Law Commons^™

Are Employee Noncompete Agreements Coercive? Why The Ftc's Wrong Answer Disqualifies It From Rulemaking (For Now), Alan J. Meese

Faculty Publications

The Federal Trade Commission recently proposed a rule banning nearly all employee noncompete agreements (“NCAs”) as unfair methods of competition under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act. The proposed rule reflects two complementary pillars of an aggressive new enforcement agenda championed by Commission Chair Lina Khan, a leading voice in the Neo-Brandeisian antitrust movement. First, such a rule depends on the assumption, rejected by most prior Commissions, that the Act empowers the Commission to issue legislative rules. Proceeding by rulemaking is essential, the Commission has said, to fight a “hyperconcentrated economy” that injures employees and consumers alike. Second, …

The Real Wrongs Of Icwa, James G. Dwyer

Faculty Publications

Haaland v. Brackeen rejected federalism-based challenges to the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) but signaled receptivity to future challenges based on individual rights. The adult-focused rights claims presented in Haaland, however, miss the mark of what is truly problematic about ICWA. This Article presents an in-depth, children’s-rights based critique of the Act, explaining how it violates a fundamental right against state exertion of power over central aspects of persons’ private lives to their detriment for illicit purposes. In fact, the Act’s defenders are complicit in the same sort of government violence that motivated ICWA’s enactment—erasing aspects of children’s heritage …

The Precarious Art Of Classifying Facts, Allison Orr Larsen

Faculty Publications

In their terrific new article, Fact Stripping, Joseph Blocher and Brandon Garrett bring formidable expertise from their respective fields to tackle the inscrutable puzzle of appellate fact review.

[...]

In this short reply I will add to Blocher and Garrett’s illuminating work by exploring a foundational confusion their article exposes. I will first explain why classifying facts as either suitable for trial or not is a very fraught endeavor; I will then argue that this difficulty allows for significant manipulation and the risk of unprincipled application. Finally, I will nod to prior work and forecast future work where I …

Supreme Court Litigators In The Age Of Textualism, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Faculty Publications

The Supreme Court’s approach to statutory interpretation has moved in a textualist direction over the last several decades, but there is little systematic information on how litigators’ briefing practices have changed during this era of textualist ascendancy. This Article examines thirty-five years’ worth of party briefs (over 8,000 briefs total), explores the briefs’ use of interpretive tools (including differences across categories of attorneys), and compares the briefs to the Court’s opinions.

This examination yields several valuable findings. Although the briefs show a textualist shift, they differ from the Court’s opinions in a few ways. The magnitude of the textualist shift …

Aggressor Status And Its Impact On International Criminal Law Case Selection, Nancy Amoury Combs

Faculty Publications

The laws of war apply equally to all parties to a conflict; thus, a party that violates international law by launching a war is granted the same international humanitarian law rights as a party that is required to defend against the illegal war. This doctrine—known as the equal application doctrine—has been sharply critiqued, particularly by philosophers, who claim the doctrine to be morally indefensible. Lawyers and legal academics, by contrast, defend the equal application doctrine because they reasonably fear that applying different rules to different warring parties will sharply reduce states’ willingness to comply with the international humanitarian law system …

Becoming A Doctrine, Allison Orr Larsen

Faculty Publications

On the last day of the 2021–22 Term, the Supreme Court handed down a decision on “the major questions doctrine” and granted certiorari to hear a case presenting “the independent state legislature doctrine”—neither of which had been called “doctrines” there before. This raises a fundamental and underexplored question: how does a doctrine become a doctrine? Law students know the difference between doctrinal classes and seminars, but how does an idea bantered about in a seminar (say, about agencies deciding major questions) become a “doctrine” complete with judicial tests, steps, and exceptions? Taking an analogy to medicine, when does …

Can Judges Help Ease Mass Incarceration?, Jeffrey Bellin

Faculty Publications

A scholar considers how judges have contributed to historically high incarceration rates -- and how they can help reverse the trend.

Patent Term Tailoring, Sarah R. Wasserman Rajec

Faculty Publications

Patent rights are designed to encourage innovation with both the promise of a patent and with its expiration. Currently, patent term lasts from issuance until twenty years from the application date, with minor exceptions. The patent term is limited so that rewards for past invention do not overly hinder future progress. Although the goal is laudable, a uniform patent term is a blunt instrument to achieve such a nuanced balance. Historically, the patent system was not averse to tailoring terms through, for example, individually granted extensions to undercompensated inventors or term curtailment when a foreign patent holder failed to “work” …

The Constitutional Court Of Indonesia As A Post-Conflict Institution, Christie S. Warren

Faculty Publications

In post-conflict settings, constitutional courts have important roles to play despite complex and often competing challenges they face to institutionalize their legitimacy and entrench the rule of law while attempting to build bridges from conflict to peace. By processing political conflict through legal means, constitutional courts can shift the tenor of public dialogue and provide a less inflammatory platform for analyzing conflicts that have divided societies. This article analyzes two seminal cases decided by the Constitutional Court of Indonesia in the aftermath of post- Suharto conflict and finds that despite its young age, the Court addressed lustration issues and a …

Ai-Based Evidence In Criminal Trials?, Sabine Gless, Fredric I. Lederer, Thomas Weigend

Faculty Publications

Smart devices are increasingly the origin of critical criminal case data. The importance of such data, especially data generated when using modern automobiles, is likely to become even more important as increasingly complex methods of machine learning lead to AI-based evidence being autonomously generated by devices. This article reviews the admissibility of such evidence from both American and German perspectives. As a result of this comparative approach, the authors conclude that American evidence law could be improved by borrowing aspects of the expert testimony approaches used in Germany’s “inquisitorial” court system.

Appealing Magna Carta, Thomas J. Mcsweeney

Faculty Publications

In 1999, Professor Richard Helmholz published Magna Carta and the Ius Commune, in which he argued that some of the ideas and language found in Magna Carta provide evidence that the early common law was engaging with the ius commune, the ancestor of modern civil law traditions. This Essay examines one piece of evidence highlighted by Helmholz and more recently by Professor Charles Donahue: that the Articles of the Barons, a preparatory document for Magna Carta, uses a phrase borrowed from canon law, appellatione remota (without possibility of appeal). Helmholz and Donahue pointed to its use as evidence that …

Laundering Police Lies, Adam Gershowitz, Caroline E. Lewis

Faculty Publications

Police officers—like ordinary people—are regularly dishonest. Officers lie under oath (testilying), on police reports (reportilying), and in a myriad of other situations. Despite decades of evidence about police lies, the U.S. Supreme Court regularly believes police stories that are utterly implausible. Either because the Court is gullible, willfully blind, or complicit, the justices have simply rubber-stamped police lies in numerous high-profile cases. For instance, the Court has accepted police claims that a suspect had bags of cocaine displayed in his lap at the end of a police chase (Whren v. United States), that officers saw marijuana through a …

Sentencing In An Era Of Plea Bargains, Jeffrey Bellin, Jenia I. Turner

Faculty Publications

The literature offers inconsistent answers to a question that is foundational to criminal law: Who imposes sentences? Traditional narratives place sentencing responsibility in the hands of the judge. Yet, in a country where 95% of criminal convictions come from guilty pleas (not trials), modern American scholars center prosecutors—who control plea terms—as the deciders of punishment. This Article highlights and seeks to resolve the tension between these conflicting narratives by charting the pathways by which sentences are determined in a system dominated by plea bargains.

After reviewing the empirical literature on sentence variation, examining state and federal plea-bargaining rules and doctrines, …

Either The Law Will Govern Ai, Or Ai Will Govern The Law, Margaret Hu

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

The Philosophy Of Ai: Learning From History, Shaping Our Future. Hearing Before The Committee On Homeland Security And Government Affairs, Senate, One Hundred Eighteenth Congress, First Session., Margaret Hu

Congressional Testimony

No abstract provided.

Biden's Executive Order Puts Civil Rights Rights In The Middle Of The Ai Regulation Discussion, Margaret Hu

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

The Independent Agency Myth, Neal Devins, David E. Lewis

Faculty Publications

Republicans and Democrats are fighting the wrong fight over independent agencies. Republicans are wrong to see independent agencies as anathema to hierarchical presidential control of the administrative state. Democrats are likewise wrong to reflexively defend independent agency expertise and influence. Supreme Court Justices also need to break free from this trap; the ongoing struggle over independent agencies should be about facts, not partisan rhetoric.

This Article seeks to reframe the fight over independent agencies. By surveying executive branch and independent agency department heads and supervisors during the Obama (2014) and Trump (2020) administrations, we have assembled unique and expansive data …

Second Amendment Exceptionalism: Public Expression And Public Carry, Timothy Zick

Faculty Publications

In New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, the Supreme Court recognized a right to carry firearms in public places. The scope of that right will depend on where, why, and how governments regulated public carry during the eighteenth and perhaps nineteenth centuries. The Court claimed that its turn to history for determining the scope of Second Amendment rights “accords with” and “comports with” how the Court has interpreted First Amendment rights. This Article examines and rejects that claim, both in general and specifically as it applies to the public exercise of Second Amendment rights. Although Bruen …

The Superfluous Rules Of Evidence, Jeffrey Bellin

Faculty Publications

There are few American legal codifications as successful as the Federal Rules of Evidence. But this success masks the project’s uncertain beginnings. The drafters of the Federal Rules worried that lawmakers would not adopt the new rules and that judges would not follow them. As a result, they included at least thirty rules of evidence that do not, in fact, alter the admissibility of evidence. Instead, these rules: (1) market the rules project, and (2) guide judges away from anticipated errors in applying the (other) nonsuperfluous rules.

Given the superfluous rules’ covert mission, it should not be surprising that the …

What Would Happen To All Of The Prior Chevron Cases In A Non-Chevron World?, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

2023 Supreme Court Preview Digital Notebook, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Creating Land With Artificial Oyster Rings: Legal Challenges From State Owned Bottom Land To Living Shorelines, Faith Parker, Will Reach

Virginia Coastal Policy Center

The Virginia Sea Grant program approached VCPC to conduct research in partnership with the William & Mary Public Policy Program and a James Madison University (JMU) architecture professor, Jori Erdman. Professor Erdman is researching the viability of creating land with artificial oyster rings based on similar projects seen in Louisiana. Professor Erdman has provided the diagrams of the project used throughout this paper. Ultimately, this paper examines some legal issues raised by the use of these rings to prevent coastal erosion or act as a flooding buffer for commercial or residential buildings. With this goal in mind, this paper addresses …

William & Mary Law School Clinical Program Newsletter (Fall 2023), William & Mary Law School

William & Mary Law School Clinical Program Newsletter

No abstract provided.

Aals Federal Courts Section Newsletter, Katherine Mims Crocker, Celestine Richards Mcconville

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Here Are Ways Professional Education Leaders Can Prepare Students For The Rise Of Ai, A. Benjamin Spencer

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Q&A With Professor Timothy Zick, Author Of "Managed Dissent: The Law Of Public Protest", William & Mary Law School, Timothy Zick

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Divided Court Finds Generic Redactions Sufficient To Admit Confessions Of Non-Testifying Codefendants, Jeffrey Bellin

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Family Research 101: Where To Start Looking, Frederick Dingledy

Library Staff Publications

No abstract provided.

On The Danger Of Not Understanding Technology, Fredric I. Lederer

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Adversarial Election Administration, Rebecca Green

Faculty Publications

As Americans, we are conditioned to believe that involving partisans in the administration of elections is inherently problematic. Understandably. The United States is a major outlier; virtually every other developed democracy mandates nonpartisan election administration. Whether on the left or right— especially since the 2020 election—we are barraged with headlines about actual or feared partisanship on the part of those who run our elections. What this narrative misses, however, is a crucial and underrecognized fact: by design, partisans have always played central roles at every level of U.S. election administration. What is more, partisans are baked into the U.S. election …