Law Commons^™

How Deregulating Derivatives Led To Disaster, And Why Re-Regulating Them Can Prevent Another, Lynn A. Stout

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

When credit markets froze up in the fall of 2008, many economists pronounced the crisis both inexplicable and unforeseeable. That’s because they were economists, not lawyers.

Lawyers who specialize in financial regulation, and especially the small cadre who specialize in derivatives regulation, understood what went wrong. (Some even predicted it.) That’s because the roots of the catastrophe lay not in changes in the markets, but changes in the law. Perhaps the most important of those changes was the U.S. Congress’s decision to deregulate financial derivatives with the Commodity Futures Modernization Act (CFMA) of 2000.

Prior to 2000, off-exchange derivatives contracts …

The Status Of Trespassers On Land, James A. Henderson Jr.

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Cooperative Federalism Post-Schaffer: The Burden Of Proof And Preemption In Special Education, Lara Gelbwasser Freed

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Federal Criminal Appeals: A Brief Empirical Perspective, Michael Heise

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Although few dispute the appellate process's centrality to justice systems, especially in the criminal context, debates over rationales supporting the appellate process's vaunted status in adjudication systems persist. Clearly, it is difficult to overestimate error correction as a justification for an appellate system. Of course, other rationales, such as a desire for lawmaking and legitimacy, also support the inclusion of a mechanism for appellate review in an adjudication system.

Though comparative latecomers, appellate courts are now ubiquitous in the American legal landscape—appellate review exists in state and federal systems for criminal convictions. Despite general agreement and widespread understanding that access …

Principles, Prescriptions, And Polemics: Regulating Conflicts Of Interest In The Canadian Investment Fund Industry, Dan Awrey

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Conflicts of interest permeate the Canadian investment fund industry. In response, securities regulators have promulgated National Instrument 81-107 Independent Review Committee for Investment Funds. In the view of securities regulators, NI 81-107 reflects a "principles-based" approach toward the regulation of conflicts of interest. This Article articulates a theoretical conception of principles-based securities regulation, one which transcends the formalism of the traditional "rules" versus "principles" debate to reveal a new regulatory paradigm. Thereafter, the author explores whether and to what extent NI 81-107 truly reflects this principles-based paradigm, manifesting the potential to tap into its inherent wisdom while at the same …