April 07, 2017
"As of 3/31/17, there are 319,072 applications submitted by 47,916 applicants for the 2017–2018 academic year. Applicants are down 1.9% and applications are up 0.3% from 2016–2017. Last year at this time, we had 87% of the preliminary final applicant count."
April 06, 2017
Leslie Green, who holds one of the two statutory (i.e., university-wide) Chairs in Philosophy of Law at Oxford, has now expanded on his thoughts about the Gorsuch plagiarism case and the claims of John Finnis (who held a personal chair in legal philosophy, but is now emeritus). (Earlier posts here and here.)
April 05, 2017
In fact, plagiarism is not, contrary to John Finnis, normal practice at Oxford. This also is irrelevant to his nomination, but the Judge should acknowledge the error.
April 03, 2017
Mary Bilder (Boston College) wrote an opinion piece for the Boston Globe about originalism and Judge Gorsuch. This elicited the following astonishing reply from originalist Larry Solum (Georgetown) on his usually benign and informative Legal Theory Blog. Some of the questions might have made sense were Solum the referee for a scholarly article making some of these claims; as a response to an op-ed, they are almost comical overreactions. Take just Solum's first intervention:
Question One: You wrote the following:
Today, most originalists contend that a judge should abide by the text’s “original public meaning” — a term of art that originalist scholars have written thousands of pages trying to explain.
What is the basis for the page count? Which articles by which originalists scholars are you discussing? I am very familiar with the theoretical literature on original public meaning, but if this claim is correct there is a large body of work that I have missed entirely.
The basis for the "page count"? Seriously? One can look just at Solum's own SSRN page to find at least 400 pages of writing on this topic. And that's just one author. Add in Randy Barnett, Keith Whittington, the late Justice Scalia, John McGinnis, Michael Rappaport, Larry Alexander, Will Baude, and Stephen Sachs, and "thousands" seems like a plausible off-the-cuff estimate. But why quibble about nonsense like this?
I would advise Prof. Bilder to let these questions pass in silence.
UPDATE: Prof. Solum replies here; I will give him the final word on this matter!
March 31, 2017
March 28, 2017
March 16, 2017
Daniel Hemel and David Herzig argue in the New York Times that a Republican plan to replace a tax penalty paid by the uninsured under the Affordable Care Act with a penalty paid directly to insurance companies after a gap in coverage could thwart Republican efforts to repeal Obamacare using budgetary reconciliation procedures.
March 09, 2017
March 01, 2017
Daniel Schwarcz (Minnesota) and Colleen Chien (Santa Clara) win American Law Institute Young Scholars Medal (Michael Simkovic)
The press release is here. The award is highly selective. The ALI--publisher of the influential Restatements of Law and co-creator of the Uniform Commercial Code--selects two out of thousands of eligible "young scholars" every two years for work that has the potential to change the law for the better.
Congratulations to Dan and Colleen!
MOVING TO FRONT FROM LAST FRIDAY, IN CASE ANYONE MISSED IT!
The University of Chicago Law School has issued the following statement; prospective authors take note!
It has come to our attention that a website run by the International Agency for Development of Culture, Education and Science (IADCES) is purporting to assist authors with submission of academic work to nearly 20 academic journals in various fields. One of these journals is the University of Chicago Law School’s Journal of Legal Studies. This website is in no way affiliated with the University of Chicago Law School, nor the Journal of Legal Studies, and submitting an article through this website will not in any way get an article submitted to JLS. We believe that is true of the other esteemed academic journals the site lists as well.This website, at http://iadces.com/, provides instructions for submissions by emailing to a gmail address and requires the payment of a fee to have the article reviewed. At least as far as JLS is concerned, this website is a scam. The Journal of Legal Studies does not charge a review fee. Submitting to the email address on this site will not get the piece submitted to JLS. The instructions on how to format your paper have nothing to do with JLS. The fee will be paid to those who run the website, not toJLS.Authors wishing to submit their work to the Journal of Legal Studies should visit the journal's website for instructions. Authors wishing to submit to any of the other journals listed on this website should visit those journals’ official web pages.