Quotes in the New Media 2012-2013

August 2013

30 August: The St. Louis Beacon published Professor Susan Appleton's comments on a new IRS rule that allows same-sex couples to file joint returns in Missouri and Illinois as long as they were married in a state recognizing same-sex unions. Appleton called the rule "significant, but certainly not surprising, given the Obama administration's response to other issues that can be handled by the executive branch." Read More  

27 August: The National Law Review published an article on Husch Blackwell University at Wash U. “This program is an innovative way to offer high-level professional development to attorneys at a crucial time in their practice,” Dean Kent Syverud said. Professor Hillary Sale added that the program is the first large-scale law firm educational program the university has been a part of and that the law school is open to similar partnerships for other firms, "But this particular program is very customized to Husch Blackwell and its strategy and culture." Read More  

22 August: Missouri Lawyers Weekly quoted Professor Hillary Sale speaking about Husch Blackwell University at Wash U. While the the program is similar to executive education programs at the Olin Business School, Sale said it offers a unique contribution by focusing on law firm economics and management. “It’s part of the way firms are thinking about how to grow and manage themselves as part of a changing legal environment," she said. "For Husch Blackwell, it’s part of a longer-term strategy.” Read More  

22 August: RegBlog quoted Professor Ronald Levin's testimony about the Regulatory Accountability Act. "Levin said that courts may turn into 'super-regulator[s]' because courts could do their own cost-benefit analysis, make their own determinations about interim rules, create their own interpretations of regulations, and redefine policy statements contained in guidance." Read More  

20 August: The Huffington Post publishes Walter D. Coles Professor of Law Emeritus Merton Bernstein’s op-ed on the need for better oversight of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Court. Better oversight "not only would ... improve what FISA and NSA do, it would declare anew to the world that the United States remains dedicated to the rule of law and the Constitution. That would wow the world and possibly diminish the tarnish and resentment resulting from past invasions and meddling with other nations' business." Read More  

18 August: CNN published an editorial by Professor Neil Richards on the government's reading of personal emails. "A society that cannot trust its citizens with ideas -- dissenting, different, or even dangerous -- is a society that is incapable of governing itself," Richards said. Read More  

16 August: The blog Balkanization quoted Professor Neil Richards's comments about the "core harms of surveillance": [The] special harm that surveillance poses is its effect on the power dynamic between the watcher and the watched. This disparity creates the risk of a variety of harms, such as discrimination, coercion, and the threat of selective enforcement, where critics of the government can be prosecuted or blackmailed for wrongdoing unrelated to the purpose of the surveillance. Read More  

14 August: St. Louis Public Radio quoted Professor Elizabeth Sepper speaking about a Republican House member who is suing to “opt out” of insurance coverage for “abortion-inducing drugs.” “If we accept this lawsuit we have to accept the notion that young people could opt out of hip replacement surgeries, women might opt out of prostate exams, and so on and so-forth until insurance doesn’t exist anymore,” Sepper said. Read More  

7 August: In Live Science, Professor Rebecca Dresser commented on the agreement struck between the family of Henrietta Lacks and the National Institutes of Health regarding the future use of HeLa cells for scientific research. "The problem is that absolute anonymity cannot be guaranteed in light of current knowledge and technology. Officials are considering whether to propose a change in the current rule," Dresser said. "In surveys, focus groups, and interviews, many would-be research contributors say they want the power to consent to research uses of their samples." Read More  

6 August: The St. Louis Post-Dispatched mentioned the Civil Justice Clinic as one of the entities “monitoring” the school transfer program. Read More  

6 August: The Riverfront Times' blog quoted Adjunct Professor Burt Newman's comments on House Bill 436, which would make it a crime to enforce federal gun control laws in Missouri. Newman's firm, the Saint Louis Lawyer's Group, may sue over the bill. "The Supremacy Clause requires that any conflict between state and federal law is decided in favor of federal law," Newman said. "The state law cannot undermine federal law and that's exactly what's taking place here. . . . I frankly could not envision this statute not being declared unconstitutional." Read More  

4 August: Professor Ronald Levin commented on the potential impact of a government shutdown on government enforcement activity for Politico. “At most, government enforcement activity might be put on hold, but after the shutdown people could be investigated and held liable for violations they committed during the shutdown period,” he said. Read More  

1 August: Slate quoted Professor Elizabeth Sepper’s latest article, "Contraception and the Birth of Corporate Conscience,” in a discussion of CEOs who “impose their religious beliefs on their workers”: “Corporations, as conglomerate entities, exist indefinitely and independently of their shareholders. They carry out acts and affect individual lives, and have an identity that is larger than their constituent parts. Walmart is Walmart, even when Sam Walton resigns.” Read More  

July 2013

31 July: Professor Hillary Sale was quoted in a Bloomberg article on a money-laundering case involving Steven Cohen's SAC Capital Advisors LP. Of the possiblity that Cohen's personal property, including his art collection, could be seized, Sale said, “If the government can establish that the funds were comingled with other funds, and it stands to reason that is the direction the government will take, then the amount could be as large as the company’s net capital and, then, possibly Cohen’s own assets, including that Picasso he just bought.” Read More 

30 July: Professor Hillary Sale was quoted in a Minneapolis Star Tribune article on "say on pay" votes on executive compensation. “The impact on boards is actually more significant than the impact on pay itself, at least so far. If they get a bad pay vote, next year’s vote will be one targeting them.” On Minneanapolis-based Target Corp.'s recent shareholder vote that showed only 52.1 percent of investors approving the company's executive compensation policies, Sale said, “Anything under 70 percent is really bad. You’ve got to be on this constantly, you have to be in touch with your institutional shareholders, and you can’t just do it around the annual meeting.” Of Best Buy, which appealed to shareholders prior to the company's vote and got 83 percent approval after getting only 38.2 percent in 2012, Sale said the outreach “certainly has done something, and the something it’s done has been it’s changed the dialogue between shareholders and the company.” Read More  

25 July: Professor Robert Kuehn and Lecturer in Law Geetha Sant, co-director of the Intellectual Property & Nonprofit Organizations Clinic, were quoted in an article about Sant's appointment. “We are looking forward to working with Geetha whose wealth of experience in corporate administration, governance, and management will greatly benefit our IP/NO Law Clinic,” Kuehn said. Added Sant, discussing her decision to retire from The Stolar Partnership to devote time to Planned Parenthood, “I asked myself, ‘What’s my legacy? What’s my second act?’” Read More 

June 2013

28 June: The International Bar Association quoted Professor Kathleen Clark's comments about whistleblower Edward Snowden's release of a video that lays the groundwork for his legal defence. "In some ways the video interview was a brilliant move," Clark said. "Snowden is clearly trying to go on a charm offensive by establishing the storyline about why he has done it, who he is, and that he is likeable and knowledgeable in some way." Read More 

27 June: Radio station KCUR interviewed Professor Greg Magarian for a story about the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling regarding gay marriage. "You could sort of read the court’s decision today as saying, 'Man Congress, you really went off the reservation to sort of make this sweeping judgment about same-sex marriage'," said Magarian. "As a matter of law and as a matter of some of the rhetoric in the case, they’re saying Missouri, you do what you want to do." Read More 

25 June: Professors Greg Magarianand Bruce La Pierre were quoted extensively in a St. Louis Beacon article on the U.S. Supreme Court's decision that "struck down the most potent part of the 1965 Voting Rights Act." La Pierre said the decision was troubling because it negated Congressional action "to make the political process more inclusive, more representative." In an email La Pierre wrote, “The court is at its best when it promotes majority rule and fair, inclusive political decision making. Congress is at its best when it promotes majority rule and fair, inclusive political decision making. Deference to Congress here was appropriate.” Magarian, also through email, stated, "The court’s decision reflects a victory for two big ideas: state power, at the expense of racial justice; and judicial power, at the expense of democracy." Read More  

24 June: Professor Daniel Keating'stestimony before the American Bankruptcy Institute Commission to Study Reform of Chapter 11 in Chicago was the subject of an article in Kansas City infoZine. “I worry that the creation of more bankruptcy-specific priorities for labor claims will end up hindering the overall effectiveness of bankruptcy as a corporate reorganization tool,” Keating told the commissioners. “And at the same time, I don’t believe that approaching these problems through the bankruptcy code will cure the true underlying disease, which is the ability of employers to make long-term promises to workers and retirees without having to provide adequate pre-funding of such promises.”  Read More 

 18 June: Professor Hillary Sale commented on Target Corp.'s narrow shareholder vote approving the company's proposed executive pay package in the Minneapolis, MN Star Tribune. “Target definitely needs more outreach” to investors, Sale said. “In any company when the vote on pay is so low, there’s a perception that there is a disconnect between pay and performance. Shareholders need a better explanation of what Target’s executive compensation means.” Read More 

 16 June: In a roundup of expert opinions on the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling that human genes can't be patented but synthetic ones can (Association for Molecular Pathology et al. v. Myriad Genetics, Inc.), the St. Louis Post-Dispatch quotes Professor Kevin Collins. Noting that the decision will mean different things for patent lawyers and biotech companies, Collins said the ruling will give patent lawyers “a new source of business” as the court left open when something changes from “a product of nature to a patentable invention.” Collins said “the patentability of insulin in the early 20th century” provided a “historical example” for comparison. Read More 

 16 June: Professor Neil Richardstalked with St. Louis Public Radio about the past and present of privacy in the U.S. "Though the Constitution doesn't use the word 'privacy,' the separation of individuals and their information and their homes and their persons from the state is a theme that runs throughout the Bill of Rights," Richards said. However, while today "we want to be safe from crime and terrorism . . .  we want to be able to share information on Facebook, we want to be able to talk on the phone, we use cloud services. The challenge that we're facing is how to strike the right balance. Realizing that information is never or rarely purely private — but at the same time, perfect security is also equally impossible." Read More 

15 June: The Minneapolis, MN Star Tribune paraphrased Professor Hillary Sale's comments on Best Buy Co.'s "last-minute pitch to shareholders on executive pay." "A 'no' vote would be an embarassing setback for the board, said Hillary Sale," the paper wrote. "It's rare for a company to lose a vote on executive pay and even more rare for shareholders to reject executive pay two years in a row, Sale said. And although 'Say on Pay' votes are nonbinding, consecutive defeats would spell bad news for the board, especially directors up for re-election the following year, she said." Read More 

12 June: In a Reuters story picked up by the Chicago Tribune and other papers, Professor Neil Richards explained why the American Civil Liberties Union's case against the government's telephone surveillance program may succeed where a previous attempt to sue the government over data collection had failed. In February the court ruled 5-4 against Amnesty International in a similar suit because the plaintiffs could not prove their phones had been tapped. However, in the ACLU case, "Because the government has told us all that it is collecting the metadata, then that (Supreme Court reasoning) goes away." Read More   

11 June: In a Law 360 article titled "Contractors May Face Backlash Over NSA Surveillance Links," Professor Kathleen Clark commented on the practice of replacing federal employees with contractors that has led to "an 85 percent increase in contractor spending, adjusted for inflaction, over 25 years": "We didn't downsize government. What we did was outsource government. Work that has been done by government employees has been increasingly done by service contractors. In some areas, the government barely retains the capacity to even supervise the contractors. The government now hires contractors to supervise other contractors.” Clark added that contractors often don't face the same "ethical and disclosure requirements as federal workers." Read More 

11 June: Professor Neil Richardstold NPR's Morning Edition that people are struggling to determine what "privacy" means in the digital age. Contrary to scholars who think "that 20th century standards of privacy were actually a historical anomaly," he said, "Lots of things we care about greatly are recent 20th or 21st century notions--sexual equality, racial equality, gay rights." Read More 

10 June: The Baltimore Sun quotes Professor Kathleen Clark in an article comparing Edward Snowden and Bradley Manning. Clark told the paper that both men had access to classified information, “And they became concerned about whether that information included evidence of wrongdoing.”  However, “Manning seems to have engaged in an indiscriminate data dump. That is not what we have with Snowden.” Clark said another difference is that Snowden appears to have been involved with the actions described in the documents he leaked, whereas Manning was not. “The moral case for engaging in whistleblowing may be different whether you are a witness to wrongdoing or whether you believe you may have participated in wrongdoing.”  Read More 

10 June: Politico paraphrases and quotes Professor Kathleen Clark in an article about Edward Snowden, the National Security Agency contractor who leaked information about the U.S. government's intelligence practices. Politico writes, "Kathleen Clark, a law professor at Washington University in St. Louis who works on national security issues, says national security leakers often face two kinds of charges under the Espionage Act: transmitting information to someone who’s not authorized to receive it, or, in lesser cases, illegal retention of national security information. Each charge carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in jail. . . . . There’s also a separate civilian charge, theft of government property, that could be used depending on the specifics of the case, Clark said. That, too, carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison in most cases. And even in other high-profile leak cases, the federal government hasn’t always used the harshest penalties. Clark cited the case of Matthew Diaz, a former Navy lawyer who leaked a list of Guantánamo Bay prisoners to a civil rights lawyer in New York. He was dismissed from the Navy and disbarred, but got only six months of jail time. It wasn’t as though Diaz got off easy — his life was basically ruined. But 'they did not throw the book at him,'Clark said." Read More 

9 June: Professor Kathleen Clark is quoted in a Washington Post story reporting that federal employees had advance notice of a Medicare decision "worth billions of dollars to private insurers" weeks before the decision was officially announced. Regarding variations among different government departments regarding how confidential information is handled, Clark said: “The Labor Department [for example] literally puts in place physical constraints on the information rather than just stamping ‘confidential’ on it. They know to be concerned about the fact that advance access could advantage some people over others.” Read More 

 8 June: In an Associated Press story picked up by the Washington Post, Professor Neil Richards comments on the conflict between "privacy and protection." “We are living in an age of surveillance. There’s much more watching and much more monitoring, and I think we have a series of important choices to make as a society—about how much watching we want. Whenever something like 9/11 happens, it does tend to cause people to change their minds. But I think what’s interesting is it has to be a long-term conversation. We can’t, whenever we’re scared, change the rules forever. It’s a symptom of the times we’re living in and the choices we’re going to have to make ... one way or the other. We don’t accept total surveillance in the name of crime prevention and I think people are coming to reject total surveillance in the name of terrorism prevention. But it’s hard to reject surveillance if you don’t know it’s there.” Read More 

7 June: In a Forbes magazine article, Professor Neil Richards comments on the U.S. Supreme Court's role in determining the limits of surveillance.  In an interview from the Privacy Law Scholars Conference in Berkeley, California, Richards told Forbes “We’ve been warning for a long time that this sort of thing is possible,”  Richards said, alluding to his article "The Dangers of Surveillance." “There’s a difference between saying, `Dear suspected terrorist, we’re going to be listening to your phone calls,’ and the goverment telling its citizens `these are the general contours of what we have,’” Richards said.  “I am opposed to the very idea of a shadowy network of surveillance that may or may not be legal in a free society. The law is struggling. The reason it’s struggling is we have legal rules that are pegged to a state of technology that is out of date.” The article states that after the Verizon case, "privacy advocates will be working on new lawsuits. “It’s inevitable,” Richards said. ” A lot of people are preparing to bring privacy suits to force a judicial resolution of this question.”Read More 

6 June: Professor Neil Richards is quoted in a Los Angeles Times article on reports that the government has been "spying" on Verizon cell phone customers. "That's them [the government] doing their jobs. That's them trying to catch criminals," Richards said. However, "The idea is that government officials shouldn't be able to get everything," he said. "There should be a process that requires the government to be accountable and to prove that they need this information." Read More   

May 2013

24 May: Professor Kathleen Clark comments on the use of think tanks "as unregistered lobbyists for corporate donors" in The Nation. “If you’re a lobbyist, whatever you say is heavily discounted. If a think tank is saying it, it obviously sounds a lot better. Maybe think tanks aren’t aware of how useful that makes them to private interests. On the other hand, maybe it’s part of their revenue model.” Read More 

18 May: Professor Peggie Smith comments on Kevin Fritz, JD '13, a student who earned his law degree despite his disability, congenital spinal muscular atrophy. “He was a student like no other who at the same time was just like everyone else,” said Smith. “We were honored to have him.” Read More 

15 May: A St. Louis Business Journal blog quotes Professor Kevin Collins'commentary on Bowman v. Monsanto. A farmer, Bowman,“[Bowman] therefore argued that he had the right to re-plant the soybeans he purchased and to grow a new crop. This is the potential loophole in Monsanto’s ability to prevent the saving and replanting of its patented soybeans that the Supreme Court closed in Bowman v. Monsanto.Read More 

13 May: Professor Kevin Collins' comments regarding the Supreme Court's decision on Bowman v. Monsanto are quoted. In sum, Collins says, "The Court closed a potential loophole in Monsanto’s long-standing business model, prevents Monsanto’s customers from setting up ‘farm-factories’ for producing soybeans that could be sold in competition with Monsanto’s soybeans, and it enables Monsanto to continue to earn a reasonable profit on its patented technology.” More extensive comments from Collins follow. Read More 

8 May: JDSupra Law News  quotes Professor Mae Quinn on Missouri Senate Bill 377, which would allow children in Missouri to be sentenced to life without parole counter the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Miller v. Alabama that declared mandatory life sentences for juvenile offenders to be unconstitutional.

“Senate Bill 377 is inconsistent with Miller, unconstitutional, inhumane and fiscally irresponsible,” says Mae C. Quinn, a professor at Washington University Law and co-director of the Civil Justice Clinic. “It continues to permit mandatory life behind bars and death behind bars sentences for children. It fails to account for any of the factors Miller requires by law relating to youth. And at a time when the state is struggling financially as it is, it is financially irresponsible.”

8 May: In an article on gender disparity in law school grading at Harvard University, The Harvard Crimson quotes Harvard alumni and Washington Univeristy Professor Laura Rosenbury: "It's interesting because I've been teaching at Washington University in St. Louis, and we don't have this problem. In fact, women outperform their male colleagues both in terms of grades and in terms of law review competition. And so what makes Harvard different?" Read More 

7 May: Professor Kathleen Clark comments on  the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge (STOCK) Act in the Baltimore Sun: "The part of the partial repeal that I find the most cynical is the repeal of the searchable, sortable database" of personal financial information for federal employees. Read More 

1 May: Professor Rebecca Dresser is quoted in an article in IRB Advisor about the Accreditation of Human Research Protectioin Programs' conference and issues related to medical research and bioethics. "Leaving patients out of the [research] process misses out on a lot of good information," she says, adding that medical research "participants view themselves as having an ongoing stake in research and want to be informed of further use of their samples" and that they want to know about health risks "even if there [is] nothing they could do about them." Read More 

April 2013

29 April: In the Chronicle of Higher Education, Professor Neil Richards writes about surveillance after the Boston bombing. He writes that while surveillance technology helped to identify the bombers, we should not overlook the "other costs" of surveillance--loss of personal privacy, the right to dissent, and to think freely. "We must recognize that surveillance is complex, and consider both the types of surveillance at issue, and the degrees to which government and private monitoring are in question," he writes. "We must remember that secret surveillance is illegitimate [and] total surveillance is illegitimate. . . . Finally, we need to recognize that while surveillance has limited benefits when used properly, it has substantial costs in money, civil liberties, and power. We must take those harms into account as we decide what kinds of surveillance and how much are consistent with our basic commitment to a free society." Read More 

23 April: Professor Neil Richards pens an op-ed for CNN on post-Boston surveillance. "How many people do you know who have been the victims of terrorism?" he writes, inviting readers to "remember the big picture." "On the other hand, how many people do you know who have suffered from cancer, or obesity, or gun violence? If we're interested in safety, public health and gun control are much more important issues than terrorism. They, not surveillance, should be our safety priority." Read More 

20 April: A St. Louis Post-Dispatch article quotes Professor Neil Richards' comments on the use of video surveillance: “We have to carefully watch the watchers or we could end up with a level of public surveillance that nobody wants. The issue isn’t that we don’t want cameras but what kind of security state do we want and what privacy are we going to give up for it?” Read More 

15 April: An article on Network World summarizes Professor Neil Richards' article "The Dangers of Surveillance." It quotes Richards' conclusion, "The alternative to grappling with the civil-liberties threats that surveillance poses is to ignore those threats altogether, to face the prospect of rendering widespread government surveillance unreviewable and uncheckable. Democratic societies can do better than that." Network World includes links to Richards' full article. Read More 

12 April: On Kitsap Sun, Professor Kathleen Clarkcomments on relevations that companies with "deep oil company ties" had put together a 2,000-page report that claims the controversial Keystone pipeline project "is unlikely to have a substantial impact" on oil sands development."Everywhere you look, almost everything the government does is by contractors and grantees," Clark said. ""In general, the government has rather strict standards for conflict of interest for its own employees, and in general when it outsources work to contractors, it doesn't outsource those standards." Read More 

11 April: In a Huffington Post op-ed, Emeritus Professor Milton Bernstein commented on the U.S. Senate's "filibuster riot." He concluded, "Polls repeatedly show popular disgust that Congress is subject to deadlock, held hostage by a minority in the Senate and a nominal majority in the House achieved through gerrymandering. To continue these unfortunate patterns unchecked is to run the risk that the United States will lose the indispensable element of democratic government--the consent of the governed." Read More 

9 April: Professor Elizabeth Sepper co-authored an op-ed for Religion & Politics on the "rhetoric versus reality" about the "Affordable Care Act's requirement that heallth plans include contraception. "The contraception benefit rule strikes a delicate balance," she writes. "It provides broad protections for religiously affiliated employers. At the same time, it protects the freedom of all Americans to live out their own religious and moral convictions." Read More 

2 April: In a preview to his forthcoming Harvard Law Review "The Dangers of Surveillance," Professor Neil Richards told The Blaze: “We only have a vague intuition about [surveillance], which is why courts don’t protect it," he said. "We know we don’t like it, and that it has something to do with privacy, but beyond that, the details can be fuzzy.” Surveillance “menaces our intellectual privacy and it gives the watcher a power advantage over the watched, which can be used for blackmail, persuasion, or discrimination,” he added. The article includes a link to the Harvard Law Review article. Read More 

March 2013

29 March: The St. Louis Beacon quotes Professor Greg Magarian in an article regarding the Supreme Court, DOMA, and gay marriage. I don’t think the court wants to paint a target on its back. At this moment, (same-sex marriage) is still a controversial issue. In 10 years it won’t be; opponents will be utterly marginalized. Tens of thousands of couples will marry in California, more states will keep legalizing SSM, and in 10 years or so the court will issue a…decision that mops up the holdouts.” Read More 

15 March: Professor Hillary Sale is quoted in Business Week commenting on Best Buy Founder Richard Schulze, whose attempt to buy the company had failed. Schulze, who has a "20 percent stake" in Best Buy, according to the article, can nominate candidates for two seats on Best Buy's board of directors or choose to leave the board. "He's preserving his options," said Sale. "He can leverage things better on the outside than on the inside with only two board seats." Read More 

12 March: An article in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution quotes Professor Kathleen Clark regarding a bill that would ease bidding rules for the Department of Transportation (DOT). "Allowing DOT the additional flexibility could do just what DOT says and produce better value for the public, Clark said, but in return, government could require “a robust system of checking on conflict of interest.” Read More 

11 March: The Los Angeles Times quotes Professor Pauline Kim's comments on Harvard University's decision to review email of resident deans. Oftentimes in a corporate setting, when a corporation decides it needs to investigate something, they tend to do it in a blanket way," Kim said. "I would actually think that if employers wanted to be careful, they could follow Harvard's example. To the extent that it was justified, they were very narrow in the search. ... That kind of approach is far more sensitive to privacy concerns than what you normally see in the corporate setting." Read More 

February 2013

28 Feb. 2013: Professor David Konig is quoted in an editorial in the Rutland (Vt.) Herald titled "When the Court Protects the Elite" comparing the Dred Scott case to the Supreme Court's 2010 ruling in Citizens United. Of Dred Scott, Konig said, “People at the time talked about the ‘slavocracy.' Slave owners were rich. They were a minority. They were corrupting the political process.” The editorial compares the "elite" slaveowners to the "elite" political interests that have been able to put money into political campaigns in the wake of Citizens United. "In both cases, the court put the interests of a tiny, powerful group above the interests of the nation," the editorial claims. Read More 

13 Feb. 2013: Bloomberg BNAquotes Professor Daniel Mandelker discussing environmental impact statements (EIS) and controversy over whether the environmental impact of ports being constructed to ship coal from the U.S. to China should be evaluated port-by-port or as a whole. “Usually these area-wide or regional EISs are reserved for actions that are close together,” he told BNA, which called him "author of a widely used treatise on National Environmental Policy Act law." Read More 

 13 Feb. 2013: A St. Louis Magazine feature on the region's top attorneys quotes Professors Greg Magarian and Neil Richards. Magarian said of the conflict between state and federal jurisdiction over the legalization of marijuana, “Initially, I think the federal government is going to push back and say, ‘Look, you guys are rogue states.' If they have an opportunity for a major drug prosecution in Colorado, they’re going to do it. But I expect that over time, assuming more states do this, a consensus will emerge.” Richards is quoted from a Wired magazine article about "frictionless sharing" of browsing history on the Internet, “Frictionless sharing of our reading and viewing habits threatens what legal scholars call ‘intellectual privacy’—the zone we need around our reading and watching so that we can think for ourselves without being affected by the often too-harsh judgment of the crowd,” Read More 

7 Feb. 2013: In a Reuters article on the possibility that Moody's Corp. may, like Standard and Poor's, be sued by states and/or U.S. Justice Dept. for defrauding investors, Professor Hillary Sale commented on the fact that the extensive "paper trail" in the S&P case make more difficult for a judge to dismiss a case before it goes to trial. "When you have that kind of evidence that looks bad, you don't want to dismiss the case until you have more discovery," Sale said, adding that a good paper trail "helps you survive a motion to dismiss." Read More 

7 Feb. 2013:  Professor Neil Richards is quoted extensively in an article on drones that appeared in Wired U.K. "The problem with drones is a common problem for new technologies, which is that they make lots of things possible, many of which are good, but some of which are not s o good,"  he said. "The challenge of law (and the challenge of engineers designing the tech) is to find a way to take as much of the good with as little of the bad as possible." Read More 

2 Feb. 2013: Professor Elizabeth Sepper's comments regarding the Obama Administration's revised rules on religious organizations and birth control are quoted in a National Public Radio (NPR) story. “In our legal system and our society, secular, for-profit businesses — like Hobby Lobby — don’t exercise religion and must be regulated to protect their employees and the public,” she said. “Any other rule would just mean corporations could force religious views on their employees, no matter what the employees’ beliefs are.” Read More 

January 2013

31 Jan. 2013: Professor Greg Magarian is quoted in an article on the credit card industry website CardHub.com speculating on the possible implications of a D.C. Circuit Court's ruling that President Obama "overstepped its authority in using recess appointments to fill three seats on the National Labor Relations Board." “The administration was certainly aware of the legal controversy around intrasession recess appointments. But administrations for roughly 70 years have been making such appointments, and the G.W. Bush administration used the process more aggressively than the Obama administration,” he said. “Presidents have simply hoped the courts would not invalidate recess appointments, and in this case, the D.C. Circuit didn’t cooperate.” He went on to say that while the court's action could be "fairly critiqued" as "politically motived," "that doesn’t necessarily mean the decision is legally wrong." Read More 

 30 Jan. 2013: Professor Marion Crainis quoted in an article in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, commenting on United Food & Commercial Workers Local 655's quest for a "neutrality agreement" with Whole Foods Market. Whole Foods, whose employees are not unionized, plans to place a store in a new development in the city's Central West End. According to the article, the neutrality agreement would mean Whole Foods will not oppose "employee union organizing efforts." “Unions have gotten a lot smarter about how to organize,” Crain said. “From a union perspective, it levels the playing field.” Read More 

29 Jan. 2013: Professor Kathleen Clark is quoted in a St. Louis Post-Dispatch article about a Sunset Hills alderman who "has business ties" to a developer who wants to build a 24-hour gas station and convenience store in the St. Louis County municipality. The alderman voted to support the controversial development. “When situations such as this arise, constituents are right to question whether an alderman is making a decision in the best interest of his business or the best interest of the public,” Clark said. Read More 

29 Jan. 2013:  The Baltimore Sun quotes Professor Kathleen Clark commenting on changes to the 1939 Hatch Act, which forbids federal employees from taking part in "partisan political activity" at taxpayers' expense. Historically, the act has been "the death penalty to your federal career," Clark told the paper. Read More  

21 Jan. 2013: In a posting on Harvard Law's blog Bill of Health, Professor Elizabeth Sepper commemorated the fortieth anniversary of the historic Roe. v. Wade decision. "Choosing to provide abortions is an act of bravery," she writes. "Abortion providers face threats to their safety and families, targeted and expensive regulations, and professional and community stigma.  They share much in common with human rights lawyers, union organizers, and women’s rights advocates around the globe who are harassed by their governments and the majority....We should acknowledge the courage and commitment of these human rights defenders." Read More  

18 Jan. 2013: In a posting on Harvard Law's blog Bill of Health, Professor Elizabeth Sepper calls for regulation to mandate flu vaccines for healthcare workers. Currently, she writes, one-third of healthcare providers do not get the flu vaccine because they "simply did not want to get vaccinated." She urges state regulations like those in Rhode Island that requires healthcare workers with direct contact with patients to get vaccinated; those not vaccinated must wear surgical masks during flu outbreaks. " Regulation ensures patients need not rely on the goodwill of particular institutions or providers," she writes. "It also avoids the model of employer coercion of employees, and establishes vaccination as a professional obligation. More states should follow Rhode Island’s lead." Read More 

14 Jan. 2013: Business Insider quotes Professor Neil Richards in an article titled “Is There Really A Difference Between Publishing Gun Owners' Addresses And Letting The Government Spy On You?”:  "What I do see happening is big institutions, the government, police forces, tech companies, they're always pushing, they're always asking for more, they're trying to intrude more into personal information and previously private zones." Read More  

14 Jan. 2013: The St. Louis Beacon quotes Professor Greg Magarian's comments about the U.S. Supreme Court's Jan. 13, 1988, decision that restricted speech in a Hazelwood, Misssouri, student newspaper. Magarian says the ruling "remains a very important speech-restrictive decision. The court has put much more energy into expanding the free speech rights of politically or economically powerful speakers while largely disdaining the First Amendment concerns of politically and economically disempowered speakers. Through this lens, Hazelwood represents perhaps the most important instance of the court's steady retreat from protecting students' free speech rights." Read More 

10 Jan. 2013: The Washington Examiner quotes Professor Kathleen Clark's comments about the creation of "a governmentwide code of conduct" for the Washington, D.C., Council. "Some of these ethics standards that are currently on the books invite contempt for the ethics standards because they are absurd and they are not being enforced," Clark says. Read More 

10 Jan. 2013: An article on "social news organization" Buzzfeed quotes Professor Hillary Sale's comments on the possibility of mandating women to be placed on corporate boards in the United States. Sales says that "quotas have been extremely effective in shifting the balance on boards," but that they're unlikely to be passed as law in the U.S. Says Sales, "it takes time. You have to start adding and keep adding. Quotas are not 'the American way. Companies just don't want to be mandated about anything." However, she adds: "Several [American] CEOs and board members have said to me on the side that they sometimes wish we had the quotas." Read More 

2 Jan. 2013: In a posting on Harvard Law's blog Bill of Health, Professor Elizabeth Sepper explains the flaw in the logic of corporations who object to being forced to provide insurance for their employees that includes coverage for contraception. "At heart, it misses a basic fact of health economics:  health insurance, like wages, is compensation that belongs to the employee," she writes. "Study after study shows that employers pay in wages whatever they don’t pay in health insurance premiums....So, when a corporation purchases a health insurance plan that its employees (and their family members) may or may not use to buy contraception, it is no more paying for contraception than it does when employees use their wages to buy it." Read More 

December 2012

28 Dec. 2012: Professor Neil Richards is quoted in an article in TechCrunch about the effects of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 Amendments Act of 2008, which the U.S. Senate reauthorized Dec. 28. “Other than the vague threat of an Orwellian dystopia, as a society we don’t really know why surveillance is bad,” Harris is quoted as writing in the Harvard Law Review. Richards then states that “surveillance inclines us to the mainstream and the boring.” Worse, “information collected surreptitiously can be used for other purposes, whether blackmail or the discrediting of opponents by revealing embarrassing secrets. Whether these discoveries are important, incidental, or irrelevant, all of them give greater power to the watcher.”  Read More 

21 Dec. 2012: The Huffington Post quotes Professor David Law's comments about the U.S. Constitution: "The framers made it structurally hard to amend the Constitution, Law told me, and since then, popular American culture has made it 'psychologically and emotionally hard' to amend or even to think clearly about the strengths and weaknesses of the Constitution because we have made what was intended to be a 'concrete plan for a government' into 'the rock on which the nation was founded and the symbol of everything that's great about America.'" Read More 

18 Dec. 2012: An article titled "Does Law School Have a Future?" on the CNNMoney/Fortune website quotes Professor Brian Tanamaha. Tamanaha says that the legal education system is "a powerful juggernaut that has momentum of its own." The article paraphrases Tamanaha saying "that the American Bar Association accreditation system has excessively encouraged a 'scholarly model' where handsomely paid professors teach few courses so they have time to write law journal articles or conduct research. That model may work well for top-tier schools but, Tamanaha argues, it's too expensive for students preparing for careers in public service, pro bono, or similar atttorney positions." Read More 

15 Dec. 2012: The Indianapolis Star quotes Professor Kathleen Clark  in one of a series of articles about "The China Letter," an investigative report questioning "the adequacy of the state's investigation" into allegations of unethical behavior between the Indiana Economic Development Corporation (IEDC), an Indiana state agency, and real estate developer Monica Liang. "How was the state going to protect itself from a rogue agent - from someone who was going to go off and try to use whatever they could to benefit themselves? The federal government requires that there be clarity about someone's status, whether they're an employee or not." The paper then paraphrases Clark saying, "The best practices are to specifically prohibit someone from using their government title or government position to further their own private business interests." Read More 

15 Dec. 2012: In another of its series on "The China Letter" (see above) the Indianapolis Star quotes Professor Kathleen Clark  on the IEDC and Monica Liang, "The concerns about control aren't just about controlling this woman [Laing]. It's controlling these quasi-agencies. Like, does the state want to control it or not?" Read More 

14 Dec. 2012: The Washington Post publishes an editorial by Professor Kathleen Clark about the "Graham affair"--an investigation by the District of Columbia's Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority which found that a 2008 "lottery contract" award by a D.C. Council Member, Jim Graham, had "“pitted the interests of the Council of the District of Columbia against the interests of Metro, and thereby unnecessarily created a conflict of interest, or, at the least, the appearance of a conflict of interest.” Clark writes, "Whether or not the board decides to open a full investigation into Graham’s 2008 conduct, it could provide helpful guidance to District officials who serve on multijurisdictional boards such as Metro to clarify their proper role. The board may also want to address the ethical risks inherent in allowing a legislative body to play a role in a sensitive area such as contracting. The District could benefit not just from a thorough airing of the facts regarding the controversial lottery contract but also from a hard look at its contracting process more generally." Read More 

6 Dec. 2012: Business Insider magazine publishes an article on changes in digital privacy that quotes Professor Neil Richards: "Sometimes it's important to connect all the dots. I really do think the big picture is tremendously important and it tends to get lost. What I do see happening is big institutions, the government, police forces, tech companies, they're always pushing, they're always asking for more, they're trying to intrude more into personal information and previously private zones. We are seeing more intrusion, more watching into people's lives and their activities that previously were secret or shared with only a few people, much more of our lives is getting recorded and digitized and shared. The changes that we're seeing are really cosmic in a sense, they're enormous." Read More  

 2 Dec. 2012: A St. Louis Post-Dispatch editorial on cell phone privacy quotes Professor Neil Richards: “We need to be able to rely on the privacy of our cellphones and our emails the way we can rely on the privacy of our living rooms and our letters." The editorial then paraphrases Richards, saying "That’s not the case now. . . . Our best protection at this point is what is found in the 1986 ECPA law (Electronic Communications Privacy Act)." Read More 


November 2012

13 Nov. 2012: The St. Louis Business Journal publishes comments by Professor Neil Richards article in the U.K. edition of Wired magazine about the decline of automatic sharing software like social reading applications. Richards is cited as writing,  "Users are starting to demand an Internet where we again can choose what we share, when we share it, and who we share it with. And that’s good news. Conscious recommendations, links and criticisms are more valuable because they result from intentional acts of expression, rather than software-controlled surveillance and dissemination."  Read More 

13 Nov. 2012: The blog fiercegovernmentit.com publishes Professor Neil Richards's  comments on the trade-off between privace and freedom of expression: "If it comes down to a value choice between 'We must disclose slightly more details about government surveillance programs...and maybe there are a few more terrorist attacks…' it's the price we have to pay for living in a free society," he says. Read More 

11 Nov. 2012: Writing on the blog Balkinization, Professor Brian Tanamaha cites a new survey of 182 law firms shows profit growth for 2012 "will fall short of 2011's low single-digit profit growth," and that "revenue and demand growth" had also slowed compared to the first half of the year. He writes, "Legal educators take note. Law school deans and admissions officers have been telling prospective law students that this is a great time to go to law school because applications are down. One dean who makes this pitch supports it with a note of optimism: 'We cannot tell the future. Bad job markets have dramatically improved in the past.' This is the worst market for legal employment in at least four decades--with no sign of a turn-around on the horizon. Under these circumstances, to even suggest the possibility of 'dramatic improvement' goes beyond wishful thinking to appeal to unreason." Read More 

9 Nov. 2012: The Supreme Court of the United States' blog features Professor Andrew Martin and Professor Lee Epstein (University of Southern California)'s study of judicial activism in the Roberts court. They write, "The Justices of the Roberts Court, like their immediate predecessors, are neither uniform activists nor committed restraintists. Rather, the Justices’ votes to strike (and uphold) statutes seem to reflect their political preferences toward the policy content of the law, and not an underlying preference for restraint (or activism)." Read More 

9 Nov. 2012: Lab Manager Magazine quotes Professor  Hillary Sale regarding diversity on corporate boards, adapted from her participation in the "Moving the Needle" think tank (see entry for 20 Oct. 2012 below). While Sale says “A recent study by the Credit Suisse Research Institute reveals that companies with women on their boards out-performed those without – in challenging markets,” she states that “the percentage of women directors on U.S. boards stagnated some years ago and remains at or near 12 percent, with fewer than 10 percent of boards having three or more women. “The pressure to add women directors is, however, growing.” Internationally, board diversity is regulated by quotas. “We are talking about quotas in the U.S. because other countries decided that quotas were the best way to make progress on board representation,” Sale says. “The real solution, of course, is leadership.  If every CEO and board chair in the Fortune 1000 sponsored one woman for a board position, we would soon have 1,000 more women on Fortune 1000 boards," though Sale adds that "The Fortune 1000 is just one index. There are many other existing boards, public and private, for which CEOs and others could sponsor women.” The article paraphrases Sale saying that "the effect could yield a corporate landscape that is truly diverse, therefore reaping the benefit of a wide array of cultural and intellectual perspectives that provide the basis for innovation and growth." Read More 


October 2012

27 Oct. 2012: Professor Kathleen Clark was quoted discussing Washington, D.C.'s controversial Chief Financial Officer, Natwar Gandhi. "I believe there were lots of reasons to be concerned before he was reappointed, and yet there seemed to be nothing to be gained politically [from the council holding up his confirmation]," she said. Read More 

 24 Oct. 2012: A National Law Journal article titled "Big Guns Gather to Discuss the Future of Law Schools" discusses "The Law School in the New Legal Environment" symposium and quotes Dean Kent Syverurd: "The predominant view shared by students, practicing attorneys and lawmakers is that law schools are in denial about these challenges, and it's time for law schools to make some serious changes to adjust to the new realities facing law graduates. This symposium will address how American law schools can embrace needed change rather than avoid it. In my view, the changes we have seen thus far pale in comparison to the transformation in legal education that will be necessary in the coming years to help our students, the profession and the clients they serve."  Read More 

20 Oct. 2012: Corporate Board Member magazine quotes and pictures Professor Hillary Sale in a "Think Tank on Boardroom Diversity." Sale, who is executive committee member of DirectWomen, discusses the challenge of quantifying board diversity: “We don’t have any long-running diverse boards, so we couldn’t measure it if we tried. But I think that the other field of academic research that comes out of the organizational behavior area is actually quite strong about diverse teams and how they operate, in terms of innovation and how that leads to growth.” So while it’s very hard to make the academic case, Sale argues, “it doesn’t mean there isn’t value in diversity.” Sale points to the need for sponsorship and advocacy, saying boards need to be “looking out for each individual and getting them over the hurdle and into the boardroom” to further the diversity agenda." Regarding quotas, she states: “The reason why we talk about quotas is because of the absence of leadership. We don’t have that leadership…and as a result, we get pressure for quotas.” Finally, she says, “The U.S. disclosure policy is, like many of our disclosure policies, subject to interpretation. Some companies have chosen to interpret diversity as ‘We have a marketing expert on our board.’ That is clearly not the intent of the guidelines…. We need to be better about holding companies’ feet to the fire on that because we haven’t made much progress in this country.”  WU Trustee Arnold Donald is also quote in the article. Read More 

19 Oct. 2012: In an article on the rising interest in courses that lead to in-house, general-counsel jobs instead of traditional practice in law firms, the National Law Journal quotes Professor  Brian Tamanaha“You need to look at the bottom line for students,” Tamanaha says. “There’s a point where you have to ask: Is this worth it?”  Read More 

16 Oct. 2012: The New York Times quotes Professor Brian Tanamaha's comments on efforts New York University School of Law is making to revise its third-year curriculum. "There are perennial complaints about the third year of law school being a waste of time," Tamanaha told the Times. "It is important that an elite law school like N.Y.U. is making these changes because the top law schools set the model for the rest of legal academia." Read More 

3 Oct. 2012:In a "Guest Commentary" in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Adjunct Professor Caterina DiTraglia writes to correct statements made in an article about the sentencing of Antonio Richardson, one of two young men charged in the murder of Robin and Julie Kerry and the attempted murder of Tom Cummins. DiTraglia explains how her client, Richardson, who is an African American, was offered a plea agreement to life in prison without parole while his accomplice, who is white, was offered thirty years to life. She concludes, " No doubt when the community seeks to execute one of its members, emotions run high, facts get murky, and true justice is difficult to know. I believe that as long as our very imperfect court system, populated by very imperfect people, exacts this ultimate punishment, race and demographics will play a role in who lives and who dies."   Read More 

2 Oct. 2012: In an article published in the Whichita (Kansas) Eagle and other papers, professor Adam Rosenzweig comments on how presidential candidate Mitt Romney used various complex transactions to provide tax shelter for profits made by his capital equity company, Bain Capital. According to the story, "Among the transactions that are piquing interest are those flowing from Bain’s purchase of ownership interests in two U.S. chains, the arts and crafts retailer Michaels Stores and HD Supply Inc., Home Depot’s former home improvement supply arm, whose sales were being hurt by a sharp downturn in the housing market when it was acquired in 2007."  Rosenzweig said that it looked like HD Supply “got to basically recapitalize their company without paying this cancelation of indebtedness tax,”  explaining that Bain converted interest income that would have been taxed at 35 percent into "capital gains" taxed at 15 percent. “It’s a pretty clever structure,” he said, asking, “Is the goal of complying with the system to comply with the literal letter of the law or to comply with the intent of the law? I don’t think anyone can say the intent of Congress in enacting the statutes is (to create) this structure.” Members of Congress, he joked, “weren’t smart enough to think of this.”  Read More 

September 2012

24 Sept. 2012: The St. Louis Post-Dispatch publishes an article on ereaders and privacy that extensively quotes Professor Neil Richards.  "The way we read is really changing," Richards tells the paper. "It used to be we could go to bookstore, with a $5 bill, and there would be no record that we had read that book." He says that when consumers read on devices such as the Kindle, "Amazon knows exactly who you are, all the books you have bought, what you are reading, what page you are on, which passages you've highlighted and how long it takes to read." The article also mentions Richards’ recent article in the Georgetown Law Journal about “social reading" and "frictionless sharing."  Richards says further, "If we give up our ability to read confidentially, we've lost a real freedom of belief and freedom of thought, which I believe are our most important civil liberties." Intellectual privacy is at stake-- "our ability to read and think and make up our minds about what we think about the world without other people watching or hearing." He concludes, "It's important for the same reason we don't like government surveillance of our lives. If we are always being watched, we will turn the entire of our society into the eighth grade, and that would be a real tragedy." Read More 

 19 Sept. 2012: The Associated Press, through The (Biloxi, MS) Sun Herald,quotes Professor Kathleen Clark, former special counsel to the District of Columbia's attorney general, regarding D.C.'s "taking a portion of workers' retirement contributions for 'administrative expenses"'"without telling employees. Part of the money then went "to the accounting firm of embattled businessman Jeffrey Thompson." "The problem, it would seem to me, is the lack of disclosure and transparency," Clark tells the paper, adding that the arrangement with Thompson's firm "is troubling and raises questions about the CFO's judgment" and "may raise not just questions of judgment but whether or not the legal requirements are being met.... As a legal matter, I was really shocked - I was amazed that the chief financial officer, as a fiduciary, hadn't disclosed this."  Read More 

10 Sept. 2012: Legal Theoryblog posted the abstract of Professor David Law’s article on “Sham Constitutions.” "It is often said that constitutions are mere parchment barriers that cannot by themselves limit the power of the state or guarantee respect for rights," Law writes. "There has been little or no empirical scholarship, however, on the global prevalence and severity of constitutional noncompliance. This Article offers the first comparative empirical study of the extent to which countries uphold their formal constitutions." Read More 

7 Sept. 2012: Saint Louis University School of Law Associate Dean for Research and Faculty Development, Anders Walker, paraphrased Professor Brian Tamanaha’s book in a National Jurist blog entry on the resignation of SLU Dean Annette Clark. Walker wrote: “what began as an ugly dispute between the Dean and the President is now morphing into something very different, a [Brian] Tamanaha-esque audit of legal education in its current state, including questions about tuition, faculty resources, and the merits of scholarship. ... The solution, argues Tamanaha, is for law schools to adopt a tiered approach, with elite institutions like Washington University continuing along the scholarly model and non-elite schools like SLU adopting a low tuition, practical skills approach.” Read More 

 3 Sept. 2012: The National Law Journalpublishes an op-ed by Professor Kathleen Clark titled "Whistleblowing incentives for lawyers?" regarding the case of U.S. ex rel. Fair Laboratory Practices Associates v. Quest Diagnostics, now before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second CircuitIn the article, Clark concludes: "No matter how the Second Circuit rules in this case, we can expect to see more lawyers seeking financial incentives for blowing the whistle on their clients' fraud."

August 2012

27 Aug. 2012: The St. Louis Post-Dispatch publishes comments from Adjunct Professor Michael Downey regarding the case of Milton Ohlsen III, a suspect in a near-fatal bombing in Clayton in 2008. Ohlsen wants the case thrown out because two of his attorneys breached client confidentiality when they notified police that they suspected Ohlsen was the bomber shortly after the incident. The attorneys consulted with Downey, partner at Armstrong Teasdale LLP, before turning the information over. That article states: "Downey said in a recent interview that the issue was whether there was a 'continuing threat.' Lawyers, he explained, may disclose client information 'to prevent death or substantial bodily harm.'" Read More 

26 Aug. 2012: The St. Louis Post-Dispatch publishes comments from Professor Karen Tokarzon foreclosure mediation. Countering a statement by general counsel of the Missouri Bankers Association that mediation would wreak "havoc" and be "very chilling for home buyers trying to get a loan," Tokarz said, “I don't see any data anywhere in the country that supports that.” Read More 

22 Aug. 2012: The New York Timespublishes a letter to the editor by Professor Rebecca Dresserabout "shared decision-making, in which doctors describe treatment options and patients choose the one they prefer." Dresser concludes, "In everyday life, arguments with family and friends help us think through the consequences of our choices and sometimes change our minds. Patients and doctors should do the same for one another." Read More 

22 Aug. 2012: An article in Law360 on a Federal Circuit Court ruling "that national security concerns can limit the review of personnel actions taken by federal agencies even against employees without access to classified information" quotes Professor Kathleen Clark: "What this court has done is crafted a very significant exception for employees in sensitive positions. The fear is that it is going to be open season on employees, and that agencies will not have to explain their actions to anyone outside the agency as long as they are going after someone in a noncritical sensitive position." Read More 

22 Aug. 2012: An op-ed in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch written by Professor Karen Tokarz and Todd Swanstrom, the Des Lee professor of community collaboration and public policy administration at the University of Missouri St. Louis Public Policy Research Center, argues for “legislation that would  establish a mediation program to address the foreclosure crisis in St. Louis County.” After analyzing the various costs and benefits of mediation, the authors conclude: “If foreclosure mediation results in even a modest number of agreements in which families save their homes and the lenders avoid big losses, foreclosure mediation will more than pay for itself. . . . Mediation is a win-win-win for homeowners, lenders and St. Louis County.” Read More   

  20 Aug. 2012: In USA Today, Professor John Inazu publishes an editorial supporting Wheaton College's decision to join Catholic University in a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services challenging "the requirement that private employers offer contraception coverage to their employees as a standard health insurance benefit." Inazu writes, "Evangelicals are wise to join this legal conflict, and they would have been wise to have done so even if the mandate had been just 'a Catholic thing.' The legal challenges implicate an interest that all of us — Catholics and evangelicals, religious and non-religious — should value and safeguard: the right of private groups to dissent from the prevailing state orthodoxy." Read More  

  2012 Aug. 14: In a Detroit Free Pressarticle, St. Louis attorney and Adjunct Professor Michael Downey comments on the possibility of a "conflict of interest" between Kwame Kilpatrick and his attorney: “In a case of this size and importance, it’s hard to get distant from it,” Downey said. “It is a very common type of conflict, particularly for high-visibility and complex cases.” Read More 

2012 Aug. 3: Science Magazinepublishes an article on the need to align "regulations and ethics in human research." Quoting Professor Rebecca Dresser, the article states "Underlying the research oversight system is a fundamental moral judgment: Human subjects have interests that should not be subordinated to the interests of the patients, researchers, industry stakeholders, and others who gain health and monetary benefits from the research enterprise." Read More 

2012 Aug. 2: Inside Higher Edpublishesan email interview with Professor Brian Tamanahaabout his book Failing Law Schools. Regarding the "mismatch" between tuition costs and "job prospects," Tamanaha says, "Law schools are producing streams of economic casualties. I wrote the book in the hope that shedding light on the situation will help prompt reform." Read More 
2012 Aug. 2: Professor Rebecca Dresseris interviewed by KWMU radio regarding "ethics of human testing": "People should be free to make informed choices about whether they want to be in research. They shouldn’t be forced to be in research. They shouldn’t be put in research without their knowledge. And they shouldn’t be in research that they don’t really understand." Read More 

July 2012

 2012 July 25: The Slate's "Explainer" column publishes Professor Adrienne Davis’s answer to the question, “If we legalize polygamous marriage, how will polygamous divorce work?" Davis and two colleagues say, "State laws do not provide for polygamous divorce, and, because most American polygamists live in insular religious communities, few cases addressing this issue have reached the courts. Judges have a few options." Read More 

 2012 July 14: News-Medicalfavorably reviews Professor Rebecca Dresser'sbook Malignant, quoting the book, "Since my diagnosis, I had been immersed in a crash course in real-world medical ethics." Read More 

2012 July 12: The St. Louis Americanwrites on the opening of Dark Girls at the Portfolio Gallery and Education Center, quoting Professor Kim Norwood who led a discussion on the exhibit: “This is happening, now,” Norwood said. [speaking of bias based on skin color]: “We have a 2012 example. We’re not making this stuff up. This still happens and something we have to deal with. This is an issue we as a community and as a society have to get over. The only way to do that is to keep this issue on the front burner of our minds and work through it. One thing we know for sure:  this issue simply is not going away on its own. This is going to require work, hard work, and deep soul searching in order to get at the root of what is going on.” Read More