Jury Selection in the Weeds: Whither the Democratic Shore? (pdf)
Andrew N. Vollmer
Accusers as Adjudicators in Agency Enforcement Proceedings (pdf)
Meredith D. McPhail
Ensuring That Punishment Does, in Fact, Fit the Crime (pdf)
Can’t make it to the November 17 Journal of Law Reform Symposium “Alt Association: The Role of Law in Combatting Extremism” in person but still interested in hearing our speakers?
Erum Sattar, Jason Robison, and Daniel McCool
Evolution of Water Institutions in the Indus River Basin: Reflections from the Law of the Colorado River (pdf)
The Michigan Journal of Law Reform is pleased to announce that its Fall 2018 Symposium, “Alt-Association: The Role of Law in Combatting Extremism” will take place on November 17, 2018, with a spring-board conversation on Monday November 12, and a introductory talk on Countering Extremist Violence on Friday, November 16 with panel participant Prof. Khaled Beydoun.
All events will be held at the University of Michigan Law School
Hutchins Hall — 625 S State St, Ann Arbor, MI 48109
South Hall — 701 S State St, Ann Arbor, MI 48109
(The two buildings are across the street from each other, separated by Monroe Street.)
Pre-Symposium Conversation & Presentation
Monday, November 12, 2018
11:55 AM – 12:55 PM | Hutchins B60A (Robert B. Aikens Lower Commons Skadden Study)
Please join us for a conversation focusing on the intersections of race, creed, orientation, politics, identity, and labeling in the study and impact of “extremism.” We will also examine the assumptions, premises, problems, feelings, and conclusions generated by the Symposium panel prompts: (1) what is “extremism” and (2) how can the law combat it? Concepts and comments from this session will be provided to JLR‘s Symposium panelists and moderators for incorporation into the events on Nov. 17th.
Friday, November 16, 2018
Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) Grant Discussion
10:00 – 11:30 AM | Hutchins 116
Symposium speaker Professor Khaled Beydoun will give a 20 minute presentation on Countering Violent Extremism grants and their impact on immigrant and Muslim communities, followed by Q&A.
Saturday, November 17, 2018
Registration & Breakfast
8:30 – 9:00 AM | South Hall
Introduction & Alt-Association 101
9:00 – 10:00 AM | South Hall 1025
10:15 – 11:30 AM | South Hall 1225
Lunch & Keynote Address
11:45 AM – 12:45 PM | South Hall 1225
The Role of Law in Responding to Extremism
1:00 PM – 2:15 PM | South Hall 1225
Design Jam: Combating Extremism in Our Communities
2:30 – 5:30 PM | Robert B. Aikens Lower Commons
5:30 – 6:30 PM | Robert B. Aikens Lower Commons
Post-Symposium Debrief Conversation
Monday, November 19, 2018
11:50 AM – 12:50 PM | Hutchins B60A (Robert B. Aikens Lower Commons Skadden Study)
More information on the speakers, and the location of the events, may be found on the Symposium’s website
For more information, comments, or questions, please contact the Symposium office at JLRSymposium52@umich.edu
Michael J. Hasday*
This Essay illustrates how the “Running It Twice” concept that makes poker games less of a gamble can also be used in another forum where large amounts of money can be at stake: arbitrations. I introduce three new forms of arbitration based on this concept: Double-Header Baseball Arbitration, Triple-Header Baseball Arbitration, and Reverse Baseball Arbitration. In this Essay, I show that that these new forms of arbitration are superior to current methods because they result in what the average or median qualified arbitrator would award—thereby making arbitration more accurate, predictable, and fair.
51 U. Mich. J. L. Reform Caveat
Police reform scholarship tends to emphasize the bureaucratic nature of problems in policing, and, in turn, proposes administrative solutions, such as providing more training or critiquing specific language in a manual. This comment argues that instead of viewing policing problems as at their core administrative, we should be willing to view them, at least in part, as moral failings warranting ethical solutions. This perspective allows research on police reform to draw from a much larger corpus of existing ethical writings. This paper applies ethical theory to police reform in the specific context of U.S. v. Warren, arguing that the success of the reforms implemented in the Warren Police Department is due in large part to the department’s use of Aristotle’s theory of “ethical modeling”: ethics is best taught by providing people with moral models whose behavior they can emulate. Other police departments can apply Aristotelian ethical theory by providing positive models from which officers can learn proper policing practices. This can be accomplished in several ways, such as expanding the use of mentoring programs, using more hypothetical role-playing in training, and publicizing stories of officers who properly de-escalated tense situations.
Under the authority provided by 42 U.S.C. § 14141, the Department of Justice (DOJ) can file a lawsuit against a local police department for a “pattern or practice of conduct . . . that deprives persons of rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.” The DOJ filed a claim against the Warren Police Department (WPD) in 2012 using this statute. While the Technical Assistance Letter that the DOJ issued as a result of its investigation was largely ineffective in facilitating reform, the Settlement Agreement which the lawsuit produced led to several reforms in the following years, most of which are largely regarded as successful. This paper examines U.S. v. Warren to identify why the Settlement Agreement reforms in Warren were so successful and how those factors can be used in the future to create meaningful reform in other police departments.
I argue that the predominant factor that led to success in Warren was the implementation of the Aristotelian idea that people learn ethical behavior by watching role models; the WPD implemented this idea by providing positive models of constitutional policing for officers to emulate. This modeling took several forms, such as the examples set by the leaders in the police department and the use of a mentorship program to train officers. This paper examines the Aristotelian principles in context. Part I focuses on the specific situation in Warren, Ohio, including the incidents that led to the investigation, the provisions of the Technical Assistance Letter and the Settlement Agreement, and the current state of compliance. Part II situates the practical discussion of the use of positive models within a wider ethical framework, arguing that one should view police reform at least in part as an ethical issue and thus should draw from ethical concepts when considering how to successfully implement police reform. Part III concludes by examining how the use of positive models can be used in other police reforms going forward.
“Declinations with Disgorgement” in FCPA Enforcement (pdf)
Eithan Y. Kidron
Understanding Administrative Sanctioning as Corrective Justice (pdf)
David Adam Friedman
Do We Need Help Using Yelp? Regulating Advertising on Mediated Reputation Systems (pdf)
William J. Aceves
The Civil Redress and Historical Memory Act of 2029: A Legislative Proposal (pdf)
Criminal Certification: Restoring Comity in the Categorical Approach (pdf)