Afterword to Intellectual Property and the New International Economic Order Symposium (Part I)

by Sam Halabi — Monday, Oct. 15, 2018

Let me begin by thanking both regular and special contributors to this symposium as well as extending an even heartier thanks to Patricia Judd, Rachel Kogan and particularly Chris Walker for the time and energy they dedicated to introducing and organizing it.  The richness and care with which the essays were drafted demonstrate, I hope, […]

This entry was tagged .

D.C. Circuit Review – Reviewed: A Dog’s Breakfast

by Aaron Nielson — Friday, Oct. 12, 2018@Aaron_L_Nielson

About ten years ago, I came across a phrase I had never heard before: dog’s breakfast. It was in a dissent penned by Chief Justice Roberts. Here is the passage: When the state courts considered these cases, our precedents did not provide them with “clearly established” law, but instead a dog’s breakfast of divided, conflicting, […]

Some Thoughts from Jim Tozzi on the 50th Anniversary of Centralized Regulatory Review

by Chris Walker — Wednesday, Oct. 10, 2018@chris_j_walker

Over at the Center for Regulatory Reform, Jim Tozzi (who was in charge of OIRA in the early 1980s) has the following thoughts on the fiftieth anniversary of centralized regulatory review: Calendar Year 2019 marks the fiftieth year since Professor Alan Schmid on leave to a position in the Pentagon declared that benefit-cost analysis should […]

This entry was tagged .

Oh SNAP!: The Battle Over “Food Stamp” Redemption Data That May Radically Reshape FOIA Exemption 4 (Part III-B)

by Bernard Bell — Wednesday, Oct. 10, 2018

This post is the concluding portion of Part III on my series on Food Marketing Institute v. Argus Leader Media.  In this post I argued that even if the Supreme Court remains unconvinced by a formal reenactment or acquiescence argument, like that outlined in Part III-A, the Court should hesitate before upending uniform court of […]

The NIEO 2.0?, by Susan K. Sell

by Guest Blogger — Tuesday, Oct. 9, 2018

Sam Halabi’s Intellectual Property and the New International Economic Order offers an original take on seemingly disparate efforts by developing countries to push back against overly strong intellectual property rules and the oligopoly power of intellectual property-intensive firms. He revisits the 1970s and 1980s debates over a New International Economic Order (NIEO) that reflected keen […]

This entry was tagged .

The Takings Clause, the Tucker Act, and Knick v. Township of Scott, by Aditya Bamzai & David N. Goldman

by Guest Blogger — Tuesday, Oct. 9, 2018

Last week, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Knick v. Township of Scott, a case that presents the question whether “the Court should reconsider the portion of Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank, requiring property owners to exhaust state court remedies to ripen federal takings claims.” At issue in Knick is the […]

Key Insights from Intellectual Property and the New International Economic Order, by Peter Yu

by Guest Blogger — Monday, Oct. 8, 2018

In a world with ever-sprawling developments involving intellectual property rights, Sam Halabi’s new book, Intellectual Property and the New International Economic Order, could not have been published at a better time. This well-written, passionately argued, historically informed and highly interdisciplinary book covers issues ranging from pharmaceutical development to agricultural production and from biological diversity to […]

Expanding Shelters into Protective Zones – the Three Step Test and State (and other) Practice in Developing International Copyright Law, By Henning Grosse Ruse – Khan

by Guest Blogger — Monday, Oct. 8, 2018

It’s great to be part of this blog symposium on Sam’s excellent monograph on IP and the New International Economic Order (NIEO). As the title of my post suggests, I’ll focus on taking the idea of IP ‘shelters’ further, looking at strategies for expanding them into broader, ideally globally recognised zones that protect the basic […]

Thacker v. Tennessee Valley Authority: The Relationship Between Judicial Review and Tort Liability (Part II)

by Bernard Bell — Sunday, Oct. 7, 2018

This post concludes my two-part preview of Thacker v. Tennessee Valley Authority, Dkt. 17-1201 (U.S. Sup. Ct.). The first post argued that the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”) and the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) should be interpreted in a complementary manner.  It explained the discretionary function exception’s vital role in allocating controversies arising from government […]

Thacker v. Tennessee Valley Authority: The Relationship Between Judicial Review and Tort Liability (Part I)

by Bernard Bell — Saturday, Oct. 6, 2018

On September 28, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Thacker v. Tennessee Valley Authority (“Thacker v. TVA”).  Order, Dkt. 17-1201, 2018 WL 4650382.  (The docket sheet is available here.)  The case raises the question of whether an implied discretionary function exception, akin to that in the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”), 28 U.S.C. §2680(a), bars […]