Pfeiffer and Hu on Deconstructing Code Words @ASUCollegeOfLaw @uarizonalaw @law_soc

Deirdre Pfeiffer, Arizona State College of Law, and Xiaoqian Hu, University of Arizona College of Law, are publishing Deconstructing Racial Code Words in volume 58 of Law & Society (2024). Here is the abstract.

Racism has become more covert in post-civil rights America. Yet, measures to combat it are hindered by inadequate general knowledge on what “colorblind” race talk says and does and what makes it effective. We deepen understanding of covert racism by investigating one type of discourse—racial code words, which are 1) indirect signifiers of racial or ethnic groups that contain 2) at least one positive or negative value judgment and 3) contextually implied or salient meanings. Through a thematic analysis of 734 racial code words from 97 scholarly texts, we develop an interpretive framework that explains their tropes, linguistic mechanisms, and unique roles in perpetuating racism, drawing from race, linguistic, and cultural studies. Racial code words promote tropes of White people’s respectability and privilege and Racial/Ethnic Minorities’ pathology and inferiority in efficient, adaptable, plausibly deniable, and almost always racially stratifying ways, often through euphemism, metonymy, and othering. They construct a “colorblind” discursivity and propel both “epistemic racism” (racism in knowledge) and systemic racism (racism in action). We further strengthen applications of Critical Race Theory in sociolegal studies of race by presenting a “racial meaning decoding tool” to assist legal and societal measures to detect coded racism.

Download the article from SSRN at the link.

Arvind and Puset on Partisan Legal Traditions in the Age of Camden and Mansfield @NDLaw

T. T. Arvind, York Law School, and Christian R. Puset, Notre Dame Law School, have published Partisan Legal Traditions in the Age of Camden and Mansfield at 20 Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 1 (2024). Here is the abstract.

The eighteenth century is often treated by scholars as a period of juristic consensus. This article argues, in contrast, that the late eighteenth century saw the emergence of rival ‘Patriot’ and ‘Tory’ legal traditions. Through a detailed study of the jurisprudence of Lords Camden and Mansfield—who were both pillars of the law, as well as political and juristic rivals—we show that they differed systematically in their understanding of the common law. Those differences had a partisan cast: although they were not crude attempts to instrumentalise law to political ends, their political and jurisprudential commitments influenced each other and emerged from the same intellectual roots. We place these differences in the context of the fragmentation of eighteenth-century Whig politics, and argue that they have important implications for how we understand and use the common-law tradition today.

Download the article from SSRN at the link.

MacLeod and Hall on Foundations of the Right of Charitable Uses @StMarys_Law @RegentLaw

Adam MacLeod, St. Mary's University Law School, and Mark David Hall, Regent University, are publishing Foundations of the Right of Charitable Uses in the Mississippi Law Journal. Here is the abstract.

In recent years, municipalities around the United States have enacted ordinances that prohibit or restrict food-sharing in public places. These ordinances make it difficult for charitable souls to share food with those most in need. In one case, a town in Arizona arrested a woman under an ordinance that prohibits sharing food in public for charitable purposes. The closest analogs to these laws are the English anti-almsgiving acts of the fourteenth and sixteenth centuries. One must look that far back in history because infringements of the right of charitable uses of property are exceedingly rare. Indeed, throughout the history of our constitutional and legal tradition, the law has repeatedly and vigorously secured the right to make charitable uses of one’s property. An examination of the history and tradition of charitable uses leads to the conclusion that the right is deeply rooted in our fundamental law. This finding has widespread implications today because the right is at stake not only in the enforcement of food-sharing ordinances but also in other attempts to limit or regulate charitable activity, such as laws that constrain the freedom of charitable organizations to solicit funds, requirements that private charities serve governments’ purposes, and burdens on charities’ exercise of their right of association.

Download the article from SSRN at the link.

Frassetto on The Historical Regulation of Intoxicated Firearms Possession and Carry: A Response to F. Lee Francis's "Armed and Under the Influence: The Second Amendment and the Intoxicant Rule after Bruen" @MarkFrassetto

Mark Frassetto, Everytown for Gun Safety, is publishing The Historical Regulation of Intoxicated Firearms Possession and Carry: A Response to F. Lee Francis's 'Armed and Under the Influence: The Second Amendment and the Intoxicant Rule after Bruen' in volume 108 of the Marquette Law Review. Here is the abstract.

Recently, the Marquette Law Review published "Armed and Under the Influence: The Second Amendment and the Intoxicant Rule After Bruen" by Prof. F. Lee Francis. In that article, Professor Francis provocatively argues that the Second Amendment protects the right of intoxicated people to carry guns in public. Francis argues that, under the history-focused framework for deciding Second Amendment cases laid out by the Supreme Court in Bruen, there is an insufficient historical tradition to support prohibiting intoxicated people from carrying arms in public. Francis is wrong about the historical tradition. The historical tradition of regulating the intersection of guns and alcohol, the tradition of regulating intoxication and substance abuse generally, and the broader tradition of prohibiting dangerous people from possessing firearms all provide historical support for the constitutionality of modern prohibitions on intoxicated people carrying and using firearms. This article will critique Francis’s article in three ways. First, Francis fails to acknowledge the full scope of the historical regulation of intoxicated people carrying firearms, which was extensive, especially during the mid-to-late-nineteenth century, the period which is most relevant to the Second Amendment analysis of state laws. Second, Francis’s piece fails to grapple with the ubiquitous general prohibition on public intoxication, which existed during the Founding Era and for much of American history. Third, Francis’s piece fails to address the historical tradition of prohibiting firearms possession by those who, like intoxicated people, posed a danger to themselves or others. All three of these traditions provide strong support for the constitutionality of prohibiting firearms possession by intoxicated individuals.

Download the article from SSRN at the link.

Feliu on From the Fox to Onlyfans: The Changing Landscape of Property Law @NovaLawReview

Vicenç Feliú, Nova Southeastern College of Law, is publishing From the Fox to Onlyfans: The Changing Landscape of Property Law in the Nova Law Review. Here is the abstract.

This law review article traces the rich evolution of American Property Law from its origins in Roman Law, through the influence of English Common Law, to its current complexities in the digital age. It highlights the continuous adaptation of property concepts to the evolving socio-political landscape, from fundamental principles like ownership and possession to the protection of intangible assets. The legacy of Roman Law, emphasizing property rights and contracts, laid the foundation for legal systems worldwide. The impact of English Common Law, with its doctrines of real property and equity, shaped American legal frameworks regarding ownership, title, and dispute resolution. Historical events such as the American Revolution and industrialization spurred significant developments in property law, leading to the recognition of new rights like water rights, environmental protection, and intellectual property. In the modern era, technological advancements present unique challenges, especially in intellectual property. Copyrights, patents, trademarks, and trade secrets are crucial for safeguarding innovation in a globalized economy. Issues like digital piracy, data privacy, and artificial intelligence continue to shape property law debates, emphasizing fairness, efficiency, and innovation promotion. This article underscores the enduring legacy of legal traditions and the capacity of property law to adapt to changing circumstances. By understanding its historical foundations and ongoing developments, we gain insight into how property law safeguards individual rights, drives economic growth, and fosters innovation in the United States and globally.

Download the article from SSRN at the link.

Call For Papers: Washington University Law Review Symposium on the 150th Anniversity of Minor v. Happersett @WashULRev

From Hannah Keidan, Chief Diversity Editor, Law Review Lead on the Symposium, Washington University Law Review, h.f.keidan@wustl.edu

Kaitlyn Salyer, EIC, Washington University Law Review, kaitlynsalyer@wustl.edu

Susan Frelich Appleton, Lemma Barkeloo & Phoebe Couzins Professor of Law, Washington University School of Law, appleton@wustl.edu

Travis Crum, Associate Professor of Law, Washington University School of Law, crum@wustl.edu

Call for Papers:

On Friday September 27, the Washington University Law Review is hosting a Symposium on the 150th anniversary of Minor v. Happersett, the case in which the Supreme Court held that women were not enfranchised by the Fourteenth Amendment's Privileges or Immunities Clause. We're casting a wide net for potential paper topics, and they can range from Reconstruction-era history, 20th century history on women's civil/political rights, feminist theory, and post-Dobbs developments. Abstracts are due by Friday June 14. Please see below for the Call for Papers. This symposium is primarily run by the students, but Professor Susan Appleton and I are serving as faculty co-advisors, and I'd be happy to answer any questions that you may have. The 150th Anniversary of Minor v. Happersett: The Past and Future of Women's Rights Washington University School of Law September 27, 2024 Call for Papers Abstract Submission Deadline: June 14 The Washington University School of Law and the Washington University Law Review will host a Symposium centered on the 150th anniversary of the historic St. Louis case, Minor v. Happersett, on September 27, 2024. (The 150th anniversary will align with the subsequent publishing of the Law Review's Symposium edition as Volume 6 of Issue 102 the following spring.) In 1872, Virginia Minor challenged a St. Louis registrar's decision to block her from registering to vote. Minor argued the Fourteenth Amendment conferred upon her the right to vote as a "privilege" of American citizenship. In 1875, the Supreme Court unanimously rejected Minor's assertion, ruling that voting was not a right of national citizenship. Despite the rejection of Minor's claim, this case remains an important historical moment in both American women's suffrage and the feminist movement at large. This Symposium will bring together scholars across many fields of law, including feminist studies, voting rights and election law, and related fields. Submissions having no direct relation to the Minor case are welcome. Papers might address topics including, but not limited to, the following: • The history and evolution of women's rights • Past or present voting rights and election law • Ballot initiatives post-Dobbs The Symposium will consist of approximately 3-4 panels over the course of one day, with the panels being created by the Law Review based on relatedness of subject matters across selected pieces. Participants will attend and serve on the panels, and will be asked to read up to a dozen papers (with special attention paid to the papers of others on their panel). The papers circulated for the Symposium are drafts, and the discussion on September 27 will include feedback. The Symposium will include a dinner the night before. There is no conference fee, and Washington University will host all of the meals on the conference date. Funding will be available to assist with travel expenses-each participant is eligible for up to $1,000 to reimburse hotel and economy-class airfare expenses. To apply, please submit an abstract of no more than 500 words to symposiums@wustllawreview.org by June 14, 2024. Submissions will be vetted by a committee of students from the Law Review, supervised by faculty advisors (listed below). Selection will be based on the originality of the abstract as well as its capacity to engage with other papers in a collaborative dialogue. Participants will also be invited to submit a paper for publication in the Washington University Law Review's Symposium edition (Issue 6 of Volume 102). The publication cycle for this edition will begin in February 2025, with publication estimated to be in the late summer of 2025. If you are interested in publishing a paper (10,000-15,000 words), please indicate your interest when you submit your abstract. Participants will be notified of their selection by early July. Drafts for distribution at the Symposium will be due on September 6. We look forward to your submissions and participation. Questions can be directed to the organizing Law Review members and their faculty advisors via the symposiums@wustllawreview.org address. Kaitlyn Salyer Editor-in-Chief Washington University Law Review kaitlynsalyer@wustl.edu Susan Frelich Appleton Lemma Barkeloo & Phoebe Couzins Professor of Law Washington University School of Law appleton@wustl.edu Travis Crum Associate Professor of Law Washington University School of Law crum@wustl.edu ------------------------------ Travis Crum Washington University in St. Louis School of Law ------------------------------

Amor on "They Willfully Themselves Exile From Light": Exile in Space, Stage and Metatheatre in William Shakespeare's A Midsummer Night's Dream

Zied Ben Amor, University of Sousse, has published “They willfully themselves exile from light”: Exile in Space, Stage and Metatheatre in William Shakespeare’s A Midsummer Night’s Dream at 1 Theatre Academy 93 (2023). Here is the abstract.

Exile runs throughout William Shakespeare’s A Midsummer Night’s Dream. Transformed characters are exiled from the human world when they change shapes. Others are forced to leave their countries and worlds to enter magical ones. Personalities and feelings shift because of magic. Examining the dichotomy between Athens and the forest and the theatrical transformations shows that exile is geographical, emotional and spatial. Exile is also endowed with a transmigrant dimension. The study of metatheatre in the play corroborates the presence of an exilic dimension. Finally, the application of Nathaniel C. Leonard’s and Robert Weimann’s fundamental notions of platea, locus, meta-platea, and meta-locus in A Midsummer Night’s Dream enables us to reach the finding that the Spectrum of Dramatic Layering hosts exilic manifestations. The research merges semantic investigations with the semiotics of theatre. Dealing with the matter of exile both from the lenses of literary and theatrical studies offers broader perspectives to understand the play’s nuances and complexities.

Download the article from SSRN at the link.