Professor Michael Borden was recently appointed by Chief Judge Patricia Gaughan to serve on the Northern District of Ohio’s Advisory Group, a committee of attorneys who advise the court on various matters, including changes to the court’s Local Rules.  Professor Borden Chairs the Advisory Group’s ADR Committee.

Professor Christa Laser is one of the founding “Masters of the Bench” for the newly-created Kathleen M. O’Malley Inn of Court, a new Inn based in Cleveland focused on Intellectual Property issues and practice.  The Inn is named after the Honorable Kathleen M. O’Malley, who started her judicial career as a judge on the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, in Cleveland, and now serves as one of the twelve active Circuit Judges on the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.  The Federal Circuit has exclusive jurisdiction over most federal appeals involving intellectual property claims, among other areas of law.

Professor Christa Laser is presenting her work-in-progress article, “Rethinking Federal Circuit Exclusive Jurisdiction in Patent Law,” at two upcoming events. On February 19, she will present the paper at the 2021 Works-In-Progress Intellectual Property Conference. On February 24, she will present the paper at a Temple University seminar hosted by Professor Paul Gugliuzza.

Professor Doron Kalir has published an op-ed on Cleveland.com titled, “Stop calling it a ‘trial.’ Senate impeachment proceedings had no resemblance to one.” Professor Kalir points out many striking differences between the Senate impeachment proceedings and an ordinary legal trial. He notes that the many of the “jurors” were either victims of or witnesses to the attack. In addition, some of those supposedly neutral jurors actively met with the defense team during the trial–and others made a public display of disregarding the evidence as it was presented. Several Senators announced their decision before the “trial” even began.

Finally, Professor Kalir calls out “the most ostentatious” departure from a real trial, the conduct of Senator Mitch McConnell. Professor Kalir explains that Senator McConnell took two remarkable steps that would be unheard of in an ordinary trial: he first delayed the trial so that it would not start until after President Trump was no longer in office, and he then relied on that very fact as a reason to vote against conviction.

Professor Kalir concludes, “please, stop calling it a ‘trial.’ It is demeaning to the very concept of a legal proceeding. Instead, just call it a GOP free-for-all. This would be a much more appropriate description.”

Professor Reginald Oh has published two op-eds on Demcast.

The first is titled “The Constitutionality of Convicting a Former President for High Crimes,” and argues that the Senate has the authority to convict a former president. He concludes, “Ultimately, whether the Senate acquits or convicts Trump, they should do so on the merits, not on jurisdictional grounds. The Constitution demands it.”

The second op-ed is titled “The Postmaster General is Unconstitutional,” and argues that the current process for appointment of the postmaster general is unconstitutional, because this office should be viewed as “a principal officer.” As such, Professor Oh explains, “the only person who has the power to appoint him is the president,” and the “[t]he statute authorizing the Board of Governors to appoint the Postmaster General . . . violates the Appointment Clause.”

On Feb. 15, 2021, Business Insider published a piece discussing the possible application of Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment on former President Trump. In the interview, Professor Kalir discussed the historical, political, and legal background of Section 3.

Section 3 provides that “No person” may hold “any office” in the United States (or any state) if, having previously taken an oath to support the Constitution, they “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” against the United States, or gave “aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.”  

Professor Kalir opined that invoking the section today — more than a century after it was last applied — in an attempt to prevent a person from running to the office of President of the United States may raise several significant legal issues — including constitutional text, separation of powers, and precedent.

Professor Milena Sterio published a blog post on Opinio Juris, on the topic of “Civil Society Documentation Efforts: Working Together to Identify and Find Solutions” (co-authored with Dr. Brianne McGonigle Leyh, Utrecht University, and Dr. Gregory Noone, Fairmont State University).  The post discusses human rights documentation efforts led by civil society organizations, as well as the recent Public International Law and Policy Human Rights Documentation Report, which Professor Sterio and her co-authors have contributed toward.  The blog post is available here: http://opiniojuris.org/2021/02/09/civil-society-documentation-efforts-working-together-to-identify-and-find-solutions/

Professor Milena Sterio was quoted in an article about the election of the new International Criminal Court prosecutor.  The article, “Last Men Standing for the ICC Prosecutor Election,” is available here: Last men standing for the ICC prosecutor election – JusticeInfo.net

Professor Milena Sterio participated as a panelist in an event titled “Sanctions Against the International Criminal Court: Constitutional and International Law Issues” on Jan. 27.  The event was co-sponsored by the American Branch of the International Law Association – ICC Committee, the AALS National Security Law Section, and the American Society of International Law. 

This panel discussion focused on sanctions imposed by the U.S. government against the ICC. Professor Sterio, as well as another panelist, Professor Leila Sadat, Washington University School of Law, are plaintiffs in two different law suits against the U.S. government, challenging the constitutionality of the sanctions regime.

On January 29, Professor Milena Sterio moderated an expert roundtable discussion on the “Rohingya Genocide.”  The discussion was organized by the Public International Law and Policy Group, a prominent Washington, D.C.-based NGO. Panelists discussed legal issues surrounding the atrocities committed against the Rohingya minority group by Myanmar armed forces, and whether these atrocities constituted genocide.

Professor Doron Kalir was interviewed on the upcoming (second) impeachment trial of former President Donald Trump. On Friday, Feb. 5, he was hosted by Peter Groff (a former Obama Administration Official) and Charles Ellison of WURD Radio Philadelphia for a prolonged zoom session on the B|E Note video hour. On Monday, Feb. 8, he was interviewed on WURD Radio on both procedural and substantive issues relating to the upcoming trial.