Daniel Crane, the Frederick Paul Furth Sr. Professor of Law and associate dean for faculty and research, was quoted in the Wall Street Journal about the proposed settlement in the case involving Silicon Valley companies that colluded not to hire each other's employees.
Christopher McCrudden, a William W. Cook Global Law Professor, has been awarded the prestigious Doctor of Civil Law (DCL) degree from the University of Oxford. He will receive the degree during a formal ceremony in Oxford this summer. The DCL is considered one of the "higher degrees" conferred by Oxford, which include the Doctor of Divinity, Doctor of Letters, Doctor of Science, and Doctor of Medicine degrees.
David Uhlmann, the Jeffrey F. Liss Professor from Practice and director of the Environmental Law and Policy Program, was quoted in Bloomberg Businessweek and The New York Times, on NPR, and in other news outlets about the final phase of BP's Gulf of Mexico oil spill case.
By Amy Spooner
Daniel Gallington, LLM '73, was in the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001, when a hijacked airliner slammed into the building around the corner from his E Ring office. After checking on his family, he stayed around the clock in the burning building for several days, helping to assess the attacks and formulate a response. As the special assistant to the secretary of defense for policy, he had thought he was temporarily postponing his retirement to help Donald Rumsfeld's team transition to the department. But as the smoke cleared, he knew he was in for something long term.
When you've been embroiled in national security firestorms for more than two decades, that's a given.
Gallington came to Washington in 1982 as an adviser on multilateral and bilateral arms control talks, spending much of the '80s in Geneva, across the table from Soviet counterparts, as Defense Secretary Casper Weinberger's representative. He then served in intelligence-related positions in the departments of Defense and Justice, and was the last bipartisan general counsel for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. He refers to his time in the Pentagon immediately after Sept. 11 as "1941," a nod to the John Belushi film that spoofed post-Pearl Harbor hysteria. "We didn't know what was going to happen next, so we didn't really know how to best protect our country," Gallington said. "And in hindsight, we didn't do everything right."
One mistake, believes Gallington, was the United States' extended "democracy mission" in Iraq after finding no threat of weapons of mass destruction—a miscalculation that likely laid the groundwork for the country's current instability and the rise of the Islamic State (ISIS). "We are now facing an unprecedented terrorist threat that is part religious and part apocalyptic, and I worry that our society is not equipped to deal with the size of it."
Worrying—and making recommendations to fix those worries—is Gallington's job. He is a U.S. News and World Report columnist and the senior policy and program adviser at the George C. Marshall Institute in Arlington, Virginia, a think tank where "we do out-of-the-box thinking that there isn't time to do in government." He has written extensively on foreign policy-related topics, especially involving privacy and cybersecurity.
When thinking about the War on Terror, Gallington said addressing difficult questions about personal privacy is paramount. "I have reminded many legislators that the fourth airplane on 9/11 was headed for the Capitol—and I ask what their views on privacy would be if it had reached its target." He advocates for "more threat-realistic" privacy rights and recently argued in U.S. News that a multinational coalition must aggressively pursue terror groups in Africa, Yemen, and beyond. "…[W]e must, if just for the moment, put aside our lessor differences and drive this evil away from the rest of civilized mankind," he wrote.
Gallington also worries that new private encryption technologies will enable terrorists to communicate in unbreakable ways. He thinks the technology is progressing faster than policymakers' perception and understanding of the threat, especially in a polarized Congress that hasn't yet passed any significant legislation on cybersecurity. "We are the only country that believes the private sector can handle critical cyber infrastructure like the power grid and banking," he said.
In addition, curbing internal threats requires cooperation by numerous government agencies and new safeguards, like the nuclear defense system's "two-man" policy. "I'm not sure which are more dangerous, internal or external attacks," Gallington said. "If you magnify what [former Soviet spy] Aldrich Ames did by a million, you would get close to the damage Edward Snowden or [Army Pfc.] Bradley Manning did in milliseconds by downloading volumes of classified material and walking out the door."
Gallington originally became interested in international law during his Air Force JAG duties in Europe, and he chose Michigan for his LLM degree because "it was—and still is—the place to go for that area of study." Whether dealing with the Soviets or secretaries of defense, writing legislation or op-eds, Gallington said basic lawyering skills of analysis, advocacy, and effective argument are fundamental to his work. He credits legendary Michigan Law Professors Eric Stein and William Bishop with helping him understand not only the nuances of international law, but how to be a persuasive advocate in any arena.
Now in his dual roles of think tank analyst and journalist, Gallington feels a continuing responsibility to suggest occasionally controversial ideas that spark debate and get people to consider issues creatively and unemotionally. "If you're right too often and too early in Washington, nobody wants you in the room," he said. "But I'm usually in the room with my ideas—whether in person or not."
If you haven't visited Michigan Law's Alumni and Friends website recently, we invite you to take a look. Our refreshed site offers increased emphasis on alumni stories and streamlined navigation. Bookmark us and visit often for the latest alumni news and upcoming events.
Have you authored a new book recently? The Law Library maintains the Alumni in the Law Collection, consisting of both fiction and nonfiction works that are authored or edited by alumni. Please consider donating a copy when you are published. When doing so, indicate your class year and degree earned, as the library will add this information to the catalog record and on the gift plate in the book. Donations should be addressed to:
University of Michigan Law Library
801 Monroe St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1210
Looking to spruce up your wardrobe? The Law School and the M Den are proud to offer specialized Michigan Law apparel online through the MLaw Marketplace. A percentage of all sales on both MLaw Marketplace and the general M Den website (when it's accessed through MLaw Marketplace) comes back to the Law School to help support the activities of our student groups.
Feb. 19: Chicago Alumni Club Launch Party
By Lori Atherton
Ruth Bader Ginsburg, associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, will present the University of Michigan's 2015 Tanner Lecture on Human Values on Friday, Feb. 6, from 10 to 11:30 a.m. at Hill Auditorium in Ann Arbor.
"A Conversation with Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg" is open to Law School students, faculty, and staff, as well as members of the general public, including alumni.
Tickets are required for the event and will be available to the general public on a first-come, first-served basis beginning Monday, Feb. 2. View ticket information.
The conversation with Justice Ginsburg will be moderated by two of her former law clerks, who are now members of the Michigan Law faculty: Kate Andrias, an assistant professor of law, and Scott Hershovitz, a professor of law and philosophy, who also directs the University's Law and Ethics Program, which is sponsoring the Tanner Lecture.
"We are thrilled to welcome Justice Ginsburg to campus," Prof. Hershovitz said. "She has led an extraordinary life—as a forceful advocate for gender equality, as an incredibly successful litigator, and as a deeply respected judge. We're looking forward to hearing what she's learned along the way."
Justice Ginsburg, who has served on the Supreme Court since being appointed by President Bill Clinton in 1993, will participate in private engagements at the Law School throughout the day. In addition to Professors Hershovitz and Andrias, three other Law School faculty previously clerked for Justice Ginsburg: Professors Sam Bagenstos, Richard Primus, and Margo Schlanger.
This will be the third time in recent years that the Law School has hosted a visit from a Supreme Court justice. Associate Justice Elena Kagan spoke in 2012 to mark the dedication of the South Hall academic building, while Chief Justice John G. Roberts visited the Law School in 2009 as part of the Law School's Sesquicentennial celebration.
By Jenny Whalen
Prof. Martha S. Jones has long struggled with the idea of checking more than one box. Her reluctance to do so has been influenced by a lifetime of changing perceptions about her own identity.
Born to an interracial couple a decade before the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on the legality of such a relationship in Loving v. Virginia, Jones, who codirects the Program in Race, Law & History at U-M, crossed the color line at birth. As the featured speaker for Michigan Law's Martin Luther King Jr. Day lecture on Jan. 19, Jones reflected on her mixed-race experience to open up an understanding of how legal culture has wrestled with the idea that Americans might check more than one box of racial identity. (Watch the full lecture online).
"Today I'm going to be asking myself, 'How does it feel to be a problem?'" Jones said, looking to address the same question contemporaries of W.E.B. Du Bois asked him at the dawn of the 20th century. For Jones, the answer to this question starts with Loving v. Virginia.
"It has been nearly 50 years since the U.S. Supreme Court struck down anti-miscegenation laws, the oldest and most enduring reflections of the law's role in constructing race and racism," Jones said. "But Loving still lives."
For students of race and law, she observed, the 1967 case marks the toppling of Jim Crow's final pillar. For students of marriage, she said, Loving offers important precedent, legal as well as cultural, for proponents of marriage equality. For people like herself, "Loving marks the moment when our families, families that transgress law and the color line, became legitimated, permissible, cognizable dimensions of our national landscape. Loving said something powerful and new about our parents and the choices they had made about whom to love and with whom to make a family."
"If American legal culture has adapted well to the changes in marriage that Loving brought, it has done less well reconciling itself to the children of those marriages," Jones added.
Projecting an image of her birth certificate for the audience, Jones noted her listed race: white. It was assigned, she explained, not by her parents, but rather by the doctor, who made an assumption based on appearance—her mother was white and her father, who was black, wasn't present in the delivery room, as was the custom in 1958.
Uncovering the error at age 19, Jones said she remembers proposing that the certificate be amended but admits that she later lost her nerve.
"I knew that neither designation, white nor black, was one that I might easily or emphatically claim, and I had no alternative to offer up," she said. Government at the time had a very limited vocabulary for describing and categorizing multiracial individuals, she added. "The taxonomy of the mid-20th century required that we be squeezed into one box, and it wasn't always an easy fit."
The opportunity to check more than one box came with the 2000 census. It also came with a warning from the federal government: Those who refuse or willfully neglect to answer a question to the best of their knowledge, or give an answer that is false, will be fined.
"I learned of these regulations while teaching a class at Michigan—after I had completed my 2010 return," Jones said. "I can't remember my own state of mind. I thought, 'Not only can't I keep my own boxes fixed in my mind, I'm now liable to federal prosecution if I've gotten them wrong.'" But, Jones added, maybe President Barack Obama, who checked only the box for black on the 2010 census, was too.
Only in recent years has Jones come to identify as mixed race—an identity that is today, as it was in the era of Du Bois, still regarded as "a problem," Jones said. She cited U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy's opinion in Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, which referenced the nation's blurring race lines and the issues raised as a result.
"In some ways I suspect there is no neat end to this story or this talk," Jones said. "There will be more anecdotes and ways to think about how courts, legal culture, and our culture at large think about and grapple with the fact, the possibility, the problem that mixed-race people represent. There is nothing new about regarding mixed-race people as a problem in the United States, and Justice Kennedy adds just one more chapter to that saga."
By Lori Atherton
This is the first time the Registry, a project of Michigan Law School, has documented more than 100 exonerations in a year. In 2013, the Registry recorded 91 exonerations.
"The big story for the year is that more prosecutors are working hard to identify and investigate claims of innocence. And many more innocent defendants were exonerated after pleading guilty to crimes they did not commit," said Michigan Law Prof. Samuel Gross, the editor of the National Registry of Exonerations and the author of Exonerations in 2014.
According to the report, 47 of the 125 exonerees in 2014—or 38 percent—were exonerated for crimes to which they had pled guilty. Nearly half of the known exonerations last year—46 percent—were cases where no crime had occurred.
The states with the most exonerations in 2014 were Texas (39), New York (17), Illinois (7), Michigan (7), Ohio (6), North Carolina (4), Louisiana (3), Maryland (3), Oregon (3), Pennsylvania (3), and Tennessee (3). While these states have the most recorded exonerations, they are not necessarily those where most false convictions have occurred.
Launched in 2012, the National Registry of Exonerations provides detailed information about every known exoneration—currently 1,536—in the United States since 1989. The cases are those in which a person was wrongly convicted of a crime and later cleared of all charges based on new evidence of innocence.