DOCSLIB.ORG

ANU BRADFORD Columbia Law School 435 West 116Th Street New York, NY 10027 Tel: 212 854 7957 E-Mail: [email protected]

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
ANU BRADFORD Columbia Law School 435 West 116Th Street New York, NY 10027 Tel: 212 854 7957 E-Mail: Abradf@Law.Columbia.Edu ANU BRADFORD Columbia Law School 435 West 116th Street New York, NY 10027 Tel: 212 854 7957 E-mail: [email protected] CURRENT POSITION Columbia Law School, Henry L. Moses Professor of Law and International Organization, May 2014 – present Professor of Law, July 2012 –May 2014 Director, European Legal Studies Center, July 2014 – present Co-Director, European Legal Studies Center, July 2012 – June 2014 Research and Teaching: International Trade Law, European Union Law, Comparative and International Antitrust Law, International Law and Political Economy, International Economic Migration PREVIOUS ACADEMIC POSITIONS The University of Chicago Law School, Assistant Professor, July 2008 – June 2012 Columbia Law School, Justin W. D'Atri Visiting Assistant Professor of Law, Business, and Society, July- December 2011 EDUCATION Harvard Law School, S.J.D., June 2007; LL.M., June 2002 Fulbright Scholar Recipient of a Derek Bok Center Teaching Award for excellence in undergraduate teaching University of Helsinki, Licentiate in Laws (graduate-level law degree), March 2001; Master of Laws (first law degree), April 2000 magna cum laude (Licentiate in Laws) laudatur (equivalent to summa cum laude) (Master of Laws) Dittmar & Indrenius Prize for the best Masters thesis at Helsinki Law School in 2000 PUBLICATIONS Academic publications Book Chapters Competition Policy and Free Trade: Antitrust Provisions in PTAs, in TRADE COOPERATION: THE PURPOSE, DESIGN AND EFFECTS OF PREFERENTIAL TRADE AGREEMENTS (Dür, Andreas, and Manfred Elsig, eds.) (Cambridge University Press – forthcoming in 2014) (with Tim Büthe) Antitrust Law in Global Markets, in RESEARCH HANDBOOK ON THE ECONOMICS OF ANTITRUST LAW (Einer Elhauge ed.) (Edward Elgar 2012) International Antitrust Cooperation and the Preference for Non-Binding Regimes, in: INTERNATIONAL COMPETITION POLICY, EXTRATERRITORIALITY, AND COMITY (Andrew Guzman ed.) (Oxford University Press 2011) Regime Theory, in: MAX PLANCK ENCYCLOPEDIA OF PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW (Oxford University Press 2008) Journal Articles Exporting standards: The externalization of the EU's regulatory power via markets, Vol. 40 International Review of Law and Economics (2014) How International Institutions Evolve, in 15 Chicago Journal of International Law 1 (Summer 2014) Reversible Rewards (with Omri Ben-Shahar), 15 (1) American Law and Economics Review (2013) Sharing the Risks and Rewards of Economic Migration, 80 The University of Chicago Law Review 29 (2013) The Brussels Effect, 107 Northwestern University Law Review 1 (2013) Efficient Enforcement in International Law (with Omri Ben-Shahar), 12 Chicago Journal of International Law 375 (Winter 2012) Universal Exceptionalism in International Law (with Eric Posner), 52 Harvard International Law Journal 3 (2011) When the WTO Works, and How It Fails, 51 Virginia Journal of International Law 1 (2010) International Antitrust Negotiations and the False Hope of the WTO, 48 Harvard International Law Journal 383 (2007) Assessing Theories of Global Governance: A Case Study of International Antitrust Regulation, 39 Stanford Journal of International Law 2 (2003) [published under maiden name Anu Piilola] Book Reviews Review of Jan Wouters and Bart De Meester: The World Trade Organization: A Legal and Institutional Analysis, 12 Journal of International Economic Law 1(2009) Short essays and op-eds Getting to Yes on Transatlantic Trade: Consistent U.S.-EU Rules Could Remake Global Commerce, FOREIGN AFFAIRS.COM (July 10, 2013) (with Thomas J. Bollyky) Insuring Immigration, PROJECT SYNDICATE (June 18, 2013) U.S.-EU Trade Negotiations Are a Rare Opportunity for the U.S. to Rein in the EU's Regulatory Reach, THE HUFFINGTON POST (June 18, 2013) The Global Rise of a Regulatory Superstate in Europe, THE GLOBALIST (January 14, 2013) The European Crisis and the Future of the Free Movement of People, THE WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM BLOG (November 1, 2012) ANU BRADFORD, Page 2 of 5 Moving beyond Doha, THE WASHINGTON POST, Davos Diary (February 1, 2011) Just Say No to a (Bad) Climate Deal, THE HUFFINGTON POST (December 7, 2010) Chinese Antitrust Law: The New Face of Protectionism?, THE HUFFINGTON POST (August 1, 2008) Publications written in connection with legal practice The New Technology Transfer Block Exemption: A Welcome Reform, After All, 27 WORLD COMPETITION 3 (2004) (with Maurits Dolmans) The Proposed New Technology Transfer Block Exemption: Is Europe Really Better Off than with the Current Regulation?,26 WORLD COMPETITION 4 (2003) (with Maurits Dolmans) Technology Licensing: Will the New Technology Transfer Block Exemption Balance the Goals of Innovation and Competition?, American Bar Association, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW NEWSLETTER, Volume 21, Number 4, Summer 2003 (with Maurits Dolmans) Works in progress The Law and Politics of Antitrust in Open Economies SELECTED PRESENTATIONS The Law and Politics of Antitrust in Open Economies Columbia Law School, Comparative Law and Economics Forum, 21st Annual Meeting (June 2014) Conseil de la Concurrence of Luxembourg, 10th Anniversary Conference (June 2014) University of Tokyo, Faculty Workshop (May 2014) Fordham Law School, Faculty Workshop (February 2014) Harvard Law School, International Law Workshop (September 2013) Chicago Kent Law School, Faculty Workshop (September 2013) The Fletcher School of Diplomacy, Tufts University, International Law and International Relations Workshop (April, 2013) George Washington Law School, American Society of International Law, International Economic Law Interest Group, 2012 Research Colloquium (December 2012) University of Stockholm, The 29th Annual Conference of the European Association of Law and Economics (September 2012) University of California, Berkeley, Colloquium on International Law & Politics (February 2012) NYU Law School, Next Generation of Antitrust Scholarship Conference (January 2012) The University of Chicago, Program on International Politics, Economics, and Security Workshop (January 2012) The Future of the European Labor Market Conference on Sovereign Debt and Social Rights, The International Association of Constitutional Law, Athens (June 2013) Sharing the Risks and Rewards of Economic Migration Sciences-Po, Paris, PILAGG Workshop on Migration (April 2013) Conference on Immigration Law and Institutional Design, The University of Chicago (June 2012) The Brussels Effect University of California, Berkeley, Workshop on European Regulation (April 2014) London School of Economics, The Golem Project seminar series (October 2012) ANU BRADFORD, Page 3 of 5 Cambridge University, Lauterpacht Centre for International Law (October 2012) The University of Chicago Law School, Work-in-Progress faculty workshop (April 2009) Columbia Law School, Work-in-Progress workshop (November 2011) Duke Law School, Roundtable on International Law and Public Goods (October 2011) University of Florence, Italy, Workshop on Legal Order, The State and Economic Development (September 2011) Reversible Rewards Stanford Law School, Law & Economics Workshop (February 2012) University of Michigan Law School, Law & Economics Workshop (September 2011) Efficient Enforcement in International Law University of Virginia Law School Colloquium on International Law and the Global Economy (September 2011) ALEA annual meeting, Princeton University (May 2010) Harvard Law School International Law Workshop (April 2010) The University of Chicago Law School, Work-in-Progress faculty workshop (October 2009) The University of Chicago, Program on International Politics, Economics, and Security workshop (October 2009) Preparing for New Realities Discussion Leader of a Workshop in Davos, World Economic Forum Annual Meeting (January 2011) Universal Exceptionalism in International Law The University of Georgia Law School, International Law Colloquium (February 2010) When the WTO Works, and How It Fails UCLA Law School, American Society of International Law, International Economic Law Interest Group, 2009 Research Colloquium (February 2009) Northwestern Law School, International Law Colloquium (January 2009) GRANTS National Science Foundation, Law & Social Science Program ($216,000) for the project “The Law and Politics of Antitrust in Open Economies” (with Tim Büthe), September 2012-August 2015 OTHER PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE TEACHING University of Tokyo, Visiting Professor, International Trade Law, May 2014 Haifa University, Israel, Visiting Professor, EU Law, May 2013 University of Helsinki, Visiting Lecturer in Law, EU Competition Law, January 2006 and March-April 2005 Brandeis University, Lecturer in Law, International Law and Organizations, Fall 2005 Harvard College, Department of Government, Teaching Fellow, International Law, Fall 2005 LEGAL PRACTICE Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton, Associate, Brussels, Belgium, September 2002 – August 2004 ANU BRADFORD, Page 4 of 5 Latham & Watkins, Summer Associate, New York, June 2005 – August 2005 (lateral offer extended) GOVERNMENT Parliament of Finland, Parliamentary Group of the National Coalition Party, Advisor on Economic Policy, August 2000 – December 2000; Assistant to a Member of Parliament, January 1997 – January 1998 European Parliament, Expert Assistant to a Member of European Parliament, Brussels, Belgium, January 2000 – July 2000 MEMBERSHIPS AND OTHER ACTIVITIES The Finnish Innovation Fund, Board Member, 2009-2012 World Economic Forum, Young Global Leader, 2010 Admitted to the New York Bar, May 2003 Qualified to practice law in Finland, April 2000 LANGUAGES Finnish, English, German, Swedish, French ANU BRADFORD, Page 5 of 5 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Rights As Signals
    RIGHTS AS SIGNALS DANIEL A. FARBER* ABSTRACT Because rights operate as trumps over normal governmental interests, they have an inherent cost. Consequently, by entrenching protection for human rights, govern- ments can signal a willingness to give up power in the short term to obtain long- term benefits. Investors can infer from this that the government has a low discount rate and is less likely to pose a threat of expropriation. Similarly, when courts vig- orously enforce human rights, they dramatize their judicial independence, which is valuable to investors, who themselves may have no interest in human rights. Thus, human rights enforcement may help encourage investment and thereby indirectly foster economic growth. I. INTRODUCTION CAN developing countries afford human rights and the rule of law? Perhaps not, according to Richard Posner. Posner advises poorer countries against "creating a first-class judiciary or an extensive system of civil liberties."' Although he is by no means opposed to judicial independence and human rights, he argues that they should largely await economic growth.2 From this point of view, the dramatic recent expansion of constitutionalism is a bit perplexing, if not a mistake. Posner's argument can be challenged on several grounds. Although he minimizes the importance of an independent judiciary to development,' the current consensus among economists is apparently to the contrary.' Some * McKnight Presidential Professor of Public Law, Henry J. Fletcher Professor of Law, and Associate Dean for Faculty and Research, University of Minnesota. Thanks to Jim Chen, David McGowan, Eric Posner, and Tom Ulen for helpful comments. 'Richard A. Posner, Creating a Legal Framework for Economic Development, 13 World Bank Research Observer 1, 9 (1998).
    [Show full text]
  • Valuing Modern Contract Scholarship
    Responses Valuing Modern Contract Scholarship Ian Ayrest I. INTRODUCTION Eric Posner has written a thoughtful and provocative indictment of the modem economic analysis of contracts. His essay makes two central claims1 about the failings of scholars "to produce an 'economic theory.' Specifically, Posner claims that the economic approach "does not explain the current system of contract law" and that it does not "provide a solid basis for criticizing and reforming contract law."2 In other words, Posner claims that modem scholarship fails as either a descriptive or a normative theory, in that it fails to give an account of what current law is or what efficient law should be. The descriptive criticism deserves only brief comment. Although he claims that modem scholarship has failed to achieve "what its proponents set out as the measure of success, ' 3 Posner sadly distorts reality by claiming that the leading scholars have been engaged in an attempt to use economic theory to predict the content of current legal rules. This is a straw man. Of course, decades ago this was the project of Richard Posner. 4 But the thought that efficiency analysis would provide a mechanism to predict the details of current doctrine is a serious misreading of the aims of modem scholarship. t William K. Townsend Professor, Yale Law School, [email protected]. Alan Schwartz provided helpful comments. 1. Eric A. Posner, Economic Analysis of Contract Law After Three Decades: Success or Failure?,112 YALE L.J. 829, 830 (2003). 2. Id. 3. Id.at 879; see also id, at 831 ("[Tjhe original aspiration[] of the economic analysis of contract law [was] to provide an explanation of existing legal rules ....").
    [Show full text]
  • THE INFLUENCE of Two DECADES of CONTRACT LAW SCHOLARSHIP on JUDICIAL RULINGS: an EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS
    SMU Law Review Volume 57 Issue 1 Article 5 2004 The Influence of woT Decades of Contract Law Scholarship on Judicial Rulings: An Empirical Analysis Gregory S. Crespi Southern Methodist University, Dedman School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.smu.edu/smulr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Gregory S. Crespi, The Influence of woT Decades of Contract Law Scholarship on Judicial Rulings: An Empirical Analysis, 57 SMU L. REV. 105 (2004) https://scholar.smu.edu/smulr/vol57/iss1/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at SMU Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in SMU Law Review by an authorized administrator of SMU Scholar. For more information, please visit http://digitalrepository.smu.edu. THE INFLUENCE OF Two DECADES OF CONTRACT LAW SCHOLARSHIP ON JUDICIAL RULINGS: AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS Gregory Scott Crespi* I. INTRODUCTION VER the last two decades, a substantial and diverse body of con- tract law scholarship has been produced. Some of this work lim- its itself to applying traditional doctrinal categories and analytical approaches to new problems, while some also engages in eco- nomic analysis of various legal regimes, and some is empirical as well as analytical in nature. Much of this work is of a rather theoretical and ab- stract character. Consequently, one wonders whether this literature has had any discernable impact upon judicial practice, particularly in light of the declarations made by both prominent jurists and leading practitioners that most current legal scholarship has very limited relevance for attor- neys and judges,' and given recent studies that suggest declining rates of 2 citation of law review articles in judicial opinions.
    [Show full text]
  • LEAVING CUSTOMARY INTERNATIONAL LAW WHERE IT Is: GOLDSMITH and POSNER's the LIMITS of INTERNATIONAL LAW
    LEAVING CUSTOMARY INTERNATIONAL LAW WHERE IT Is: GOLDSMITH AND POSNER'S THE LIMITS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW David M. Golove* TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ......................................... 334 II. THE THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ............................ 336 A. Self-Interested States? ................................ 337 B. The Supposed Weakness of Customary InternationalLaw ..... 343 Im. EMPIRICAL METHODOLOGY: GOLDSMITH AND POSNER' S APPROACH TO HISTORY ....................................347 IV. CUSTOMARY INTERNATIONAL LAW AND THE CIVIL WAR ........ 350 V. CONCLUSION ........................................... 377 * The Hiller Family Foundation Professor of Law, New York University School of Law. For helpful comments, the author is indebted to Eyal Benvenisti, John Ferejohn, Thomas Franck, Barry Friedman, Clay Gillette, Dan Hulsebosch, Stephen Holmes, Lewis Kornhauser, Mattias Kumm, Daryl Levinson, Susan Lewis, Rick Pildes, and all of the participants in the symposium. This Essay was presented at a symposium on The Limits of InternationalLaw, University of Georgia Law School, October 28-29, 2005. GA. J. INT'L & COMP. L. [Vol. 34:333 I. INTRODUCrION International legal scholarship has long suffered from too much normative theorizing and too little positive analysis about how the international legal system actually works. This inattention to the empirical and descriptive has alienated international legal scholars from their colleagues in political science departments and lent much of international law scholarship an utopian air. Whatever the historical source of this state of affairs, however, it is rapidly fading. A new generation of scholars, steeped in a variety of social scientific methodologies, has turned its sights on international law and is actively employing positive theories of state behavior to enhance legal analyses. These scholars have also begun to undertake empirical studies in an effort to provide support for their theoretical claims.
    [Show full text]
  • Economic Analysis of Contract Law After Three Decades: Success Or Failure? Eric A
    University of Chicago Law School Chicago Unbound Coase-Sandor Working Paper Series in Law and Coase-Sandor Institute for Law and Economics Economics 2002 Economic Analysis of Contract Law after Three Decades: Success or Failure? Eric A. Posner Follow this and additional works at: https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/law_and_economics Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Eric Posner, "Economic Analysis of Contract Law after Three Decades: Success or Failure?" (John M. Olin Program in Law and Economics Working Paper No. 146, 2002). This Working Paper is brought to you for free and open access by the Coase-Sandor Institute for Law and Economics at Chicago Unbound. It has been accepted for inclusion in Coase-Sandor Working Paper Series in Law and Economics by an authorized administrator of Chicago Unbound. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CHICAGO JOHN M. OLIN LAW & ECONOMICS WORKING PAPER NO. 146 (2D SERIES) Economic Analysis of Contract Law after Three Decades: Success or Failure? Eric A. Posner THE LAW SCHOOL THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO This paper can be downloaded without charge at: The Chicago Working Paper Series Index: http://www.law.uchicago.edu/Lawecon/index.html The Social Science Research Network Electronic Paper Collection: http://ssrn.com/abstract_id=304977 Economic Analysis of Contract Law After Three Decades: Success or Failure? Eric A. Posner1 Abstract: Law and economics has failed to produce plausible descriptive theories of contract doctrines. This paper documents these failures and suggests that they are due to a methodological problem involving the concept of transaction costs. If transaction costs refer to writing or information costs, then rational individuals would agree to complex contracts that are not in fact observed, and contract law would, for the most part, have no other function than that of specifically enforcing contracts.
    [Show full text]
  • Book Review Rationalism and Revisionism in International Law
    BOOK REVIEW RATIONALISM AND REVISIONISM IN INTERNATIONAL LAW THE LIMITS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW. By Jack L. Goldsmith and Eric A. Posner. New York: Oxford University Press. 2005. Pp. 262. $29.95. Reviewed by Oona A. Hathaway*and Ariel N. Lavinbuk** INTRODUCTION International law has moved from the periphery to the center of public debate in the course of only a few short years. The ever- quickening globalization of politics, culture, and economics has prompted new efforts to find global solutions to global problems. In- ternational law now touches an astonishing array of activities. It gov- erns everything from the goods and services that cross state borders and the greenhouse gases that industries and consumers produce, to the circumstances that justify intervention in humanitarian disasters and the treatment afforded suspected terrorists. Of increasingly urgent concern, then, is whether all of this law actually makes much of a difference. Legal scholars have traditionally argued that it does. They have, for the most part, portrayed international law as a powerful and much-needed external limit on states' pursuit of their own short-term interests. Over the last half decade, however, Professors Jack Gold- smith and Eric Posner have aspired to revolutionize policymaking and scholarship by arguing precisely the opposite - an argument now pre- sented fully in The Limits of InternationalLaw. In their view, interna- tional law does not check self-interest but instead "emerges from states acting rationally to maximize their interests, given their perceptions of the interests of other states and the distribution of state power" (p. 3). * Associate Professor of Law, Yale Law School; Carnegie Scholar 2004.
    [Show full text]
  • Judicial Independence in International Tribunals
    University of Chicago Law School Chicago Unbound Journal Articles Faculty Scholarship 2005 Judicial Independence in International Tribunals Eric A. Posner John C. Yoo Follow this and additional works at: https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/journal_articles Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Eric Posner & John C. Yoo, "Judicial Independence in International Tribunals," 93 California Law Review 1 (2005). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at Chicago Unbound. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal Articles by an authorized administrator of Chicago Unbound. For more information, please contact [email protected]. California Law Review VOL. 93 JANUARY 2005 No. 1 Copyright © 2005 by California Law Review, Inc. Judicial Independence in International Tribunals Eric A. Posnert and John C. Yoot TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ............................................................................................. 3 I. Background on International Dispute Resolution ............................ 8 II. Independence and the Role of International Tribunals ..................... 12 A. Independence in the Domestic and International Spheres ....... 12 B. Why States Use International Tribunals ..................................... 14 1. Information Disclosure in Treaty Disputes ........................... 15 2. Information Disclosure in Customary International Law D isputes ............................................................................. 18 3. The Dispute Resolution Mechanism
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Vitae
    ANU BRADFORD Columbia Law School 435 West 116th Street New York, NY 10027 Tel: 212 854 7957 E-mail: [email protected] CURRENT POSITION Columbia Law School, Henry L. Moses Professor of Law and International Organization, May 2014 – present Director, European Legal Studies Center, July 2014 – present; Co-Director, European Legal Studies Center, July 2012 – June 2014 Senior Scholar, Jerome A. Chazen Institute for Global Business, Columbia Business School, September 2016 – present. Professor of Law, July 2012 –May 2014 Research and Teaching: European Union Law, International Trade Law, Comparative and International Antitrust Law, International Law and Political Economy, International Economic Migration Service: Law Teaching Committee, 2017-; Entry Level Appointments Committee 2013-2014, 2016-2017; Global Affairs Committee, 2016-2017, Lateral Appointments Committee, 2014-2015; Comparative and International Law Committee, 2012-2014; LL.M. Committee, 2012-2013; Member of the Board of Directors, Columbia Journal for Transnational Law, February 2016-present; Co-Chair of the Executive Editorial Board, Columbia Journal of European Law, March 2016-; Accreditation Working Group on Columbia’s Global Centers 2014-2015. University of Helsinki, Docent in Transnational European Law, September 2018- PREVIOUS ACADEMIC POSITIONS The University of Chicago Law School, Assistant Professor, July 2008 – June 2012 Columbia Law School, Justin W. D'Atri Visiting Assistant Professor of Law, Business, and Society, July- December 2011 EDUCATION Harvard Law School,
    [Show full text]
  • Franks CV 3.12.14
    MARY ANNE FRANKS Associate Professor of Law University of Miami School of Law• 1311 Miller Drive, Coral Gables, FL 33146 (305) 284-5345 (office) • [email protected] EMPLOYMENT UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW, July 2010 – present. Associate Professor of Law Courses: Family Law, Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure Seminar: Bias and the Law Independent Studies: Death Penalty, Same-Sex Marriage, Same-Sex Adoption, Incarceration, Law and Gender 2013 Hausler Golden Apple Teaching Award Nominee CYBER CIVIL RIGHTS INITIATIVE, August 2013-present Vice-President UNIVERSITY OF NAVARRA, PAMPLONA, SPAIN, November 2013. Visiting Professor Course: U.S. Criminal Law UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO LAW SCHOOL, September 2008 – June 2010. Bigelow Fellow and Lecturer in Law; Faculty Affiliate, Center for Gender Studies Seminar: The Social Meaning of Crime; Legal Research and Writing THE SAB NEGOTIATION GROUP, CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS, Fall 2007 – 2009. Senior Consultant and Trainer HARVARD UNIVERSITY, Fall 2005 – June 2008 (4 Derek Bok Distinction in Teaching Awards) Lecturer, Department of Social Studies Seminar: Shouting Fire: Laws and Limits of Free Speech, spring 2008 Course: Social Studies 10: Introduction to Social Theory, full year 2007 Teaching Fellow, Government, Philosophy, and English Departments, fall 2005 – winter 2007 Courses: Justice, Existentialism in Literature and Film, Art and Thought of the Cold War CATHARINE MACKINNON, VISITING PROFESSOR, HARVARD LAW SCHOOL, Fall 2007. Research Assistant DEBEVOISE AND PLIMPTON, NEW YORK, Summer 2006. Summer Associate (received offer of permanent employment) INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT (ICC), THE HAGUE, NETHERLANDS, June – August 2005. Law Clerk/Visiting Professional, Office of the Prosecutor (Investigations Division) QUINCY COLLEGE, QUINCY, MASSACHUSETTS, January 2004 - January 2005.
    [Show full text]
  • Judge Posner's Dissenting Judicial Oeuvre and the Aesthetics of Canonicity Robert F
    Valparaiso University ValpoScholar Law Faculty Publications Law Faculty Presentations and Publications 2006 Judge Posner's Dissenting Judicial Oeuvre and the Aesthetics of Canonicity Robert F. Blomquist Valparaiso University School of Law Follow this and additional works at: http://scholar.valpo.edu/law_fac_pubs Part of the Judges Commons, and the Legal Writing and Research Commons Recommended Citation Robert F. Blomquist, Judge Posner's Dissenting Judicial Oeuvre and the Aesthetics of Canonicity, 36 N.M. L. Rev. 161 (2006). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Faculty Presentations and Publications at ValpoScholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Law Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of ValpoScholar. For more information, please contact a ValpoScholar staff member at [email protected]. JUDGE POSNER'S DISSENTING JUDICIAL OEUVRE AND THE AESTHETICS OF CANONICITY ROBERT F. BLOMQUIST* In the autumn of 2001, Judge Richard A. Posner completed twenty years of judicial service and started his third decade on the federal appellate bench. During his tenure as a judge, Posner's output of scholarly books' and articles2 has continued to flow like a waterfall, attracting widespread attention.3 Moreover, Posner's judicial opinions have been noticed for their perspicacity and edifying style.4 In particular, his dissenting judicial opinions are unusually powerful and persuasive. In this Article, I extend and refine the project that I started in the Missouri Law Review (where I examined the judicial opinion style of Judge Posner's dissenting opinions during his first decade on the bench, 1981 through 1991)' with a fresh critique of his dissenting judicial opinion style during his last dozen years as a judge, from 1992 through 2003.
    [Show full text]
  • Nicholas Stephanopoulos
    NICHOLAS O. STEPHANOPOULOS Professor of Law, Harvard Law School Areeda Hall 230, 1545 Massachusetts Ave, Cambridge, MA 02138 (781) 248-8145 | [email protected] EMPLOYMENT HARVARD LAW SCHOOL, Cambridge, MA Professor of Law, 2020-Present Austin Wakeman Scott Visiting Professor of Law, Fall 2018 Research interests include election law, constitutional law, legislation, administrative law, and comparative law. Classes taught include Election Law; Constitutional Law; The Future of Voting Rights; and Law & Politics Workshop. UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO LAW SCHOOL, Chicago, IL Professor of Law and Herbert and Marjorie Fried Research Scholar, 2017-2019 Assistant Professor of Law, 2012-2017 Classes taught included Election Law; Constitutional Law; Administrative Law; The Future of Voting Rights; Canonical Ideas; The Comparative Law of Democracy; and Public Opinion, Public Policy, and the Law. Helped organize Public Law & Legal Theory Workshop. Committee memberships included Appointments and Clinical and Experiential Learning. COLUMBIA LAW SCHOOL, New York, NY Associate-in-Law, 2010-2012 Taught Legal Practice Workshop to first-year law students. Coordinated weekly Associates’ and Fellows’ Workshop. Contributed to DrawCongress.org redistricting project. JENNER & BLOCK LLP, Washington, DC Associate, 2007-2010 Practice focused on complex federal litigation, appellate advocacy, and election law. Drafted sections of ten Supreme Court briefs, on subjects including Voting Rights Act, Establishment Clause, and criminal procedure. Election law work included redistricting and campaign finance matters. OBAMA FOR AMERICA, Washington, DC Volunteer Attorney, 2007-2008 Carried out legal work for Obama presidential campaign. Served in Election Day legal “war room.” HON. RAYMOND C. FISHER, NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS, Pasadena, CA Law Clerk, 2006-2007 Wrote bench memoranda addressing all aspects of federal appellate cases.
    [Show full text]
  • Appearances (Selected)
    PUBLIC APPEARANCES (SELECTED) Interview, NOW, MSNBC, w/Ari Melber, 12/27/12 Berkeley, CA "Torture and Zero Dark Thirty," North Gate Hall Studio. Seminar, “The US Elections and the Forever 11/9/12 Copenhagen, Denmark War,” Danish Institute for International Studies. Introduction, Mark Danner and Joshua 11/8/12 Copenhagen, Denmark Oppenheimer “The Act of Killing,” Copenhagen Documentary Festival. Panel, “Courthouse Dialogue on Film and 9/3/12 Tellruide, CO Injustice,” Joshua Oppenheimer, Peter Sellars and Mark Danner, The Courthouse, Telluride Film Festival. Introduction and Q&A, Dror Moreh, “The 9/2/12 Telluride, CO Gatekeepers,” The Sheridan Opera House, Telluride Film Festival. Talk, Ben Affleck, Dror Moreh, Michael 9/2/12 Telluride, CO Winterbottom, Ziad Doueiri, Joshua Oppenheimer and Mark Danner “Injustice, Reconciliation and Cinema,” Telluride Park, Telluride Film Festival. Q&A, “No,” Gael Garcia Bernal, Pablo 9/2/12 Telluride, CO Larrain, Chuck Jones Theatre, Telluride Film Festival. Q&A, “The Attack,” Ziad Doueiri and Mark 9/1/12 Telluride, CO Danner, The Mason’s Theatre, Telluride Film Festival. Q&A, “The Act of Killing,” Joshua 8/31/12 Telluride, CO Oppenheimer and Mark Danner, The Mason’s Theatre, Telluride Film Festival. Lecture, Helen Ingram Plummer Lecture, 4/19/12 Atlanta, GA “Living With the New Normal: Human Rights, US Foreign Policy and the 2012 Elections”, Georgia State University. Talk, Karen Malpede’s “Another Life”. 3/21/12 Brooklyn, NY Dialogue, Ray Bonner Dialogue, “Anatomy 3/15/12 Berkeley, CA of Injustice”, Boalt Hall, UC Berkeley Reading, Story Hour at Morrison Library, 3/8/12 Berkeley, CA UC Berkeley.
    [Show full text]