Law Commons^™

Incentivizing Transparency: Agricultural Benefit Corporations To Improve Consumer Trust, Kathryn Smith

San Diego Law Review

In the face of inadequate, often abysmal agricultural practices and laws that enable them, producers who provide the social good of transparency should receive a benefit. Amidst the debate that all benefit corporations should qualify for special tax treatment, this Comment proposes the development of a federal benefit corporation class offering special tax treatment to worthy agricultural producers. By reallocating current agricultural subsidies, Congress can feasibly correct the agricultural industry’s failure to adequately inform consumers.

Mapping Territorial Limitations On Insurance Coverage, Douglas R. Richmond

San Diego Law Review

Globalization has come to financial markets and to innumerable industries. U.S. businesses export and import goods and products; many have done so for decades. Domestic companies that sell materials online almost certainly do some international business. American corporations have foreign facilities or operations. Americans travel internationally with relative ease. For those living in states that adjoin Canada or Mexico, international travel can be accomplished simply by driving across the border.

At the same time, insurance policies sold in the United States frequently contain territorial limitations on coverage that superficially seem out of place when compared to many aspects of modern …

A Survivor’S Tale: Mcdonnell Douglas In A Post-Nassar World, Joss Teal

San Diego Law Review

This Comment examines the circuit split that has developed over the application of but-for causation in Title VII retaliation claims. Following a brief look into the traditional requirements of a Title VII retaliation plaintiff, Part II assesses the 2013 Supreme Court holding that established but-for causation as the required causation standard and surveys courts of appeal holdings in its wake. After examining policy considerations and arguments put forward for each position in Part III, this Comment clarifies the misperception that the McDonnell Douglas framework necessarily proves but-for causation. In Part IV, this Comment proposes that the Supreme Court should rectify …

Are Passive Index Funds Active Owners? Corporate Governance Consequences Of Passive Investing, Giovanni Strampelli

San Diego Law Review

The exponential rise of mutual funds designed to track stock indices has been one of the drivers behind the re-concentration of ownership of listed companies in the United States. Because of the high concentration of the passive index funds industry, the three leading passive fund managers—BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street—make up an increasingly important component of the shareholder base of listed companies. In spite of this however, it remains questionable whether they are actually interested in playing an active role in the corporate governance of investee companies. In fact, although passive investors are, by definition, focused on the long term …

The Rational Basis Test And Why It Is So Irrational: An Eighty-Year Retrospective, James M. Mcgoldrick Jr.

San Diego Law Review

The Rational Basis test is one of the most common and yet perhaps the most insignificant United States Supreme Court test in the history of the constitution, yet year in year out clients and lawyers will submit another brief hoping against hope that this time there might be a meaningful outcome. There will not be.

This article attempts to explain why the rational basis test is so irrational in its outcome, why basic interests are disregarded in the name of judicial respect for the legislative process, and how easy it would be for there to be a better outcome. The …

Ribeiro On Mill's Harm Principle, Christopher T. Wonnell

San Diego Law Review

Ribeiro’s article is broadly sympathetic to Mill’s harm principle. However, it argues that there is no one conclusive argument in its favor. Rather, there are a plurality of different arguments that all lend strength to Mill’s general conclusion, at least in particular categories of cases. The Article begins by noting that the harm principle is not limited to criminalization. In various ways short of criminalization, the law seems to prefer some ways of life over others on what seem to be paternalistic or moralistic grounds rather than any kind of obvious harm the actors are doing to other people. We …

V.55-3, 2018 Masthead

San Diego Law Review

No abstract provided.

Conscious Identity Performance, Leslie P. Culver

San Diego Law Review

Marginalized groups in the legal profession sometimes feel pressure to perform strategies to communicate their identity in a predominantly white legal profession. Relevant legal scholarship describes this phenomenon, for example, in terms such as covering and passing—largely forms of assimilation. The notion is that outsiders—women, people of color, LGBTQ—use these strategies to communicate with insiders—white, heterosexual, males—in ways designed to advance their status in the legal profession. This article expands on that scholarship by drawing on a theoretical framework that legal scholars have largely ignored: co-cultural theory. This interdisciplinary theory describes how non-dominant cultures communicate in a dominant society. In …

In Consumer Protection We Trust? Re-Thinking The Legal Framework For Country Of Origin Cases, Shmuel I. Becher, Jessica C. Lai

San Diego Law Review

Markets are becoming more complicated in an ever faster changing world. New findings pertaining to human behavior and consumer markets constantly challenge traditional legal and policy assumptions. Social science offers a myriad of insights into the ways trust, identity, ideology, and preferences interact and impact one another. Against this background, the need to advance a nuanced legal framework is increasingly vital.

Consumer law policy requires an interdisciplinary and holistic approach. Recent scholarship has acknowledged this need, proposing novel ways to enrich the academic discourse and develop consumer law policy. Along these lines, a growing body of literature examines how notions …

Reconciling Brady And Pitchess: Association For Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs V. Superior Court, And The Future Of Brady Lists, Ryan T. Cannon

San Diego Law Review

In 2014, the Los Angeles County Sherriff’s Department (LASD) joined a growing number of law enforcement agencies utilizing “Brady lists”; a system by which prosecutorial agencies are notified of potential Brady/Giglio material in a police officer’s personnel file. These lists enable prosecutors to comply with their constitutional Brady disclosure obligations—to turn over all evidence material to guilt or punishment, including impeachment material. However, in 1978 California made the contents of police officer personnel files confidential with the passage of the Pitchess statutes. Since that time, California courts have wrestled with the extent of allowable disclosure under the Pitchess statutes, including …

The Duality Of Provider And Payer In The Current Healthcare Landscape And Related Antitrust Implications, Julia Kapchinskiy

San Diego Law Review

Health care landscape has changed with the introduction of the ACA and will keep changing due to the proposed repeal. The only constant is the desire of health plans and providers to maximize profits and minimize costs, which is attainable through consolidation. This Comment advocates a revision of the existing antitrust guidelines that would (1) recognize unique nature of health care market, (2) be independent from the current or proposed legislation to the maximum possible extent, and (3) reflect the insurer-provider duality, which heavily influences the quality and accessibility of the healthcare for the consumer.

Laying Siege To The Ivory Tower: Resource Allocation In Response To The Heckler's Veto On University Campuses, Macklin W. Thornton

San Diego Law Review

High in the towers of academia, the lofty ideals of free speech are tossed around with a deceptive ease. However, as legal minds grapple with heady legal doctrines, free speech has concrete consequences down at the foot of those towers. At this ivory base, the property line between the university and the community blur. Students and nonstudents assemble and deliver conflicting speech that, at times, foments violence. Molotov cocktails, gun shots, broken windows, disgruntled students. All attempts to trigger the dreaded heckler’s veto—an attempt the government has an obligation to prevent. In addition to the public relations disasters grown from …

The Need To Attend To Probabilities—For Purposes Of Self-Defense And Other Preemptive Actions, Larry Alexander

San Diego Law Review

I was not certain I was going to write something for this symposium. After all, I had written a lot on the topic of self-defense, so what was there left to say that I had not said before? I have concluded, however, after reading a new generation of literature on self-defense, that most who write on the topic neglect its perhaps most important aspect, namely, that it is a preemptive action. As a preemptive action, self-defense perforce takes place before the attack to which it is a response occurs. This preemptive aspect of self-defense brings with it a nest of …

The Nature Of Self-Defense, Samuel C. Rickless

San Diego Law Review

What is self-defense? Most theorists of self-defense are mainly interested in explaining why and when we are morally justified in defending ourselves from a threat posed by another. The moral questions here are important, not just because self-defense represents an interesting moral conundrum, but because morality, at least in this case, is, or should be, a reliable guide to the law. So theorists of self-defense often start with paradigm cases—the culpable aggressor, the justified aggressor, the innocent aggressor, the innocent threat, and so on—and try to explain moral intuitions about them with the help of moral theory, whether Hohfeldian, utilitarian, …

Defense And Desert: When Reasons Don’T Share, Kimberly Kessler Ferzan

San Diego Law Review

Assume Culpable Aggressor threatens Innocent Victim with a knife. Victim is stronger than Culpable Aggressor and is able to defend herself by punching Culpable Aggressor in the face, causing him to stumble back and drop the knife. Not only was this action necessary, but also Victim believed it to be so to save her life.

I take it that this is an uncontroversial case of self-defense. My question is whether this is also a case of punishment. Uwe Steinhoff suggests that it might be. Indeed, he states that “nothing hinders an act from being both punitive and defensive. In fact, …

Poor Wesley Hohfeld, Peter Westen

San Diego Law Review

John Wesley Hohfeld has lost one audience and gained another in the century since he published his seminal Fundamental Legal Conceptions in 1919. Hohfeld originally conceived of his work as an aide to lawyers and law students. And law faculties initially embraced him enthusiastically. Over time, however, law faculties have lost interest in Hohfeld, and moral philosophers have taken their place, such that it is difficult to read widely nowadays in moral theory regarding war and self defense without coming across supportive references to Hohfeld. Unfortunately moral theorists too often invoke Hohfeld for propositions that he explicitly disavowed. Using Uwe …

Steinhoff And Self-Defense, Michael S. Moore

San Diego Law Review

I shall first describe what moral combat would be if it existed, separate it into distinct species, and say why it is so undesirable that one should be brought to acknowledge its existence only reluctantly and as a last resort. I will then detail two ways in which rights to do things—often called “action rights” or “active rights”—such as the right to defend oneself, are integrated into standard deontic logic: (1) Hohfeld’s way and (2) the older but still popular Kantian alternative that Hurd and I recently defended. The first of these is compatible with—indeed, inviting of—moral combat, whereas the …

Unwitting Justification, Peter Westen

San Diego Law Review

An assailant is on the verge of shooting a hated rival, Jones, when Jones, oblivious to the attack, decides in that instant to kill his assailant, thereby becoming what commentators call an “unknowing self-defender” or “unwittingly justified actor.” By its terms, Jones is guilty of an impossibility attempt under the Model Penal Code because he satisfies all the elements of attempted murder under the Code. The question, which has divided commentators since George Fletcher and Paul Robinson’s debate in the 1970s, is whether Jones is also guilty of the completed crime of murder and whether the latter is the more …

The Vindication Of Good Over Evil: “Futile” Self-Defense, Douglas Husak

San Diego Law Review

The burgeoning self-defense literature, like that in most areas of moral and legal philosophy, typically begins with and seeks to rationalize our intuitions. I submit that the intuitive judgment of virtually all respondents, at least initially, is that IV is permitted to exercise her right of self-defense, however futile, and scratch WA. This intuition, I believe, is incredibly powerful and robust; I certainly have it myself. Yet quite a few philosophers and legal theorists contend IV is not permitted to employ futile self-defense against WA. Presumably, they believe IV must passively accept her fate without injuring WA. Why hold this …

The Right To Cause Harm As An Alternative To Being Sacrificed For Others: An Exploration Of Agent-Rights With A Special Focus On Intervening Agency, Alec Walen

San Diego Law Review

My strategy for defending the right of non-sacrifice and the connected agent–patient inference is to move through a series of cases, starting with easy cases—clearly permissible acts of non-sacrifice—and moving to more controversial ones. The controversial cases are those in which intervening agency is central to explaining why an agent should have the right of non-sacrifice. My argument will not simply be an attempt to explain intuitions. I take the intuitions on the easy cases to be reliable, but once we move to controversial cases, I think moral intuitions become unreliable. My argument fundamentally trades on two thoughts: (1) there …

Self-Defense And Culpability: Fault Forfeits First, Richard J. Arneson

San Diego Law Review

Under what conditions is it morally permissible to kill someone in order to save your own life—or the life of another who is threatened? There seem to be clear cases. Threatened by an assailant who is trying to kill you for no good reason, you may use lethal force if necessary to save yourself from death or serious injury from the assailant’s attack. Threatened with death in the form of an onrushing runaway truck, you may not save yourself by using a bystander or imposing on a bystander in a way that inflicts severe harm on her. In a justly …

Self-Defense, Necessity, And The Duty To Compensate, In Law And Morality, Kenneth W. Simons

San Diego Law Review

What is the proper scope of the right to self-defense in law and morality? How does this right compare to the privilege of necessity? Professor Uwe Steinhoff’s manuscript offers a distinctive and wide-ranging perspective on the controversial questions these privileges raise. This essay engages with a number of his arguments, particularly focusing on legal and moral duties of compensation.

First, this essay examines how Anglo-American tort law would likely address the defender’s liability in a variety of scenarios, including disproportionate, excessive, and unnecessary force; unreasonable and reasonable mistakes; and use of force against innocent aggressors. It next considers whether private …

Replies, Uwe Steinhoff

San Diego Law Review

Many philosophers who write on self-defense tend to ignore the self-defense discussions offered by legal scholars, and accordingly they often ignore the law or pay insufficient attention to it. In my experience, this attitude stems from a misperception of legal scholarship as some kind of positivistic interpretation of legal documents and as positive law being irrelevant for deciding what the morally right answer to the issues raised by self-defense are. I find this attitude deplorable because legal scholarship, especially in the field of criminal law, is more often than not straightforward moral philosophy; and criminal law especially gives expression to …

V.55-2, 2018 Masthead

San Diego Law Review

No abstract provided.

V. 55-1, 2018 Masthead

San Diego Law Review

No abstract provided.

In Defense Of A Little Judiciary: A Textual And Constitutional Foundation For Chevron, Terence J. Mccarrick Jr.

San Diego Law Review

This Article hopes to help fill that “important gap in the administrative law literature.” And it proceeds in three parts. Part II offers a brief history of the Chevron doctrine and its discontents. It traces the doctrine’s origin and scope and ends by articulating the textualist and originalist critique of Chevron described above. Part III grapples with that criticism and offers a textualist and originalist defense of Chevron. Section III.A describes the textual footing for Chevron in the APA and argues that Chevron—if not commanded by the APA—does not upset the role it envisions for courts. Section III.B describes the …

Update On Antitrust And Pay-For-Delay: Evaluating “No Authorized Generic” And “Exclusive License” Provisions In Hatch-Waxman Settlements, Saami Zain

San Diego Law Review

In Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis, the United States Supreme Court held that a patent litigation settlement where a branded drug company pays a generic drug company to end the litigation and delay launching its generic may violate the antitrust laws. Although the decision ended years of controversy over whether such settlements were subject to antitrust scrutiny, many issues remain unresolved concerning the lawfulness of these settlements. In particular, courts have struggled in assessing the legality of patent settlements between branded and generic drug manufacturers involving non-cash compensation or benefits. This article discusses one type of non-cash compensation that is …

Looking For Venue In The Patently Right Places: A Parallel Study Of The Venue Act And Venue In Anda Litigation, Mengke Xing

San Diego Law Review

Like any other type of litigation, venue is often an important strategic decision for patent infringement litigants. Under the traditional nation-wide venue rule, a patent owner was able to sue a corporate defendant almost in every district in the country, giving rise to abusive forum shopping and the popularity of the Eastern District of Texas. Last year, the Supreme Court in TC Heartland dramatically changed the legal framework of venue in patent litigation, while leaving some issues unaddressed. After a discussion of the evolvement of venue laws and the significance of TC Heartland, this Comment focuses on the Venue Equity …

Culture Wars On Campus: Academic Freedom, The First Amendment, And Partisan Outrage In Polarized Times, Jason M. Shepard, Kathleen B. Culver

San Diego Law Review

After a California community college professor called the election of President Donald Trump an “act of terrorism” in her classroom the week after the vote, a student-recorded viral video sparked a national conservative media firestorm. Critics said the professor should be fired for outrageous liberal bias, while supporters defended her comments as being protected by academic freedom and the First Amendment. The student, meanwhile, was suspended for his unauthorized recording while defenders decried his punishment as evidence of anti-conservative discrimination and harassment. By examining tensions between faculty and student speech rights, the use of technologies to take ideological disagreements viral …

Punitive Preemption And The First Amendment, Rachel Proctor May

San Diego Law Review

In recent years, state legislators have begun passing a new breed of “punitive” preemption laws–those that impose fines, civil and criminal sanctions, and other sanctions on local governments and their officials as a consequence of passing laws or enacting policies that are inconsistent with state laws. This represents a significant change from traditional preemption, under which a local government could enact laws based on its view of preempting state statutes and applicable state constitutional provisions and, if necessary, defend its interpretation in court. When punitive preemption prevents a local lawmaking process from taking place, the state forecloses a unique form …