On the Colloquy: St. George Tucker, Midnight Regulation, Proposition 8, and More
posted by Northwestern University Law Review
Recently, the Colloquy has started a dialogue on St. George Tucker. Professor Cornell disputes Hardy’s characterization of St. George Tucker. Hardy, as you’ll remember from his previous colloquy piece, criticized Justice Stevens’ mention of St. George’s work in DC v. Heller. Cornell says Hardy’s description of Tucker as an original public meaning originalist is incorrect.
Professor Zasloff observes that with the new Obama administration taking power, bureaucratic reorganization is inevitable. He then argues that in the realm of international climate change, the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) is best positioned to design effective international climate change architecture. Speaking of transitioning administrations, Professor Beermann examines the phenomenon of “midnight regulation,” a series of regulations enacted by an outgoing administration when a new one is waiting to take over.
The United States form of elected government differs from those of other countries through the lens of the executive appointment process. In our form of government, as Professor Fontana observes in his essay, after a POTUS is elected, there is a scramble for who gets what position on the transition team. In other countries, there are systems set up of appointing those in the losing political coalition to various executive positions. Thus, in other countries, it is much easier to identify who are the minority party leaders.
Professor Ghosh examines the three fundamental tenets of intellectual property rights and competition policy and their application to a preliminary report released by the European Commission in November 2008.
The New York Times reported that prior to the passage of California’s Proposition 8, churches played an active role in supporting the initiative. Gay rights advocates and others have argued that the churches’ support violate federal law restricting political activity by tax-exempt charities. Professor Galle analyzes the merits to this argument in his essay.
A growing trend in corporate law is the notable increase of independent directors appointed to corporate boards. Professors Sharfman and Toll argue that the “independence” sought by corporations is useless without “independence of mind.”
For more, go to the Colloquy archives page, and remember to check back each week for new content.
March 23, 2009 at 3:57 pm
Posted in: Law Rev (Northwestern)
Print This Post
Leave a Reply