Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Institution
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
The History And Political Economy Of The Hatch-Waxman Amendments, Erika Lietzan
The History And Political Economy Of The Hatch-Waxman Amendments, Erika Lietzan
Faculty Publications
Reform of the Hatch–Waxman generic drug framework is in the air. Scholars, consumer advocacy groups, regulated industry, and policymakers are engaged in heated debate about perceived shortcomings in the scheme, flaws, and unexpected loopholes. Changes in how the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) implements the law, as well as changes to the law itself, are under serious consideration. These policymaking discussions take place against a backdrop of shared assumptions about the origins and nature of the original Hatch–Waxman legislation — assumptions that this Article claims are wrong. Convention wisdom holds that the Hatch–Waxman legislation was a delicate compromise privately …
The Public Choice Problem In Corporate Law: Corporate Social Responsibility After Citizens United, David Yosifon
The Public Choice Problem In Corporate Law: Corporate Social Responsibility After Citizens United, David Yosifon
Faculty Publications
The Supreme Court held in Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission (2010) that the First Amendment forbids Congress from restricting the political speech of corporations. While corporate theory did little to inform the Court’s thinking in Citizens United, this Article argues that the holding in Citizens United requires us to rethink corporate theory. The shareholder primacy norm in American corporate governance relies on the assumption that corporations can be restrained from influencing external governmental operations. We can enjoy the efficiencies generated by shareholder primacy in corporate governance, mainstream corporate theorists have long argued, because we can rely on external regulation …
An Empirical Examination Of Product And Litigant-Specific Theories For The Divergence Between Nafta Chapter 19 And U.S. Judicial Review, Juscelino F. Colares
An Empirical Examination Of Product And Litigant-Specific Theories For The Divergence Between Nafta Chapter 19 And U.S. Judicial Review, Juscelino F. Colares
Faculty Publications
Empirical analysis of NAFTA panel review has shown that panels reverse US agency trade remedy determinations twice as often as US courts. Recent studies have eliminated case selection and other hypotheses as potential explanations for this divergence. In this article, Probit regressions show that case docket differences, such as type of import or litigant identity, also cannot account for this discrepancy. As NAFTA panels must apply the same law and standards of review as the US courts they replace, this divergence presents serious questions regarding US Congressional acquiescence to the operation of NAFTA panels and encourages discussion of the role …