day and the public’s changing sentiment is demanding attention from the nations law makers. The current climate and inclusion of different classes that make up the civil rights of the United States has taken a winding path that has led it away from the oppressive, segregate founding, to the arguable progressive, inclusive current day.... Comparing two vastly different countries with glaring differences becomes productive when the factors that have effected changes in civil rights, while accounting for any differences, cultural or otherwise, are similar. What this comparison sets out to accomplish is to compare two different countries: the United States, and Afghanistan. The similarities in civil rights are few and far between. Instead what will be compared are the events in the two countries that are somewhat similar and the outcomes that resulted in the respective countries....
Christine Powers, A Comparison of the Child Custody Standards in the United States, New Zealand, and Ireland. This paper is an examination and discussion of the different child custody definitions and terminologies and the standard deployed by the judicial system when making a child custody determination. The paper will discuss the different factors that a judge may or must consider when making a child custody arrangement. Further, the article will discuss whether or not there is a trend towards a unified standard and whether unification of the standard is possible.
Kiersten Reider, I Do But I Don't Want To: A Comparative Analysis of the Criminal Marital Rape Laws of the United States and India. The aim of this paper is to provide a comprehensive analysis of the criminal rape laws of the United States and India, with an emphasis on marital rape. I will spend time discussing each country individually before drawing a comparison between the two. First, I will discuss the United States, briefly touching on the common law history of marriage, and criminal rape laws at the state and federal level. I will then discuss India, touching on its hybrid legal system, and the history of marriage and criminal rape laws at the state and federal level. Last, I will discuss the similarities and differences between the two systems.
Christina Suh, Comparing the Law to Court-Mandated Divorce Parenting Class Between the United States and South Korea. This paper compares legislative and judicial history in implementation of court-mandated parenting classes during divorce proceedings in the United States and South Korea. The discussion demonstrates how evolution of social movements in each country changed its customary laws in the area of family law jurisprudence. In exploring the multiple related causes behind the development of the mandated parenting class, parts of the paper will address how Korea’s high cultural context influenced its revision in laws to focus on the protection of minor children and promote gender equality. Although there is a lack of strong studies that speaks to the direct effectiveness of the program in each country, the related research demonstrates the importance of educating parents about managing conflict and promoting the health and safety of children. In conclusion, findings will show why changes in law that educate and decrease adverse child experience (ACE) is an approach that benefits society as a whole, in the long term....
Brittany Wescott, Juvenile Justice Converges on Principles Leading to the International Harmonization of the Juvenile Justice System [South Africa, US]. This paper explores the similarities and differences between two countries, South Africa and the United States, specifically Massachusetts, in relation to the international principles governing each respective juvenile justice system. This paper explains how both the South African system and the U.S. system developed, illustrating the various principles each holds dear. In addition, this paper looks specifically at the value behind setting a minimum age of criminal responsibility, the crimes juveniles can be charged with, the limitations on sentencing, and the handling of juveniles in and out of the court room. Regardless of ratifying the Convention on the Rights of the Child, both countries have made significant progress toward embodying the principles of the international community.
Kyle Zacharewicz, Wish You Were Here: A Comparative Analysis of U.S. and Canadian Refugee Law and Policy. Immigration and refugee policy of various nations has started to move in the trend of “locking down” the border. It has been seen, both with the increase in numbers of refugees and the occurrence of several populist movements across the globe gaining real traction, that many countries have begun to implement a “Nation First” mentality toward the growing threat of “those people,” the nomadic wanderers by happenstance of displacement and inability to return home.... While the exchange of ideas on the treatment of and allowances for Refugees in the greater European community are robust and important, this paper will instead take a deep dive into the myths of how two different countries, the only two neighbors on the continent of North America, deal with and treat refugees and asylum seekers in order to discover how truly they hold up currently.... I find it effective to analyze these two countries as they are connected by their common law systems, participation in international treaty-making, similar legal structure in immigration and refugee procedure, and a border.... It is easy to see how the policy of one can affect the other, and my goal after explaining the reality of how these systems operate today is to show how the United States has clamped down on its immigration policy, and why Canada largely has the potential makings of a similar populist movement toward “locking down” the border.
—
*Hyperbole. I'm not overcompensated at UMass, despite an inexplicable vote by the tenured faculty to disallow anyone asking for a raise. Compare Salary.com with MassLive database. Nonetheless, I will remain grateful for the opportunity to have worked with and learned from my students.
At risk of pride, I wish to share, with students' permission, the impressive range of projects generated in our class this semester in 2019. The following excerpts are of my construction, so any roughness in the editing is my fault. No need to call for reference checks on any of these students; every one has our informed endorsement. Let the hiring begin!
William McGuire, Prostitution and Human Trafficking [Sweden, UK, US]. Prostitution and human trafficking are two intertwined issues that have prevailed throughout the course of modern history, and an analysis of the different approaches taken by different societies articulates a quadripartite view of prostitution as a whole. The four views are the moralizing view, normalizing view, the patheticizing view and the victimization view. These four views have produced three categories of legal systems, the absolute or partial criminalization of prostitution, the regulation and legitimization of prostitution, and the abolition of prostitution.... In this paper, I will articulate the three different legal systems through example. I will use the Swedish Model to show how the partial criminalization of prostitution has affected Swedish society as a whole. I will use the United States to show the American model of abolition of prostitution, with the exception of the state of Nevada. Finally, I will use The Netherlands to show the regulation of prostitution. I will then discuss the social pressures that led to the adoption of the legal system used in each country, specifically, whether the impetus was to combat human trafficking or not. Finally, I will conclude by discussing whether there is convergence or divergence on a regional and global level.
Daniel Picketts, [Civil Rights in United States and Contemporary Afghanistan]. The evolution of civil rights has been driven by changing societal sentiments and ultimately cemented in different civilizations through changes in their laws. Currently in the United States, civil rights are the buzzword of the day and the public’s changing sentiment is demanding attention from the nations law makers. The current climate and inclusion of different classes that make up the civil rights of the United States has taken a winding path that has led it away from the oppressive, segregate founding, to the arguable progressive, inclusive current day.... Comparing two vastly different countries with glaring differences becomes productive when the factors that have effected changes in civil rights, while accounting for any differences, cultural or otherwise, are similar. What this comparison sets out to accomplish is to compare two different countries: the United States, and Afghanistan. The similarities in civil rights are few and far between. Instead what will be compared are the events in the two countries that are somewhat similar and the outcomes that resulted in the respective countries....
Christine Powers, A Comparison of the Child Custody Standards in the United States, New Zealand, and Ireland. This paper is an examination and discussion of the different child custody definitions and terminologies and the standard deployed by the judicial system when making a child custody determination. The paper will discuss the different factors that a judge may or must consider when making a child custody arrangement. Further, the article will discuss whether or not there is a trend towards a unified standard and whether unification of the standard is possible.
Kiersten Reider, I Do But I Don't Want To: A Comparative Analysis of the Criminal Marital Rape Laws of the United States and India. The aim of this paper is to provide a comprehensive analysis of the criminal rape laws of the United States and India, with an emphasis on marital rape. I will spend time discussing each country individually before drawing a comparison between the two. First, I will discuss the United States, briefly touching on the common law history of marriage, and criminal rape laws at the state and federal level. I will then discuss India, touching on its hybrid legal system, and the history of marriage and criminal rape laws at the state and federal level. Last, I will discuss the similarities and differences between the two systems.
Christina Suh, Comparing the Law to Court-Mandated Divorce Parenting Class Between the United States and South Korea. This paper compares legislative and judicial history in implementation of court-mandated parenting classes during divorce proceedings in the United States and South Korea. The discussion demonstrates how evolution of social movements in each country changed its customary laws in the area of family law jurisprudence. In exploring the multiple related causes behind the development of the mandated parenting class, parts of the paper will address how Korea’s high cultural context influenced its revision in laws to focus on the protection of minor children and promote gender equality. Although there is a lack of strong studies that speaks to the direct effectiveness of the program in each country, the related research demonstrates the importance of educating parents about managing conflict and promoting the health and safety of children. In conclusion, findings will show why changes in law that educate and decrease adverse child experience (ACE) is an approach that benefits society as a whole, in the long term....
Brittany Wescott, Juvenile Justice Converges on Principles Leading to the International Harmonization of the Juvenile Justice System [South Africa, US]. This paper explores the similarities and differences between two countries, South Africa and the United States, specifically Massachusetts, in relation to the international principles governing each respective juvenile justice system. This paper explains how both the South African system and the U.S. system developed, illustrating the various principles each holds dear. In addition, this paper looks specifically at the value behind setting a minimum age of criminal responsibility, the crimes juveniles can be charged with, the limitations on sentencing, and the handling of juveniles in and out of the court room. Regardless of ratifying the Convention on the Rights of the Child, both countries have made significant progress toward embodying the principles of the international community.
Kyle Zacharewicz, Wish You Were Here: A Comparative Analysis of U.S. and Canadian Refugee Law and Policy. Immigration and refugee policy of various nations has started to move in the trend of “locking down” the border. It has been seen, both with the increase in numbers of refugees and the occurrence of several populist movements across the globe gaining real traction, that many countries have begun to implement a “Nation First” mentality toward the growing threat of “those people,” the nomadic wanderers by happenstance of displacement and inability to return home.... While the exchange of ideas on the treatment of and allowances for Refugees in the greater European community are robust and important, this paper will instead take a deep dive into the myths of how two different countries, the only two neighbors on the continent of North America, deal with and treat refugees and asylum seekers in order to discover how truly they hold up currently.... I find it effective to analyze these two countries as they are connected by their common law systems, participation in international treaty-making, similar legal structure in immigration and refugee procedure, and a border.... It is easy to see how the policy of one can affect the other, and my goal after explaining the reality of how these systems operate today is to show how the United States has clamped down on its immigration policy, and why Canada largely has the potential makings of a similar populist movement toward “locking down” the border.
Congratulations, Comparative Law students!
—
*Hyperbole. I'm not overcompensated at UMass, despite an inexplicable vote by the tenured faculty to disallow anyone asking for a raise. Compare Salary.com with MassLive database. Nonetheless, I will remain grateful for the opportunity to have worked with and learned from my students.
Labels:
Afghanistan,
Armenia,
Canada,
comparative law,
England,
India,
Ireland,
Law 588 papers,
legal education,
legal research,
legal writing,
New Zealand,
pedagogy,
South Africa,
South Korea,
Sweden,
UK
Monday, December 16, 2019
'Breakaway state' of Transnistria might model new Russian sphere of influence
Transnistria (Perconte CC BY-SA 2.0) |
Last week I got a close-up look at what might be a model of Russian territorial expansion in the 21st century, the semi-autonomous state of Transnistria. To the United Nations, Transnistria is part of Moldova, the eastern European nation that declared its independence from the Soviet Union in 1991. But going to Transnistria requires a passport, and the border crossing is no joke.
Transnistria occupies a 1,600-square mile strip of land east of the Dniester River from Moldova and along the border with Ukraine, not far from Odessa. In 1992, only months after the end of the Moldovan Soviet Socialist Republic, Transnistria fought a war with Moldova for close to four months. Prominent monuments to the fallen can be found on both sides of the border today, in Chișinău and Tiraspol. An uneasy truce resulted in which Transnistria regards itself as an independent nation, and it operates with near autonomy within Moldova's internationally recognized borders.
Sign at Border Crossing (CC BY-SA 4.0) |
Near autonomy does not fully describe Transnistria's situation, because the breakaway state depends on Russia for unofficial political recognition and essential economic support. Economic aid keeps prices shockingly low in the markets. A big part of border security is interdiction of smuggling, especially for precious taxable commodities such as liquor.
Sheriff FC Billboard (CC BY-SA 4.0, no claim to underlying work) |
A Sheriff Supermarket (CC BY-SA 4.0) |
And those ties to Russia help, I think, to illustrate Putin's strategy for a new kind of Russian union. The Crimean peninsula essentially is Russia, Putin has argued, a minority Russian population being marginalized by a Ukrainian majority. Russia is still fighting to extend this Crimean buffer zone into mainland Ukraine. Move just a bit counterclockwise around the Black Sea coast and one comes to the prized port of Odessa, then shortly to the Dniester River mouth, leading to Transnistria.
Me and Lenin in Tiraspol (CC BY-SA 4.0) |
For now, the hearts and minds of Transnistria are not yet committed. Notwithstanding ubiquitous Cyrillic script and an unexpected Russian military presence this far west of Sochi, people in Transnistria, like in Moldova or anywhere else, just want security and opportunity. The subsidized subsistence of Transnistria is a Potemkin Village—a curiously appropriate term, as related in origin to Russia's historic annexation of Crimea—not a thriving economy.
However, reinvigorated American isolationism and stalled European expansion eastward can't presently compete with what Putin has on offer. Transnistria now looks like an idiosyncratic outlier among European neighbors. One day Transnistria might prove to have been a bellwether.
To visit Transnistria or explore elsewhere in Moldova, I recommend Voyages Moldavie. The website is in French, but contact guide Andrian Gurdis for English-speaking tourism, too. For long-haul taxi services in Moldova, turn to Corneliu Scurtu and his business, Carpoint (Facebook). Read more about Transnistria at Wired (2016), The Bohemian Blog (2013), and The Wall Street Journal (2011). There's a deeper dive, which I've not read (pay wall), into the Crimea comparison in Adrian Rogstad, The Next Crimea?, 65:1 Problems of Post-Communism 49-64 (2018).
Monday, November 25, 2019
Area man signposts 'sovereign immunity site'
Attorney Dan Greenberg, friend of the blog and a federal policy adviser in Washington, D.C., contributes this photo from his home neighborhood of Alexandria, Va.
The sign reads:
The underlying dispute was reported by Fox 5 D.C. in October. A trash truck caused $5,000 in damage to Denis Goris's 30-year-old iron fence.
Sovereign immunity turns up often in a society in which government is pervasive in our lives and surroundings, and that's bound to cause frustration. The sign-bearer is right that the essence of immunity is inequitable, as between the plaintiff who suffers an injury and the defendant sovereign who caused it. The Federal Tort Claims Act waives federal sovereign immunity in a narrow class of cases, and states can be less generous with their tort claims acts. The broader aim that keeps immunity going in a democracy is the protection of public assets, which belong to all of us.
It looks like Alexandria does use city staff for trash collection. Contractors throw a wrinkle into the mix (federal, state). I am not a Virginia lawyer; what I know of the state's tort claims act, it treats counties and cities much more generously than state-level actors. The localities enjoy near absolute sovereign immunity for governmental functions, and, almost 50 years ago, the Virginia Supreme Court held that municipal trash collection is a governmental function entitled to immunity. Alexandria does have an administrative claim process, and there's some room to argue.
The city told Fox 5: "Under federal and state laws and court rulings, the City is generally not liable for damages caused in the course of providing core government services. While the City conducts extensive planning and training to avoid damaging property, some damage does occur given the vast scope of City operations. Exemption from these claims saves a significant amount of money every year for taxpayers as a whole."
In a story last year, NBC 4 Washington reported: "Alexandria Won't Pay $4,600 in Damages to SUV Caused by City Trash Truck." The city is as consistent with its tort claims as it is with its driving record.
[SUPPLEMENT: "Why is this still a thing?," Planet Money asks about state sovereign immunity in the context of excellent coverage of the copyright case pending in the U.S. Supreme Court, Allen v. Cooper.]
The sign reads:
City of Alexandria
Sovereign Immunity Site
Did you know ...
The City of Alexandria claims "sovereign immunity" from liability for damage its trash collection truck did to this fence.
That's right. On May 22, 2019 a city truck hit and broke this fence. It's on video! But none of that matters. They're immune from liability.
What is sovereign immunity?
Simply put, the term sovereign immunity is derived from British common law doctrine based on the idea that the King could do no wrong.
So be careful around City of Alexandria vehicles. They can do no wrong.
The underlying dispute was reported by Fox 5 D.C. in October. A trash truck caused $5,000 in damage to Denis Goris's 30-year-old iron fence.
Sovereign immunity turns up often in a society in which government is pervasive in our lives and surroundings, and that's bound to cause frustration. The sign-bearer is right that the essence of immunity is inequitable, as between the plaintiff who suffers an injury and the defendant sovereign who caused it. The Federal Tort Claims Act waives federal sovereign immunity in a narrow class of cases, and states can be less generous with their tort claims acts. The broader aim that keeps immunity going in a democracy is the protection of public assets, which belong to all of us.
It looks like Alexandria does use city staff for trash collection. Contractors throw a wrinkle into the mix (federal, state). I am not a Virginia lawyer; what I know of the state's tort claims act, it treats counties and cities much more generously than state-level actors. The localities enjoy near absolute sovereign immunity for governmental functions, and, almost 50 years ago, the Virginia Supreme Court held that municipal trash collection is a governmental function entitled to immunity. Alexandria does have an administrative claim process, and there's some room to argue.
The city told Fox 5: "Under federal and state laws and court rulings, the City is generally not liable for damages caused in the course of providing core government services. While the City conducts extensive planning and training to avoid damaging property, some damage does occur given the vast scope of City operations. Exemption from these claims saves a significant amount of money every year for taxpayers as a whole."
In a story last year, NBC 4 Washington reported: "Alexandria Won't Pay $4,600 in Damages to SUV Caused by City Trash Truck." The city is as consistent with its tort claims as it is with its driving record.
[SUPPLEMENT: "Why is this still a thing?," Planet Money asks about state sovereign immunity in the context of excellent coverage of the copyright case pending in the U.S. Supreme Court, Allen v. Cooper.]
Friday, November 22, 2019
Expert on Polish judicial crisis speaks to law class
Prof. Wortham |
With JU Professor Fryderyk Zoll, Professor Wortham authored Judicial Independence and Accountability: Withstanding Political Stress, recently published at 42 Fordham International Law Journal 875 (2019). Here is the abstract.
For democracy and the rule of law to function and flourish, important actors in the justice system need sufficient independence from politicians in power to act under rule of law rather than political pressure. The court system must offer a place where government action can be reviewed, challenged, and, when necessary, limited to protect constitutional and legal bounds, safeguard internationally-recognized human rights, and prevent departures from a fair and impartial system of law enforcement and dispute resolution. Courts also should offer a place where government officials can be held accountable. People within and outside a country need faith that court decisions will be made fairly and under law. Because the Council of Europe’s Group of States against Corruption (“GRECO”) deems judicial independence critical to fighting corruption, GRECO makes a detailed analysis of their members’ judicial system part of their member review process. This Article is a case study of the performance of Poland’s mechanisms for judicial independence and accountability since 2015, a time of extreme political stress in that country. Readers will see parallels to comparable historical and current events around the world.
In discussion with the class, Professor Wortham remarked on parallels between the Polish judicial crisis and threats to the legitimacy of the courts in the United States. She referenced recent remarks by U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman to the American Law Institute, in which Judge Friedman distinguished denigration and personal attacks on the judiciary from disagreement with judicial decisions accompanied by respect for a co-equal branch of government (ALI, CNN). The class discussion about Poland also treated the recent decision of the Irish Supreme Court to order extradition of a Polish man wanted for drug trafficking offenses, despite concerns about judicial independence in Poland (Irish Times).
CUA offers summer study abroad opportunities for U.S. law students and, in cooperation with JU, an LL.M. program in Comparative and International Law.
Wednesday, November 20, 2019
Teaching and learning speech and advocacy: Is online as good?
The National Communication Association met in downtown Baltimore, Md. (All photos by RJ Peltz-Steele CC BY-SA 4.0.) |
I've used Zoom quite a bit: for class guests and snow make-ups. I took the university training to teach online courses in toto; I was uninspired by the shaky infrastructure and unproved methods, especially relative to the worthy rigors of legal education. At the same time, I like teaching the occasional online one-off, and online might work well for a seminar. The early miseries of teleconferencing (still the norm in the ABA) feel nothing like the real-time interactive experience offered by contemporary tools.
Anyway, I would not vote against a colleague’s well intentioned proposal. That would be unprofessional.
Well, when you don’t know, ask an expert. At the National Communication Association annual meeting in Baltimore on Saturday, experts in public speaking debated whether the communication discipline’s most popular basic course, Public Speaking, should be taught online.
Keohane and Broeckelman-Post |
On the first score, they cited research showing that in 2018, the number of online first job interviews doubled, and more than half of professionals telecommute at least half the week. Hillary Clinton was the first candidate to announce for the Presidency online. And globalization is pushing demand for long-distance teamwork, having to surmount communication hurdles from the technical to the cultural.
Huddy and Morreale |
On the third score, Broeckelman-Post and Keohane argued that educators' responsibility to ensure access to education demands online teaching. They cited research counting 74% of college students as “nontraditional,” including military, parents, disabled persons, commuters, and others who are financially independent. Also, dual enrollment in college coursework is on the rise, including more than 1.2 million high schoolers.
In the no camp—though in truth, this was in large measure devil’s advocacy—were Sherwyn P. Morreale, University of Colorado, Colorado Springs, and William P. Huddy, Metropolitan State University of Denver. They appealed more to qualitative than quantitative sources.
Morreale |
Morreale pointed also to the six core components of instructional communication competence (Beebe & Mottet 2009), immediacy, affinity-seeking, relational power, credibility, clarity and humor. Live communication epitomizes immediacy and better allows a speaker to exercise relational power, she argued. Credibility and clarity are achieved best without the intermediation of mics and speakers, and humor is more readily generated in person.
Huddy |
Huddy described the cruciality of de-centering in public speaking (I missed the attribution), meaning putting yourself mentally in your audience's thinking, and evolving on the fly the main points that the audience wants to hear. Learning to do that with live visual cues has no equal of experience, he argued. Effective public speaking requires richness, authenticity, and warmth, he explained, and warmth only communicates in person. An audience member in the Q&A offered some pushback, observing that she experiences a kind of warmth with students online incidentally by seeing them in their home contexts—with nagging siblings, dogs, and other home pandemonium unfolding on screens' edges.
Thorpe, Keohane, Morreale, Huddy, and Broeckelman-Post |
The session was moderated by Janice Thorpe, University of Colorado, Colorado Springs. Susan Ward, Delaware County Community College, offered insightful responsive commentary.
Labels:
ABA,
appellate practice,
curriculum,
higher education,
legal education,
litigation,
mass communication,
NCA,
oral argument,
pedagogy,
Sherwyn Morreale,
speech communication,
technology,
trial practice,
Zoom
Location:
Baltimore, MD, USA
Monday, November 18, 2019
It's not just whistleblower law; First Amendment public employee-speech doctrine is in disarray
You might have heard some wrangling in the news about whistleblowers. They're all the rage, lately, even here and there on this blog.
A big problem for whistleblowers in the public sector is that the U.S. Supreme Court has clearly held that there is no First Amendment protection for whistleblowing in the United States. So public employees who blow the whistle on public misfeasance or malfeasance have to be prepared to pay for their good intentions with their livelihoods.
Notably, that was the Court's holding in 2006, when a lawyer, Richard Ceballos, suffered retaliation in the office of L.A. District Attorney Gil Garcetti for having disclosed to criminal-defense counsel that a sheriff misrepresented facts in a search warrant affidavit, despite having been admonished to remain silent. Remember that when Gil Garcetti runs for President. Even when there is statutory protection, as in the case of that federal whistleblower whom everyone's been talking about, it is extremely difficult to police prohibitions on retaliation, thus the whistleblower's present penchant for anonymity.
In a recent opinion column in The Hill, Independent Institute Policy Fellow Ronald L. Trowbridge, Ph.D., bemoaned this sorry state of constitutional whistleblower law since Garcetti.
Right.
Well, welcome to the table, Dr. Trowbridge. Some of us transparency-and-accountability types in the public sector have been living, working, and biting our tongues under Garcetti for more than a dozen years.
I don't concede that Garcetti applies to me; a footnote in the opinion left the question open as a matter of constitutional law for academics, who sit in a weird place, constitutionally speaking. I've dared to offer my own constructive criticism here and there. But often, I stay silent. And by often, I mean a lot. For example, you want to know what goes on at a public school inside the ABA accreditation process? Well wouldn't you, then. How nice for you. Talk to the hand.
What we need is not another op-ed bemoaning Garcetti. We need a way forward.
In 2016, Jerud Butler was reprimanded and demoted in his job at the San Miguel County, Colorado, Road and Bridge Department after he testified truthfully at a child custody hearing involving his sister-in-law and her ex-husband, another employee at the San Miguel County Road and Bridge Department. His testimony, in a personal capacity, incidentally touched on the hours of operation of the department. The Tenth Circuit rejected Butler's bid for First Amendment protection, finding Butler an employee of the government, like an employee anywhere else, subject to the whimsy of the employer.
Butler was not a whistleblower. But Garcetti was not a watershed moment. Rather, Garcetti was a symptom of an employee-speech doctrine in First Amendment law that has been badly broken since it was invented in Pickering v. Board of Education in 1968.
On behalf of "First Amendment Scholars," including me, Professors Lisa Hoppenjans and Gregory P. Magarian and their student team at the Washington University First Amendment Clinic at St. Louis University Law School filed an amicus brief in support of U.S. Supreme Court cert. in Butler (No. 18-1012). Butler has got to be a mistaken outcome, even if we think that whistleblowing should be a statutory matter rather than a constitutional right, even under Pickering.
Like Dr. Trowbridge, I hope the Supreme Court at some point will realize the work that needs to be done to make sensible public-employee speech doctrine, whether fixing what we've got or starting from scratch.
Meanwhile I'll take anything that chips away at Garcetti.
Scholar-amici on the Wash. U. brief in Butler included: RonNell Andersen Jones, Associate Dean of Research & Teitelbaum Chair of Law, University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law; Cynthia Boyer, Associate Professor, Institut Maurice Hauriou (Université Toulouse Capitole)/Institut National
Universitaire Champollion; Alan K. Chen, Professor of Law, University of Denver Sturm College
of Law; Eric B. Easton, Professor of Law Emeritus, University of Baltimore School of Law; Craig B. Futterman, Clinical Professor of Law, University of Chicago Law School; Heidi Kitrosser, Robins Kaplan Professor of Law, University of Minnesota Law School; Lyrissa Lidsky, Dean and Judge C.A. Leedy Professor of Law, University of Missouri School of Law; Gregory P. Magarian, Thomas and Karole Green Professor of Law, Washington University in St. Louis School of Law; Helen Norton, Rothgerber Chair in Constitutional Law, University of Colorado School of Law; Richard J. Peltz-Steele, Chancellor Professor, University of Massachusetts Law School; Tamara R. Piety, Professor of
Law, University of Tulsa College of Law.
Amici aligned with First Amendment Scholars in Butler included the National Whistleblower Center, the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence, the Duke Law School First Amendment Clinic, and the Government Accountability Project.
A big problem for whistleblowers in the public sector is that the U.S. Supreme Court has clearly held that there is no First Amendment protection for whistleblowing in the United States. So public employees who blow the whistle on public misfeasance or malfeasance have to be prepared to pay for their good intentions with their livelihoods.
Notably, that was the Court's holding in 2006, when a lawyer, Richard Ceballos, suffered retaliation in the office of L.A. District Attorney Gil Garcetti for having disclosed to criminal-defense counsel that a sheriff misrepresented facts in a search warrant affidavit, despite having been admonished to remain silent. Remember that when Gil Garcetti runs for President. Even when there is statutory protection, as in the case of that federal whistleblower whom everyone's been talking about, it is extremely difficult to police prohibitions on retaliation, thus the whistleblower's present penchant for anonymity.
In a recent opinion column in The Hill, Independent Institute Policy Fellow Ronald L. Trowbridge, Ph.D., bemoaned this sorry state of constitutional whistleblower law since Garcetti.
Right.
Well, welcome to the table, Dr. Trowbridge. Some of us transparency-and-accountability types in the public sector have been living, working, and biting our tongues under Garcetti for more than a dozen years.
I don't concede that Garcetti applies to me; a footnote in the opinion left the question open as a matter of constitutional law for academics, who sit in a weird place, constitutionally speaking. I've dared to offer my own constructive criticism here and there. But often, I stay silent. And by often, I mean a lot. For example, you want to know what goes on at a public school inside the ABA accreditation process? Well wouldn't you, then. How nice for you. Talk to the hand.
What we need is not another op-ed bemoaning Garcetti. We need a way forward.
In 2016, Jerud Butler was reprimanded and demoted in his job at the San Miguel County, Colorado, Road and Bridge Department after he testified truthfully at a child custody hearing involving his sister-in-law and her ex-husband, another employee at the San Miguel County Road and Bridge Department. His testimony, in a personal capacity, incidentally touched on the hours of operation of the department. The Tenth Circuit rejected Butler's bid for First Amendment protection, finding Butler an employee of the government, like an employee anywhere else, subject to the whimsy of the employer.
Butler was not a whistleblower. But Garcetti was not a watershed moment. Rather, Garcetti was a symptom of an employee-speech doctrine in First Amendment law that has been badly broken since it was invented in Pickering v. Board of Education in 1968.
On behalf of "First Amendment Scholars," including me, Professors Lisa Hoppenjans and Gregory P. Magarian and their student team at the Washington University First Amendment Clinic at St. Louis University Law School filed an amicus brief in support of U.S. Supreme Court cert. in Butler (No. 18-1012). Butler has got to be a mistaken outcome, even if we think that whistleblowing should be a statutory matter rather than a constitutional right, even under Pickering.
Like Dr. Trowbridge, I hope the Supreme Court at some point will realize the work that needs to be done to make sensible public-employee speech doctrine, whether fixing what we've got or starting from scratch.
Meanwhile I'll take anything that chips away at Garcetti.
Scholar-amici on the Wash. U. brief in Butler included: RonNell Andersen Jones, Associate Dean of Research & Teitelbaum Chair of Law, University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law; Cynthia Boyer, Associate Professor, Institut Maurice Hauriou (Université Toulouse Capitole)/Institut National
Universitaire Champollion; Alan K. Chen, Professor of Law, University of Denver Sturm College
of Law; Eric B. Easton, Professor of Law Emeritus, University of Baltimore School of Law; Craig B. Futterman, Clinical Professor of Law, University of Chicago Law School; Heidi Kitrosser, Robins Kaplan Professor of Law, University of Minnesota Law School; Lyrissa Lidsky, Dean and Judge C.A. Leedy Professor of Law, University of Missouri School of Law; Gregory P. Magarian, Thomas and Karole Green Professor of Law, Washington University in St. Louis School of Law; Helen Norton, Rothgerber Chair in Constitutional Law, University of Colorado School of Law; Richard J. Peltz-Steele, Chancellor Professor, University of Massachusetts Law School; Tamara R. Piety, Professor of
Law, University of Tulsa College of Law.
Amici aligned with First Amendment Scholars in Butler included the National Whistleblower Center, the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence, the Duke Law School First Amendment Clinic, and the Government Accountability Project.
Saturday, November 16, 2019
Dublin City's Brexit Institute tracks all things Brexit
If you're like me, Brexit is a lot to keep up with. How do you find out the latest developments, when all of your news channels are around-the-clock impeachment hearings? It's quite the chore for the responsible global citizen.
Let the Brexit Institute alleviate your anxiety. Since 2016, the good people at Dublin City University have been tracking all things Brexit. You can follow the institute through its excellent blog, newsletter, or Twitter feed. IAMCRers will remember DCU from our excellent 2013 conference.
Unrelated to the institute, but while on the subject of Brexit, a shout out to one of my favorite Twitter feeds, The Irish Border, which earned mention in The Guardian last year.
Earlier this week, my Comparative Law class was privileged to host via Zoom a guest from the Brexit Institute, post-doc Professor Giovanni Zaccaroni. Extra thanks that he stayed up late to join us from GMT. Prof. Zaccaroni walked us through an intense short course on EU treaty exit article 50, the U.K. Supreme Court decision voiding prorogation, and the proposed Irish border protocol.
Prof. Zaccaroni answered students' questions on those issues and more, explaining the cultural, political, and historical sensitivity around the Irish border question, as well as the relationship between Brexit and potential eastward growth of the European Union—spoiler alert: don't hold your breath, for many reasons, Brexit besides.
Let the Brexit Institute alleviate your anxiety. Since 2016, the good people at Dublin City University have been tracking all things Brexit. You can follow the institute through its excellent blog, newsletter, or Twitter feed. IAMCRers will remember DCU from our excellent 2013 conference.
Unrelated to the institute, but while on the subject of Brexit, a shout out to one of my favorite Twitter feeds, The Irish Border, which earned mention in The Guardian last year.
Earlier this week, my Comparative Law class was privileged to host via Zoom a guest from the Brexit Institute, post-doc Professor Giovanni Zaccaroni. Extra thanks that he stayed up late to join us from GMT. Prof. Zaccaroni walked us through an intense short course on EU treaty exit article 50, the U.K. Supreme Court decision voiding prorogation, and the proposed Irish border protocol.
Prof. Zaccaroni answered students' questions on those issues and more, explaining the cultural, political, and historical sensitivity around the Irish border question, as well as the relationship between Brexit and potential eastward growth of the European Union—spoiler alert: don't hold your breath, for many reasons, Brexit besides.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)