My Profile Search Directory Submit News Contact Us Logout Alumni Home
Spring 2014UVA Lawyer - Home
Dean's MessageOpinionClass NotesIn MemoriamIn PrintFaculty BriefsUVA Lawyer Home


Faculty News & Briefs

Since 2012 Barbara Armacost ’89 has participated in a unique book project in which pairs of law professors and theologians collaborated. The book explores what various parts of the biblical text might have to say about law and legal institutions.

The group first met in the winter of 2012 for a roundtable conference in which each collaborating pair presented a first draft of its chapter. The reason for the law/theology collaboration was to make sure they were reading the biblical text in a way that did justice to its original context and audience but were also drawing enduring themes that could have something to say about modern legal, institutional, and ethical issues.

Their initial roundtable brought together a diverse group of experts from the disciplines of theology and law. (Law professor contributors included, among others, David Skeel from University of Pennsylvania, Bob Cochran from Pepperdine University Law School, John Nagle from Notre Dame, and John Witte Jr. , from Emory University Law School). The discussion on their drafts was “rich and formative,” according to Armacost. Over the next year, each pair continued its collaboration, applying the insights gleaned from the conference. The book, Law and the Bible: Justice, Mercy and Legal Institutions, was completed in 2013 with an introduction by John Witte, Jr. Armacost collaborated with Old Testament scholar, Peter Enns, on a chapter entitled “Crying Out for Justice: Civil Law and the Prophets.”

More recently, Armacost participated in a panel discussion on the case Sebelius v Hobby Lobby with Doug Laycock and Rich Schragger. Students from a range of organizations sponsored the panel (St. Thomas Moore, Law Christian Fellowship, and Advocates for Life) which was strategically scheduled for the day before the oral argument in the case.

Armacost is also working on an article entitled “Immigration Policing: Federalizing the Local,” which explores the ways in which engaging state and local police in immigration enforcement changes the shape of policing in ways that are counterproductive to ordinary law enforcement.

Last fall Margo Bagley presented “Apple v. Samsung and Multinational Patent Litigation” to the J.B. Moore International Law Society at the Law School.

She published Patent Law in Global Perspective, (Ruth L. Okediji and Margo A. Bagley, eds. Oxford University Press, 2014) and one of the included chapters, “Patent Barbarians at the Gate: The Who, What, When, Where, Why & How of U.S. Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Disputes.” In January she presented that chapter at Vanderbilt University School of Law.

In February Bagley provided expert assistance to the government of Mozambique in the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Intergovernmental Committee (IGC) on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge, and Folklore 26th session negotiations in Geneva, Switzerland. She also presented “Improving Search and Examination in Developing Country Patent Offices” at South Centre/Third World Network WIPO ICG Side Event in Geneva.

In March Bagley presented “Issues in Patenting Genetic Resource-based Inventions” at the American Chemical Society National Meeting in Dallas and served as a facilitator to the chair of the WIPO IGC 27th session.

Michal Barzuza published “Noise Adopters” in the Columbia Business Law Review 627.

She was also a panelist at a conference on Financial Regulation and Comparative Corporate Governance at Tel Aviv University and on “Incorporation and the Nevada Delaware Debate, Power and Control” at the Law School in February.

Last year Barzuza participated in conferences and workshops at UCLA, Fordham, Brooklyn, and Vanderbilt.

Richard Bonnie ’69 is chairing three consensus studies for the National Academy of Sciences. One study will propose a strategic plan for the federal government to implement a “developmental approach” to juvenile justice reform. The Justice Department’s Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, the MacArthur Foundation, and the Annie E. Casey Foundation requested the expedited study after the National Research Council released its influential report on juvenile justice reform in 2013. (That study was also chaired by Bonnie.)

The Institute of Medicine asked Bonnie to head a consensus study charged with conducting a comprehensive review of federal and state policies and programs affecting the health, safety, and well-being of young adults, taking account of substantial demographic, cultural, social, and economic changes. The premise for the study is that medical and social science research typically classifies the population in two categories, juveniles/minors (under 18) and adults, without providing an integrated look at the extended transitional period of early adulthood.

A third study, requested by Congress in the Tobacco Control Act of 2009, looks at a very specific legal policy issue – whether the minimum age for purchasing tobacco products should be raised to 21.

In December, the Institute of Law, Psychiatry and Public Policy, headed by Bonnie, released a major report on emergency mental health evaluations in Virginia. It gives an objective and detailed review of Virginia's emergency mental health system, sheds light on persistent gaps in available services, and illustrates the need for timely access to mental health services, including access to crisis response services and psychiatric beds.

In May Bonnie delivered the Lattimer Lecture at the New York Academy of Medicine. In his lecture, “The Sudden Collapse of Marijuana Prohibition,” he described the emergence of prohibition during the early decades of the twentieth century, reflected on his experience as Associate Director of the Commission National Commission on Marijuana and Drug Abuse, and traced the uneven pace of reform since the Commission recommended decriminalization in 1972.

In February Kevin Cope published a blog post on the Summit online international law forum (sponsored by Georgetown Law).

Ashley Deeks
has published a book chapter, "Taming the Doctrine of Preemption," in an edited volume, The Oxford Handbook on the Use of Force, Marc Weller ed., publishing in April.

In November Kimberly Emery ’91 was appointed by Cynthia Kinser ’77, chief justice of the Virginia Supreme Court, to serve on the new Virginia Access to Justice Commission (established by Court order in September. Emery is the Commission's representative for law schools.

Last spring Kim Forde-Mazrui was appointed the Mortimer M. Caplin Professor of Law. In October he delivered a lecture in honor of the appointment, entitled “The Canary-Blind Constitution: Must Government Ignore Racial Inequality?” He delivered a similar presentation this January as the keynote Martin Luther King Day lecture at the University of Michigan Law School.

Forde-Mazrui also co-organized two conferences last spring. In March he and Deborah McDowell, UVA Professor of English and Director of the Carter G. Woodson Institute for African-American and African Studies, and Lawrie Balfour, UVA Professor of Politics, organized a two day conference at UVA, entitled, “Does Reparations Have a Future?  Rethinking Racial Justice in a ‘Color Blind’ Era.”

In April 2013 Forde-Mazrui, along with R. Richard Banks (Stanford Law) and Guy-Uriel Charles (Duke Law) hosted a two-day Roundtable at Stanford during which 20 law professors from around the country gave commentary on their forthcoming casebook, Law and Race: Consensus and Controversy in Twenty-First Century America; R. Richard Banks, Kim Forde-Mazrui, Guy-Uriel Charles, and Cristina Rodríguez, (Foundation Press, forthcoming 2015).

In fall of 2013 Forde-Mazrui published “Does Racial Diversity Promote Cultural Diversity?: The Missing Question in Fisher v. University of Texas” in the Lewis & Clark Law Review. The article examines the relationship between racial diversity and cultural diversity in higher education, and the implications of that relationship for the constitutionality of race-based affirmative action. Earlier in July, he presented a draft of the article to UVA’s Working Group on Racial Inequality.

Forde-Mazrui delivered several presentations over the past six months. In November he delivered a talk entitled “Two Trends in Affirmative Action Law Revealed by Fisher v. University of Texas” during a plenary session on Access, Affirmative Action, and Admission that was part of the 2013 Virginia Universities and Race Histories conference held at UVA. 

In January Forde-Mazrui delivered remarks entitled “Is Johnson’s War on Race Disparities in Infant Mortality Unconstitutional Today?” as part of a conference on President Lyndon B. Johnson’s Great Society and Beyond held at the University of Baltimore School of Law and sponsored by the Mid-Atlantic People of Color Legal Scholarship Conference. 

In February he presented an argument in favor of the constitutionality of race-based affirmative action entitled, “Taking the Federalist Society Seriously: A Constitutional Defense of Affirmative Action.” The presentation was part of a debate held at the Law School with Hans von Spakovsky of the Heritage Foundation, sponsored by the Federalist Society and the Black Law Students Association. Forde-Mazrui also gave a presentation entitled “What Can Race Law Learn from Disability Law?” at a conference on Disabling Normalcy held at UVA.

This spring Forde-Mazrui was selected as one of “50 Under 50 Outstanding Law School Professors” in Lawyers of Color, Law School Diversity Issue (2014).

Brandon Garrett’s book Too Big to Jail: How Prosecutors Compromise with Corporations is forthcoming from Harvard University Press this summer. His previous book with Harvard Press, Convicting the Innocent, will have translations in Taiwan and Japan published this year.

This year he has forthcoming “The Constitutional Standing of Corporations” in the University of Pennsylvania Law Review; “Accuracy In Sentencing” in the Southern California Law Review; “Images of Injustice” (chapter in Punishment and Popular Culture, ed. Austin Sarat & Charles Ogletree); “Eyewitness Identifications and Police Practices in Virginia” in the Virginia Journal of Criminal Law; “The Banality of Wrongful Convictions” in the Michigan Law Review (book review of Dan Simon, In Doubt, and James Liebman et al., Los Tocayos Carlos); and “Applause for the Plausible” in the University of Pennsylvania Law Review Online.

His commentary includes “Too Big to Jail?” In the Harvard University Press Blog; “For a Better Way to Prosecute Corporations, Look Overseas” in the New York Times (with David Zaring); and “It’s High Time for Lineup Reform” in the Richmond Times-Dispatch.

Garrett also wrote DNA Exonerations in the United States for the United Nations, OHCHR Global Panel, “Moving Away from the Death Penalty: Wrongful Convictions”; and Corporate Anti-Corruption Prosecutions in the United States for the fifth session of the International Forum on Crime and Criminal Law in the Global Era.

Jon Ashley and Garrett are preparing substantial additions to the data resource collections the Law School’s Morris Law Library maintains on organizational prosecution agreements, both plea agreements, and deferred and non-prosecution agreements.

In November Garrett presented “Wrongful Convictions and the Death Penalty” at the ABA Carter Center Death Penalty Conference and “The Rule of Law and Wrongful Convictions” at the 2013 U.S.-China Legal Experts Dialogue. He also spoke on “The Law and Science of Eyewitness Memory” at the Law School Foundation Board and Faculty luncheon.

In January he gave a talk on contamination of confessions at a conference at Washington & Lee School of Law, spoke on the constitutional standing of corporations at an American Constitution Society conference at the Law School, and testified in the Virginia House of Delegates, Committee for Courts of Justice, at a Hearing on H.B. No. 805 concerning regulating law enforcement lineup policies. He also continues to advise law enforcement agencies and DCJS concerning model policies on lineups in Virginia.

In February Garrett gave a talk on eyewitness misidentifications at William & Mary School of Law.

In addition to his vice dean duties, George Geis has completed four recent publications: “Shareholder Derivative Litigation and the Preclusion Problem” in the Virginia Law Review; “Gift Promises and the Edge of Contract Law” in the Illinois Law Review; “The Economics of Contract Law: A Business Outsourcing Application,” a chapter in a book published in India on law and economics (Sage); and “Shareholder Power in India,” a chapter in a forthcoming book in the United States on shareholder power (Edgar Elgar press).

Geis has also given recent presentations at the University of Warsaw, the University of Chicago, and the University of Colorado; and taught a short course on applied problem solving at the Georgetown Law School in January.

In February Michael Gilbert presented “Insincere Rules” at the Law and Economics Workshop at Berkeley Law School. He will present the same paper at the annual meetings of the American Law and Economics Association in May.

Gilbert presented “The Problem of Voter Fraud” at the Constitutional Law Schmooze at the University of Maryland in February. He presented the same paper at the annual meetings of the Midwest Political Science Association in April. He also participated in a symposium titled“The Future of Campaign Finance Reform” at Duke Law School.

In the fall Risa Goluboff gave her John Allan Love Chair Lecture at the Law School, “People out of Place: A Constitutional History of the Long 1960s.” She gave the same lecture at the American History Seminar of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and the American Historical Association, which was aired on CSPAN, and at George Washington University. Goluboff was a guest on the radio show Backstory with the American History Guys, discussing the history of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

In June Goluboff will moderate a discussion with Todd Purdham on his book on the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for the Aspen Institute’s monthly lunchtime book series. And in September she will moderate a seminar on constitutional history for the Congressional Research Service’s launch of “The Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation” (CONAN), at the Library of Congress.

In 2014 Andrew Hayashi has published three articles: “Property Taxes and their Limits: Evidence from New York City” will be appearing in the Stanford Law and Policy Review; “The Legal Salience of Taxation” will be published in the University of Chicago Law Review; and the third is a short response piece to Ryan Bubb and Richard H. Pildes’s piece: “How Behavioral Economics Trims Its Sails and Why” Hayashi wrote with Michael Livermore and Quinn Curtis that will appear in the Harvard Law Review Forum.

Hayashi is currently working on three other projects; the effects of state mortgage foreclosure laws on household credit use, developing an economic analysis of legal rules that incorporate subjective intent, and a third that explores the potential benefits of setting off, or “netting,” government taxes and transfers to individuals across different programs and different levels of government.


Dick HowardA. E. Dick Howard ’61 has been busy on both sides of the Atlantic as organizations in the United Kingdom and the United States begin preparations for the marking of Magna Carta's 800th anniversary in 2015. In London Howard spoke at the House of Commons to the Magna Carta 800th Anniversary Commemoration Committee, a cross-party committee laying plans for 2015. In Oxford Howard, joined by Suzelle Smith ’83 and Don Howarth, gave the Howarth and Smith Law Lecture, at Lady Margaret Hall. Their subject was "From Legem Terrae to Due Process of Law: 800 Years after Runnymede." England's Salisbury Cathedral, which has perhaps the best preserved of the four extant copies of the 1215 charter, has asked Howard to advise on the Cathedral's plans for 2015. In the United States Howard has been appointed to advise the Library of Congress on its forthcoming exhibit, "Magna Carta: Muse and Mentor."

Having assisted other countries in the writing of new constitutions, Howard reflected on that experience when he gave the Dean's Distinguished Lecture at Wake Forest University's Law School. His topic was "To Begin the World Anew: The Influence of the American Constitutional Experience on Other Countries and Cultures." As a warmup for his Wake Forest lecture, Howard covered some of the same ground in a lecture to the University of Virginia's Jefferson Society. In that talk, Howard emphasized Jefferson's time as American Minister to Paris in the 1780s.

Howard's interest in comparative constitutionalism informed a lecture he gave to Rhodes Scholars at Oxford's Rhodes House. Talking about "The Idea of a Constitution," Howard considered the several phases of modern constitution-making from the founding era in France and America to the years since the collapse of communism. Here in Virginia, together with his colleagues, the Law School's Mila Versteeg and Washington and Lee's Russell Miller, Howard helped conceive and organize the first annual Comparative Constitutional Law Roundtable at James Madison's Montpelier. The roundtable drew participants from major law schools around the country. Howard keynoted the roundtable with a talk on the history of Virginia's Constitution, including tales from the campaign for the Constitution's ratification.

Always interested in the Supreme Court of the United States, Howard spoke at Mount Vernon to the Virginia Bar Association's Special Issues Committee on the subject "What's Happening at the Supreme Court." Not neglecting the Law School's own family, Howard talked on Magna Carta's America legacy to alumni of the Law School in Charlotte, North Carolina.


Deena Hurwitz received grants from the UVA Center for Global Inquiry & Innovation to pursue research with a colleague in the Politics Department, Jonah Schulhofer-Wohl, on women’s rights, Islam, and the rule of law. They will begin this research in Palestine this May.

Hurwitz taught a session on Human Rights and Islam for the Judge Advocate General Legal Center & School Emergent Topics Course in March, and she has been invited to be a UVA Center for Global Health Faculty Fellow.

She is participating in the UVA-Department of State “Diplomacy Lab” Project, supervising three inter-disciplinary student teams on Assessing the Efficacy of Transitional Justice Mechanisms; Mapping and Analysis of Pro-LGBT Work by Religious Organizations; and Legal Reform Under Shari’a Law.

Hurwitz is supervising students in the Human Rights Clinic who have drafted a training module on maternal health rights for the Guatemala based Women’s Justice Initiative (founded by Kate Flatley,’08); writing an amicus brief for the African Commission on Human Rights on the violations of the rights of Eqyptian women protesters who were subjected to forced virginity tests in the custody of the Egyptian military; working on a legislative project concerning government accountability for corporate human rights violations, and a petition to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in a Virginia case involving access to justice, gender, race and socio-economic discrimination, in the context of contested custody and child sexual abuse.

In January Penn Press published Does Regulation Kill Jobs? (edited by Cary Coglianese, Adam M. Finkel & Christopher Carrigan), which included a chapter authored by Michael Livermore (with Jason Schwartz) titled “Analysis to Inform Public Discourse on Jobs and Regulation.”

Another chapter by Livermore, “Environmental Law and Economics” (with Richard L. Revesz), will appear in the Oxford Handbook of Law and Economics.

In April, Livermore, along with Quinn Curtis and Andrew Hayashi, published an invited response in the Harvard Law Review Forum to “How Behavioral Economics Trims its Sails and Why” by NYU Law Professors Ryan Bubb and Richard Pildes. In their response, Curtis, Hayashi, and Livermore discuss and critique the role of behavioral economics theory in informing real-world regulatory policy.

In May Livermore was hosted by Ambassador Julissa Reynoso at the U.S. Embassy in Montevideo, Uruguay, for a multi-day visit with academics and government officials on his recently published book The Globalization of Cost-Benefit Analysis in Environmental Policy (Oxford University Press, 2013) (ed. with Richard L. Revesz). He also presented his forthcoming article “Rethinking Health Based Environmental Standards” (NYU Law Review, also with Revesz) at the American Law and Economics Association Annual Meeting at the University of Chicago.

In November David Martin participated in a roundtable hosted by Yale Law School titled “Immigration Reform: The Good, the Bad, and the Possible.” Convening academics and activists, the conference analyzed the bill that passed the Senate by a wide margin in June 2013, assessed prospects for the House to pass its own bill, and considered possible scenarios if legislation is not finalized in 2014.

Later that month Martin participated in a U.S.–China Legal Experts Dialogue, convened at the Morven Estate in Charlottesville by the U.S. Department of State and the Chinese Foreign Ministry to consider rule-of-law reforms.

Also in November Martin appeared in a lengthy dialogue on the PBS News Hour, moderated by Gwen Ifill, discussing the extent of the President’s power to exercise prosecutorial discretion in implementing and enforcing the immigration laws.

In December Martin was invited to give the opening presentation to a different group of 40 Chinese officials and academics investigating migration management systems in other countries. The group came to the Law School for this lengthy session. Martin lectured and provided materials on the structure and history of U.S. immigration controls. 

In February Martin was part of a bipartisan group of six former government officials, which included former Attorney General Michael Mukasey and former INS Commissioner James Ziglar, filing an amicus brief urging the granting of certiorari in Acebo-Leyva v. Holder. The brief asked the Court to resolve a circuit conflict over the retroactive effects of certain provisions in the 1996 Immigrant Responsibility and Illegal Immigration Reform Act. A few weeks later, the Board of Immigration Appeals issued a new precedent decision holding that the provision in question should not be applied retroactively – the interpretation urged in the amicus brief.

In March Martin was a panelist at a conference at Yale Law School on “The Globalization of High Seas Interdiction,” held on the twentieth anniversary of the Supreme Court’s decision in Sale v. Haitian Centers Council. That decision found no domestic or international law violation in the U.S. government’s then-extant policy of interdicting Haitian migrants and returning them to Haiti without screening for refugee claims. A 2012 decision of the European Court of Human Rights, in contrast, found multiple legal violations in similar practices conducted by Italy. Martin’s contribution, voicing focused skepticism regarding the ECHR decision, was published on the Opinio Juris blog.

In January Ruth Mason presented at a Pepperdine tax analysts conference on “Tax in a time of Crisis.” In February she presented “International Law Constraints on U.S. International Tax Policy” at the Urban Institute in Washington, D.C., and gave a talk at the University of Minnesota moderated by the Chief Judge Delapeña of the Minnesota Tax Court on federal-state tax-base conformity.

In April and May Mason will present her paper on citizenship taxation at faculty workshops at Washington and Lee, Tulane, the Max Planck Institute in Munich, and the Sorbonne in Paris. Also in May Mason will participate in a panel at Bocconi University in Milan on base erosion and profit shifting. She will also serve with Josh Blank of NYU as reporter for the United States to the European Association of Tax Law Professors Annual Congress. The Congress will take place in Istanbul and will focus on strategies to combat off-shore tax evasion.

John Monahan wrote the afterword to Violence Risk-Assessment and Management: Advances Through Structured Professional Judgment and Sequential Redirections (2d ed.) by Webster, C., Haque, Q., and Hucker; “Risk Redux: The Resurgence of Risk Assessment in Criminal Sanctioning” (with Skeem, J.) in Federal Sentencing Reporter; and Social Science in Law: Cases and Materials (Eighth edition, with Larry Walker).

He has in press “Legal Process and Social Science: United States” in The International Encyclopedia of Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2nd Ed.,(R. Greenspan and K. Levine, Eds); “The Evolution of Violence Risk Assessment” (with Skeem, J.) in CNS Spectrums; and “Social Science in Law: Continuity and Change” (with Walker, L.) in the Oxford Handbook of Psychology and Law (Melton, G. B., & Ogloff, J. R. P. (Eds.).

Greg Mitchell received the University of Virginia’s 2014 All-University Teaching Award (see the Law School News section for related article).

Mitchell and his co-author Philip Tetlock participated in the Critical Review's symposium on Neil Gross' book, Why Are Professors Liberal and Why Do Conservatives Care? Mitchell and Tetlock are also publishing a chapter on implicit prejudice research in the forthcoming book, Psychological Science Under Scrutiny: Recent Challenges and Proposed Solutions.

The 38th annual conference of the Center for Oceans Law and Policy, which John Norton Moore directs, will take place this June in Bergen, Norway. The conference topic is Challenges of the Changing Arctic: Continental Shelf, Navigation, and Fisheries. The volume of papers from this conference, which Moore will co-edit, will be published by Martinus Nijhoff in early 2015. The volume of papers from the 37th annual conference, Freedom of Navigation and Globalization (forthcoming 2014), is in preparation and is co-edited by Moore, Myron Nordquist, and Robert Beckman. The 19th session of the Rhodes Academy of Oceans Law and Policy will take place this summer in Rhodes, Greece. Moore will teach four classes at the Rhodes Academy.

This June the Center for National Security Law, which Moore also directs, will host its 22nd National Security Law Institute. Moore will teach classes at the Institute on Understanding War, Institutional Modes of Conflict Management, and the Use of Force in International Relations. 

The center will co-sponsor with the ABA the 24th Annual Review of the Field of National Security Law Conference November 6-7 in Washington, D.C.

In November of 2013 the ABA’s Standing Committee on Law and National Security presented Moore with the Morris I. Leibman Award in Law and National Security, which is among the highest honors given to national security lawyers.

In February of this year Moore spoke on international investor-state arbitration at the Law School colloquium “Crossing Borders: Rethinking International Development,” and he participated in the workshop, National Security Law: A View from the Inside, also held at the Law School.

In January Dotan Oliar published "Copyright Preregistration: Evidence and Lessons from the First Seven Years, 2005-2012" (with Nicholas Matich) in the Arizona Law Review. This is a quantitative and interview-based study of copyright’s recently-established early registration system of yet to be completed copyrighted works. It is relied upon heavily in the movie industry. Oliar also presented "Who’s Copyrighting What: An Empirical Analysis of Copyright Registrations" at the University of Texas Law School. The article was selected for presentation at the 24th annual meeting of the American Law and Economics Association in May at the University of Chicago. The article, co-authored with Nate Pattison and Ross Powell, is an empirical study of copyright registrations, and will be published in the Texas Law Review later this year.

In February Robert O’Neil and Barrett Prettyman, Jr. '53 shared the podium for a retrospective law clerks' review of the careers of several Supreme Court Justices. The program took place in the federal courthouse in Oklahoma City (a new building across from the Murrah Courthouse Plaza and Memorial Park.) It was sponsored by the Oklahoma City Federal Bar Association under the aegis of a 10th Circuit Judge and brought out all the federal and many state judges and local lawyers. O’Neil was there in person while Prettyman appeared via video conference - he recalling Justices Jackson and Frankfurter for whom he clerked, while O’Neil recalled Justice Brennan as a mentor.

In March 2013 Mildred Robinson moderated a panel at Symposium 40th Anniversary - San Antonio v. Rodriguez at the University of Richmond School of Law.

Robinson published “It Takes a Federalist Village: A Revitalized Property Tax as the Linchpin for Stable, Effective k-12 Public Education Funding” as an article in the Richmond Journal of Law and the Public Interest and as a book chapter in The Enduring Legacy of Rodriguez: Creating New Pathways to Equal Educational Opportunity (tentative title).

Her essay, “Skin in the Tax Game: Invisible Taxpayers? Invisible Citizens?,” is forthcoming in the Villanova Law Review. The essay is based upon her lecture as the 2014 Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial speaker at the Villanova University School of Law in January.

In January George Rutherglen attended a conference at Stanford on the 50th anniversary of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and is scheduled to attend another at Boston University in October. His papers for these events are “Title VII as Precedent: Past and Prologue for Future Legislation” and “Private Rights and Private Actions:The Legacy of Civil Rights in the Enforcement of Title VII.”

In addition Rutherglen is publishing articles on “Sovereignty, Territoriality and the Enforcement of Foreign Judgments” in the Virginia Journal of International Law (with James Stern); “The Origins of Arguments Against Reverse Discrimination: Lessons from the Civil Rights Act of 1866” in The Greatest and Grandest Act: The Civil Rights Act of 1866 from Reconstruction to Today (Christian Samito, ed. 2014); “The Thirteenth Amendment” in American Governance (Laurie Malashenko ed. 2014); and “Sovereignty, Authority, and Personal Jurisdiction: Decisions in Search of Rules.”

In March Fred Schauer delivered the Julius Stone Address at the University of Sydney (Australia) with the title "Do People Obey the Law?," and published "Modeling Tolerance" in the Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, and "Analogy in the Supreme Court: Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach" in The Supreme Court Review.

He also published "Stare Decisis and the Selection Effect" in Precedent in the United States Supreme Court (C.J. Peters, ed.), and will be publishing "Our Informationally Disabled Courts" in Daedalus (special issue on courts, Linda Greenhouse & Judith Resnik, editors) in August.

Schauer also taught sessions on "Constitutionalism," "Constitutional Rights," and "Constitutional Interpretation" at in Masters Course in Legal Theory at University of Genoa, Italy; presented "Free Speech on Tuesdays" at University of Chicago Law School; and spoke on "Civil and Common Law "Constitutionalism" and "Free Speech in Comparative Perspective" at University of Lucerne in Switzerland, and on "A Right to Know?" at a conference on Philosophy of Information at Duke University.

Last fall Rich Schragger participated in drafting an amicus brief in support of the government in Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., which was argued in March at the Supreme Court. In April he presented a chair lecture on "Can Cities Govern?" marking his appointment as the Perre Bowen Professor of Law.

In June Barbara Spellman was an invited guest to the White House celebration of Champions of Change for Open Science.

She was elected to the governing board (as a member-at-large) of the section on psychology, American Association for the Advancement of Science for the term 2014-18. Spellman continues as editor in chief of the journal Perspectives on Psychological Science until 2015.

She has published “Blame, Cause, and Counterfactuals: The Inextricable Link,” a comment on: “A Theory of Blame” in Psychological Inquiry (with Gilbert, E. A. and in press); “Is Expert Evidence Really Different? (with Schauer, F.) in the Notre Dame Law Review; “Stereotypic Crimes: How Group-Crime Associations Affect Memory and (Sometimes) Verdicts and Sentencing” (with Skorinko, J. L.) in Victims & Offenders; “Social Cognition and the Law” (with Schauer, F.) in the Oxford Handbook of Social Cognition (D. Carlston (Ed.); and “There is No Such Thing as Replication but We Should Do it Anyway,” a comment on “Recommendations for Increasing Replicability in Psychology” in the European Journal of Personality.

Spellman has also conducted a number of workshops and talks about trends in psychological science and other life sciences that question research and publication practices. One was based on her book in-progress, The Evolution of the Revolution, at the invited symposium, The Replication Revolution: One Year On, at the annual meeting of the Association for Psychological Science in May.

Last year she lectured on “Putting Humpty Dumpty Together Again: (Re)Creating a Whole and Healthy Psychological Science” at the University of Amsterdam and Tilburg University in The Netherlands; held a workshop on “Psychological Foundations of Evidence Law” at Cardozo School of Law; delivered “Research Revolution 2.0: Whence and Whither? The View from a Journal Editor” at the symposium: Best Practices of the Society for Experimental Social Psychology in Berkeley, Calif.; discussed “Building a Better Psychological Science: Good Data Practices and Replicability” at the European Society for Cognitive Psychology and Association for Psychological Science in Budapest, Hungary; and was a panelist on “Replication and Reliability in Research: Views from Editors, Program Officers and Publishers” at the Association for Psychological Science Convention in Washington, D.C.

Paul Stephan ’77 is one of the reporters for the Restatement (Fourth) of the Foreign Relations of the United States- Jurisdiction. They presented a council draft to the ALI Council in January, received approval, and a tentative draft representing a portion of the overall project will be presented to the ALI membership for discussion and approval in May.

In February Stephan presented at a workshop at Duke his paper, “Courts on Courts,” which was just published by the Virginia Law Review. In March Stephan moderated a panel on the “Law of Nations” at the colloquium organized by the Virginia Law Review.

In April Stephan took part in a panel discussion of the Restatement at the annual meeting of the American Society of International Law and at the Potomac Valley Foreign Relations Law Roundtable hosted by GW Law School.

In May Stephan will host and serve as a commentator for the Southeastern Branch of the American Society of International Law Young Scholars’ Workshop at the Law School. He will also take part in a conference, and deliver two papers, at Sapienza University in Rome on the topic of the political economy of international law. He will also be a scholar in residence in the London offices of Wilmer Hale.

In July Stephan will teach public international law in the University of San Diego’s Paris summer program.

Last September Ted White made presentations at two conferences, one sponsored by the Law School and the Miller Center on “Charles Beard and the Constitution,” and the other by the Law School on “Compelled Commercial Speech.” Articles that White wrote in connection with those conferences are appearing this year under the titles "Charles Beard and Progressive Legal Historiography" and "The Evolution of Compelled Commercial Speech" in, respectively, Constitutional Commentary and the Virginia Journal of Law and Politics.

In February he presented at a panel discussion in the Stanford Law School conference on “The Role of History in Constitutional Law.”

In May White was on a panel with James McPherson of the history department at Princeton University on "Holmes and the Civil War," sponsored by the Supreme Court Historical Society. The panel discussion took place at the Supreme Court of the United States.

In September he will be making a presentation at the Law School Symposium on History and Jurisprudence, and in October will be giving a faculty workshop at the law department of Edinburgh University in Scotland on constitutional jurisprudence in the New Deal period.