Announcements

Current Issue, Volume 44

Volume 44 Issue 1


No Comments

Here’s a look at Volume 44 Issue 1:

1) J.L.’s Time Bomb Still Ticking: How Navarette’s Narrow Holding Failed to Address Important Issues Regarding Anonymous Tips, by Andrew B. Kartchner, Law Clerk to the Hon. James A. Teilborg, U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona

2) The Free Labor Standards Act? A Look at the Ongoing Discussion Regarding Unpaid Legal Internships and Externships, by Lauren K. Knight, Director of the Career Development and Externship Office at Savannah Law School

3) The Courts and National Security: The Ordeal of the State Secrets Privilege, by David Rudenstine, Sheldon H. Solow Professor of Law, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, Yeshiva University

4) Newborn Screening Programs and Privacy: Shifting Responsibility from the Parent to the Laboratory, by Michael D. Leeb, Staff Editor, University of Baltimore Law Review

5) The Security and Exchange Commission’s Proposed Regulations Under the CROWDFUND ACT Strike a Necessary Balance Between the Burden of Disclosure Placed on Issuers of Securities and Meaningful Protection for Unsophisticated Investors, by Stuart E. Smith, Technology Editor, University of Baltimore Law Review

Announcements

Call for Papers: Applied Feminism and Health


1 Comment

The University of Baltimore School of Law’s Center on Applied Feminism seeks submissions for its Seventh Annual Feminist Legal Theory Conference.  This year’s theme is “Applied Feminism and Health.”  The conference will be held on March 6 and 7, 2014.  For more information about the conference, please visit law.ubalt.edu/caf.

With the implementation of the Affordable Care Act (or Obamacare) and renewed attacks on reproductive health in the United States, the time is right to consider the relationship between feminism and health across multiple dimensions.  This conference seeks to explore the intersections between feminist legal theory and physical, mental, public, and community health in the United States and abroad.  Papers might explore the following questions:  What impact has feminist legal theory had on women’s health policy and practice? How might feminist legal theory respond to the health challenges facing communities and individuals, as well as increase access to health care?  What sort of support should society and law provide to ensure good health?  How do law and feminist legal theory conceptualize the role of the state in relation to health rights and reproductive justice?  What are the links between health, feminist legal theory, and sports?  Are there rights to good health and what are their foundations?  How do health needs and conceptions of rights vary across cultural, economic, religious, and other identities?  What are the areas where health justice is needed and how might feminist legal theory help?

This conference will attempt to address these and other questions from the perspectives of activists, practitioners, and academics.  The conference will provide an opportunity for participants and audience members to exchange ideas about the current state of feminist legal theories.  We hope to deepen our understandings of how feminist legal theory relates to health and to move new insights into practice.  In addition, the conference is designed to provide presenters with the opportunity to gain feedback on their papers.

The conference will begin the afternoon of Thursday, March 6, 2014, with a workshop for conference participants.  This workshop will continue the annual tradition of involving all attendees as participants in an interactive discussion and reflection.  On Friday, March 7, 2014, the conference will continue with a day of presentations by legal academics, practitioners and activists regarding current scholarship and/or legal work that explores the application of feminist legal theory to issues involving health.  The conference will be open to the public and will feature a keynote speaker.  Past keynote speakers have included Nobel Laureate Toni Morrison, Dr. Maya Angelou, Gloria Steinem, Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Sheryl WuDunn, and Senators Barbara Mikulski and Amy Klobuchar.

To submit a paper proposal, please submit an abstract by Friday, 5 p.m. on November 1, 2013, to ubfeministconference@gmail.com.  It is essential that your abstract contain your full contact information, including an email, phone number, and mailing address where you can be reached.  In the “Re” line, please state:  CAF Conference 2014.  Abstracts should be no longer than one page.  We will notify presenters of selected papers in mid-November.  We anticipate being able to have twelve paper presenters during the conference on Friday, March 7, 2014. About half the presenter slots will be reserved for authors who commit to publishing in the symposium volume of the University of Baltimore Law Review.  Thus, please indicate at the bottom of your abstract whether you are submitting (1) solely to present or (2) to present and publish in the symposium volume.  Authors who are interested in publishing in the Law Review will be strongly considered for publication.  Regardless of whether or not you are publishing in the symposium volume, all working drafts of papers will be due no later than February, 14, 2014.   Abstracts will be posted on the Center on Applied Feminism’s conference website to be shared with other participants and attendees.

We look forward to your submissions.  If you have further questions, please contact Prof. Michele Gilman at mgilman@ubaltedu.

Symposium

Privacy Rights and Proactive Investigations: Emerging Constitutional Issues in Law Enforcement


No Comments

Our March 28th symposium examines growing tensions between constitutional safeguard and effective law enforcement in Maryland and across the nation including the validity of DNA databases, new approaches and the latest thinking on witness identifications, and the use of tracking devices after United States v. Jones, with forthcoming articles by several of our panelists serving as the foundation for the debate.  Author biographies and article synopses can be found here.

I.  GPS TRACKING AFTER UNITED STATES v. JONES

(1)  Nancy Forster, Former Public Defender for the State of Maryland:  Back to the Future: United States v. Jones Resuscitates Property Law Concepts in Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence.

(2) Jason Medinger, Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of Maryland:                                      Post-Jones: How District Courts are Answering the Myriad Questions Raised by the Supreme Court’s Decision in United States v. Jones.

(3) Nancy Oliver, Division Counsel, Department of Justice – ATF:  Location, Location, Location: Balancing Crime Fighting Needs and Privacy Rights.

II. INNOVATIONS IN SUSPECT IDENTIFICATION

(1) Frederick Bealefeld, Former Commissioner of the Baltimore Police Department:  Research and Reality: Better Understanding the Debate between Sequential and Simultaneous Photo Arrays.

(2) Rebecca Brown, Director of State Policy Reform, Innocence Project, and Stephen Saloom, Policy Director, Innocence Project:  Improving Eyewitness Identifications: The Imperative of Reform and the Role of Police Leadership.

III. MARYLAND’S DNA DATABASE LAWS AND KING

(1) Jessica Gabel, Associate Professor, Georgia State University College of Law:  Indecent Exposure: Genes are More than a Brand Name Label in the DNA Database Debate.

(2) Rana Santos, DNA Technical Leader for the Baltimore Police Department : Why DNA Databasing is Good for Maryland: A DNA Analyst’s Perspective.

Announcements

March 28th Symposium


No Comments

Please join the University of Baltimore Law Review and our group of distinguished panelists for our upcoming symposium:

PRIVACY RIGHTS AND PROACTIVE INVESTIGATIONS:
EMERGING CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES IN LAW ENFORCEMENT

Date: Thursday, March 28, 2013
Time: 10:00 AM – 2:00 PM
Location: The University of Baltimore School of Law, Moot Court Room
Moderator: Thiru Vignarajah, Chief – Major Investigations Unit, Baltimore City State’s Attorney’s Office

Emerging technologies and investigative techniques have spawned a new wave of opportunities for law enforcement as well as constitutional challenges for defense attorneys and prosecutors. Our symposium, “Privacy Rights and Proactive Investigations: Emerging Constitutional Issues in Law Enforcement,” examines growing tensions between constitutional safeguards and effective law enforcement in Maryland and across the nation. The symposium seeks to assemble leading scholars and practitioners to explore, through scholarship and debate, three issues that have once more thrust Maryland to the frontier of law enforcement: the validity of DNA databases, new approaches and the latest thinking on witness identifications, and the use of tracking devices after United States v. Jones.

PANEL 1: Location Tracking after United States v. Jones                           10:00 AM – 11:00 AM

NANCY FORSTER, Former Public Defender for the State of Maryland
JASON MEDINGER, Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of Maryland                                  ANN O’CONNELL, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice                                NANCY OLIVER, Division Counsel, Department of Justice – ATF

PANEL 2: Innovations in Suspect Identification                                        11:00 AM – 12:00 PM

ANTHONY BATTS, Commissioner of the Baltimore Police Department
FREDERICK BEALEFELD, Former Commissioner of the Baltimore Police Department
GREGG BERNSTEIN, State’s Attorney for Baltimore City
REBECCA BROWN, Director of State Policy Reform for the Innocence Project
MICHELE NETHERCOTT, Director, University of Baltimore Innocence Project Clinic

PANEL 3: DNA Database Laws and King v. Maryland                                       1:00 PM – 2:00 PM

JESSICA GABEL, Associate Professor, Georgia State University School of Law
STEPHEN B. MERCER, Chief Attorney, Forensics Division, MD Office of the Public Defender
RANA SANTOS, DNA Technicial Leader for the Baltimore Police Department
SCOTT SHELLENBERGER, State’s Attorney for Baltimore County
KATHERINE WINFREE, Chief Deputy Attorney General for Maryland

Co-hosted by: Criminal Law Association

Archive Issues, Issues, Volume 42

Volume 42 Issue 1


No Comments

Here’s a look at Volume 42 Issue 1:

1) A Critique of Best Practices in Legal Education: Five Things All Law Professors Should Know, by Michael T. Gibson, Professor of Law at the Oklahoma City University School of Law

Professor Gibson has written a critique of four of the central claims in Best Practices in Legal Education, a 2007 publication that he argues can increase the rigors of legal teaching but “barely touches” current empirical research on legal education and teaching in general.

A synopsis of the article is available here.

2) The Romantic Corporation: Trademark, Trust, and Tyranny, by Malla Pollack, Associate Professor of Law at the Florida Coastal School of Law

Professor Pollack has written a piece which casts doubt on the historical notion that “the welfare of large corporations is central to the United States’ national interest.” The piece discusses and illustrates several ways corporate personhood is used to “manipulate” the public.

A synopsis of the article is available here.

3) The “Walkaway Shop”: Long-Term Union Avoidance And Management Decisions to Open New Facilities As Lawful Conduct under the National Labor Relations Act, by Garrett Wozniak, Comments Editor, University of Baltimore Law Review

This Comment develops a framework for determining when management decisions to create new work should be considered unlawful under the NLRA in light of Boeing’s decision to open a South Carolina plant in 2011. The Comment explains why Boeing did not transfer work from one facility to another and suggests that a management decision to create new work should not be considered violative of the NLRA unless the decision is made with the purpose of discouraging union activity. The piece argues that union avoidance should not be per se unlawful and proposes that management conduct be analyzed under a modified version of the test for partial closings.

A synopsis of the article is available here.

4) Estate Planning for the Posthumously Conceived Child: A Blueprint for the Sperm Donor, by Brooke Shemer, Staff Editor, University of Baltimore Law Review

Given the ability to preserve frozen sperm for at least ten years and the growing use of reproductive technology, an increasing number of children are being conceived from their father’s banked sperm after that parent’s death. Whether these posthumously conceived children may inherit through the deceased father’s estate implicates numerous concerns for legislators, families, and estate planners. Under the proposed solution, Maryland donors would complete a consent form at the time of the donation, creating a signed, written, and witnessed record that expresses the unequivocal intent for the posthumous reproduction to occur and the desire to financially provide for the child. Further, the donor would be required to engage in estate planning during his lifetime to ensure a source of funds for the child’s inheritance.

A synopsis of the article is available here.

As always our most recent issues are available on the University of Baltimore School of Law’s website.