News & Events

In the wake of the 2016 election, a great deal of attention has been directed towards the processes by which we choose presidential nominees. Two independent political figures—Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders—rose to prominence in the 2016 election, each choosing a party to serve as their vehicle for a presidential campaign. Each established a strong populist, anti-establishment, and to some extent, anti-party, profile, albeit offering very different policy perspectives: they emphasized that they would run, and govern, “outside the system.” One, Donald Trump, had no prior elective or government experience, and he emerged from a complex process in which 17 candidates participated, some of whom but not others participated in a series of prime-time debates controlled by media organizations and not the parties. Yet, many Americans might be surprised that, for long stretches of our history, these outcomes would have been largely inconceivable under our presidential primary system.

Although the 2016 election has renewed interest in the presidential nominations process, and the legal structure through which presidential nominees are selected is one of the most important features in the design of American democracy, there has been very little writing in the law reviews on the subject. The New York University Law Review has chosen to host a symposium on the nominations process in order to start an important and timely discussion about the case for redesign of the system and, if so, how. The symposium will examine the historical trends in primary system design, and the role of parties in the nominations process and in the democratic process overall. It will invite debate over different primary structures (closed v. open primaries) and normative questions about the functions of the presidential primary election system, the desirable effects of various designs on voter engagement and participation, and the relative influence and responsibilities of political parties, candidates for the presidency, new forms of political organization such as Super PACs, and the media in our systems of democracy.

The N.Y.U. Law Review and the Center on Civil Justice at NYU School of Law invite you to attend “Rule 23 @ 50: The 50th Anniversary of Rule 23” Conference. The conference will take place on Friday and Saturday, December 2–3, 2016, in Vanderbilt Hall, Greenberg Lounge, located at 40 Washington Square South.

This is a wonderful time to reflect on Rule 23 – the history of the federal rule; its use in civil rights and mass tort cases; what the rule was meant to accomplish, and whether it has met its promise; as well as what is in store for the rule going forward. The conference will include an oral history interview with Professor Arthur Miller, who was there at the creation of Rule 23, and will conclude with a judges’ roundtable moderated by Professor Miller. For more information, please see the schedule below.

RSVP to attend the conference by clinking here.

*CLE credit will be available for both newly admitted and experienced attorneys.

Law Review invites you to attend the 2016 Law Alumni Association Fall Conference, “Judith S. Kaye ’62: A Judicial Legacy.” The conference, co-sponsored by the New York University School of Law and the Law Alumni Association, will take place on Wednesday, November 16, 2016 from 6:00-8:00 p.m. in Vanderbilt Hall, Greenberg Lounge, located at 40 Washington Square South.

This year’s conference will pay tribute to the legacy of the Hon. Judith S. >Kaye ’62, former Chief Judge of the New York Court of Appeals, by examining and recognizing her accomplishments and her profound impact on a wide variety of social and legal issues. Please join us for a diverse and dynamic panel discussion moderated by Dean Trevor Morrison, Eric M. and Laurie B. Roth Professor of Law, NYU School of Law.

Panelists include:

• Helaine Barnett ’64, chair of the New York State Permanent Commission on Access to Justice; past president of the Legal Services Corporation;
• Helen Hershkoff, Herbert M. and Svetlana Wachtell Professor of Constitutional Law and Civil Liberties; co-director, Arthur Garfield Hays Civil Liberties Program, NYU School of Law;
• Stephen Kong, chief counsel for the Economic Development Administration, US Department of Commerce;
• Hon. Albert Rosenblatt, retired judge, New York Court of Appeals; of counsel, McCabe & Mack; judicial fellow, NYU School of Law;
• Lisa Schweitzer ’96, partner, Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton; and
• Hon. Richard Wesley, senior judge, US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

A reception will immediately follow the lecture.

In a recent Scholastica blog entry, Online Editor Alice M. Phillips (’17) discusses the creation of the Merrick Garland Project. Read Phillips’s entire post here.

In a recent Huffington Post Crime Blog entry, Staff Editor Getzy Berger (’17) examines challenges to implementing police body cameras in jurisdictions both large and small. Citing the need to balance cost with accountability, Berger argues, “What is needed is a set of careful, transparent, and democratically formulated rules governing bodycam recording, access, and use.”

Read Berger’s entire post here. Berger’s piece is also featured on the N.Y.U. Policing Project’s website.

The New York University Law Review will begin considering Articles for the spring selection cycle on February 15, 2016. We accept submissions by Scholastica only. For more information on our selection requirements, please see our Submissions page.

In the September 2015 issue of Intellectual Property Magazine, Staff Editor Max Isaacs (’17) (with co-author David Munkittrick) explores the disconnect between courts’ reliance on expert musicologists in music copyright cases and application of the “lay listener” test, which “leaves it to the fact-finder’s ears to determine musical similarity.” Munkittrick and Issacs argue that expert testimony serves an important role in analyzing “technical musical elements,” but it “cannot completely displace the lay listener” test.

Read Issacs’s full piece here.

The Law Review has now completed its first selection season for 2015. We will reopen for submissions via Scholastica on August 1, 2015 for our summer selection season. Questions regarding article submissions may be submitted to lawreview@nyu.edu.

Congratulations to Steve Tensmeyer ’15, Andy Brewster ’15, and Sean Stefanik ’16, who all competed in the 2015 Orison S. Marden Moot Court Competition Final this evening! We are proud to note that Tensmeyer was honored for writing the best brief during the Spring semifinals. Stefanik, also the Law Review’s new Senior Articles Editor, received accolades for best brief during the Fall competition and was recognized as the best oralist of both the Fall and Spring competitions.

Congratulations to Articles Editor Jack Millman, Class of 2016, for publishing his piece, Gambling with Health Care, with the Ohio State University Law Review Online! Millman explores how low-income individuals could inflate their adjusted gross income using estimated gambling returns in order to qualify for Affordable Care Act subsidies in states opting against the Medicare expansion. In doing so, this novel analysis highlights the difficult position in which many low-income taxpayers find themselves and emphasizes the need for Congress to act. Download his article here.