Chapman University Dale E. Fowler School of Law’s Entertainment and Sports Law Society will present its third annual symposium, Relationships, Regulations & Compliance: Forces of Change in Sports Law and Business, on Friday, February 12, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. in the law school’s Kennedy Hall. Four panels of experts will provide in-depth analysis on a wide range of core topics.

Former San Diego Chargers and Buffalo Bills All-Pro Linebacker Shawne Merriman

Former San Diego Chargers and Buffalo Bills All-Pro Linebacker Shawne Merriman will serve as the keynote speaker. Merriman will discuss his experience as a professional athlete and the importance of protecting one’s intellectual properties, as well as his viewpoints and experiences on the selection of an agent.

A panel of sports team entity counsel representatives will discuss the strategies, complexities and negotiations they face as these entities grow greater in financial importance.

Compliance representatives from three large collegiate sports entities – California State University, Long Beach; University of California, Los Angeles; and University of California, Berkeley – will present on how to ensure compliance with regulation of student athletes, booster, agents and coaches, and what the future may hold in this rapidly expanding field.

Two agent panels will focus on recruiting and solicitation of clientele in college and high school and the issues and practices therein, as well as negotiations, crisis management and branding.

Find more information, including a full schedule, about the 2016 Sports Law Symposium.

Register now.

Chapman University Dale E. Fowler School of Law Professor Deepa Badrinarayana’s article “‘Gatting’ the New Climate Treaty Right: Leveraging Energy Subsidies to Promote Multilateralism” was recently published in Volume 39 or the Fordham International Law Journal.

From the abstract:

In a previous paper, Trading Up Kyoto: A Proposal for Amending the Protocol, I argued that not only do international trade rules, specifically the operation of the World Trade Organization (“WTO”) agreements, hinder international climate change treaty negotiations, but also that applying exceptions to circumvent trade rules is doctrinally difficult and normatively unsettling, primarily because of WTO jurisprudence, the colorable intent of nations that are violating WTO rules in the guise of mitigating climate change, and the challenges to creating environmental exceptions to trade rules to facilitate emissions reduction. To illustrate this point, I focused on ongoing trade disputes involving a few renewable energy subsidies through which some nations are apparently seeking to reduce their emissions. I then argued that an effective climate change treaty should counteract the impact of trade and trade rules. In this Article, I argue that nations should negotiate a plan to phase out harmful subsidies, particularly fossil fuel subsidies. The idea of eliminating subsidies is not new. It has been considered an important solution to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and one that can complement WTO rules. This Article adds another dimension to this solution, i.e. leveraging subsidies within the new climate change treaty to encourage multilateralism. Multilateralism is essential to address the leakage and competition problems arising from the non- participation of all major greenhouse gas emitters. Effective unilateral measures to counter leakage violate WTO rules. I argue that nations can counteract this problem by incorporating into the new climate change treaty a mechanism to phase out harmful subsidies in exchange for a right to provide beneficial subsidies as one policy tool that would promote climate change mitigation efforts significantly. This proposal would complement, and not replace, existing provisions; would comply with WTO rules; would mimic other international environmental treaties, notably CITES, the Basel Convention, and the Montreal Protocol, which have addressed tensions between trade and an environmental problem by incorporating trade measures within the treaty.

Read the full article.

Professor Badrinarayana came to Fowler School of Law from Pace Law School, where she completed her Doctorate in Juridicial Studies in Environmental Law. Professor Badrinarayana researched for Professor Frank P. Grad at Columbia Law School on environmental and public health laws. Between 2005 and 2006, she was a Visiting Scholar at the Center for Global Legal Studies, Columbia Law School. Professor Badrinarayana is also a consultant to the United Nations Global Compact, on issues of corporate voluntarism and regulations. Before coming to the United States, Professor Badrinarayana was a Research Officer for a Government of India-World Bank Environmental Capacity-Building Project, at the National Law School of India University. In addition to research and advocacy, she also trained government officials and legal professionals in environmental law. Professor Badrinarayana was part of a team that advised the Government of India on its new legislation to manage biomedical waste. Professor Badrinarayana holds an LL.M. in Environmental Law from Pace Law School and a B.A.LL.B. (Hons) from the National Law School of India University. She is also a Member of the World Conservation Union, Committee on Environmental Law and serves as Chair of the Association of American Law Schools (AALS) Section on Law and South Asian Studies and as an Executive Committee member of the AALS Section on Environmental Law. Other recent articles include “A Response to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report: Security Regained (Security Lost? The Climate Change Conundrum),” published in 2015 in the Environmental Law Reporter News & Analysis, and “Trading up Kyoto: A Proposal to Amend the Protocol,” published in 2014 in the Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review.

See more of Professor Badrinarayana’s writings.

Teams from Chapman University Dale E. Fowler School of Law’s competition boards participated in two competitions last weekend: the National Juvenile Moot Court Competition and the National Trial Competition.

At the National Juvenile Law Moot Court Competition at Whittier Law School, two teams – Sumangala Bhattacharya (JD ’17) and Laura Lopez (JD ’17), and Caitlin Ramsey (JD ’17) and Susan Nikdel (JD ’17) – advanced to quarterfinals. Caitlin and Susan made it to the semifinals before losing a hotly contested round to a team from Oklahoma. Cailtin and Susan won the title of Best Brief, and Sumangala was recognized as the 8th Place Advocate after the preliminary rounds.

At the National Trial Competition in San Diego, Marcus Sweetser (JD ’16), Breanne Reese (JD ’16) and Kristen Hayes (JD ’17) advanced to the quarterfinal round. Victor Bachand (JD ’16), Allison Grandy (JD ’16) and Andrea Campbell (JD ’17) also competed.

Congratulations to all of our hardworking students!

Read more competition news.

Above: (from left) Coach Arthur Arutyunyants (’15), Susan Nikdel (JD ’17), Caitlin Ramsey (JD ’17), Laura Lopez (JD ’17)

This post was co-written by AJ Jahanian (JD ’17) and Regina Zernay (JD ’17).

On Friday, January 29, 2016, the Chapman Law Review hosted its annual symposium titled Cyber Wars: Navigating Responsibilities for the Public and Private Sector. Over the course of the day, four distinguished panels discussed the history and evolution of cybercrimes, as well as the outlook on our abilities to minimize these incidences.

The Government Perspective: Preventing, Regulating and Responding to Cyberattacks

The first panel discussed the government’s perspective on preventing, regulating and responding to cyberattacks. The panel presented varying perspectives on the state of current cybersecurity, and how it can be improved. Stephen Flores, Special Agent at the FBI, provided some insight into how proactive the United States government truly is in preventing cyberattacks, but also, notably, how the government uses the internet to prevent more physical crimes (such as terrorism). Scott Shackelford of the Indiana University’s Kelley School of Business and Jasper Tran of the University of Minnesota discussed with brevity current models that countries (and private companies within) are following, and which of those we should emulate given their current successes and/or failures.

Keynote Address: Harvey Rishikof

This year’s keynote address, Framework for the Future of Cybersecurity, was presented by Harvey Rishikof, Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) Advisory Standing Committee on Law and National Security and Co-Chair of the ABA Cybersecurity Legal Task Force.  Mr. Rishikof is the former Dean of Roger Williams College of Law, and Professor of Law and National Security Studies at the National Defense University, National War College in Washington, D.C., where he chaired the Department of National Security Strategy. He also served as Legal Counsel for the Deputy Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Mr. Rishikof began his lively presentation by describing the division between technology specialists and lawyers, what he called the “Geek – Wonk Divide.” The “Geeks” are the IT professionals whose strengths lie in writing algorithms, coding, math, physics and computer science. In contrast, the “Wonks” are the lawyers, who focus on policy and regulation. Despite the differences between both sides, he said, the issue of cybersecurity cuts across all sectors, whether public, academic or private, and each sphere has trouble trying to approach this problem.

Keynote speaker Harvey Rishikof presents a “Framework for the Future of Cybersecurity”

He identified three competing frameworks – cybercrime, espionage and cyber war. Cybercrime falls under Title 18 most easily, and the core of § 1030 is authorized and unauthorized access. Espionage falls under Title 50, which governs intelligence, as well as Executive Order 12333. Mr. Rishikof explained that the government is interested in gaining a “decisional advantage” from uncovering information about the intent and capabilities of foreign lands. Mr. Rishikof observed that the internet has created an amazing place for espionage, and the information is extremely advantageous; thus, we can expect the government to exploit the resources the internet provides. Finally, war falls under Title 10. This deals with the law of conflict, and it is driven by the Defense Department.

The cyber world is used across all three platforms, and Mr. Rishikof pointed out that it is not owned by any of the platforms using it. Instead, the platforms are traversing something controlled by the private sector.

Mr. Rishikof went on to identify the instigators of cybersecurity problems, a group he called “CHEW” (Criminals/Hactivists/Espionage/Warriors). The questions asked when an issue arises are (1) who is hacking you, (2) which statutory authority applies, and (3) what your responses may be. In today’s world, the FBI now chases hackers, and guns are likely to “go the way of the stage coach,” he said. Mr. Rishikof described this as revolutionary; agents have gone from knocking down doors to chasing hackers hiding behind computers.

To organize the ABA in order to regulate cybersecurity, admittedly a difficult task, Mr. Rishikof said three major groups – law firms, critical infrastructure and international norms – have been identified.

Fowler School of Law Dean Tom Campbell, Chapman Law Review Senior Symposium Editor Alexa Stephenson, and keynote presenter Harvey Rishikof

Law firms possess a great deal of private information. In answering the question of why the field is so difficult, Mr. Rishikof identified four vulnerabilities. First, software, by its nature, is flawed. For instance, the average length of malware is 140 lines, versus iPhone apps, which consist of hundreds of thousands to millions of lines of code; this makes it easy to bury malware. Second, there is a hardware problem. A disturbing example of this is if other countries added extra hardware in electronics when their companies have been contracted to manufacture technology. Third, people are a vulnerability because they can be used to access private systems and networks. One example is when thumb drives are given away for free to employees, but loaded with code that allows instigators to hack into a company’s systems. Finally, internet service providers themselves can leave firms vulnerable.

Critical infrastructure indicates both our physical and cyber vulnerabilities. Of the 16 critical infrastructures identified, the most critical is the electrical system, said Mr. Rishikof.

Finally, four international norms recommended in a recent report commissioned by the United Nations were discussed. First, a state should not conduct or support activity that threatens critical infrastructure. Second, a state should not conduct or support activity to prevent action by CERTS (Computer Emergency Response Teams) for cyber structure emergencies. Third, states should assist other states in controlling and mitigating cyber threats. Fourth and finally, a state should not conduct or support activity that facilitates cyber-enabled threats of private, intellectually valuable property.

To address these problems, Mr. Rishikof said we have “four hammers” for implementation: litigation, Tax Code (providing both incentives & disincentives), the insurance industry and legislation or regulation.

Regarding the private sector, Mr. Rishikof said the question of where liability lies is driving the issue and solution; more specifically, the corporate world will take action so long as there’s no liability attached. The current approach by the Department of Defense is that if a company has been hacked, it won’t be penalized for failing to protect the information, but they do want information for the investigation.

In discussing solutions for the private sector, Mr. Rishikof recommended that companies have a management risk committee. He suggested factoring it into a company’s plans and budgeting for it. He also recommended a public information officer, and a planned company response in case someone has been compromised.

Mr. Rishikof’s keynote was well-paced and entertaining, filled with timely and relevant information, and sound practical advice.

The Corporate Perspective: Corporate Duties and Responsibilities Relating to Cyberattacks

The second panel focused more on corporations’ perspectives on cybersecurity, provided us with varying viewpoints on the ability of corporations to minimize the incidences of attacks on their sensitive corporate information. Mike Hornak, partner at Rutan & Tucker. described the startling dichotomy, wherein the risks of costly and harmful cyberattacks are enormous, yet corporations often concern themselves more with the short-term costs of implementing uniform rules. David Groshoff of the American Jewish University, described in detail, some of the notable recent cyberattacks that have stymied our economy and even air travel. However, Groshoff’s resolution to these threats, unlike Hornak’s, which suggested hiring external third party experts to handle a company’s cybersecurity issues, detailed internal company changes (such as establishing committees or members of the board with fiduciary duties) that would affect the corporation’s cybersecurity policy. View the webcast.

Cybersecurity for the Practitioner: Client Security, Discovery, and Ethical Considerations

To begin the fourth and final panel, Professor Eli Wald of the University of Denver Sturm College of Law, gave an energetic and well-researched presentation about lawyers and cybersecurity. Professor Wald explained that lawyers, as centers of valuable and sensitive information, are often seen as a “one-stop-shop target” for hackers. Law firms can sometimes be more vulnerable than clients because their offices may be smaller than their clients’, they work with a lower budget, and they may have less sophisticated measures in place to prevent cyberattacks. Additionally, due to increased competitiveness, lawyers are under great pressure to be responsive 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, and as a result, they employ advanced technology and work remotely. This can lead to the use of technology they don’t fully understand, increasing the risk of a cyberattack. The list of those attacking lawyers includes insiders, social engineers, state-sponsored hackers and even governments.

Fortunately, he said, as many as 97% of cyberattacks can be prevented. Professor Wald discussed a number of ways to prevent attacks, such as virus scanners, firewalls, software updates, and better password procedures.

Professor Wald also cited a number of reasons why there is not sufficient protection from cyberattacks, such as under-regulation of lawyers’ cybersecurity conduct and the legal ethics of cybersecurity. Under the current rules of professional conduct, lawyers are not required to take action to protect themselves from cyberattacks.

Professor Wald described three things we can do to address these problems. First, he suggested mandating the adoption of cybersecurity plans in the Rules of Professional Conduct. Second, he urged that the definition of “reasonable efforts” should mean, in the rules of professional responsibility, to prevent the inadvertent or unauthorized disclosure sensitive information. Finally, he recommended requiring disclosure to clients of cyberattacks and data theft.

Scott B. Garner, Advisor and former Chair for the Committee on Professional Responsibility and Conduct, State Bar of California, and Attorney at Umberg Zipser LLP, provided a well-organized and clear discussion about the ethical duties of lawyers both pre- and post-breach, along with techniques and strategies to help lawyers take reasonable precautions to avoid a breach.

Ethical duties pre-breach involve a blending of the duties of competence and confidentiality. While the duty of competence does not require a lawyer to be an expert, Mr. Garner advised that he should probably hire a consultant. The duty of confidentiality is statutory, and is held to a higher standard in California. Additionally, the duty of confidentiality is also owed to former clients. As former clients can number in the tens of thousands, Mr. Garner warned that notice and implementation can sometimes prove to be difficult.

Mr. Garner offered a number of reasonable precautions that firms can take to avoid a breach. He discussed the considerations involved, such as technology, additional safeguards, the sensitivity of the information, and client expectations. Some strategies he suggested included the use of technology, policies, monitoring, and the very important and often overlooked tool of staff education.

Useful forms of technology Mr. Garner mentioned included encryption, access control, firewalls, antivirus software and “kill switches” which shut off the computer if it’s lost or stolen. Policies Mr. Garner suggested included “BYOD (Bring Your Own Device)” policies for the use of personal devices, access control, polices regarding the use of social media and public wifi and a procedures for handling angry and departing employees.

Mr. Garner wrapped up his presentation with a discussion of ethical duties post-breach, which include the duty to communicate, the duty of confidentiality and the duty of loyalty/conflict avoidance.

The third panelist, Tanya L. Forsheit, Partner at Baker & Hostetler LLP, gave a spirited presentation on the ways in which lawyers are currently meeting and exceeding their ethical requirements in cases of a breach.

Ms. Forsheit noted that existing laws (not just ethics) require attorneys to disclose security breaches. For instance, California has a security breach law that applies to a number of industries possessing sensitive information (e.g., health/medical information, social security numbers and credit card information). Additionally, California law requires reasonable measures to protect sensitive client information (both at law firms and other businesses). Many jurisdictions also require written plans. Since these obligations already exist, additional ethical requirements may not lead to a great change in current behavior.

Ms. Forsheit also mentioned that lawyers have become much more tech-savvy. Ms. Forsheit predicted that, eventually, there will be some common law guidance about the definition of “reasonable efforts.”

In terms of requiring disclosures of cyberattacks, Ms. Forsheit said the big issue is what the “trigger” is (i.e. when has information truly been compromised). California has a higher standard. The amount of notification is also an issue; it may be unreasonable to require notification for every suspected incident. Also, too many notifications can lead to notice-fatigue and desensitization.

Ms. Forsheit summarized by saying that lawyers are catching up, but they still have some catching up to do. Law firms, however, are paying attention and know that cybersecurity is an issue.

The fourth and final speaker was Drew Simshaw, Attorney & Teaching Fellow at the Institute for Public Representation, Georgetown Law.

Professor Simshaw began with a discussion of the lawyer’s ethical obligations, including reasonable security, breach notification laws, HIPAA and Federal Trade Commission Act Section 5 – Unfair or Deceptive Acts or Practices. He warned of the consequences of failing to meet these obligations, which can include malpractice suits, ethical violations and a loss of credibility.

Professor Simshaw advised lawyers to take statistics with a grain of salt, as they are often incomplete and suffer from inherent uncertainty. He suggested implementing small-scale fixes, as well as offering training for all staff members. On a larger scale, Professor Simshaw suggested changing legal education to address this, and even the ethics rules themselves.

In terms of generational challenges, Professor Simshaw observed that the older generation may be less tech-savvy, but they will have a critical eye about important issues. Historically, lawyers have had an aversion to new technology, but eventually, this aversion evolved into annoyance, and finally acknowledgment of technology’s usefulness. In today’s world, we recognize the benefits and risks associated with technology, and a competent and vigilant attorney should take advantage of the security benefits offered by new technology. However, lawyers are vulnerable and advised to “practice what they preach” to clients and protect their personally identifiable information. They should also know when to bring in consultants and do so whenever necessary.

Professor Simshaw advised that ethics rules should be viewed as a “floor, not a ceiling,” and lawyers should always attempt to protect themselves before anything happens. He encouraged lawyers to talk with clients before a breach, and to think of security as an investment, reminding everyone that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Finally, he urged lawyers to include all staff in measures to prevent a breach, and to be proactive and keep up with changes in technology.

View a webcast.

Chapman Law Review Symposium Board

Chapman University Dale E. Fowler School of Law alumnus Marty Burbank (LL.M. ’08) recently offered to pay the tuition of 26 Anaheim kindergartners at Rio Vista Elementary.

Chapman University Fowler School of Law alumnus Marty Burbank

Burbank has previously supported the school through donations such as a pallet of granola bars, more than 1,000 notebooks and a power washer, but this is by far his largest donation, expected to total about $1 million.

The idea came when he was shopping for a sailboat, he said in an Orange County Register article. But after a random thought, he opted to take the money he would spend on a boat and give it back to the community.

“Sailing has been a big part of my life. (But) the boat seemed like a real selfish thing to me at that point. This is something significant that I think is going to impact a lot more people than just me,” he said in the article.

Burbank and his wife will provide two years of community college and two years of Cal State University tuition (or the equivalent if students attend a private college or a University of California school), as well as books.

The only requirement for the students is to send Burbank a drawing or essay each year describing what a college education will mean to them and their family.

Burbank is founder of OC Elder Law, which specializes in a number of areas including estate planning, wills and trusts, Medi-Cal planning, veteran’s benefits and special needs planning, among others.

Read more.

Orange County-based law firm Rutan & Tucker, LLP, has renewed its annual $15,000 gift to Chapman University Dale E. Fowler School of Law to support the school’s first year oral and written advocacy competition program. The generous contribution funds the annual award program that bears the firm’s name – The Rutan & Tucker Golden Gavel Award (for best oral argument) and the Rutan & Tucker Golden Quill Award (for best brief).

The competition provides an opportunity for first year Fowler School of Law students to participate in a rigorous mock oral and written argument, building core advocacy and research skills. Students compete against each other before panels of volunteer judges consisting of sitting judges, practicing lawyers, professors and members of the law school’s Appellate Moot Court Board.

Since the creation of the award program, Rutan & Tucker has contributed $265,000 to the school’s advocacy programs.

See the 2015 Rutan & Tucker Golden Quill and Golden Gavel winners.

About Rutan & Tucker LLP

Rutan & Tucker is California’s largest full-service law firm headquartered in Orange County, California with offices in Costa Mesa and Palo Alto. Primary practice areas include business and real estate litigation, corporate and securities law, labor and employment law, intellectual property, real estate, municipal and government agency law, land use law, bankruptcy, condemnation and property valuation, environmental law, as well as taxation and estate planning.

Above: (from left) Fowler School of Law Dean Tom Campbell, Associate Dean for Student Affairs and Administration Jayne Kacer, Rutan & Tucker Managing Partner Steven A. Nichols, and Rutan & Tucker Partner Layne Melzer

With the passing of United States Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, the Chapman community remembers the noted jurist’s visit to the law school in August 2005. Justice Scalia participated in a full day of activities as part of our annual Madison Lecture Series and 10th anniversary celebration. The events included the teaching of a special Constitutional Law course, meeting with the student Federalist Society, unveiling and dedication of our “Milestones on the Road to Freedom” lobby wall, a keynote presentation in Chapman University’s Memorial Hall, and the reenactment of a historic Supreme Court oral argument. In reenacting the landmark Lochner v. New York case, Justice Scalia played the role of Chief Justice Melville Fuller while Chapman law students and alumni took on the roles of the other justices. Chapman Professor John Eastman argued the case on behalf of Joseph Lochner while then California Attorney General Bill Lockyer argued on behalf of the state of New York. The historical archive video may be viewed here.

Chapman law students and alumni join Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia in a reenactment of the landmark Lochner v. New York case.

Above: Justice Scalia poses with Chapman students at the 2005 Madison Lecture Series event.

Professor John Eastman, former Dean Parham Williams, and President Jim Doti join Justice Scalia on stage in a special keynote presentation in Memorial Hall.

See more photos from Justice Scalia’s visit:

Some say that it’s hard to find a lawyer who’s not only brilliant and accomplished, but also empathetic and compassionate. Those people have obviously never met Lakshmi Odedra, a second year law student at the Chapman University Dale E. Fowler School of Law. Her decision to pursue law came from a strong desire to better people’s lives. “I found the study of law to be more appealing because I could directly use the law to help other people,” Lakshmi said.

And Lakshmi is definitely a woman of her word. In addition to being a member of the Warren J. Ferguson Inn of Court, and the Submissions Coordinator for Diversity Initiative Symposium and Publication Board, she is the Co-Volunteer Chair of the Public Interest Law Foundation, an organization dedicated to providing assistance to those who are underrepresented in the legal system. When asked why she was interested in student volunteering, Lakshmi replied, “I think it’s really important for law students to actually go out as a community and have experiences outside of just learning the law, and actually apply the law.”

Lakshmi’s interest in social justice began during her sophomore year at Chapman University. Her moment of enlightenment came when she attended the Capital Semester Program at Georgetown University in Washington D.C. While interning with the Department of Justice, she witnessed the impact of social injustice firsthand: “I would walk to work, and I’d pass a food bank where people would line up at 7 AM just to be fed four hours later.”

Lakshmi was inspired to expand her horizons to international social issues. She was a member of Chapman University’s Model United Nations team, she served as the Commissioner of Awareness for Chapman’s student government, and she was a three-time participant and facilitator in the Next Step Social Justice Retreat. She studied South Asian Politics at Oxford University in the spring of 2012, where she had the opportunity to speak to other students about global issues and hear their perspectives on international affairs.

These unique experiences led Lakshmi to pursue international law at Fowler School of Law. She plans to work in international development and is currently an extern at 10 Development LLC, an international consulting firm in Irvine, California. This year, she joined the Diversity Initiative Symposium and Publication Board because she believes the organization is a great opportunity for the school to progress and start a dialogue among the students and within the Orange County legal community.

Come meet Lakshmi and join us at “Blinded Justice: A Discussion About How the Legal System Values and Protects Diverse Communities,” on Thursday, March 3, presented by the Diversity Initiative Symposium and Publication Board at Fowler School of Law.

Chapman University Dale E. Fowler School of Law Professor Celestine McConville’s article, “The (Not so Dire) Future of the Necessary and Proper Power After National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius” was recently published in Volume 24, Issue 2 of the William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal.

From the abstract:

NFIB v. Sebelius has generated much discussion, but too little of it has focused deeply on whether, and the extent to which, the decision will limit the scope of the Necessary and Proper Clause.  Following NFIB, many observers doubtless found themselves asking the same questions they were asking in 1995 after the Supreme Court’s decision in Lopez drew a line in the sand after sixty years of imposing virtually no limits on the federal commerce power:  Was the Court really serious about imposing vigorous federalism limits on one of Congress’s biggest powers?  This article seeks to answer that question, arguing that NFIB will have a relatively minor overall impact on the scope of the necessary and proper power, even if the Court remains committed to judicial enforcement of federalism and even in the absence of a personnel change on the Court.    At first blush, it appeared that NFIB could have a dramatic impact, as it seemed to apply new and stringent limits on the necessary and proper power when it invalidated the individual mandate.  While the Court recently warned that federalism limits the reach of the necessary and proper power, it had not, until NFIB, gone as far as suggesting that Congress may not regulate indirectly through the necessary and proper power that which it may not regulate directly through an enumerated power.  Nevertheless, this article explains that, viewed in the light of decisions handed down leading up to and following NFIB, the decision does not signal a drastic change in doctrine.  The Necessary and Proper Clause was not the target of the Court’s federalism ire in NFIB, but rather was the victim of the Supreme Court’s continuing federalism campaign to rein in the federal commerce power.   As a result, it should be business as usual in cases where Congress seeks to enforce an enumerated power other than commerce, while use of the power in combination with the commerce power likely will trigger closer scrutiny.  And if the power is used so aggressively as to transform the Necessary and Proper Clause into a general police power, then it’s game over, no matter what enumerated power Congress is trying to enforce.

Professor McConville joined the Chapman faculty in August 2000. While at Chapman, she has received the Professor of the Year award three times. She served as Associate Dean for Administrative Affairs from June 2007 to May 2009. Before coming to Chapman, Professor McConville was a visiting faculty member at Case Western Reserve School of Law, where she received the Student Bar Association’s Teacher of the Year award for 1999. She earned her B.A. from Boston University, graduating magna cum laude, and her JD from Georgetown University Law Center, graduating magna cum laude in the top one percent of her class. She was selected for Order of the Coif and served as an editor for the Georgetown Law Journal’s Criminal Procedure Project. After law school, Professor McConville served as a law clerk to Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist at the Supreme Court of the United States. She also clerked for Judge Cynthia Holcomb Hall on the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and for Judge Donald C. Nugent on the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. Following her clerkship with Chief Justice Rehnquist, Professor McConville practiced law for three years as an associate with Shea & Gardner in Washington, D.C., working primarily on litigation matters involving constitutional, labor, banking and aviation law issues. Professor McConville teaches Constitutional Law, Federal Courts, and Wills and Trusts. Her current research and writing projects are in the constitutional law and death penalty areas. Other articles include “Yikes! Was I Wrong? A Second Look at the Viability of Monitoring Capital Post-Conviction Counsel,” published in the Maine Law Review, and “The Meaninglessness of Delayed Appointments and Discretionary Grants of Capital Postconviction Counsel,” published in the Tulsa Law Review.

See more of Professor McConville’s scholarly writing.

It was a weekend of milestones for Chapman University Dale E. Fowler School of Law competition teams at the regional American Bar Association Client Counseling Competition in San Francisco, February 13-14. Fowler School of Law walked away with both first and second place after an impressive showing by two teams – Julia Pavel (JD ’16) and Kyle Hindin (JD ’16), and Jatin Patel (JD ’16) and Amanda Thyden (JD ’17).

Pavel and Hindin took first place and will head to the national finals in Waco, Texas, in April. Patel and Thyden finished second overall.

This is the first time since 2002 that Fowler School of Law students will compete in the final round of this competition, and it’s also the first time that Fowler School of Law has had two teams in the final round at the regional competition.

“Both Chapman teams worked extremely hard in order to prepare for the regional Client Counseling Competition,” Pavel said. “The ultimate victory was being able to compete with such a wonderful group of people, and have Chapman take first and second place. I’m very thankful for the opportunity Chapman has given me to participate in competitions, where I have gained invaluable practical experience.”

“It was an honor to be selected to represent Chapman in the competition, and I was very excited to bring the award back to school,” Hindin said. “The show of support from the Chapman community has been tremendous, and we are excited to represent the school at nationals in April!”

Read more competition news.

Learn more about Fowler School of Law Competition Boards.

Symposium keynote speaker Paulette Brown

Chapman University Dale E. Fowler School of Law’s Diversity Initiative Symposium and Publication will host its inaugural symposium, Blinded Justice: A Discussion About Whether the Legal System Values and Protects Diverse Communities, next Thursday, March 3, from 1 to 8 p.m., in Kennedy Hall. American Bar Association (ABA) President Paulette Brown and Founder and Former Executive Director of the South Asian Network Hamid Khan will serve as keynote speakers.

The event invites locally and nationally recognized legal practitioners and social justice advocates to discuss unequal justice in diverse communities on three distinct panels:

• Inequality: The Immigration and Asylum Process;
• Impracticality: The School to Prison Pipeline; and
• Impunity: The Criminal and Civil Justice Response to Violence Against Minorities

Symposium keynote speaker Hamid Khan

Paulette Brown has served as president of the ABA since 2015. She is also partner and co-chair of the firmwide Diversity & Inclusion Committee at Locke Lord LLP. She has been recognized by the National Law Journal as one of “The 50 Most Influential Minority Leaders in America” and by the New Jersey Law Journal as one of the “prominent women and minority attorneys in the state of New Jersey.” Before becoming ABA president, Brown served in a number of roles at the ABA including as a member of the ABA House of Delegates since 1997 and as a former member of the ABA Board of Governors and its Executive Committee. Hamid Khan currently is campaign coordinator for Stop LAPD Spying. Before his current role, he served for 20 years as Executive Director for the South Asian Network – an organization dedicated to advancing the health, empowerment and solidarity of persons of South Asian origin in Southern California.

Panelists include John Burris, Esq., best known for his work in the area of civil rights with an emphasis on police misconduct, excessive force cases; James Bell, Esq., founder and director of the W. Haywood Burns Institute; Farida Chehata, Esq., an immigrant rights attorney for the Council on American-Islamic relations; Jorge Gutierrez, founder and director of Familia: Trans Queer Liberation Movement; and Margaret Prescod, founder of Black Alliance Fighting Black Serial Killers and host of Sojourner Truth on Pacifica Radio. Moderators include Fowler Law Professor Bobby Dexter, Thurgood Marshall Bar Association President Michael Gregg, Orange County Hispanic Bar Association Chief Financial Officer Darrell White, and Sasha Tymkowicz  from the Orange County Hispanic Bar Association Board of Directors.

See full list of panelists and presenters.

The Fowler School of Law’s Diversity Initiative is a “super group” made up of leaders and senior members from a diverse cross section of law school student organizations, including the Minority Law Students Association, Asian Pacific American Law Student Association, Children and Family Law Society, Animal Law Society, National Lawyers Guild, Outlaw, Public Interest Law Foundation, and more.

This activity has been approved for MCLE credit in the amount of 5.5 units, including elimination of bias credit. The event is open to the public and free to those not seeking MCLE credit, and $10 for those seeking MCLE credit. Chapman University Dale E. Fowler School of Law is a State Bar of California approved MCLE provider.

See a complete schedule and register.

Chapman University Dale E. Fowler School of Law Professor Hugh Hewitt will again pose questions to the 2016 Republican presidential candidates tonight during the next Republican primary debate, which airs on CNN, Telemundo and the Salem Radio Network at 5:30 p.m. PST.

Professor Hewitt will join CNN’s Chief Political Correspondent Dana Bash and Telemundo News anchor Maria Celeste Arras as a co-panelist for the evening. Wolf Blitzer will serve as moderator. This is the third time this year that Professor Hewitt has participated in the presidential debates. He has also conducted numerous and regular interviews with the presidential candidates on his nationally syndicated radio show, inspiring a profile in The Washington Post entitled “Who is Hugh Hewitt?” and ranking on Politico Magazine’s Politico 50 list leading up to the second Republican debate.

For more than 20 years, Professor Hewitt has been teaching classes and serving integral roles in faculty governance (including chairing at one time or another almost every major faculty committee) at Fowler School of Law. Professor Hewitt’s constitutional expertise and high-level governmental experience make it fitting that the principal course he teaches is Constitutional Law. Hewitt also serves as the faculty advisor to one of Fowler School of Law’s two student-edited law journals, the Nexus Journal of Law & Policy. Professor Hewitt maintains this vibrant presence as a leader in the law school community, while also excelling as a lawyer, broadcast journalist and columnist at the same time.

Learn more about Professor Hewitt and his role in this year’s presidential debates.

Chapman University Dale E. Fowler School of Law hosted its annual Diversity Day on Saturday, February 20, 2016. Organized by the Office of Admission in conjunction with the Minority Law Students Association, the event was an inspiring and thought-provoking opportunity to shed light on diversity in the legal profession, illuminating the path to success for hundreds of Orange County’s future leaders.

The Honorable Frank Ospino of the Orange County Superior Court addresses local high school students

Diversity Day, co-sponsored by the Law School Admission Council’s DiscoverLaw.org, brought Latina and Latino judges and practitioners to speak at a panel and inspire more than 200 middle and high school students on the importance of higher education and community service. Panelists discussed legal practice and community involvement, and spoke candidly about their experiences growing up.

The speakers told students that despite often overwhelming odds, a combination of hard work, mentorship and sacrifice allowed them to persevere and reach considerable feats in their legal profession. Many attendees were visibly moved by the panelists’ comments.

“The Hispanic Bar Association of Orange County (HBA) is proud to support Chapman University Fowler School of Law’s diversity initiative program. Chapman’s diversity initiative program, which dares to inspire Latino high school students to dream of a career in the practice of law, aligns perfectly with our core values and mission to promote education, unity and excellence in our community,” said Guillermo M. Tello, CFO of the Orange County Hispanic Bar Association. “I along with the rest of the HBA look forward to our continued support of Chapman’s diversity initiative program. “

The speakers reminded the students that they could also be leaders in their fields and communities. They shared experiences about their struggles during high school and the steps they took to overcome real life challenges such as poverty, involvement in gangs and teenage pregnancies. They challenged the students to aspire to greatness and to seek their mentorship so that one day they can realize their own potential and, like the panelists, inspire a new generation of student leaders.

“I was proud to see and hear from such inspiring leaders in the legal community,” said Hugo Salazar, past president of the Minority Law Students Association and current co-chair of the Diversity Initiative Symposium and Publication.

Diversity Day speakers included The Honorable Frank Ospino of the Orange County Superior Court; The Honorable Elizabeth Macias of the Orange County Superior Court; alumna Rosa Elena Sahagun (JD ’02); Guillermo Tello, CFO of the Orange County Hispanic Bar Association, adjunct professor at Western State College of Law, and an associate at Ogletree Deakins; Lyo Figueroa, founding partner of the Fontes Figueroa Law Group, and member of the Orange County Hispanic Bar Association Board of Directors; Araceli Gonzalez Guerrero, founder of the Law Offices of Araceli G. Guerrero; State Senator Lou Correa; John Palacio, School Board President of the Santa Ana Unified School District.

Upcoming diversity programs at the law school include the 2016 Social Justice Symposium. The symposium entitled Blinded Justice: A Discussion About Whether the Legal System Values and Protects Diverse Communities will be held on Thursday, March 3, 2016 from 1 to 8 p.m. The event is presented by the Chapman University Dale E. Fowler School of Law Diversity Initiative Symposium and Publication.

Above: Chapman University Fowler School of Law Assistant Dean of Admission and Diversity Initiatives Justin Cruz addresses students

On February 8, Chapman University Dale E. Fowler School of Law welcomed David B. Thronson, Associate Dean for Experiential Education and Professor of Law at Michigan State University College of Law, to deliver the second installment of the 2016 Chapman Dialogue Lecture Series. His presentation, “Immigration Law and the Family,” was followed by an interactive discussion with Fowler School of Law Professor Marisa Cianciarulo, director of Fowler School of Law’s Bette and Wylie Aitken Family Protection Clinic, and a lively question and answer session with several of the nearly 100 student and faculty guests.

Michigan State University College of Law Associate Dean Thronson and Fowler School of Law Professor Marisa Cianciarulo

Dean Thronson’s presentation focused on the underappreciated intersections between family law and immigration law, emphasizing that each of these spheres of law is involved in the enterprise of defining who can and should live together. Despite these similar points of focus, immigration law and family law often operate under distinct and often non-coordinated rules, norms and values.

The difficulty of identifying a pathway to status that is not overly burdensome was one focal point in the presentation and the dialogue that followed. Thronson explained the Catch-22 facing many undocumented individuals who wish to reform their status. There are substantial disincentives to leaving the United States after being here even if one is leaving to establish documented status. For example, once an undocumented individual who has been in the country for a certain period of time leaves, he is subject to 3-year or 10-year bars to reentry. While there was a time when we allowed individuals to acknowledge wrongdoing, pay a fine, and then proceed with paperwork, that method of reforming status was allowed to sunset more than a decade ago.

A large part of Dean Thronson’s talk gave particular attention to the needs of the millions of children affected by this intersection of family and immigration law – some who are themselves U.S. citizens but with undocumented parents, some who are undocumented themselves, and some who are U.S. citizens but living outside the United States. One of the problems with many current legal doctrines most affecting children is the fact that the characterization of children in immigration law is entirely dependent on whether a child is a dependent of an adult who has status. Furthermore, Thronson identified what he called an asymmetry in the system, where parents can extend status to children but children cannot extend status to parents. Among the guidance Dean Thronson offered in conclusion was the suggestion that we need to better educate the public and family law courts about immigration issues; and we need to start reforming our immigration law policies so that those policies are better informed by principles at the heart of family law, including looking to the best interests of children as a metric in decisionmaking.

View the webcast.

See the full 2015-2016 Chapman Dialogue schedule.

Dean Thronson is also co-founder of the Immigration Law Clinic and served as Associate Dean for Academic Affairs at the Michigan State University College of Law. His research and writing seeks to develop frameworks and critical perspectives for analyzing the intersection of family and immigration, with a particular focus on children.

In 1994, Thronson earned his JD from Harvard Law School where he served as Co-Editor-in-Chief of the Harvard Human Rights Journal. After clerking for the Honorable A. Wallace Tashima in California, Thronson returned to New York City as a Skadden Fellow at The Door’s Legal Services Center, providing direct legal services to at-risk young people primarily in the areas of immigration, housing, public benefits and family law. He then served as the Gibbons Fellow in Public Interest and Constitutional Law at the law firm of Gibbons, Del Deo, Dolan, Griffinger and Vecchione where he litigated cases involving a wide range of issues including the scope of federal habeas jurisdiction to review immigration matters, the application of the Convention Against Torture, the constitutional adequacy of educational opportunities provided to urban children in New Jersey, and discrimination in New Jersey State Police hiring practices.

Thronson has served on numerous boards of directors, including those of the National Youth Leadership Council and International Social Service – USA. He currently serves on the national Interagency Working Group on Unaccompanied Children and his past governmental appointments include service on the Nevada Supreme Court’s Access to Justice Commission, the Nevada Law Foundation, and the Nevada’s Governor’s Commission for National and Community Service. In 2006, he received the Friend of Working Families Award from the Nevada State AFL-CIO and in 2011 the Education Law Center honored him, along with other past Gibbons Fellows, with the Moreheuser Humanitarian Award. In January 2014 he was elected to membership in the American Law Institute and selected as a fellow of the American Bar Foundation.

About the Chapman Dialogue Lecture Series

The Chapman Dialogue Lecture Series is a special lineup of distinguished lectures by innovative and thought-provoking legal scholars as well as some of the nation’s most prominent legal practitioners. Invited speakers present their research and ideas to a wide audience of faculty, students, alumni and special guests. Each Dialogue concludes with a lively Question and Answer session, typically led by one or two discussants from among the Fowler School of Law faculty.

This week marks Fowler School of Law’s 10th annual Diversity Week celebration, a law school event that showcases the school’s commitment to providing an inclusive, diverse, and safe environment. Past Diversity Week events have included special speakers, panel presentations, international food fairs, and symposia. Hosted by the administration and student organizations, the activities provide an opportunity for all members of the community to celebrate and embrace our differences. Diversity Week was created in 2007 by Jayne Kacer, the law school’s Associate Dean for Student Affairs and Administration, who has overseen the program since its inception.

2015 Orange County Bar Diversity Panel at Fowler School of Law

2016 Diversity Week events include presentations on “Aging In Society” (Monday), “Civil Rights and the Muslim Community” (Wednesday), and a Social Justice Symposium, “Blinded Justice: A Discussion About Whether The Legal System Values and Protects Diverse Communities” (Thursday).

Chapman University Fowler School of Law is proud of its ongoing commitment to diversity and inclusiveness. Below is a list of the many areas in which the school has been a leader in its diversity efforts, resulting in a steady rise in minority representation in its student population.

• Chapman’s most recent incoming class has 42% minority representation.
• Chapman strongly supports diversity and inclusiveness in its more than 40 student organizations, which represent various groups, including ethnic, cultural, religious, political, public interest, gender, and sexual orientation. The groups are an active part of law school life and all students are supported in the creation of new organizations to fit special interest areas.
• Chapman received the Law School Admission Council’s DiscoverLaw.Org Diversity Matters Award in 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2015.
• In 2015, the law school approved the Diversity Initiative and Publication project, which consists of leaders from multiple student organizations committed to diversity in the legal profession. The organization received $10,000 from the law school and the university to fund the 2016 symposium, “Blinded Justice: A Discussion about Whether the Legal System Values and Protects Diverse Communities.”
• Chapman faculty members have published on a wide range of topics addressing diversity and social justice, including, gender bias, marriage equality, jury bias, anti-Semitism, immigration law, minority and mentally ill youth justice, asylum, domestic violence, human trafficking, and more. In addition to their scholarly efforts, faculty members provide service in areas such as juvenile justice, race and immigration, student disability, diversity in the legal profession, prevention of domestic violence and sexual assault, and more.
• Chapman’s immediate past dean and current professor Tom Campbell will be honored in April 2015 with the Marcus M. Kaufman Jurisprudence Award by the Orange County /Long Beach Anti-Defamation League.
• Chapman hosts an annual leadership conference at which student organizations are encouraged to share their culture, traditions, faith, and ideas with the broader law school community.
• Chapman’s student Public Interest Law Foundation has raised significant funds through its annual fundraising program to support students taking public interest summer positions.
• Chapman recruits at a number of diversity recruitment events including Historically Black Colleges & Universities Pre-Law Summit & Law Expo, Latino Justice Law Day and Law Fair, Wisconsin Statewide Pre-Law Diversity Day and Law Fair, and National Society of Black Engineers National Graduate School Fair.
• Chapman annually hosts a Diversity Day event, which provides outreach to middle and high schools within the Santa Ana Unified School District.
• Chapman is a member of the Orange County Coalition for Diversity in Law and the Council on Legal Education Opportunity.
• Chapman is home to a number of clinics that provide free client services, including the Bette and Wylie Aitken Family Protection Clinic, the Alona Cortese Elder Law Center, the Juvenile Mediation Clinic, and the Low Income Taxpayers Clinic.
• Chapman’s Assistant Dean of Admissions and Diversity Initiatives is co-chair of the Law School Diversity Professionals annual meeting , a member of the Law School Admission Council’s Diversity Committee and the Diversity Pipeline Conference Subcommittee, and has served as the vice chair of the Minorities in the Profession Committee for the American Bar Association Young Lawyer’s Division.  In addition, all of our senior admission administrators are members of the Law School Admission Council’s Minority Network Group.
• Chapman’s Admission Office has created a pipeline program that assists students from underrepresented populations to prepare to come to law school.
• Chapman’s Associate Dean of Student Affairs and Administration promotes inclusiveness by, among other things, officiating at weddings of former students of different faiths and sexual orientation (which was reported in the National Law Journal and National Jurist).
• Members of our Career Services Office team are members of the Orange County Bar Association Diversity Task Force, National Association of Law Placement Section on Diversity and Inclusion, Orange County Lavender Bar Association, Orange County Asian American Bar Association, and a number of other organizations committed to diversity and inclusiveness.
• Chapman law students have traveled to Uganda to participate in the production of a documentary film about persecuted gay rights activists who face imprisonment and the death penalty for homosexuality.
• Chapman recently sponsored selected students to attend the ABA Judicial Clerkship Program, which assists diverse students in obtaining judicial clerkships. The law school also sponsors students to attend national conferences, including Equal Justice Works and Lavender Law.

The Internal Revenue Service announced on Friday that it has given a $100,000 grant through its Low Income Taxpayers Clinic (LITC) program to the Chapman University Dale E. Fowler School of Law Tax Law Clinic for its work supporting low income taxpayers.

Tax Law Clinic Director and Professor of Law George Willis

Through the LITC program, the IRS awards up to $100,000 in matching grants annually to 129 recipients across the nation for development, expansion or continuation of qualified clinics that represent low-income taxpayers in federal tax disputes with the IRS for free or nominal fees. Fowler School of Law’s Tax Law Clinic is one of only 10 law schools in the country to receive the highest grant total.

This grant brings the total awards and grants to the clinic, directed by Fowler School of Law Professor George Willis, to more than $1.7 million since its inception in 1997. The Tax Law Clinic is the oldest clinical program at Fowler School of Law and provides students with an opportunity to gain practical skills training while benefiting real tax clients. Each year, students serve hundreds of clients by providing counsel and representation they otherwise could not afford, while also gaining hands-on training in both trial and appellate tax issues.

See the full press release.

Learn more about the Fowler School of Law Tax Law Clinics.

Read more Fowler School of Law Clinic news.

Chapman University Dale E. Fowler School of Law’s Diversity Initiative Symposium and Publication hosted its inaugural symposium, Blinded Justice: A Discussion About Whether the Legal System Values and Protects Diverse Communities, on March 3, 2016. The symposium invited both legal practitioners and social activists for a candid discussion about unequal justice in diverse communities.

Panel I: Inequalities: The Immigration and Asylum Process

Panelists discuss the immigration and asylum process

Asylum law, panelists asserted, is stacked against the poorest and most vulnerable of asylum seekers. Munmeeth Soni, an immigration advocate with the Public Law Center, opened the discussion with an overview of immigration procedures and the statutory grounds under which an applicant may qualify for asylum. Those seeking asylum after being threatened, beaten, raped or tortured often are unable to articulate their experience in a way that will satisfy current U.S. asylum statues, she noted.

Gary Silbiger, a member of the National Lawyers Guild Los Angeles Chapter’s Immigration Court Watch, said he has also documented numerous procedural abuses while observing in immigration court. He noted a failure of judges to provide the legal guidance to pro per applicants that the judges are supposed to provide. Shockingly, panelists explained, procedural shortcomings are so rampant in immigration court that having an attorney may not help. They spoke of the “rocket dockets” – courts noted for their speedy disposition of cases – that push asylum seekers, particularly undocumented children, through the court process without sufficient time to prepare their case. Likewise, attorneys may not have any chance to speak privately with their clients who appear in court from a distant location via video conference.

Fatima Dadabhoy, with the Council on American-Islamic Relations, discussed procedural abuses of those politically disfavored, particularly Muslim immigrants. She noted that she represents clients whose asylum and immigration applications have been delayed by years after the FBI demanded information that her clients did not have.

Panelist Jorge Guitierrez speaks as part of the 2016 Social Justice Symposium

Jorge Guitierrez, founder of Familia: Trans Queer Liberation Movement, pointed to the systemic abuses faced by gay men and transgender women, politically disfavored populations with high deportation rates.

Panelists proposed a variety of solutions. At the top of their list was creative lawyering; panelists said they spend significant time conducting client interviews to find some way to connect their client’s abuse to a statutory ground for asylum. Their second suggestion was to incorporate into asylum law domestic violence protections for women and children subjected to abuse in home countries that not only fail to prosecute abusers but in fact tacitly approve of the violence. And finally, panelists encouraged others to get involved as volunteer attorneys to assist with asylum claims and representation for activists arrested at protests outside federal immigration facilities and private detention centers.

View the webcast.

Panel II: Inequities: The School to Prison Pipeline

James Bell, founder and director of the W. Haywood Burns Institute, and Stacey Lamont, who handles school expulsion defense cases at Moore Law For Children, addressed systemic causes of the school to prison pipeline and its impact on local youth.

Panelists Stacey Lamont and James Bell discuss the school to prison pipeline

At the heart of the crisis, Bell identified zero tolerance policies and the outsourcing of student discipline from schools to law enforcement. Zero tolerance policies criminalize the developmentally normal behavior problems of children. When school officials stop taking corrective measures within the school and instead rely on suspension or calling the police – whose tool bag is limited to warnings and arrest – the perfect storm is created that ensures large numbers of young people will have academic gaps and a criminal record. According to Lamont, whether a student receives a suspension, expulsion, or arrest, there is a ripple effect on the child’s future.

The solutions Bell and Lamont recommended began with eliminating zero tolerance policies. Schools must reclaim responsibility for student discipline. The discipline employed must reflect an understanding of normal juvenile brain development and the goal of keeping children in school. At the same time, schools must increase academic standards and faculty diversity. If children are going to work for success in school, they must be challenged, engaged, and kept in school.

View the webcast.

Panel III: Impunity: The Failure of the Criminal and Civil Justice System to Respond to Violence Against Diverse Communities

Panelists Margaret Prescod and Nana Gyamfi

The final panel of the evening got to the heart of the symposium question, whether the justice system values and protects diverse communities. The overwhelming response from the panel: No. Margaret Prescod, founder of the Black Coalition Fighting Back Serial Murders and host of the nationally syndicated Sojourner Truth radio show, put the question in context. She discussed the roots of policing in America which stem from the early slave patrols and developed from there as a means of social control.

How does this system of social control relate to those listening today, particularly white listeners? Prescod spoke of social control being hierarchical, a pyramid in which those lacking equality of treatment were pacified by having their superiority to those lower in status made clear. Today, just as in the past, superiority is an illusion paid for with our own oppression. Her powerful and moving example was the extent of current media coverage for a white journalist that was videotaped nude, while little attention is being paid to the trial of a man who murdered numerous poor, black women in South Los Angeles. And how is the justice system implicated in this? The official police reports for the murders of those women in South Los Angeles list the crime as “NHI,” a police acronym for “No Human Involved.”

Attorneys Nana Gyamfi and John Burris spoke of their work to hold police accountable for misconduct. Burris, who has been litigating high profile civil rights cases for more than 40 years, spoke of the revolution that video footage has had in these cases. Twenty years ago, when he was representing Rodney King – the first high profile police beating that was videotaped – the video had little impact. Today, video footage can make all the difference.

Chapman University Fowler School of Law Professor Bobby Dexter moderates the final panel

Gyamfi was quick to point out that video recordings, particularly those from police dash cams and body cameras, are not a cure-all and in fact cause problems because rules are not clear on their usage. She discussed instances where prosecutors have denied having footage against one defendant, the relevant footage being used by the prosecutor in another related case. Her most troubling issue is with the selective use of the cameras. In one case the police turned the cameras on and off repeatedly throughout the course of their interaction with her client. The judge had no issue with the gaps in the footage the prosecutor seeks to use. Burris advises that the solution is to move forward with video usage and let rules be established through impact decisions.

View the webcast.

Keynote Presentation by Hamid Khan

2016 Social Justice Symposium Keynote Speaker Hamid Khan

Hamid Khan, activist and community organizer who has advocated for the empowerment of marginalized communities across Southern California for decades, delivered the keynote address at the 2016 Social Justice Symposium at Fowler School of Law.

Khan began his discussion on the impact of modern policing with this supposition that police exist to protect and serve. But, he posed the question of whose interests are served. To arrive at the answer, and to see the systemic flaws in policing, Khan asked attendees to consider the structures of modern policing. Specifically, what informs those structures, how they are guided, how policies are created, who is involved in crafting those policies, and how those policies are financed and enforced.

Khan began an examination of modern policing with a quote from Edward Banfield, who wrote, “The implication that lower-class culture is pathological seems fully warranted. Rather than waste time and public money implementing policies based on the false notion that all men were created equal, better to just face facts and acknowledge the natural divisions that exist. . . . And the police should feel free to crack down on young lower-class men.”

The application of this “scientific” justification for state violence was guided by “the five faces of the ‘other’” that our society already had: the savage native face, the criminal black face, the manipulative Asian face, the illegal Latino face and the terrorist Muslim face. Khan pointed out that the list of ‘others’ is far more expansive and includes those who threaten the property-focused justice system. He shared a memo issued by the United States Department of Homeland Security in which officers were advised to open suspicious activity reports against anyone organizing against gentrification. The memo described opponents of gentrification as “anarchist extremists.”

Increasingly the craftsmen of these policing policies are police officers and the architects of federal counter-intelligence/counter-insurgency policy. Khan noted the growing presence of police officers on the Los Angeles City Board, a city that leads the nation in killings by police.

The cities are receiving federal financing for anti-terrorist policing, yet the policing disproportionately targets the black community and those who advocate for social change, he said. Khan noted that more than 30 percent of suspicious activity reports, a focus of the federally funded “anti-terrorism” program, were opened against black people. In addition to the surveillance, local police departments are the beneficiaries of tremendous amounts of military grade weaponry. The deployment of armed drones and militarized “Robocops” against the “other,” he said, belie any thought that the police are there to protect and serve marginalized communities.

Khan urged attendees to consider the information they heard during the symposium as a call to action. He reminded guests that there is opportunity for collective learning and engagement, and advised everyone to get involved in some way, such as providing legal research, pro bono representation or committing to attend further education and action events. The onus is on each one of us to shed the shackle of passivity that a control centered system has placed on us, he said.

View the keynote presentation webcast.

After eight years away from Chapman University Fowler School of Law, former Professor Matthew Parlow will return to lead as Dean this July. His return to Southern California comes after serving as Associate Dean for Academic Affairs at Marquette University Law School. His emphasis areas include sports law, land use and urban redevelopment.

In preparation of his arrival, Dean Parlow recently spent some time talking to The Orange County Register about his thoughts on returning to the law school and his vision for its future. In the article, Dean Parlow expressed his excitement about returning to Fowler School of Law, citing his admiration and respect for the faculty and administration, and his hopes for building on the school’s current successes.

“I’ve been away for almost eight years; Fowler has done some really impressive things,” he said. “There’s a great story to be told and even greater work to be done, and that’s an exciting prospect for anyone looking at a deanship.”

Incoming Fowler School of Law Dean Matthew Parlow was recently interviewed by The Orange County Register.

He’s also eager to harness his years as a consultant to professional sports leagues and teams to help bolster Fowler School of Law’s existing curriculum, he said. He noted a number of alumni who have entered into the sports industry, including an NBA agent, the former General Counsel for the Phoenix Suns, and a sports writer for Forbes.com and professor of Sports Law Management at the University of Miami.

“Using my contacts in sports and building on the success that Fowler grads have had in sports, I think there is some exciting momentum there and opportunities,” he said. “I’d like to bring my relationships in sports to help provide opportunities for the students and the community to learn and interact with those who work in the world of sports.”

Dean Parlow also offered a few words of advice to law students, emphasizing that although their years of study can be grueling, their impact after graduation makes it all worth it.

“When you can serve a client and help them with something they can’t do on their own, it’s a really fulfilling profession,” he said. “I think it’s an honorable profession; the hard work pays off and it’s a way to really make an impact in society. During those tougher moments in law school, remember the goals you’re working towards, find that passion so you’re excited about the work you’re doing each and every day and be mindful about the impact you can have on people’s lives and what a great honor that is.”

Read the full article on The Orange County Register website.

Chapman University Dale E. Fowler School of Law competition teams claimed four titles last weekend at the International Law School Mediation Tournament in Chicago. Team members Jade McKenzie (JD ’16), Jeremy Talcott (JD ’16), Shane Micheil (JD ’16), Kyle Hindin (JD ’16), Weston O’Connor (JD ’17) and Markeshia Moore (JD ’17) competed against 52 teams from more than 30 law schools in 12 countries.

Shane Micheil (JD ’16), Jade McKenzie (JD ’16) and Jeremy Talcott (JD ’16)

McKenzie, Talcott and Micheil earned several honors including second overall in the advocate/client competition and seventh overall in the mediator competition. Micheil earned a third-place individual mediator award, and he and Talcott also earned a fifth-place individual advocate/client award.

Despite narrowly missing a win in a raw point score comparison after a tie in the final round, Fowler School of Law won all judges’ ballots through three preliminary rounds as well as the semifinal and final rounds.

Read more competition news.

Learn more about Fowler School of Law Competition Boards.

Above: Fowler School of Law Competition Board teams with Professor David Dowling in Chicago.

Between six distinguished JD emphasis certificate programs and two joint degree options, current Chapman University Dale E. Fowler School of Law students have numerous choices to direct their studies into high-impact career paths. Next year, they’ll have another option, with the addition of the law school’s new Criminal Law Emphasis Program, our seventh certificate offering.

The Criminal Law Emphasis Program is designed to provide a tailored education to those students who wish to pursue careers as prosecutors or defense attorneys. It adds to the existing emphasis programs — Entertainment Law; Environmental, Land Use & Real Estate; Tax Law; Business Law; Advocacy & Dispute Resolution; and International Law – where students receive a high degree of specialization in their chosen fields of interest.

In addition to the specialty coursework, students are encouraged to complete an externship for elective credit. Employers that hire graduates in this area rely heavily on the records built by students who have worked in the offices of prosecutors or defense attorneys while in school. The Fowler School of Law Externship Program provides a useful resource for all students in building experience while also earning course credit.

Learn more about Fowler School of Law’s new Criminal Law Emphasis Program and our existing Emphasis Programs.