Digital Commons Network^™

Regulating Sex Work: Assimilationism, Erotic Exceptionalism And The Challenge Of Intimate Labor, Adrienne D. Davis

Scholarship@WashULaw

Most commentators on sex markets focus on the debate between abolitionists and those who defend and support professional sex work. This paper, instead, looks at debates within the pro-sex work camp, uncovering some unattended tensions and contradictions. It shows that, within this camp, some stress the labor aspect, urging that sex markets perpetuate a “vulnerable population” of workers, similar to others who perform highly risky and/or exploited labor, and should be regulated accordingly. In this view, sex work would be assimilated into other labor. Others, though, take a more anti-regulatory stance. They exceptionalize this form of labor, arguing that because …

The Promise And Peril Of The Anti-Commandeering Rule In The Homeland Security Era: Immigrant Sanctuary As An Illustrative Case, Trevor George Gardner

Scholarship@WashULaw

Despite the broad powers wielded by the federal government in security administration, the Supreme Court’s holding in Printz v. United States serves as a substantial check against federal overreach. Hand wringing by legal scholars over the Court’s reasoning in Printz and the rigid rules against commandeering attached to this reasoning have obscured the fact that the case now stands as a bulwark against the expansion of federal authority over state, county, and local police. Given the holding in Printz, ICE cannot require the active participation of subnational police in immigration enforcement and must instead—despite its previous assertions to the contrary—solicit …

Disclaiming Loyalty: M&A Advisors And Their Engagement Letters, Andrew F. Tuch

Scholarship@WashULaw

Are investment banks fiduciaries of their merger and acquisition clients? If not, what rules, if any, constrain the conflicts of interest M&A advisors may face when advising their clients? These questions are rarely asked but central to the regulation of investment banking activities. In their article Bankers and Chancellors, 93 TEX. L. REV. 1 (2014), Professors William W. Bratton & Michael L. Wachter contend that M&A advisors effectively contract out of fiduciary duties in their client engagement letters, “emerging] in practice as arm’s-length counterparties constrained less by rules of law than by a market for reputation.” They also regard recent …

Conduct Of Business Regulation, Andrew F. Tuch

Scholarship@WashULaw

This chapter provides a survey and comparative analysis of conduct of business (COB) regulation. COB regulation governs financial intermediaries’ conduct toward their clients, that is, toward the actors – whether individuals or institutions – with whom financial intermediaries transact in providing financial products and services. Modal regulatory strategies include anti-fraud rules, and duties of care, loyalty, fair-dealing and best-execution – and variants of these duties.

The chapter describes the justifications for COB regulation, the modal regulatory strategies used and the complex frameworks within which COB regulation operates. It then generally assesses US COB regulation, focusing on the regulation of broker-dealers …

Banker Loyalty In Mergers And Acquisitions, Andrew F. Tuch

Scholarship@WashULaw

When investment banks advise on merger and acquisition (M&A) transactions, are they fiduciaries of their clients, gatekeepers for investors, or simply arm’s-length counterparties with no other-regarding duties? Scholars have generally treated M&A advisors as arm’s-length counterparties, putting faith in the power of contract law and market constraints to discipline errant bank behavior. This Article counters that view, arguing that investment banks are rightly characterized as fiduciaries of their M&A clients and thus required to loyally serve client interests.

This Article also develops an analytical framework for assessing the liability rules that will most effectively deter disloyalty on the part of …

Addressing Systemic Discrimination: Public Enforcement And The Role Of The Eeoc, Pauline Kim

Scholarship@WashULaw

Cases challenging systemic discrimination have always constituted an important slice of litigation under Title VII. Early government enforcement efforts sought thorough-going reform of employment practices in major industries. Private litigants have also pursued cases alleging systemic discrimination through class action litigation. The Supreme Court’s decision in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, however, made it considerably more difficult for private plaintiffs to pursue claims of systemic discrimination by raising the bar for certifying class actions. In the wake of the Court’s decision in Wal-Mart, many urged the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) to use its enforcement powers to take up the …