DOCSLIB.ORG

Faculty Activities

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

18 19 yale law report winter 2010 faculty activities • 2009 Distinguished Speaker Luncheon of the young • francis Lieber colloquium Series, columbia Law Lawyers Section, connecticut Bar Association, School, “Vestiges of the common Law/civil Law hartford, keynote speech Divide” • festival del Diritto (festival of Law), Piacenza, Italy, “Is other professional highlights Equality a Matter of Public or Private Law?” • Lifetime Achievement Award, American Society of • XXI International conference of the “Giordano Dell’ comparative Law Amore” observatory, Milan, Italy, on “The Day After the crisis: Economic, financial and Social Issues,” delivered Drew S. Days, III introductory speech, and was commentator on the lectures and addresses Jules L. Coleman Bruce Ackerman • Museum of jewish heritage, New york, “The Black/ presentation given by Professor Guido rossi on the • The Pacific Islander Asian and Native American Law publications jewish Alliance: Shared Vulnerability” desirability of global legal standards Students Association of yLS Third Annual Alumni • Second Annual rosenkranz Debate and Luncheon, • The Citizenship Agenda, in The Constitution in 2020 • Seminario en Latinoamerica de Theoria constitucional Banquet, New haven, “Introduction of Goodwin Lui” Washington, D.c., debated The honorable frank 109 (j. Balkin & r. Siegel eds., 2009) y Politica (SELA), Asuncion, Paraguay, “regulating • Thinking about Law and justice with the Teen justice Easterbrook, with Professor john Manning moder- • My Debt to Mirjan Damasˇka, 118 Yale L.J. Pocket Sexuality: on Liberty versus Equality” court, New haven, “justice, fairness and Impartiality” ating, at the National Lawyers convention of The Part 171 (2009), available at http://thepocketpart. • yale National Initiative, New haven, “civil rights for • Admitted Student Dinner, New haven federalist Society, resolved: “The United States org/2009/03/23/ackerman.html African-Americans, Women, and Same-Sex couples: • New haven Legal Assistance Breakfast, New haven, “A constitution requires federal courts to interpret stat- • Abolish the White House Counsel, Slate, April 22, 2009 Some Parallels, Some Differences” firm Stand for justice” utes as honest agents of the enacting congress” Bruce Ackerman • Section Five and the On-going Canonization of the Civil publications • The colorado Lawyers committee 30th Annual Mirjan R. Dama˘kas Rights Revolution, Balkinization, june 22, 2009, avail- • Constitutional Constraints on the Regulation of other professional highlights Luncheon Keynote Speaker, Denver, CO, “Past able at http://balkin.blogspot.com/2009/06/section- Cloning, IX Yale J. Health Pol’y, Law & Ethics 495 • recipient, with wife Anne T. calabresi, of the United Transgressions, Present challenges and the obama five-and-on-going-canonization.html (2009) Way of Greater New haven 2009 Alexis de Tocqueville justice Department” • America Needs to Prepare for Early Iraq Pullout (with o. • chapter in In Memoriam: Jay Katz 31 (2009) Society’s herbert h. Pearce Award for contributions to • United States Senate Democratic Policy committee, hathaway), Financial Times, August 24, 2009 philanthropy, New haven Washington, D.c., confirmation of justice Sotomayor • A General’s Public Pressure, Wash. Post, october 2, Guido Calabresi • American Bar Association 2009 Annual Meeting, 2009 lectures and addresses Jules L. Coleman chicago, IL, panelist, “The roberts court - Three’s a • federalist Society, yale Law School, debate with lectures and addresses charm?” • Boconni University, “Law and Morality” • Practicing Law Institute Annual Supreme court Jack M. Balkin Jack M. Balkin The honorable richard A. Posner, 7th circuit court Drew S. Days III lectures and addresses of Appeals, on “Are federal Appeals judges Legal • The University of Michigan Law School, “The review, New york, panelist • American constitution Society convention, realists?” Normative Structure of Tort Law” • Quinnipiac University School of Law Symposium on Washington, D.c., “The constitution in 2020” • American constitution Society and The federalist • Stetson Law School, Nichols Lecture on Torts and The Life of constance Baker Motley, hamden, cT, pan- • Aspen Arts and Ideas festival, Aspen, “The National Society, University of chicago Law School, panelist on responsibility elist Surveillance State” Legal Education with judges robert A. Katzmann, 2nd • NyU, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, and • Berkeley college fellows’ Meeting, New haven, “Strip • National Press club and American constitution circuit court of Appeals, and Milan Smith, 9th circuit Northwestern University: “Torts” Searches, Angry firefighters, DNA Tests and Elected Society, Washington, D.c., “constitutional court of Appeals • University of Antwerp conference on jurisprudence judges” Interpretation in 2020” • Presided over hinton Moot court finals, University of • University of Michigan Law School conference on • DrI 14th Annual conference, chicago, IL, panelist, “The • American Political Science Association, Toronto, chicago Law School jurisprudence Supreme court - changes and challenges” Robert A. Burt John J. Donohue III “constitutional Dictatorship” • AALS Workshop for New Law School Teachers, • University of San Diego Law School conference on • yale federalist Society Luncheon Series, New haven, • National Archives, Washington, D.c., “The future of the Washington, D.c., keynote speech Tort Law oral Advocacy Lecture constitution” • cNPDS (centro Nazionale di Prevenzione e Publications • featured, c-SPAN, United States Supreme court publications Difesa Sociale) Workshop and Meeting, cariplo • Theories of Tort Law, in Stanford Encyclopedia of Documentary • The Constitution in 2020 (with r. Siegel) (2009) headquarters, Milan, Italy, “Ways of Supporting the Philosophy (with G. Mendlow) 2009 • Framework Originalism and the Living Constitution, 103 Economy Without Distorting competition” • Beyond Inclusive Legal Positivism, in Ratio Juris, 20th John J. Donohue III Nw. U. L. Rev. 549 (2009) • International Meeting of “The Global Standard of Anniversary Issue of the journal devoted to Professor lectures and addresses • What to Do About the Court?, American Prospect, the XXI century,” in cooperation with Aspen Institute coleman’s contributions to jurisprudence • NBEr Summer Institute Pre-conference, Economic october 2009 Italia and the Italian Ministry of the Economy and other Professional Highlights crime control, “rethinking America’s Illegal Drug Guido Calabresi • Supreme Court Justices Have It Too Good, The finance, rome, Italy, opening remarks; panelist • Visiting Distinguished Professor of the Philosophy Policy” Guardian Online (UK), May 2009 • judged final Moot court Tournament, University of of the Social Sciences, herdecke-Witten University, • Whitney center Lecture Series, hamden, cT, • Jon Stewart and the Crisis of Journalism, The Guardian Turin Law School, Turin, Italy Germany “rethinking America’s Illegal Drug Policy” Online (UK), March 2009 • Delivered two “Inaugural” Lectures of the Third Term • Nichols Distinguished Professor, Stetson University • Law and Economics Workshop, University of chicago • A Body of Inquiries, N.Y. Times, january 2009 of the Master of Science course in comparative Law, Law School, “rethinking America’s Illegal Drug Policy” Economics, and finance, International University Mirjan R. Damasˇka • 1st Paris and Bonn Workshop on Law and Economics: Robert A. Burt college of Turin lectures and addresses The Empirics of crime and Deterrence, University of lectures and addresses • yale Law School Association of Washington, D.c. Area • Toronto conference of the International Association of Paris ouest Nanterre, keynote address, “The Evolution of Econometric Evaluation of crime and Deterrence” • Bioethics and Law Symposium, connecticut Bar Alumni Dinner, remarks and introduction of Dean Procedural Law, Keynote Address foundation, “Decision Making at the Very End of Life” robert Post 20 21 yale law report winter 2010 faculty activities • NBEr regulation and Litigation conference, The publications • Revitalizing Global Environmental Governance for • Localism and Democracy Panel, The constitution in Boulders, carefree, Arizona, comment on cook, • The Mediocrity of Government Subsidies to Mixed- Climate Change, Global Governance, vol. 15 (2009) 2020 conference, yale Law School, “federalism All the Ludwig, and Samaha, “Gun control after heller: Income Housing Projects, in Property Rights and Land other professional highlights Way Down” Litigating Against regulation” Policies (G. K. Ingram & yu-hung hong eds., 2009) • Inc’s 30 Best Business Books Every Business owner • Duke Law School, “The Legacy of David Souter” • faculty Workshop, Universitat Pompeu fabra, Should read, for Green to Gold: How Smart • Midwest Democracy Network, columbus, ohio, “four Barcelona, Spain, “Impact of the Death Penalty on William N. Eskridge, Jr. Companies Use Environmental Strategy to Approaches to redistricting reform” Murder in the U.S.” lectures and addresses Innovate, Create Value, and Build Competitive • Election reform Agenda conference, University of • Latin American caribbean Law and Economics • congressional Testimony Supporting the Employment Advantage Iowa, “Getting from here to There in Election reform” Robert C. Ellickson Association Plenary Session, Universitat Pompeu Non-Discrimination Act, Before the house committee publications Owen M. Fiss fabra, Barcelona, Spain, “can you Believe Econometric on Education and Labor, 111th congress, first Session Owen M. Fiss • Uncooperative
Recommended publications
  • Stepping up to the Challenge of Leadership on Race

    Stepping up to the Challenge of Leadership on Race

    STEPPING UP TO THE CHALLENGE OF LEADERSHIP ON RACE Anthony C. Thompson* I. INTRODUCTION First and foremost, I want to thank you for inviting me to deliver this keynote address. I applaud your choice to participate in a conference on difference and leadership because these are critical issues that deserve our best thinking and our collective attention. I have watched with great interest as organizations from global businesses, to law schools, to court systems have begun embracing the concept of diversity and inclusion. Setting diversity and inclusion as operating goals in our institutions is long overdue and an important step toward addressing chronic equity issues in our society. But as I celebrate the attention and intention around such efforts, I also have a worry. I am concerned that, as we work toward the inclusion part of the effort, we are rushing a little too fast past the diversity component. As a country, we have been quite anxious to define diversity as “diversity of thought,” “diversity of experience,” and, yes, even “gender diversity” as a way of avoiding the difficulty and discomfort of examining racial diversity. But we, as lawyers and leaders, need to learn to get comfortable in that discomfort. Because as much as we might * Professor of Clinical Law, Faculty Director, Center on Race, Inequality, and the Law at New York University School of Law. I gratefully acknowledge financial support from the Filomen D’Agostino and Max Greenberg Research Fund at the New York University School of Law. I would like to thank Professor Kim Taylor-Thompson for her helpful comments on this project.
  • The Early Years of First Amendment Lochnerism

    The Early Years of First Amendment Lochnerism

    COLUMBIA LAW REVIEW VOL. 116 DECEMBER 2016 NO. 8 ARTICLES THE EARLY YEARS OF FIRST AMENDMENT LOCHNERISM Jeremy K. Kessler* From Citizens United to Hobby Lobby, civil libertarian challenges to the regulation of economic activity are increasingly prevalent. Critics of this trend invoke the specter of Lochner v. New York. They suggest that the First Amendment, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, and other legislative “conscience clauses” are being used to resurrect the economically libertarian substantive due process jurisprudence of the early twentieth century. Yet the worry that aggressive judicial enforcement of the First Amendment might erode democratic regulation of the economy and enhance the economic power of private actors has a long history. As this Article demonstrates, anxieties about such “First Amendment Lochnerism” date back to the federal judiciary’s initial turn to robust protection of free exercise and free expression in the 1930s and 1940s. Then, it was those members of the Supreme Court perceived as most liberal who struck down economic regulations on First Amendment grounds. They did so in a series of contentious cases involving the Jehovah’s Witnesses, who challenged local peddling taxes as burdening a central aspect of their missionary faith—the mass sale and distribution of religious literature. In dissent, Justice Robert Jackson warned that the new “liberal” majority’s expansive conception of First *. Associate Professor and Milton Handler Fellow, Columbia Law School. FoR conversation and counsel along the way,
  • An Open Letter to Congressman Gingrich

    An Open Letter to Congressman Gingrich

    Columbia Law School Scholarship Archive Faculty Scholarship Faculty Publications 1995 An Open Letter to Congressman Gingrich Bruce Ackerman Akhil Amar Jack Balkin Susan Low Bloch Philip Chase Bobbitt Columbia Law School, [email protected] See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, Taxation-Federal Commons, and the Tax Law Commons Recommended Citation Bruce Ackerman, Akhil Amar, Jack Balkin, Susan L. Bloch, Philip C. Bobbitt, Richard Fallon, Paul Kahn, Philip Kurland, Douglas Laycock, Sanford Levinson, Frank Michelman, Michael Perry, Robert Post, Jed Rubenfeld, David Strauss, Cass Sunstein & Harry Wellington, An Open Letter to Congressman Gingrich, 104 YALE L. J. 1539 (1995). Available at: https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/2193 This Response/Comment is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Publications at Scholarship Archive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of Scholarship Archive. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Authors Bruce Ackerman, Akhil Amar, Jack Balkin, Susan Low Bloch, Philip Chase Bobbitt, Richard Fallon, Paul Kahn, Philip Kurland, Douglas Laycock, Sanford Levinson, Frank Michelman, Michael Perry, Robert Post, Jed Rubenfeld, David Strauss, Cass Sunstein, and Harry Wellington This response/comment is available at Scholarship Archive: https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/ faculty_scholarship/2193 Comment An Open Letter to Congressman Gingrich* We urge you to reconsider your proposal to amend the House Rules to require a three-fifths vote for enactment of laws that increase income taxes.' This proposal violates the explicit intentions of the Framers.
  • Bios for Commercial Speech 2020

    Bios for Commercial Speech 2020

    Bios for Commercial Speech 2020 Floyd Abrams Floyd Abrams is Senior Counsel in Cahill Gordon & Reindel LLP's litigation practice group. Floyd has a national trial and appellate practice and extensive experience in high-visibility matters, often involving First Amendment, securities litigation, intellectual property, public policy and regulatory issues. He has argued frequently in the Supreme Court in cases raising issues as diverse as the scope of the First Amendment, the interpretation of ERISA, the nature of broadcast regulation, the impact of copyright law and the continuing viability of the Miranda rule. Floyd Abrams is a member of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences. He has been an active member of both federal and New York City bar associations and has chaired committees for both. He has been the recipient of numerous awards, including Yale Law School’s prestigious Award of Merit in 2015. He has appeared frequently on television and has published articles and reviews in The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Yale Law Journal, The Harvard Law Review, and elsewhere. For fifteen years, Floyd was the William J. Brennan, Jr. Visiting Professor of First Amendment Law at the Columbia Graduate School of Journalism. He has, as well, been a Visiting Lecturer at Yale Law School and Columbia Law School and he is author of Friend of the Court: On the Front Lines with the First Amendment, published by Yale University Press (2013) and Speaking Freely: Trials of the First Amendment, published by Viking Press (2005). Alex Abdo Alex Abdo is the inaugural Litigation Director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University.
  • Inspiring Americans to Greatness Attendees of the 2019 Freedom Conference Raise Their Hands in Solidarity with Hong Kong Pro-Democracy Protesters

    Inspiring Americans to Greatness Attendees of the 2019 Freedom Conference Raise Their Hands in Solidarity with Hong Kong Pro-Democracy Protesters

    Annual Report 2019-20 Inspiring Americans to Greatness Attendees of the 2019 Freedom Conference raise their hands in solidarity with Hong Kong pro-democracy protesters The principles espoused by The Steamboat Institute are: Limited taxation and fiscal responsibility • Limited government • Free market capitalism Individual rights and responsibilities • Strong national defense Contents INTRODUCTION EMERGING LEADERS COUNCIL About the Steamboat Institute 2 Meet Our Emerging Leaders 18 Letter from the Chairman 3 MEDIA COVERAGE AND OUTREACH AND EVENTS PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT Campus Liberty Tour 4 Media Coverage 20 Freedom Conferences and Film Festival 8 Social Media Analytics 21 Additional Outreach 10 FINANCIALS TONY BLANKLEY FELLOWSHIP 2019-20 Revenue & Expenses 22 FOR PUBLIC POLICY & AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM FUNDING About the Tony Blankley Fellowship 11 2019 and 2020 Fellows 12 Funding Sources 23 Past Fellows 14 MEET OUR PEOPLE COURAGE IN EDUCATION AWARD Board of Directors 24 Recipients 16 National Advisory Board 24 Our Team 24 The Steamboat Institute 2019-20 Annual Report – 1 – About The Steamboat Institute Here at the Steamboat Institute, we are Defenders of Freedom When we started The Steamboat Institute in 2008, it was and Advocates of Liberty. We are admirers of the bravery out of genuine concern for the future of our country. We take and rugged individualism that has made this country great. seriously the concept that freedom is never more than one We are admirers of the greatness and wisdom that resides generation away from extinction. in every individual. We understand that this is a great nation because of its people, not because of its government. The Steamboat Institute has succeeded beyond anything Like Thomas Jefferson, we would rather be, “exposed to we could have imagined when we started in 2008.
  • Jack Balkin's Interaction Theory of “Commerce”

    Jack Balkin's Interaction Theory of “Commerce”

    Georgetown University Law Center Scholarship @ GEORGETOWN LAW 2011 Jack Balkin's Interaction Theory of “Commerce” Randy E. Barnett Georgetown University Law Center, [email protected] Georgetown Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper No. 11-37 This paper can be downloaded free of charge from: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub/626 http://ssrn.com/abstract=1803439 2012 U. Ill. L. Rev. 623-667 This open-access article is brought to you by the Georgetown Law Library. Posted with permission of the author. Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub Part of the Constitutional Law Commons BARNETT.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) 5/14/2012 10:46 AM JACK BALKIN’S INTERACTION THEORY OF “COMMERCE” Randy E. Barnett* In his book, Living Originalism, Jack Balkin proposes what he calls the “interaction theory” of the original semantic meaning of the word “commerce” in the commerce clause. He claims that “com- merce” meant “social interaction.” In this Article, I explain why his theory is wrong due to errors of commission and omission. Balkin is wrong to reduce “commerce” to “intercourse,” “intercourse” to “in- teraction,” and “interaction” to “affecting.” This triple reduction dis- torts rather than illuminates the original meaning of “commerce.” Balkin furthermore omits from his discussion the massive amounts of evidence of contemporary usage—along with dictionary definitions of “intercourse”—establishing that “commerce” referred to the trade or transportation of things or persons, and did not include such produc- tive economic activity as manufacturing or agriculture, much less all social interaction. I also reply to Balkin’s criticisms of my book, Re- storing the Lost Constitution.
  • Why Liberals and Conservatives Flipped on Judicial Restraint: Judicial Review in the Cycles of Constitutional Time

    Why Liberals and Conservatives Flipped on Judicial Restraint: Judicial Review in the Cycles of Constitutional Time

    BALKIN.PRINTER (DO NOT DELETE) 12/21/2019 1:12 PM Why Liberals and Conservatives Flipped on Judicial Restraint: Judicial Review in the Cycles of Constitutional Time Jack M. Balkin* INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 215 I. POLITICAL REGIMES IN POLITICAL TIME ............................................ 220 A. The Idea of a Constitutional Regime ...................................... 220 B. Judicial Time ........................................................................... 224 II. HOW THE RISE AND FALL OF REGIMES AFFECTS JUDICIAL REVIEW . 227 III. THE ROLE OF CONSTITUTIONAL THEORY IN THE CYCLE OF REGIMES ............................................................................................. 243 A. The Cycle of Regimes and Living Constitutionalism ............. 246 B. The Cycle of Regimes and Originalism .................................. 251 C. The Return of Liberal Skepticism About Judicial Review ..... 261 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................. 264 Introduction Over the course of a little more than a century, American liberals (or, in an earlier period, progressives) and conservatives have switched positions on judicial review, judicial restraint, and the role of the federal courts—not once, but twice.1 At the beginning of the twentieth century, progressives grew increasingly skeptical of judicial review, while conservatives embraced judicial review to limit federal and state regulation and
  • Living Originalism and Living Constitutionalism As Moral Readings of the American Constitution

    Living Originalism and Living Constitutionalism As Moral Readings of the American Constitution

    LIVING ORIGINALISM AND LIVING CONSTITUTIONALISM AS MORAL READINGS OF THE AMERICAN CONSTITUTION JAMES E. FLEMING∗ INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 1171 I. THE BALKANIZATION (AND BALKINIZATION) OF ORIGINALISM........ 1173 II. BALKIN’S LIVING ORIGINALISM AS A MORAL READING OF THE AMERICAN CONSTITUTION ................................................................ 1175 III. STRAUSS’S LIVING CONSTITUTIONALISM AS A MORAL READING OF THE AMERICAN CONSTITUTION .................................................... 1177 A. Originalism and Its Sins ............................................................ 1177 B. The Common Law ...................................................................... 1179 C. The Role of the Written Constitution: Common Ground and Jefferson’s Problem ............................................................ 1180 D. Constitutional Amendments and the Living Constitution .......... 1183 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................. 1184 INTRODUCTION With this event – A Symposium on Jack Balkin’s Living Originalism and David Strauss’s The Living Constitution – we launch a Boston University School of Law series of symposia on significant recent books in law. The distinctive format is to pick two significant books that join issue on an important topic, to invite the author of each book to write an essay on the other book, and to invite several Boston University School of Law faculty
  • Democracy and Dysfunction: an Exchange

    Democracy and Dysfunction: an Exchange

    DEMOCRACY AND DYSFUNCTION: AN EXCHANGE SANFORD LEVINSON' JACK M. BALKIN* September 29, 2015 Dear Jack, It is obviously no longer controversial that the American political system, especially at the national level, is seriously dysfunctional. Consider, for example, what are nearly the opening words-after noting that the United States Capitol is currently enfolded by scaffolding for repair of the physical building-of the distinguished Columbia political scientist and historian Ira Katznelson's recent contribution to a Boston Review forum on "Anxieties of Democracy."' Even if "[r]estoration is underway, its conclusion in sight," repair of the institutions inside the Capitol seems a long way off, if it is even possible.2 Katznelson continues: The House and Senate are presently shackled. Paralyzed by party divisions, influenced excessively by moneyed interests, and perverted by the disappearance of civic virtue, representative institutions appear unable to identify and address our most consequential public problems, including the politics of redistribution, racial equity, immigration, and the proper balance between liberty and national security. Like the dome, American democracy badly needs reconstruction.3 * Professor Sanford Levinson, who holds the W. St. John Garwood and W. St. John Garwood, Jr. Centennial Chair in Law, joined the University of Texas Law School in 1980. Professor Levinson is also, in both fall 2015 and 2016, a visiting Professor of Law at Harvard Law School. He was elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2001 and received the Lifetime Achievement Award from the Law and Courts Section of the American Political Science Association in 2010. Among his books is Framed:America's 51 Constitutions and the Crisis of Governance (2012).
  • White Male Aristocracy

    White Male Aristocracy

    Boston College Law School Digital Commons @ Boston College Law School Boston College Law School Faculty Papers 4-30-2020 White Male Aristocracy Mary Sarah Bilder Boston College Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/lsfp Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, and the Legal History Commons Recommended Citation "White Male Aristocracy," Symposium on Gerald Leonard and Saul Cornell, The Partisan Republic: Democracy, Exclusion, and the Fall of the Founders' Constitution, 1780s-1830s (Cambridge University Press, 2019), Balkinization, April 30, 2020. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ Boston College Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Boston College Law School Faculty Papers by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Boston College Law School. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Balkinization: White Male Aristocracy More Create Blog Sign In Balkinization Front page Thursday, April 30, 2020 Balkin.com Books by Balkinization White Male Aristocracy Bloggers Balkinization an unanticipated Guest Blogger consequence of Jack M. Balkin For the Symposium on Gerald Leonard and Saul Cornell, The Partisan Republic: Democracy, Exclusion, and the Fall of the Founders' Constitution, 1780s- -- Archives - - 1830s (Cambridge University Press, 2019). Mary Sarah Bilder Gerry Leonard and Saul Cornell’s fascinating book, The Partisan Republic: E-mail: Democracy, Exclusion, and the Fall of the Founders’ Constitution, 1780-1830s Jack Balkin: jackbalkin at tells the story, as I put in in a blurb, “of the unsettling transformation of yahoo.com aristocratic-tinged constitutional republic into a partisan white male democracy.” Bruce Ackerman bruce.ackerman at In this year where we recall the Nineteenth Amendment’s re-enfranchisement of yale.edu women, the Leonard/Cornell book demands that we reevaluate the way we Ian Ayres describe the early nineteenth-century constitutional state.
  • Report to the Internal Review Committee

    Report to the Internal Review Committee

    Center for Neuroscience & Society University of Pennsylvania REPORT TO THE INTERNAL REVIEW COMMITTEE I. Mission …………………………………………………………………………………….…………………….. p. 2 II. History …………………………………………………………………………………………………….…….. p. 2 III. People ………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. p. 2 Faculty Staff Fellows Visiting Scholars Advisory Board IV. Funding …………………………………………………………………………………………………….…… p. 4 V. Space and Facilities ………………………………………………………………………………………… p. 4 VI. Overview .……………………………………………………………………………………………………… p. 5 VII. Research on Neuroscience and Society…………………………………………………………. P. 5 VIII. Outreach (Including K-12 Education) …………………………………………………………… p. 7 Online Public Talks Academic Outreach Within Penn Outreach Beyond Penn Conferences K-12 Education IX. Higher Education ………………………………………………………………………………………….. p. 11 Neuroscience Boot Camp Continuing Medical Education Neuroethics Learning Collaborative Penn Fellowships in Neuroscience and Society New Courses Preceptorials Graduate Certificate in Social, Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience (SCAN) X. Conclusions, Challenges for the Future …………………………………………………………… p. 15 Appendices 1-11 Submitted April 9, 2016, by Martha J. Farah, Director of the Center for Neuroscience & Society 1 I. Mission Neuroscience is giving us increasingly powerful methods for understanding, predicting and manipulating the human mind. Every sphere of life in which psychology plays a central role – from education and family life to law and politics – will be touched by these advances, and some will be profoundly transformed.
  • Law & Economics

    Law & Economics

    ANNUAL REPORT 2008–2009 We find “islands of conscious power in this ocean of unconscious co-operation like lumps of butter coagulat- ing in a pail of buttermilk.” But in view of the fact that it is usually argued that co-ordination will be done by the price mechanism, why is such organization neces- sary? Why are there these “islands of conscious power”? Outside the firm, price movements direct production, which is coordinated through a series of exchange trans- actions on the market. Within a firm, these markets transactions are eliminated and in place of the com- plicated market structure with exchange transactions is substituted the entrepreneur co-ordinator, who directs production. It is clearinstitute that these for are alternative methods of co-ordinatinglaw production. & economics Yet, having regard to the fact that if production is regulated by price movements, production could be carried on without any organization at all, well might we ask, why is there any organization? A Joint Research Center of the Law School, the Wharton School, and the Department of Economics in the School of Arts and Sciences at the University of Pennsylvania Message from the Co-Chairs for almost three decades, penn’s institute for law and economics has contributed to scholarship, policy, and practice on relevant issues of law and economics that affect our country’s businesses and fi nancial institutions. tHe InstItUte’s programs have become increasingly relevant and important in this challenging economic climate, focusing on the issues that the academic, legal, and business communities care about. today the Institute enjoys an Message from the Co-Chairs 1 deal day 20 outstanding international reputation for the excellence of its programs, where leaders in business, fi nancial management, Board of Advisors 2 Chancery Court programs 20 legal practice, and academic scholarship candidly discuss the intersec- Message from the Dean 4 Lectures 22 tion of theory and practice on a host of signifi cant issues.