Steinglass Advocates for the Ohio Constitutional Modernization Commission to Review and Revise the Ohio Constitution

Dean Emeritus Steven Steinglass has been active in the effort to create an Ohio Constitutional Modernization Commission as a means to review and revise Ohio’s constitution .  He published, today, an Op-Ed in the Columbus Dispatch entitled Constitutional Commission is the Way to Go.  The Op-Ed provides a history of the Ohio constitutional amendment processes and advocates for a new approach to constitutional revision.  He urges voters to reject the option of a Constitutional Convention, which will appear on the ballot in November 2012.  Instead, the new approach, supported by a broad, bi-partisan coalition, would allow a bi-partisan commission to review the constitution and propose changes to the legislature.  The commission includes 12 legislators – six from each house divided equally between Republicans and Democrats – and 20 non-legislators selected by the legislative members. It may make recommendations  to the General Assembly only by a two-thirds vote.  Steinglass argues that the commission approach is well suited to facing the complex and divisive issues that will undoubtedly arise, and that the nature of the commission and approval process will ensure that only broadly supportable proposals will emerge.

To read Dean Steinglass’ Op-Ed, please click here.

Dean Steinglass was also inverviewed on National Public Radio regarding the Constitutional Modernization Commission.  Please click here for a link to the June 24 interview. Interview of Steven H. Steinglass on the Constitutional Modernization Commission and Call for a 2012 Constitutional Convention – Ideastream, WVIZ-PBS.  The interview starts 16 minutes into the video, at 16:05.

Hoke to Participate in Panel Discussion at Republican National Lawyers Association Election Law Seminar

On Friday, August 12, Professor Candice Hoke will participate in the Republican National Lawyers Association’s Election Law Seminar in Cincinnati, Ohio.  The panel will address”Electoral Reform:  Registration and Ballots for Military, Overseas, Student and Other Voters.”  Professor Hoke will discuss, in particular, The Threats Posed by Internet Voting.

Forte Publishes Originalism in the Classroom

Professor David Forte

Professor David Forte has published Originalism in the Classroom in the current issue of Academic Questions.  In this article, Forte evaluates the way we have taught law in the twenty-five years since Attorney General Edwin Meese’s plea to return to “a Jurisprudence of Original Intention.”    Forte begins by looking at several US Supreme Court cases in the areas of church-state relations, 14th amendment Due Process, and abortion.  It is through these cases, he argues, that the Court reawakened ideas of originalism.  Following these cases, Forte writes, originalism became a legitimate and principled method of constitutional interpretation.  Following Meese’s speech, he asserts, originalism became the most principled form of constitutional analysis.

Forte next addresses the impact of originalism, arguing that substantial research has been done on the topic since the Court and Meese reintroduced and even championed it as a principled method of constitutional analysis.    That research has provided this generation of lawyers with a new and deeper outlook on the original meaning of the most significant clauses of the Constitution.  According to Forte, originalism and the research it engendered has changed the way attorneys argue cases in the Supreme Court and how the Justices decide them.

Forte delves into the role of originalism in the classroom by highlighting three major indicators of originalism’s reach and influence.  First, originalism now plays a major role in the cross-examination of federal judicial appointees, especially to the U.S. Supreme Court.  Second, the news media often opines on ‘originalism versus the living Constitution.’  Finally, presidential candidates are now all but obliged to discuss their judicial philosophy because it will influence their judicial appointments.  It is largely for these reasons, that originalism is due a prominent place in law school Constitutional Law classrooms.

Forte has performed a longitudinal analysis of the major Constitutional Law texts used in law schools.  This study revealed that although Constitutional Law texts have remained largely doctrinally focused, in the 1980s and 1990s, originalism gained more specific attention.  He directs much of his further attention to the six texts used more predominately at the top 50 ranked law schools, evaluating the degree to which they present originalism, and the method they use to do so.  He also surveyed a Constitutional Law professors listserve and learned that as in other disciplines coverage of originalism is limited by time, and of course, the interest of the professor.  He concludes that whereas some Constitutional Law professors praise originalism and others ridicule it, originalism is alive and well in American Constitutional Law classrooms.

You can view Professor Forte’s article at:

Top Ten Downloads in Several SSRN Journals: Natural Resources; European Economics; International Environmental Law eJournals

Professor Heidi Gorovitz Robertson’s article Public Access to Private Land for Walking: Environmental and Individual Responsibility as Rationale for Limiting the Right to Exclude was recently listed on 4 of SSRN’s Top Ten download lists.  It was listed in the top ten for ERN: Natural Resources.  It was also on the Top Ten download list for European Economics: Agriculture, Natural Resources & Environmental Studies eJournal.    It was a Top Ten download in Property, Citizenship, & Social Entrepreneurism.  Finally, it was on the Top Ten download list for SSRN’s International Environmental Law eJournal.  You can access this article via SSRN at

Hoke Actively Engaged and Commenting on Voting and Election Law Issues

Professor Candice Hoke has been active this summer in the area of Election Law.  She was recently interviewed by The Statesman, an Austin, Texas, newspaper regarding a voting system decision of the Texas Supreme Court.  Commenting on the current state of electronic voting, Hoke said “[t]he court’s conclusion means that electronic voting is likely be further entrenched, even as researchers find new vulnerabilities. ”  She added, “[a]s precedent it’ll be difficult to overturn, but courageous courts could do so.” You can read the story at

Professor Candice Hoke

Professor Hoke spoke last week at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.  She participated in the Software Assurance Summer Working Group.  At the working group event, Professor Hoke chaired a panel on licensing and credentialing for software engineers.  You can download (application/pdf, 440.3 kB, info) the program, and see the event webpage here:
In July, Hoke participated in an international conference on Verifiable Elections and the Public in Dagstuhl, Germany.  Participants included computer scientists, political scientists, and government officials from around the world who work on internet or all-electronic elections.  The purpose of the seminar was to address the security and perceptions of security for electronic and internet voting systems worldwide.  For more information, see
Professor Hoke is serving as the Program Committee Chair for a peer-review international conference on Governance of Technology.  To date, the committee has released a Call for Papers for the conference, which will be held in December 2011.
Finally, Professor Hoke has reviewed and commented on eight  papers, and participated in discussion regarding their acceptance for a workshop on Electronic Voting Technology.

O’Neill Teaches Evidence to High School Students at Summer Legal Academy

On June 22, Professor Kevin F. O’Neill taught a two-hour evidence seminar at Case Western Reserve University School of Law as part of the 2011 Stephanie Tubbs Jones Summer Legal Academy.  The Academy, now in its sixth year, is an annual program, co-sponsored by C|M|LAW, designed to encourage minority high school students to pursue a career in the law.