Law Librarian Blog

Shortchanging America’s Health 2008

New report from Trust for America’s Health:

"Trust for America’s Health (TFAH) released a new study that finds Midwestern states receive less funding from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) than other states.
Midwestern states receive less funding from the CDC than other states, at an average of $16.24 per person. Western states receive the second least, with an average of $19.74 per person. Northeastern states receive an average of $23.37 per person. Southern states receive the most CDC funding, with an average of $29.40 per person.

The new analysis, Shortchanging America’s Health: A State-By-State Look at How Federal Public Health Dollars Are Spent — 2008, reviews key health statistics and federal funding for public health on a state-by-state level.

Federal funding for disease and injury prevention programs in states averages out to be $17.23 per person for fiscal year (FY) 2007. However, CDC funding for individual states can vary by more than $56 per person, according to ! the analysis. Alaska receives more than any other state from the CDC at $69.76 per person. Kansas receives the least at $13.61 per person."  [RJ]

Spotlight on 2007: RAND Europe Annual Review

New report from the RAND Corporation: RAND Europe’s Spotlight on 2007 is the first year-end review of its kind for the organisation. It features the work of each of RAND Europe’s established teams as well as our emerging areas, while highlighting specific projects carried out in 2007 as case studies. Spotlight also provides information on RAND Europe’s development as a Unit of the RAND Corporation. Selected 2007 publications are listed along with names of clients and collaborators."  [RJ]

Senate Passes Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act

Yesterday, the Senate passed S. 358, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) [Thomas Resources], approving by unanimous consent an amended version of H.R. 493 [Thomas Resources], which passed the House April 25, 2007 by a vote of 420-3. The House is expected to take up the measure again quickly before sending it to President Bush to sign the measure into law. Details at Science Daily. Check out additional resources provided on Human Genome Project Information's Genetics Privacy and Legislation webpage. [JH]

Friday Fun: Project Law School

A parody of Project Runway from the Cardozo Law Revue 2008. [JH]

New Textbooks for Legal Research and Writing Courses

McKinney's Legal Research: A Practical Guide and Self-Instructional Workbook,
5th with 2008 Computer Assisted Legal Research Package
By Scott Childs and Ruth A McKinney

List Price: $52.00
Publisher: West Law School (American Casebook Series)(March 2008)
ISBN: 031418502X
Format: Softbound

Book Desciption: Based on time-proven active learning principles, this workbook relies on a guided, self-instructional model that allows students to learn in their own style and at their own pace, thus increasing their motivation, retention, and satisfaction. Complete with an enhanced supplement for online research and an accompanying Web site, this edition emphasizes the importance of having familiarity with a wide array of legal research tools and strategies from which the legal researcher can choose wisely.

Legal Writing
by Richard K. Neumann, Jr. and Sheila Simon

List Price: $57.00
Publisher: Aspen (April 3, 2008)
ISBN: 0735564248
ISBN-13: 9780735564244
Format: Paperback

Book Desciption: This concise, basic text for legal writing courses features:

• succinct explanations that don’t sacrifice coverage
• step-by-step guidance through the process of writing
• manageably short chapters focused on essential skills
• improved explanation of the CREAC formula (also known as the paradigm)
• innovative and vivid coverage of how to use storytelling in fact statements
• coverage of office memos, motion memos, and appellate briefs
• checklists and exercises throughout

Classes using Richard K.Neumann Jr. and Sheila Simon’s Legal Writing will have access to a unique and dynamic website with a wide range of features, including:

• many of Sheila Simon’s most creative and famous teaching tools
• audio recordings of teachers and writers talking about the writing process
• printable checklists for rewriting
• additional exercises
• additional coverage on letter-writing, client interviewing, punctuation, and more.

Hat tip to Mark E. Wojcik (John Marshall Law School, Chicago), Legal Writing Prof Blog here and here. [JH]

The Law and Politics Book Review's Fiction Issue

The Law and Politics Book Review has published a special issue devoted to fiction. The issue reviews twenty-two American, British, and European novels from the 19th, 20th, and 21st centuries. Including some unexpected novels, this is a good checklist for law and literature collections. Details below the fold. [JH]

Abbey, Edward.  THE MONKEY WRENCH GANG. Reviewed by Darren Botello-Samson, Department of Social Sciences, Pittsburg State University.

Asimov, Isaac.  I, ROBOT.  Reviewed by Susan M. Behuniak, Department of Political Science, Le Moyne College.

Atwood, Margaret.  THE HANDMAID’S TALE.  Reviewed by Kathleen A. Cameron, Justice Studies, Social Sciences Department, Pittsburg State University.

Campbell, Bebe Moore.  YOUR BLUES AIN’T LIKE MINE.  Reviewed by Angela Mae Kupenda, Mississippi College School of Law.

Camus, Albert.  THE STRANGER. Reviewed by David S. Mann, Department of Political Science, College of Charleston..

Carofiglio, Gianrico.  INVOLUNTARY WITNESS. Reviewed by Christoph Konrath, Parliamentary Administration, Austrian Parliament.

Dickens, Charles.  BLEAK HOUSE. Reviewed by R. B. Bernstein, Distinguished Adjunct Professor of Law, New York Law School.

Drury, Allen.  ADVISE AND CONSENT.  Reviewed by Trevor Parry-Giles, Department of Communication, University of Maryland.

Grisham, John.  A TIME TO KILL.  Reviewed by Laura J. Hatcher, Department of Political Science and Women’s Studies Program, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale.

Guterson, David.  SNOW FALLING ON CEDARS.  Reviewed by Margaret S. Hrezo, Department of Political Science, Radford University.

Huxley, Aldous.  BRAVE NEW WORLD. Reviewed by Tracy Lightcap, Department of Political Science, LaGrange College.

Kafka, Franz.  THE TRIAL. Reviewed by Adelaide H. Villmoare, Department of Political Science, Vassar College.

Lee, Harper.  TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD.  Reviewed by Richard A. Glenn, Department of Government and Political Affairs, Millersville University, Pennsylvania.

McEwan, Ian.  SATURDAY. Reviewed by Lynne S. Viti, Writing Program, Wellesley College.

Melville, Herman.  BILLY BUDD, SAILOR.  Reviewed by Stephen A. Simon, Department of Political Science, University of Richmond.

Motley, Willard.  KNOCK ON ANY DOOR.  Reviewed by Walter J. Kendall, III, The John Marshall Law School.

Rowling, J.K.  HARRY POTTER AND THE ORDER OF THE PHOENIX. Reviewed by Bruce Peabody, Department of Social Sciences and History, Fairleigh Dickinson University.

Stevenson, Robert Louis.  THE STRANGE CASE OF DR. JEKYLL AND MR. HYDE.  Reviewed by Simon Stern, Faculty of Law and Department of English, University of Toronto.

Twain, Mark.  PUDD’NHEAD WILSON AND THOSE EXTRAORDINARY TWINS.  Reviewed by Christopher P. Banks, Department of Political Science, Kent State University.

Vonnegut, Kurt, Jr.  CAT’S CRADLE. Reviewed by Stephen McDougal, Department of Political Science/Public Administration, University of Wisconsin-La Crosse.

Warren, Robert Penn.  ALL THE KING’S MEN.  Reviewed by Susan McWilliams, Department of Politics, Pomona College.

Wolfe, Tom.  THE BONFIRE OF THE VANITIES. Reviewed by David Schultz, Graduate School of Management, Hamline University.

What Can You (Legally) Take From the Web?

Interesting post from IEEE Spectrum describing how copyright applies to bloggers and webmasters.  Check it out!

See also: Legal Consequences of Co-Blogging: "The decision to blog collaboratively can have significant legal consequences for the co-bloggers. In part 1 of a two-part series, Eric Goldman examines how current legal doctrines relevant to co-blogging can lead to unexpected (and possibly unwanted) results." Here's Legal Consequences of Co-Blogging, Part 2)  [RJ]

A Survey of University Cost Containment Practices

Cost Containment: A Survey of Current Practices at America’s State Colleges and Universities is a new report from the American Association of State Colleges and Universities:

"Member institutions of the American Association of State Colleges and Universities are witnessing measurable success in identifying and implementing cost containment strategies in order to reduce operating costs.  Nearly all survey respondents at AASCU institutions place high importance on cost containment, with most having implemented cost control strategies in multiple operational areas. As a result, a majority of the state colleges and universities participating in this study indicated sufficient satisfaction with their cost containment efforts. Institutions rely more on support and business functions in their cost control efforts than on core academic functions. Energy management and consortium purchasing are the two most common areas of focus for cost containment." 

Executive Summary
Download full version 
Read news release

[RJ]

The Web Development Cheat Sheet Cheat Sheet

Check out Top 100 Lists of Web Development Cheat Sheets by VirtualHosting's Jessica Hupp. The list is broken down into the following categories:

• General cheat sheet lists
• Client-side cheat sheet for CSS, HTML, etc.
• Server-Side cheat sheets for PHP, Python, Ruby, etc.
• Blogging
• Others

Hat tip to LISNews. [JH]

NISO's A Shared Electronic Resource Understanding

The National Information Standards Organization (NISO) has issued SERU: A Shared Electronic Resource Understanding (pdf) as part of its Recommended Practice series (NISO-RP-7-2008). The SERU document codifies best practices and offers publishers and librarians the opportunity to save both the time and the costs associated with a negotiated and signed license agreement by agreeing to operate within a framework of shared understanding and good faith.

Essentially SERU provides both parties with a set of common understandings to reference as an alternative to a formal license when conducting business. It's an excellent idea but but I doubt the U.S. legal publishing cartel will go for it without a vigorous campaign from AALL. [JH]

Monitoring and Managing Corporate Reputations Online

Interesting post from Mashable: Andy Beal, co-author of Radically Transparent: Monitoring and Managing Reputations Online (book information below the fold) and CEO of online reputation monitoring tool Trackur, outlines ten tactics that could prevent your company suffering its own online reputation meltdown.  [RJ]

This is sure to become the definitive guide for members of any company or group who want to join and shape the often brutally honest conversation across social media about their brands, products, and people. — Tom Giles, Editor, Technology & Science, BusinessWeek.com

Radically Transparent: Monitoring and Managing Reputations Online
by Andy Beal and Judy Strauss

List Price: $29.99
Publisher: Sybex (March 4, 2008)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 0470190825
ISBN-13: 978-0470190821

Book Description: Radically Transparent is the complete resource for monitoring, managing, building, and repairing online reputations. The comprehensive guide provides a full-featured reputation monitoring and management system. It includes practical, step-by-step instruction in four skills for personal reputation construction: public relations, search engine optimization, research, and online content creation. It explains how to apply these skills to create online content for blogs, social networking sites, and text communication (e-mail, text messaging, and so forth). The book provides background information, research results, anecdotal evidence, case studies, and practical strategies. It also emphasizes Internet research techniques for identifying and monitoring online identities and features exercises that reinforce key discussions.

Part I explores this new era of transparency and its implications for companies and individuals. Part II reveals the best online reputation management tools and techniques. It explains the what, when, and how of reputation monitoring and explores how to leverage social media to build positive buzz, use search engines to your advantage, and communicate effectively using everything from emails and IMs to blogs and social networks. Part III shows how to track, manage, and repair your online reputation. It explores various tracking methods, provides strategies and techniques when reputation repair is in order, and concludes with a concrete, seven-step action plan for successful and ongoing online reputation management.

Using step-by-step instruction and tested techniques, the expert authors unveil a detailed blueprint for building, managing, monitoring, and repairing your reputation. They detail important public relations, search engine optimization, research, and online content creation strategies and provide a seven-step action plan so that you can develop the skills necessary to monitor and manage your reputation. You'll learn how to:

• Navigate the new rules of engagement in a transparent world
• Define who you are and develop your personal or corporate brand
• Create positive PR buzz with your online content
• Gain visibility in web search results and harness SEO tools
• Understand the pros and cons of e-mail before you hit "Send"
• Use the latest Internet tracking methods and understand how information spreads online
• Apply solid strategies for reputation repair when things go wrong

Professional Reading: From Sovereignty to Jurisdiction in the Early Republic

Alison Lacroix (Chicago) has posted The New Wheel in the Federal Machine: From Sovereignty to Jurisdiction in the Early Republic in SSRN. Here's the abstract:

The years between 1787 and 1802 witnessed a transformation in American federal theory: from the focus on legislative authority that had occupied constitutional thinkers since the colonial period to a new emphasis on jurisdiction and a corresponding institutional preoccupation with courts. This shift is evident in the decades-long debate concerning the nature and scope of the federal judicial power, which saw repeated efforts by jurists and statecrafters to establish the proper jurisdictional arrangement to mediate between the multiple levels of government set forth in the Constitution. The fruits of these struggles to cement the practical and ideological meanings of federalism were the judiciary acts of 1789 and 1801. The two acts have received remarkably disparate treatment from scholars, with the 1789 act heralded as the basis of the federal judicial system and the 1801 act largely regarded as an embarrassment notable only for its role in the partisan conflict surrounding the election of 1800.

Instead of lionizing the 1789 act and attempting to excuse or dismiss the 1801 act, however, I read the two together to offer new insights into these crucial decades. In the 1801 act, Federalists sought to revive the colonial idea of subject-matter jurisdiction by establishing broad federal jurisdiction, including granting arising under jurisdiction to the federal courts and easing the requirements for removal of cases from state to federal court. The election of 1800 and the ensuing repeal of the 1801 act, however, spelled the demise of this idea of jurisdiction and a return to the type of concurrence and overlap among levels of government that had characterized the system set up by the 1789 act. As a chapter in my forthcoming book on the history of the American federal idea, this essay challenges the assumption underlying some modern federalism scholarship that nationalization through the federal judiciary is a relatively new, post-1937 phenomenon. My argument demonstrates the anachronistic nature of such assumptions by highlighting the centrality of the judiciary to early republican debates concerning the scope and extent of national power.

2008 Law School Summer Boot Camp for Students of Color

The  Summer Boot Camp is an online distance learning program designed to provide that intense preparation for law students of color.  The Boot Camp teachs students to study effectively for law school, introduces students to the writing, thinking and test-taking skills needed to excel on law school exams, and builds a network of academic support that crosses school boundaries.  The participants will work on the study skills, strategies and techniques they will need to achieve their goals as law students.  This is a 100 hour online program (fee: $600). Admission is on a rolling basis until the program is filled.  Because of the intense nature of this program it is important that students start as early in the summer as possible, preferrably by June 1st.

The Summer Boot Camp is part of the The JD Project which is committed to increasing the number of black and Latino law students. For more information about the Summer Boot Camp, contact Ms. Brenda Randall, Volunteer Director and Admission Coordinator. [email]. [JH]

Supreme Court Inc.

Interesting article from the New York Times Magazine: "How the nation’s highest court became increasingly receptive to the arguments of American business."  Check it out!  [RJ]

Supreme Court Broadens Police Searches

From CNN:

"The Supreme Court offered unanimous support for police Wednesday by allowing drug evidence gathered after an arrest that violated state law to be used at trial, an important search-and-seizure case turning on the constitutional limits of probable cause."

See also:  Virginia v. Moore (06-1082), SCOTUSblog  [RJ]

Today is Tax Freedom Day

According to the Tax Foundation! Three days earlier than last year but three months later than Tax Freedom Day in 1900. Details including "tax freedom" days by state at America Celebrates Tax Freedom Day.

Hat tip to TaxProf Blog. [JH]

Will Google Remain Evil?

Yes, if the Company gets its way at its annual shareholder meeting on May 8, 2008. Why? Because Google has recommended a no vote against a shareholder resolution for the creation of a board-level advisory committee on human rights. [the Company's Proxy Statement]. As information professionals, shouldn't we be concerned?

Resolution 5: Committee on Human Rights is offered by Harrington Investments. Here's the text:

4.7 COMMITTEE ON HUMAN RIGHTS

RESOLVED: To amend the Bylaws, by inserting the following after section 4.6:

Section 4.7. Board Committee on Human Rights. There is established a Board Committee on Human Rights, which is created and authorized to review the implications of company policies, above and beyond matters of legal compliance, for the human rights of individuals in the US and worldwide.

The Board of Directors is authorized in its discretion consistent with these Bylaws, the Articles of Incorporation and applicable law to (1) select the members of the Board Committee on Human Rights, (2) provide said committee with funds for operating expenses, (3) adopt regulations or guidelines to govern said Committee’s operations, (4) empower said Committee to solicit public input and to issue periodic reports to shareholders and the public, at reasonable expense and excluding confidential information, including but not limited to an annual report on the implications of company policies, above and beyond matters of legal compliance, for the human rights of individuals in the US and worldwide, and (5) any other measures within the Board’s discretion consistent with these Bylaws and applicable law.

Nothing herein shall restrict the power of the Board of Directors to manage the business and affairs of the company. The Board Committee on Human Rights shall not incur any costs to the company except as authorized by the Board of Directors.

SUPPORTING STATEMENT

The proposed Bylaw would establish a Board Committee on Human Rights which would review and make policy recommendations regarding human rights issues raised by the company’s activities and policies. We believe the proposed Board Committee on Human Rights could be an effective mechanism for addressing the human rights implications of the company’s activities and policies as they emerge anywhere in the world. In defining “human rights,” proponents suggest that the committee could use the US Bill of Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as nonbinding benchmark or reference documents.

Perhaps Google is scared off by the proposed committee's mandate: "authorized to review the implications of company policies, above and beyond matters of legal compliance, for the human rights of individuals in the US and worldwide." (emphasis added). But note how the US Bill of Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are referred to as "nonbinding benchmark or reference documents" for defining human rights. The proposed committee could be the first step towards developing a corporate human rights policy. Apparently Google doesn't want to join the growing number of companies that already have one [see compilation of company policy statements maintained by the Business & Human Rights Resource Centre].

Of course, this shareholder resolution is a reaction to Google's complicity with China's authoritarian regime by modifying the version of its search engine in China to exclude controversial topics such as the Tiananmen Square massacre or the Falun Gong movement. When asked whether he regretted the decision, Sergey Brin  admitted: "On a business level, that decision to censor... was a net  negative." [Google Censorship FAQ]

Clearly Google isn't prepared to change the "net negative" yet. In addition to opposing the human rights committee proposal, it should come as no surprise that the Company opposes (again) a strongly worded anti-censorship shareholder resolution. Unlike the human rights committee proposal, the Internet censorship resolution identifies minimum standards for establishing corporate policies to protect freedom of access to the Internet.

Shareholder Resolution 4: Internet Censorship is offered by the Office of the Comptroller of New York City, the custodian and trustee of the New York City Employees’ Retirement System, the New York City Teachers’ Retirement System, the New York City Police Pension Fund, and the New York City Fire Department Pension Fund, and custodian of the New York City Board of Education Retirement System, and others. Here's the text:

Whereas, freedom of speech and freedom of the press are fundamental human rights, and free use of the Internet is protected in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which guarantees freedom to “receive and impart information and ideas through any media regardless of frontiers”, and

Whereas, the rapid provision of full and uncensored information through the Internet has become a major industry in the United States, and one of its major exports, and

Whereas, political censorship of the Internet degrades the quality of that service and ultimately threatens the integrity and viability of the industry itself, both in the United States and abroad, and

Whereas, some authoritarian foreign governments such as the Governments of Belarus, Burma, China, Cuba, Egypt, Iran, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Vietnam block, restrict, and monitor the information their citizens attempt to obtain, and

Whereas, technology companies in the United States such as Google, that operate in countries controlled by authoritarian governments have an obligation to comply with the principles of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights, and

Whereas, technology companies in the United States have failed to develop adequate standards by which they can conduct business with authoritarian governments while protecting human rights to freedom of speech and freedom of expression,

Therefore, be it resolved, that shareholders request that management institute policies to help protect freedom of access to the Internet which would include the following minimum standards:

(1) Data that can identify individual users should not be hosted in Internet restricting countries, where political speech can be treated as a crime by the legal system. 

(2) The company will not engage in pro-active censorship. 

(3) The company will use all legal means to resist demands for censorship. The company will only comply with such demands if required to do so through legally binding procedures. 

(4) Users will be clearly informed when the company has acceded to legally binding government requests to filter or otherwise censor content that the user is trying to access.

(5) Users should be informed about the company’s data retention practices, and the ways in which their data is shared with third parties. 

(6) The company will document all cases where legally-binding censorship requests have been complied with, and that information will be publicly available.

Google's Corporate Culture. Google has already violated it's "don't be evil" corporate code of conduct;. Shareholders can change the Company's direction by voting in favor of these proposals. Prior to voting, hopefully shareholders will review Google's Letter from the Founders: "An Owner's Manual" for Google's Shareholders from the S-1 Registration Statement, which states in part:

Don't be evil. We believe strongly that in the long term, we will be better served—as shareholders and in all other ways—by a company that does good things for the world even if we forgo some short term gains. This is an important aspect of our culture and is broadly shared within the company.

...

We aspire to make Google an institution that makes the world a better place. In pursuing this goal, we will always be mindful of our responsibilities to our shareholders, employees, customers and business partners.

Compelling Corporate Conduct. In the U.S., there are three principal mechanisms for compelling corporate conduct: governmental action (through legislation and judicial enforcement), shareholder action and consumer action. I doubt consumer boycotts (e.g., refusing to click on Google ads) is going to work. Looks like shareholder action won't work either. That leaves government action which could turn on corporate complicity and corporate culture, the twin themes of the above shareholder resolutions.

Perhaps it is time to follow international criminal law standards. Complicity does not require knowledge of the specific abuse or a desire for it to have occurred, as long as there was knowledge of the contribution. Therefore, it may not matter that the company was merely carrying out normal business activities if those activities contributed to the abuse and the company was aware or should have been aware of its contribution. The fact that a company was following orders, fulfilling contractual obligations, or even complying with national law will not, alone, guarantee it legal protection. See John G. Ruggie's recent report to the UN Human Rights Council, Protect, Respect and Remedy: a Framework for Business and Human Rights (April 7, 2008) [pdf] (John Ruggie, Evron and Jeane Kirkpatrick Professor of International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School of Government, is Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General on business & human rights.)

Maybe it is time to follow what some national governments are doing, namely apply "corporate culture" in deciding corporate criminal accountability by examining a company’s policies, rules and practices to determine criminal liability and punishment, rather than basing accountability on the individual acts of employees or officers. See Corporate Culture as a Basis for the Criminal Liability of Corporations (Feb. 2008)(prepared for the Special Representative by the law firm Allens Arthur Robinson)(pdf). See also, Trends in the Use of Corporate Law and Shareholder Activism to Increase Corporate Responsibility and Accountability for Human Rights (Dec. 2007)(prepared for the Special Representative by the law firm Fried Frank)(pdf).

I wonder what our presidential contenders have to say. If we cannot promote corporate social responsibility through shareholder or consumer action, national governments must be persuaded to regain control of corporations through regulation. That's the conclusion University of British Columbia law prof Joel Bakan reached in his 2004 work, The Corporation: The Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power [LLB post]. [JH] 

Directory of Online Canadian Federal Government Databases

The Directory of Online Canadian Federal Government Databases (2008) is the 4th edition of the bibliography of online Canadian federal government databases. This current edition lists 488 databases publicly accessible on Government of Canada Web sites. Some of these databases require user registration. This edition contains 334 entries from the 2005 edition that have been reviewed and verified as well as 154 databases that have appeared since the previous edition. [RJ]

Professional Reading: On the Opinion Limited to Its Facts

Jeff Todd's (Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, LLP) Undead Precedent: The Curse of a Holding "Limited to its Facts," 40 Tex. Tech L. Rev. 67 (2007) [Westlaw] brings the concept of a holding limited to its facts into the bright light of day. First, Part II explores the tensions between adhering to precedent and addressing live disputes that lead a court to issue an opinion that is limited to its facts. Then, Part III looks at what this phrase means. One of the major problems is that courts interpret this phrase in various ways, often incorrectly, such as treating the holding as binding in cases with remarkably similar factual circumstances. This Article argues that “limited to its facts” should mean one of two things. First, when the original opinion declares that the holding is limited to its facts, that opinion announces no general rule and should be treated as dictum. Second, when a subsequent case limits the holding of a prior case to its facts, the process of implicitly overruling the prior case begins.  Both of these meanings present problems in practice-the first makes application of such holdings to current litigation difficult; the second wastes time and confuses lower courts. Part IV recommends that courts be more direct and specific in their treatment of holdings limited to their facts. [JH}

New Law Titles from Stanford University Press

Details below the fold for the following new books from Stanford UP. [JH]

• Files: Law and Media Technology by Cornelia Vismann
• The Constitution of Electoral Speech Law: The Supreme Court and Freedom of Expression in Campaigns and Elections by Brian K. Pinaire
• The Cultivation of Resentment: Treaty Rights and the New Right by Jeffrey R. Dudas
• The Permanent Tax Revolt: How the Property Tax Transformed American Politics by Isaac William Martin
• Global Justice: The Politics of War Crimes Trials by Kingsley Chiedu Moghalu
• Legal Realism Regained: Saving Realism from Critical Acclaim by Wouter de Been

Files
Law and Media Technology
Cornelia Vismann, Translated by Geoffrey Winthrop-Young

Cloth: $65.00
216 pp., 2008
ISBN-10: 0804751501
ISBN-13: 9780804751506

Paper: $24.95
ISBN-10: 080475151X
ISBN-13: 9780804751513

Book Description: Quod non est in actis, non est in mundo. (What is not on file is not in the world.) Once files are reduced to the status of stylized icons on computer screens, the reign of paper files appears to be over. With the epoch of files coming to an end, we are free to examine its fundamental influence on Western institutions. From a media-theoretical point of view, subject, state, and law reveal themselves to be effects of specific record-keeping and filing practices. Files are not simply administrative tools; they mediate and process legal systems. The genealogy of the law described in Vismann's Files ranges from the work of the Roman magistrates to the concern over one's own file, as expressed in the context of the files kept by the East German State Security. The book concludes with a look at the computer architecture in which all the stacks, files, and registers that had already created order in medieval and early modern administrations make their reappearance.

The Constitution of Electoral Speech Law
The Supreme Court and Freedom of Expression in Campaigns and Elections
Brian K. Pinaire

Cloth $60.00
368 pp., 2008
ISBN-10: 0804757240
ISBN-13: 9780804757249

Book Description: Bush v. Gore brought to the public's attention the significance of election law and the United States Supreme Court's role in structuring the rules that govern how campaigns and elections function in America. In this book, Brian K. Pinaire examines one expanding domain within this larger legal context: freedom of speech in the political process, or, what he terms, electoral speech law.

Specifically, Pinaire examines the Court's evolving conceptions of free speech in the electoral process and then traces the consequences of various debates and determinations from the post-World War II era to the present. In his analysis of the broad range of cases from this period, supplemented by four recent case study investigations, Pinaire explores competing visions of electoral expression in the marketplace of ideas, various methods for analyzing speech dilemmas, the multiple influences that shape the justices' notions of both the potential for and privileged status of electoral communication, and the ultimate implications of these Court rulings for American democracy.

The Cultivation of Resentment
Treaty Rights and the New Right
Jeffrey R. Dudas

Cloth $50.00
224 pp., 2008
ISBN-10: 0804758093
ISBN-13: 9780804758093

Book Description: The Cultivation of Resentment is one of the first book-length examinations of how grassroots conservative activists use rights discourse to pursue their political goals. It argues that conservative activists engage in frequent and sincere mobilizations of rights talk—a discourse that includes accusations that socially marginal Americans are seeking un-American, "special" rights that violate the nation's commitment to equal rights. The Cultivation of Resentment finds that such rights talk is central both to the identities of conservative activists and to the broad appeal of modern New Right politics.

However, through an in-depth case study of opposition on the Indian treaty rights, this book establishes that the impact of conservative rights talk is ultimately ambiguous. While conservative rights discourse effectively expresses the nationalistic resentment that saturates New Right politics, it deflects critical scrutiny from the actual causes of that resentment. By tracing the interplay of rights and resentment, The Cultivation of Resentment adds new insight to the prevailing scholarship on law and politics, which typically overlooks the importance of rights discourse for conservative politics.

The Permanent Tax Revolt
How the Property Tax Transformed American Politics
Isaac William Martin

Cloth $55.00
264 pp., 2008
ISBN-10: 0804758700
ISBN-13: 9780804758703

Paper $21.95
ISBN-10: 0804758719
ISBN-13: 9780804758710

Book Description: Tax cuts are such a pervasive feature of the American political landscape that the political establishment rarely questions them. Since 2001, Congress has abolished the tax on inherited wealth and passed a major income tax cut every year, including two of the three largest income tax cuts in American history despite a long drawn-out war and massive budget deficits. The Permanent Tax Revolt traces the origins of this anti-tax campaign to the 1970s, in particular, to the influence of grassroots tax rebellions as homeowners across the United States rallied to protest their local property taxes.

Isaac William Martin advances the provocative new argument that the property tax revolt was not a conservative backlash against big government, but instead a defensive movement for government protection from the market. The tax privilege that the tax rebels were defending was in fact one of the largest government social programs in the postwar era.

Global Justice
The Politics of War Crimes Trials
Kingsley Chiedu Moghalu

Paper $24.95
240 pp., 2008
ISBN-10: 0804759715
ISBN-13: 9780804759717

Book Description: In Global Justice, Moghalu examines the phenomenon of war crimes trials from an unusual, political perspective—that of an "anarchical" international society. He argues that, contrary to conventional wisdom, war crimes trials are neither motivated nor influenced solely by abstract notions of justice. Instead, war crimes trials are the product of the interplay of political forces that have led to an inevitable clash between globalization and sovereignty on the sensitive question of who should judge war criminals. From Germany's Kaiser Wilhelm to the Japanese Emperor Hirohito, from the trials of Milosevic, Saddam Hussein, and Charles Taylor to Belgium's attempts to enforce the contested doctrine of "universal jurisdiction," Moghalu renders a compelling tour de force of one of the most controversial subjects in world politics. He argues that, necessary though it was, international justice has run into a crisis of legitimacy. While international trials will remain a policy option, local or regional responses to mass atrocities will prove more durable.

Legal Realism Regained
Saving Realism from Critical Acclaim
Wouter de Been

Cloth $60.00
264 pp., 2008
ISBN-10: 0804756597
ISBN-13: 9780804756594

Book Description: Legal Realism Regained presents a comparison between the legal realists, a group of pragmatic legal theorists from the 1920s and 1930s, and critical legal studies, a movement of postmodern legal theory during the end of the twentieth century. The book argues for a return to legal realism and the classical pragmatism of John Dewey and William James and for a rejection of the postmodern critique of critical legal studies. It discusses the two movements with respect to three topics: their view of history, their view of social science, and their view of language.

Rejecting the claim that critical legal studies can be seen as the heir of legal realism, Legal Realism Regained argues that, with respect to each of these three topics, the realists still present a stronger argument than their more radical descendants.