Wands Away (or Preaching to Infidels Who Wear Earplugs)

The juxtaposition between doing--what we might call practice --and reading or thinking about doing--what we might call the study of theory or doctrine or both--evokes familiar debates on what a law school is and the pedagogical choices made by teachers and administrators

The Gift of Enron: An Opportunity to Talk About Capitalism, Equality and the Promise of a North American Charter of Fundamental Rights

In this Article, Enron is positioned as a promising opening in the debate about economic globalization and the regulation of advanced capitalism in North America. As a contribution to that debate, the author suggests that there are two aspects of advanced capitalism which call for supranational response and regulation. First, advanced capitalism is increasingly transnational (as distinct from international and intranational). This brings unique regulatory challenges to the fore. Second the regulation of advanced capitalism can be usefully understood as a substantive equality issue (as that concept in understood in Canadian law). In the past, this aspect of capitalism-thef act that it raises substantive equality issues-could be largely dealt with within the borders of the nation-state. But the transnationalization of capitalism makes this increasingly difficult, at the same time that it brings new equality issues to the table. In these circumstances, this Article suggests that a North American Charter of Fundamental Rights might be one answer, or one part of a larger answer. A supranational Charter of Fundamental Rights holds enormous potential for reasserting government sovereignty over corporate sovereignty, protecting already achieved national rights, introducing and enhancing new rights, shaping the debate about corporate reform, giving us (enforceable) minimum standards, and-perhaps most importantly-providing an opportunity to develop a coherent vision for shaping and managing our evolving North American community under NAFTA and the WTO. In exploring the scope and utility of a supranational Charter, core concepts are explored and predictable objections are canvassed The author concludes that we should begin the complex discussions about a North American Charter, even if ratification proves impossible or inadvisable

The Law and the Human

The law plays a role in the social construction of what it means to be human. The stakes are high, especially for those, like the Indigenous Peoples of North America, whose bodies and cultures have been both humanized and dehumanized through law. Listen on Soundcloud. Full hyperlink: https://soundcloud.com/cornellcas/the-law-and-the-huma

The Evolving Architecture of North American Integration

Given its potential significance for democracy, sovereignty, government, governance, and justice in each of Canada, the United States, and Mexico, North American integration qua integration has thus far received surprisingly little attention from legal scholars and social scientists. While an expanding body of research explores the dynamics of continental integration in other contexts (especially Europe) and/or examines the meaning of globalization, regionalism, and multilateral internationalism in a general sense, the specific constitution of an integrated North American space remains largely undertheorized. This Article aims to advance the literature in this area by examining legal discourse as an example of the integrative processes by which North America is constructed as a region. Specifically, it examines a series of proceedings arising from a challenge by the United Parcel Service of America Inc. ( UPS\u27) to Canadian policies and practices in the non-monopoly courier market under the North American Free Trade Agreement ( NAFTA\u27). While explicitly invoking the terms and conditions of NAFTA, UPS\u27s claims call into question the ground upon which NAFTA may be said to operate: namely, an ideational, juridical, and physical space called \u27North America.\u27 The author argues that these proceedings recognize and form part of something we might call integration discourse, installing or (re)inscribing integration as part of a conceptual or ontological framework that plots particular notions of nationalism, regionalism, and globalization in relation to one another; naturalizes a nascent body of integration law that connects and defines national, regional, and global identities; and authorizes specific actors, positions, and foundational concepts that serve, in part, to constitute North America as a distinct-and distinctly integrated-regio

The Evolving Architecture of North American Integration

Given its potential significance for democracy, sovereignty, government, governance, and justice in each of Canada, the United States, and Mexico, North American integration qua integration has thus far received surprisingly little attention from legal scholars and social scientists. While an expanding body of research explores the dynamics of continental integration in other contexts (especially Europe) and/or examines the meaning of globalization, regionalism, and multilateral internationalism in a general sense, the specific constitution of an integrated North American space remains largely undertheorized. This Article aims to advance the literature in this area by examining legal discourse as an example of the integrative processes by which North America is constructed as a region. Specifically, it examines a series of proceedings arising from a challenge by the United Parcel Service of America Inc. ( UPS\u27) to Canadian policies and practices in the non-monopoly courier market under the North American Free Trade Agreement ( NAFTA\u27). While explicitly invoking the terms and conditions of NAFTA, UPS\u27s claims call into question the ground upon which NAFTA may be said to operate: namely, an ideational, juridical, and physical space called \u27North America.\u27 The author argues that these proceedings recognize and form part of something we might call integration discourse, installing or (re)inscribing integration as part of a conceptual or ontological framework that plots particular notions of nationalism, regionalism, and globalization in relation to one another; naturalizes a nascent body of integration law that connects and defines national, regional, and global identities; and authorizes specific actors, positions, and foundational concepts that serve, in part, to constitute North America as a distinct- and distinctly integrated-regio

Brief for Professors, Lamar, Archer & Cofrin, LLP v. R. Scott Appling as Amicus Curiae

This brief is concerned with the Petitioner’s misinterpretation of §523(a)(2) of the United States Bankruptcy Code, 11 U.S.C. §101, et seq., which wrongly maintains that a false oral statement describing a single asset gives rise to a non-dischargeable debt. This brief shows Congress understood that §523(a)(2) simply re-enacted statutory language already having a completely settled understanding that a statement about a single asset was a “statement respecting financial condition” which must be in writing in order to give rise to a nondischargeable debt. This brief also submits that even if, arguendo, Petitioner were correct that a statement respecting financial condition must refer to overall financial condition, Respondent gave statements about his overall financial condition because they amounted to a claim that he was solvent in the equity sense; i.e., able to pay his debts

Brief for Professors, Czyzewski v. Jevic Holding Corp. as Amicus Curiae

We urge that the decision of the Circuit Court should be affirmed because Petitioners were not injured or prejudiced by the settlement--they are not worse off than if the settlement had been rejected. Aside from that, the remaining issue is whether the bankruptcy court had discretion to approve the instant settlement even though it did not strictly follow the priority rule. We believe that the courts correctly decided not to apply the absolute priority rule under the circumstances of this case. We urge that the Rule need not be followed by a bankruptcy court in approving a settlement. Alternatively, if the Court concludes that further development of the record is warranted, it is respectfully urged that the Court order a remand for consideration of why Petitioners were not included in the settlement and whether there was any means for them to realize a recovery in the bankruptcy

Human Being

In this summary, Professor Spitz discusses how the Douglas Treaties acknowledged Aboriginal title when negotiations with Indigenous populations when purchasing land. She looks at how what the definition of “human being” is during the 18th century and how Douglas’ respect of Aboriginal land title also indicated he was these people as people. This diverges from categorizations surrounding the term Indian, and its implication that populations were subhuman and/or a different species. Douglas is still embedded in a larger social and legal structure even as he understands indigenous populations as human when it comes to resources and allocations. Where the white, colonial legal field is assigning human-ness based on legal definitions, the Coast Salish nations understand human-ness as in yourself. Where those who are legally human believe they are owed something, the belief of innate human-ness corresponds to an obligation to all living things. View video on Vimeo

Red River, White Law

No matter how well-intended, advocates reaching for personhood on behalf of rivers in the United States must think carefully about how to meaningfully engage the Indigenous peoples directly affected, or risk continuing practices of colonization. In that sense, the Colorado River case was a missed opportunity to contextualize the claim in terms of local Indigenous laws and cultures. Its dismissal provides an opportunity to reset and reach out before moving forward again