<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Yale Law Library - Reference Blog</title><link>http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/default.aspx</link><description /><dc:language>en</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2007 SP2 (Build: 20611.960)</generator><item><title>Market Damages, Efficient Contracting and the Economic Waste Fallacy</title><link>http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/2008/05/13/market-damages-efficient-contracting-and-the-economic-waste-fallacy.aspx</link><pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 16:15:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">3dba5dbf-cc88-412d-a5e1-dc96318a2d17:176</guid><dc:creator>John Nann</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><description>&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;is the title of a new paper by Alan Schwartz and Robert E. Scott (Columbia) posted on SSRN.&amp;nbsp; Here&amp;#39;s the &lt;a href="http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1131297"&gt;paper&lt;/a&gt; and here&amp;#39;s the abstract:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;font face="ARIAL, HELVETICA"&gt; Market damages - the difference between
the market price for goods or services at the time of breach and the
contract price - are the best default rule whenever parties trade in
thick markets: they induce parties to contract efficiently and to trade
if and only if trade is efficient, and they do not create ex ante
inefficiencies. Courts commonly overlook these virtues, however, when
promisors offer a set of services some of which are not separately
priced. For example, a promisor may agree to pay royalties on a mining
lease and later to restore the promisee&amp;#39;s property. In these cases,
courts compare the cost to the promisor of providing the service that
was not supplied to the increase in the market value of the
promisee/buyer&amp;#39;s property had the promisor/seller performed. When the
cost of completion is large relative to the &amp;quot;market delta&amp;quot;- the
increase in market value - courts concerned to avoid &amp;quot;economic waste&amp;quot;
limit the buyer to the market value increase. This concern is
misguided. Since the buyer commonly prepays for the service at the ex
ante market price, a cost of completion award actually has a
restitution element - the prepaid price - and an expectation interest
element - the market damages. The failure to recognize the joint nature
of cost of completion damages causes courts to deny these damages more
frequently than they should. In this paper, we argue that the
unappreciated virtues of market based damages justify removing the
courts&amp;#39; discretion to deny them no matter how high they appear to be.
The rule that denies buyers market damages induces excessive entry into
these service markets. Moreover, buyers are under-compensated when they
prepay and cannot recover the price paid for the breached services but
instead are restricted to the market delta. As a result, too few buyers
contract ex ante for the relevant service and surplus maximizing
contracts are forgone. Finally, sellers often can take actions in the
interim between making the contract and the time for performance of the
service that would reduce the service cost to manageable proportions.
Sellers are less likely to take these precautions if they are required
to pay buyers only the market delta rather than the full performance
cost that their actions could have avoided.&lt;/font&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/aggbug.aspx?PostID=176" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/tags/Scholarship/default.aspx">Scholarship</category><category domain="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/tags/alan+schwartz/default.aspx">alan schwartz</category></item><item><title>SSRN</title><link>http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/2008/05/12/ssrn.aspx</link><pubDate>Mon, 12 May 2008 18:22:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">3dba5dbf-cc88-412d-a5e1-dc96318a2d17:175</guid><dc:creator>John Nann</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><description>&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;Another fascinating &lt;a href="http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1131292"&gt;paper&lt;/a&gt; from Professor Hathaway, &amp;quot;&lt;i&gt;The Continuing Influence of the New Haven School&lt;/i&gt;.&amp;quot;&amp;nbsp; Originally published in 32(2) Yale Journal of International Law in 2007.&amp;nbsp; Here is the abstract: &lt;/p&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;font face="ARIAL, HELVETICA"&gt; This Commentary examines the deep and
abiding influence of what has been called the New Haven School of
international law. It considers the connection between the past and the present the ideas first formulated by Myres S. McDougal and Harold D. Lasswell more than a half-century ago, and those, both near and far, whose work they have influenced.&lt;/font&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;img src="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/aggbug.aspx?PostID=175" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/tags/Scholarship/default.aspx">Scholarship</category><category domain="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/tags/oona+hathaway/default.aspx">oona hathaway</category></item><item><title>Paper on SSRN</title><link>http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/2008/05/12/paper-on-ssrn.aspx</link><pubDate>Mon, 12 May 2008 18:16:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">3dba5dbf-cc88-412d-a5e1-dc96318a2d17:174</guid><dc:creator>John Nann</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><description>&lt;p&gt;Professor Hathaway has posted a &lt;a href="http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1131411"&gt;paper&lt;/a&gt; originally published in the journal International Organization in 1998 (v. 52, no. 3) on SSRN, entitled &amp;quot;&lt;i&gt;Positive Feedback: The Impact of Trade Liberalization on Industry Demands for Protection&amp;quot;.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Here is the abstract:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;font face="ARIAL, HELVETICA"&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;font face="ARIAL, HELVETICA"&gt;This article proposes a theory of
dynamic industry preferences and strategies to explain variation in
industries&amp;#39; demand for trade protection over time. This theory shows
how the characteristics of industries affect their demand for trade
policy and how, in turn, trade policy transforms industry
characteristics. An
important implication of this theory is that trade liberalization tends
to reduce, rather than increase, industry demand for protection over
the long term. The article begins by developing a static model of
industry decision making that illustrates how producers faced with a
reduction in trade barriers weigh the costs and benefits of political
action and economic adjustment. It then explains how the strategic
choices of an industry are determined by key industry characteristics
that evolve over time in response to changes in trade policy and market
conditions. In particular, it demonstrates that reductions in trade
barriers may have a positive feedback effect that dampens rather than
amplifies domestic protectionist sentiment. To test this model, the
article examines the dramatic postwar transformation of three
industries that have historically demanded and received extensive
import protection: the footwear, textile, and apparel industries. The
article concludes with an assessment of the model and a discussion of
its possible implications for our understanding of the politics of
trade policy.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;img src="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/aggbug.aspx?PostID=174" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/tags/Scholarship/default.aspx">Scholarship</category><category domain="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/tags/oona+hathaway/default.aspx">oona hathaway</category></item><item><title>Review of Kahn, Out of Eden: Adam and Eve and the Problem of Evil</title><link>http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/2008/05/09/review-of-kahn-out-of-eden-adam-and-eve-and-the-problem-of-evil.aspx</link><pubDate>Fri, 09 May 2008 20:41:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">3dba5dbf-cc88-412d-a5e1-dc96318a2d17:172</guid><dc:creator>John Nann</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><description>&lt;p&gt;Nice review in the Times Literary Supplement by John Habgood, the former Archbishop of York:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;
A book which begins with the sentence “Evil makes us Human” must surely compel
attention. This is no ordinary account of what is usually meant by the
problem of evil, where the main emphasis is on justifying the ways of God to
man. Instead, Paul W. Kahn’s aim is to explore the nature of evil itself. He
interprets it, not just as doing or experiencing bad things, but as “a way
of being in the world”. Evil, he claims, is about making ourselves the
source of our own meaning, a meaning inevitably negated by death, the
certainty of which gives urgency and depth to the way life is lived. It is
this consciousness of our mortality, and the refusal to accept its 
implications, which can lead to the worship of false gods. Ascribing
ultimate value to what is essentially nothing at all results in what he
calls “a pathology of the will”. Personal evil is essentially about
wilfulness rather than reason, nor can it be subsumed within our rational
understanding. Evil in this sense, as part of our humanity, is not a
fashionable concept, but we have good reasons to recognize it, not least in
ourselves.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;--- &lt;a href="http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/the_tls/article3901509.ece"&gt;more&lt;/a&gt; ---&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;img src="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/aggbug.aspx?PostID=172" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/tags/Scholarship/default.aspx">Scholarship</category><category domain="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/tags/paul+kahn/default.aspx">paul kahn</category></item><item><title>Faculty Publications</title><link>http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/2008/05/09/faculty-publications.aspx</link><pubDate>Fri, 09 May 2008 20:35:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">3dba5dbf-cc88-412d-a5e1-dc96318a2d17:171</guid><dc:creator>John Nann</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><description>&lt;p&gt;Three recent law review articles by members of the faculty:&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Ian Ayres and Gideon Parchomovsky,&amp;nbsp; Tradable Patent Rights,   60 Stan. L. Rev. 863 (2007)&lt;br /&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Daniel Markovits, &lt;font face="Verdana"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:10pt;"&gt;Luck Egalitarianism and Political Solidarity, 9 Theoretical Inquiries L. 271 (2008)&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;font face="Verdana"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:10pt;"&gt;Judith Resnik, No Daubert Hearing Necessary: The Extraordinary Expertise of
Margaret Berger, 16 J.L.
&amp;amp; Pol&amp;#39;y 6 (2007)&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;font face="Verdana"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:10pt;"&gt;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/aggbug.aspx?PostID=171" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/tags/Scholarship/default.aspx">Scholarship</category><category domain="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/tags/judith+resnik/default.aspx">judith resnik</category><category domain="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/tags/daniel+markovits/default.aspx">daniel markovits</category><category domain="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/tags/ian+ayres/default.aspx">ian ayres</category></item><item><title>Law Day, May 1st 2008</title><link>http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/2008/05/01/law-day-may-1st-2008.aspx</link><pubDate>Thu, 01 May 2008 16:44:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">3dba5dbf-cc88-412d-a5e1-dc96318a2d17:163</guid><dc:creator>ct286</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><description>&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;The theme of this year&amp;#39;s Law Day, &amp;quot;The Rule of Law:
 Foundation for Communities of Opportunity and Equity,&amp;quot; recognizes the
fundamental role that the rule of law plays in preserving liberty in our
Nation and in all free societies.&amp;nbsp; View President Bush&amp;#39;s proclamation &lt;a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/05/20080501.html"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/aggbug.aspx?PostID=163" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>Law Professor Accuses Students of Defamation</title><link>http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/2008/05/01/law-professor-accuses-students-of-defamation.aspx</link><pubDate>Thu, 01 May 2008 14:52:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">3dba5dbf-cc88-412d-a5e1-dc96318a2d17:162</guid><dc:creator>ct286</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><description>&lt;p&gt;By LYNNLEY BROWNING, New York Times.&lt;br /&gt;Published: May 1, 2008.&lt;/p&gt;

	
&lt;div id="summary" class="story"&gt;At the University of Arkansas in Little
Rock, a law professor has sued two of his students, alleging that they
defamed him by unfairly describing him as a racist.&amp;nbsp; Read more &lt;a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/01/us/01legal.html?ex=1367380800&amp;amp;en=7125f39c28f1ce21&amp;amp;ei=5124&amp;amp;partner=permalink&amp;amp;exprod=permalink"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/aggbug.aspx?PostID=162" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>Were patent appeals judges unconstitutionally appointed?</title><link>http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/2008/04/28/could-constitutional-flaw-unravel-eight-years-of-patent-board-rulings.aspx</link><pubDate>Mon, 28 Apr 2008 13:42:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">3dba5dbf-cc88-412d-a5e1-dc96318a2d17:158</guid><dc:creator>ct286</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><description>&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office may have a major problem on its
hands -- the possibly unconstitutional appointment of nearly two-thirds
of its patent appeals judges.&amp;nbsp; Read more about this case &lt;a href="http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1209114346908"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp; &lt;span id="mDocumentText_ctl00_mTextDisplay" class="DocumentBody"&gt;Translogic Technology, &lt;/span&gt;a company whose patent was rejected, is raising this issue in a petition to the &lt;span id="mDocumentText_ctl00_mTextDisplay" class="DocumentBody"&gt;&lt;/span&gt;U.S. Supreme Court.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; A copy of the petition is available for viewing at the Law Library Reference Desk.&lt;br /&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/aggbug.aspx?PostID=158" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/tags/Practice/default.aspx">Practice</category><category domain="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/tags/U.S.+Supreme+Court/default.aspx">U.S. Supreme Court</category><category domain="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/tags/Judicial+Reform/default.aspx">Judicial Reform</category><category domain="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/tags/Patents/default.aspx">Patents</category></item><item><title>Lawyers Open Their File Cabinets for a Web Resource</title><link>http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/2008/04/28/lawyers-open-their-file-cabinets-for-a-web-resource.aspx</link><pubDate>Mon, 28 Apr 2008 13:24:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">3dba5dbf-cc88-412d-a5e1-dc96318a2d17:157</guid><dc:creator>ct286</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><description>&lt;div id="byline" class="byline"&gt;By ANNE EISENBERG, New York Times&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div id="pubdate" class="timestamp"&gt;Published: April 27, 2008.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div id="pubdate" class="timestamp"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;	
&lt;div id="summary" class="story"&gt;Services are appearing on the Web that
may make it easier for consumers to do their own preliminary homework
on legal issues before seeking professional help.&amp;nbsp; Read more &lt;a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/27/technology/27novel.html?ex=1366948800&amp;amp;en=382b42e2594cf3b7&amp;amp;ei=5124&amp;amp;partner=permalink&amp;amp;exprod=permalink"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/aggbug.aspx?PostID=157" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/tags/Practice/default.aspx">Practice</category><category domain="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/tags/Open+Access/default.aspx">Open Access</category></item><item><title>House Hearing on Executive Branch Electronic Communications Preservation</title><link>http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/2008/04/25/house-hearing-on-executive-branch-electronic-communications-preservation.aspx</link><pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2008 13:31:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">3dba5dbf-cc88-412d-a5e1-dc96318a2d17:155</guid><dc:creator>ct286</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><description>&lt;p&gt;The House Oversight and Government Reform’s &lt;a href="http://informationpolicy.oversight.house.gov/"&gt;Subcommittee on Information Policy, Census, and National Archives&lt;/a&gt; held a hearing yesterday to address  the &lt;i&gt;Electronic Communications Preservation Act&lt;/i&gt; (&lt;a href="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:h.r.05811:"&gt;H.R. 5811&lt;/a&gt;), sponsored by Chairman of the Committee &lt;a href="http://www.house.gov/waxman/"&gt;Henry Waxman&lt;/a&gt; (D-CA-30), Chairman of the Subcommittee &lt;a href="http://lacyclay.house.gov/"&gt;Wm. Lacy Clay&lt;/a&gt; (D-MO-1), and &lt;a href="http://hodes.house.gov/"&gt;Rep. Paul Hodes&lt;/a&gt;
(D-NH-2). The bill directs the Archivist of the United States to
establish standards for the capture, management, retrieval, and
preservation of White House e-mails and other electronic
communications. The Committee’s Press Release, summary of the bill, and
full text of the bill is available &lt;a href="http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=1875"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&amp;nbsp; Transcripts from the hearing are posted &lt;a href="http://informationpolicy.oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=1900"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Under the Federal Records Act, &lt;span class="contentText"&gt;the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA) is responsible for assisting Federal agencies in
maintaining adequate and proper documentation of federal records.&amp;nbsp; Given the increased use of electronic communications, federal agencies are potentially creating &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="contentText"&gt;(and discarding)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="contentText"&gt; messages that have the status of federal records.&amp;nbsp; According to a new &lt;a href="http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-08-699T"&gt;report&lt;/a&gt; issued by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), when GAO reviewed the e-mail management practices of four senior agencies officials they found that, although the agencies’ e-mail records management policies addressed the regulatory requirements, these requirements were not always met for the senior officials. &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;&lt;span style="font-family:Verdana;"&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/aggbug.aspx?PostID=155" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/tags/Archives/default.aspx">Archives</category><category domain="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/tags/Open+Access/default.aspx">Open Access</category><category domain="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/tags/technology/default.aspx">technology</category></item><item><title>New SSRN Working Paper</title><link>http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/2008/04/24/new-ssrn-working-paper.aspx</link><pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2008 20:32:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">3dba5dbf-cc88-412d-a5e1-dc96318a2d17:153</guid><dc:creator>John Nann</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><description>
&lt;p&gt;Dan Kahan, &lt;a href="http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1123807"&gt;Cultural Cognition as a Conception of the Cultural Theory of Risk&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;Abstract&lt;/b&gt;: Cultural cognition refers to the tendency of individuals to form
beliefs about societal dangers that reflect and reinforce their
commitments to particular visions of the ideal society. Cultural
cognition is one of a variety of approaches designed to empirically
test the cultural theory of risk associated with Mary Douglas and Aaron
Wildavsky. This commentary discusses the distinctive features of
cultural cognition as a conception of cultural theory, including its
cultural worldview measures; its emphasis on social psychological
mechanisms that connect individuals&amp;#39; risk perceptions to their cultural
outlooks; and its practical goal of enabling self-conscious management
of popular risk perceptions in the interest of promoting scientifically
sound public policies that are congenial to persons of diverse outlooks.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;

					  
					   
					  
					  
					  					  &lt;img src="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/aggbug.aspx?PostID=153" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/tags/Scholarship/default.aspx">Scholarship</category><category domain="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/tags/dan+kahan/default.aspx">dan kahan</category></item><item><title>Military Tribunals</title><link>http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/2008/04/23/military-tribunals.aspx</link><pubDate>Wed, 23 Apr 2008 15:38:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">3dba5dbf-cc88-412d-a5e1-dc96318a2d17:151</guid><dc:creator>John Nann</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><description>&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;The Law Library of Congress is hosting &lt;a href="http://www.loc.gov/law/help/usconlaw/constitutional_law.html#military"&gt;two articles&lt;/a&gt; by Louis Fisher on Constitutional problems raised by the military commissions/tribunals authorized by President Bush.&amp;nbsp; The site also provides reference to two book-length treatments of the subject by Fisher.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/aggbug.aspx?PostID=151" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/tags/Constitution/default.aspx">Constitution</category><category domain="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/tags/law+library+of+congress/default.aspx">law library of congress</category><category domain="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/tags/military+tribunals/default.aspx">military tribunals</category></item><item><title>New Article</title><link>http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/2008/04/21/new-article.aspx</link><pubDate>Mon, 21 Apr 2008 18:34:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">3dba5dbf-cc88-412d-a5e1-dc96318a2d17:149</guid><dc:creator>John Nann</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><description>&lt;p&gt;A new article by a member of our faculty has come to our attention.&amp;nbsp; Here is the opening: &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;In December 2006, the British Serious Fraud Office (SFO) closed an investigation into a case that has become a vexing test for the emerging international anti-corruption regime. The centerpiece of this regime is the Anti-Bribery Convention negotiated under the auspices of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). The Convention—to which Britain is a party—requires the State Parties to outlaw overseas bribery. In closing the investigation into corruption involving a large defense procurement contract (dubbed Al Yamamah or “the dove”), the SFO and the Attorney General cited national security concerns.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;font face="Verdana"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:10pt;"&gt;Susan Rose-Ackerman and Benjamin
Billa, &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;font face="Verdana"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:10pt;"&gt;Treaties and National Security, 40 N.Y.U. J. Int&amp;#39;l L. &amp;amp;
Pol. 437 (2008).&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;The NYU Journal of Law and Politics has &lt;a href="http://www3.law.nyu.edu/journals/jilp/issues/40/NYI202.pdf"&gt;more&lt;/a&gt; (the whole article :-)).&lt;br /&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/aggbug.aspx?PostID=149" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/tags/Treaties/default.aspx">Treaties</category><category domain="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/tags/international+law/default.aspx">international law</category><category domain="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/tags/Rose-Ackerman/default.aspx">Rose-Ackerman</category></item><item><title>Info you need about the law library this summer</title><link>http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/2008/04/18/info-you-need-about-the-law-library-this-summer.aspx</link><pubDate>Sat, 19 Apr 2008 00:29:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">3dba5dbf-cc88-412d-a5e1-dc96318a2d17:146</guid><dc:creator>ct286</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><description>&lt;p style="margin:0px;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;The Yale Law Library Reference Department is hosting two brief, convenient and informative &lt;b&gt;&lt;span style="color:blue;"&gt;Out-the-Door&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/b&gt; sessions.&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/span&gt;Come get the information you need about using the law library – and what the library staff can do for you – this summer.&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/span&gt;The half-hour sessions are very informal.&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/span&gt;Just show up, pick up a handout, ask questions, and get answers.&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/span&gt;You’ll be in and out in about half an hour.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style="margin:0px;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style="margin:0px;"&gt;The schedule is:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style="margin:0px;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style="margin:0px;"&gt;&lt;u&gt;Session One:&lt;/u&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style="margin:0px;"&gt;4/24/2008&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 11:30 a.m. to&amp;nbsp; 12:00 p.m.&amp;nbsp; SLB Room 109&amp;nbsp; &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style="margin:0px;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style="margin:0px;"&gt;&lt;u&gt;Session Two:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/u&gt;&lt;span&gt;4/25/2008&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 10:10 a.m.&amp;nbsp; 10:40 p.m. SLB Room 109&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style="margin:0px;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style="margin:0px;"&gt;You don’t need to sign up --&amp;nbsp;just show up. We hope to see you next Thursday or Friday of next week!&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/aggbug.aspx?PostID=146" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>New paper</title><link>http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/2008/04/17/new-paper.aspx</link><pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 19:16:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">3dba5dbf-cc88-412d-a5e1-dc96318a2d17:144</guid><dc:creator>John Nann</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><description>
&lt;p&gt;Professor Siegel has posted on SSRN a version of a &lt;a href="http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1120502"&gt;paper&lt;/a&gt; to be published in the Duke Law Journal.&amp;nbsp; The paper is entitled: &amp;quot;&lt;i&gt;The Right&amp;#39;s Reasons: Constitutional Conflict and the Spread of Woman-Protective Antiabortion Argument&lt;/i&gt;&amp;quot;. Here is the abstract:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&amp;quot;&lt;font face="ARIAL, HELVETICA"&gt;This Lecture investigates the social
movement dynamics that produced woman-protective antiabortion argument.
The Lecture explores the political conditions under which leaders of
the antiabortion movement began to supplement or even to supplant the
constitutional argument abortion kills a baby with a new argument,
abortion hurts women - a claim that achieved widespread public notice
with the Supreme Court&amp;#39;s 2007 decision in Gonzales v. Carhart.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font face="ARIAL, HELVETICA"&gt;The
Lecture&amp;#39;s genealogy of a social movement claim begins in the 1980s,
when members of the antiabortion movement asserted that abortion
subjects women to regret, trauma, and psychological illness, a
condition they termed post-abortion syndrome (PAS). My story then
follows changes in the abortion-harms-women claim as it was transformed
from PAS - a therapeutic discourse initially employed to dissuade women
from having abortions and to recruit women to the antiabortion cause -
into woman-protective antiabortion argument (WPAA), a political
discourse forged in the heat of social movement conflict that sought to
persuade audiences outside the movement&amp;#39;s ranks in electoral campaigns
and in constitutional litigation.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font face="ARIAL, HELVETICA"&gt;Whereas PAS grew up as a
mobilizing discourse deployed primarily among women volunteers and
clients in the antiabortion movement&amp;#39;s crisis pregnancy network - a
context in which abortion-hurts-women testimonials had important
expressive functions - WPAA took shape in political contexts in which
the abortion-hurts-women argument had important strategic functions. In
the 1990s, antiabortion advocates sought to explain to audiences that
ambivalently supported the abortion right why women would benefit from
legal restrictions on abortion. As they did so, they fused PAS claims
and stories with traditional gender-paternalist argument, justifying
restrictions on women&amp;#39;s agency as needed to protect women from male
coercion and to free women to be mothers. As a political discourse
designed to rebut feminist, pro-choice claims, WPAA came to internalize
elements of the very arguments it sought to counter - fusing the public
health, trauma, and survivors idiom of PAS with the idiom of the late
twentieth-century feminist and abortion-rights movements. As the
Lecture shows, social movement mobilization, conflict, and coalition
each played a role in the evolution and spread of the woman-protective
antiabortion argument, in the process forging new and distinctly modern
ways to talk about the right to life and the role morality of
motherhood in the therapeutic, public health, and political rights
idiom of late twentieth-century America.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font face="ARIAL, HELVETICA"&gt;The Lecture concludes
by considering the new gender-paternalist justifications for abortion
restrictions discussed in Carhart. With the spread of woman-protective
antiabortion argument and its seductively modern justifications for
using law to impose motherhood on women, Justice Kennedy and the nation
will once again have to decide - not only how to balance the liberty of
the pregnant woman against the state interest in protecting potential
life - but more fundamentally, about the kind of women that
constitutional guarantees of liberty and equality protect. This
question is far from abstract, as South Dakota once again considers
whether to adopt an abortion ban, justified by fetal-protective and
woman-protective argument, in the 2008 elections.&lt;/font&gt;&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/aggbug.aspx?PostID=144" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/tags/Scholarship/default.aspx">Scholarship</category><category domain="http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/reference/archive/tags/Reva+Siegel/default.aspx">Reva Siegel</category></item></channel></rss>