Professor Davis Co-Authors Article on Drug Pricing and Medicare

Professor Mickey Davis co-authored an article entitled “Should Medicare be allowed to negotiate drug prices?” with Peter S. Arno, Senior Fellow and Director of Health Policy Research at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.  The article was published in Volume 26, Number 20, of CQ Researcher, in its May 20, 2016 issue.

The article is available here: cqr20160520C

Sagers Publishes in New York Times on Staples/Office Depot Merger Loss

Chris Sagers, the James A. Thomas Distinguished Professor of Law, published a column in the New York Times’ daily business affairs blog DealBook concerning the Federal Trade Commission’s courtroom victory in challenging the merger proposed between the office supply chains Staples and Office Depot. Among other things, his column explores the defense team’s remarkable decision to rest in the case without putting on any evidence at all, and the legal consequences it may have had.

The article is available here.

Sagers Quoted in Wall Street Journal on Staples/Office Depot Merger Injunction

Chris Sagers, the James A. Thomas Distinguished Professor of Law, was quoted in the Wall Street Journal for his views on a litigation tactic that took the antitrust community only slightly less by surprise than did U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan’s decision to enjoin the $6.3 billion merger of office supply chains Staples and Office Depot. The defense team’s decision to rest their case without putting on any evidence was apparently unprecedented in a litigated merger case. While no one knows for sure, the decision appears to have been made on the basis of Judge Sullivan’s several, much-reported in-court statements casting doubt on the government’s evidence.
You can read the story here.

Professor Ray’s Book on Social Rights in South Africa Published by Cambridge University Press

Professor Brian Ray’s book, “Engaging with Social Rights: Procedure, Participation and Democracy in South Africa’s Second Wave,”  has been published by Cambridge University Press.  The Konrad Adenauer-Siftung Foundation will be sponsoring a South African launch of the book later this summer.  A more detailed description of the book and its endorsements from the Cambridge University Press site, available here.  The book description and some of the endorsements are reproduced below:
 Engaging with Social Rights: Participation, Procedure and Democracy in South Africa’s Second Wave
With a new and comprehensive account of the South African Constitutional Court’s social rights decisions, Brian Ray argues that the Court’s procedural enforcement approach has had significant but underappreciated effects on law and policy and challenges the view that a stronger substantive standard of review is necessary to realize these rights. Drawing connections between the Court’s widely acclaimed early decisions and the more recent second-wave cases, Ray explains that the Court has responded to the democratic legitimacy and institutional competence concerns that consistently constrain it by developing doctrines and remedial techniques that enable activists, civil society and local communities to press directly for rights-protective policies through structured, court-managed engagement processes. Engaging with Social Rights shows how those tools could be developed to make state institutions responsive to the needs of poor communities by giving those communities and their advocates consistent access to policy-making and planning processes.
Reviews & endorsements
“Brian Ray’s book is a remarkably insightful and powerfully analytical contribution to the evolving scholarship on social (socio-economic) rights adjudication. Using the lens of the South African Constitutional Court – internationally renowned as a pioneer court on social rights – Engaging [with] Social Rights focuses on the Court’s more recent decisions, comparing and contrasting these with the better-known earlier decisions … charting how the Court has used procedural approaches and remedies to navigate the kinds of separation of powers concerns … that typically preoccupy courts in crafting their social rights adjudication doctrine and practice. Highlighting the potential of the Court’s procedural focus – especially the meaningful engagement remedy – in opening up space for democratic participation in the context of acknowledged failures of electoral politics, [this book] provides a convincing and comprehensive account of the promise and pitfalls of social rights adjudication in South Africa.”
Jackie Dugard, University of the Witwatersrand Law School
“Drawing upon his thorough knowledge of both South African case law and important social scientific analyses of the relation between courts and social change, Brian Ray offers valuable insights into how the South African Constitutional Court has developed a new mechanism for judicial encouragement of policies that advance social and economic rights. By connecting the doctrine of ‘meaningful engagement’ with broader accounts of courts and democratic politics, Ray makes an important contribution to comparative constitutional law as well as to the study of South African constitutional law.”
Mark Tushnet, William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Law, Harvard Law School
“The South African Constitutional Court has received international acclaim for enforcing socio-economic rights provisions in their Constitution. Brian Ray’s impressive, well-written, and learned book examines those cases and various views (criticisms and defenses) as well as the Court’s most recent ‘second wave’ of such cases. He proposes novel and sophisticated theories on how the Court should handle competing concerns such as separation of powers, the incredible poverty the nation faces, and various political considerations. This book is essential reading for all those who wish to keep up with the latest developments in the socio-economic rights area.”
Mark Kende, Director, Drake University Constitutional Law Center

Akron Repeals Panhandling Law

On Monday night, the Akron City Council voted unanimously to repeal its anti-panhandling ordinance.  The law had been challenged in federal court on the grounds that it violated the First Amendment right to free speech by unconstitutionally limiting requests for help by the visibly poor.  The litigation was brought on behalf of 3 homeless clients by Professors Joseph Mead and Doron Kalir, law students Katie Weber and Emily Mikes who were enrolled in the Cleveland-Marshall Civil Litigation Clinic, in cooperation with the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio.

Professor Forte Lectures with Professor Adler; Is Named Visiting Professor at Princeton University; Publishes Commentary on Federalist Society Blog

As part of Cleveland-Marshall’s Transformative Dialogues series, Professor David Forte joined Professor Jonathan Adler of Case Western Reserve Law School on a panel discussing “Justice Scalia’s Quest–and Bequest” on April 20, 2016.

Professor Forte has been named the Garwood Visiting Professor in the Department of Politics at Princeton University for the Fall semester of 2016.  In addition, he will be Research Fellow in the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions at Princeton throughout the academic year.

Finally, the Federalist Society Blog has published David Forte’s commentary, Religious Liberty after Scalia.  The commentary is available here.

Professor Daiker-Middaugh Elected to the CMBA Board of Trustees


Professor Pamela Daiker-Middaugh

Professor Pamela Daiker-Middaugh was elected to the Board of Trustees of the Cleveland-Metropolitan Bar Association (CMBA).  Professor Daiker-Middaugh will serve a two-year term; she will be sworn in at the June 3 CMBA’s Ninth Annual Meeting at the Huntington Convention Center of Cleveland.


Professor Sagers Publishes Column in the New York Times’ Daily Business Affairs Blog


Professor Chris Sagers

Chris Sagers, the James A. Thomas Distinguished Professor of Law, published a column with DealBook, the New York Times’ daily business affairs blog, entitled “Everyone Wants to Get Tough on Antitrust Policy, but Not Really.” He discussed a recent Obama administration initiative to increase regulatory concern for matters affecting competition, and what it says about the overall state of American competition policy.

You can read the column here.