Professor Oh Publishes Essay on Critical Race Theory

Professor Reginald Oh has published an article titled “An Academic Theory Has Become the 21st Century’s Willie Horton” in the Washington Monthly. In the article, Professor Oh argues that “the Right is exploiting Critical Race Theory (CRT) to trigger explicit and implicit racial biases about what it deems to be dangerous, radical African American ideologies.”

Professor Oh contends that “the attacks on CRT are based on Big Lies that castigate complex legal scholarship as absolutist, dogmatic ideology laying out a programmatic blueprint for laying waste to the American social order.”

Professor Oh identifies four general themes of CRT scholarship:

  • “First, CRT is committed to achieving racial equality and justice.”
  • “Second, CRT seeks to achieve its broad goals of racial justice and equality by embracing the full complexity of race, racism, and social reality.”
  • “A third general feature of CRT is careful, nuanced analysis,” characterized by a “more thoughtful and introspective” voice.
  • “Fourth, CRT emphasizes nonviolence, community building, and even friendship.”

Professor Oh argues readers to familiarize themselves with the actual content of CRT scholarship. He concludes that “defending CRT is ultimately about defending truth and democracy.”

Professor Kalir Notes on the Qualified Immunity Paradox for the Federal Bar Association Newsletter

The recent Federal Bar Association Northern District of Ohio Newsletter featured a short Note from Clinical Professor of Law, Doron Kalir. The Note, titled “The Qualified Immunity Paradox and the Sixth Circuit Moderwell Opinion,” discusses the requirement of “clearly-established law” which a plaintiff needs to show in order to overcome a qualified immunity defense.

This requirement – in essence, asking a plaintiff to show that someone else in their shoes has already prevailed in similar circumstances – may lead to an infinite regression paradox:  Assume, for example, that a police officer continuously places his knee on the neck of a restraint suspect, who is also handcuffed, for eight minutes and 46 seconds, causing the suspect’s death; assume, in addition, that this set of “particular circumstances” has never occurred before. How, then, could a § 1983 plaintiff prevail over a qualified immunity defense in such circumstances? 

The Note discusses this paradox and the ways in which the Supreme Court, and now the Sixth Circuit, have begun to resolve it. The Note can be found on pages 8-10 of the Newsletter.

Professor Sagers on Growing Democracy Podcast

Chris Sagers, the James L. Thomas Professor of Law, was featured on a recent episode of Growing Democracy, a podcast produced by the Growing Democracy Project at Kent State University. Hosts Ashley Nickels and Casey Boyd-Swan, policy scholars at Kent, discussed with Sagers how federal antitrust might fit as a component of improving American democracy and political participation.

Supreme Court Cites Professor Sagers in Historic Antitrust Ruling

In a historic ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court this week ruled 9-0 that the NCAA’s amateurism regime violates antitrust law

In the course of its opinion (see p. 25), the Court cited a friend-of-the-court brief co-authored by Professor Chris Sagers. Sagers, working with Professor Mike Carrier of Rutgers law school, submitted on behalf of 65 other law professors (one of whom was Professor Doron Kalir of C|M|Law).

Professor Kalir Interviewed on Harvard Affirmative Action Case

On Monday, June 14, the Supreme Court issued an Order in the Harvard Affirmative Action case seeking the opinion of the Solicitor General on the case. Law360 interviewed Clinical Professor of Law Doron Kalir on the significance of that move. Kalir explained that, in general, asking the opinion of the Solicitor General – sometimes referred to as the “Tenth Justice” – is often a sign that the Court is heavily considering taking the case. He opined that with the new super-majority of conservatives on the Court, this case might spell the beginning of the end for Affirmative Action in Higher Education. 

The article is here:

C|M Law Creates 3+3 Program with Baldwin Wallace University

Cleveland-Marshall College of Law is pleased to announce that it has entered into a 3+3 partnership with Baldwin Wallace University. This latest 3+3 agreement is particularly satisfying, as C|M Law can trace the origin of one of its predecessor law schools to Baldwin Wallace. In 1897, then-Baldwin University (prior to its merger with German Wallace college) created a law school–one of the first in the country to admit women–which would eventually merge with another law school and become the Cleveland-Marshall College of Law.

In the last six years, Cleveland-Marshall College of Law has created an internal 3+3 program at Cleveland State University and entered into external agreements with Lake Erie College, the University of Findlay, Ursuline College, Notre Dame College, Mercyhurst University (in Pennsylvania), Trine University (in Indiana), Hiram College, Marietta College, Wagner College (New York), Rust College (Mississippi), and now Baldwin Wallace University.

These agreements permit students to complete both their undergraduate and law degrees in six years rather than seven, with their first year of law school satisfying the student’s final year of undergraduate credits, as well. Saving students both time and money, this opportunity is consistent with the value proposition inherent in everything we do.

Professor Robertson Publishes Letter to the Editor on Home Rule

Professor Heidi Gorovitz Roberton has published a letter in the June 13, 2021, print edition of the Sunday Cleveland Plain Dealer. Her letter is titled “Erosion in Ohio home-rule rights hurts citizens, helps monied interests.” Professor Robertson’s letter highlights the benefits of home rule related to oil and gas law. The letter is available here.

Professor Mika Publishes Article on Survivor Stories

Professor Karin Mika has published an article, “Stories Lived, Stories Told: The Significance of Survivor Stories in our Populist World,” in the International Journal of Arts, Humanity, and Social Sciences.  The link to the publication is here:, and a pdf is here:

Here is the article’s abstract:

Although all stories of all our ancestors have significance, the stories of World War II have particular relevance in terms of understanding the mentality that has resulted in what seems to be blatant hatred for “the other.” All history, and especially the history that leads to the hatred causing wars, is significant; however, World War II has a particular unique significance related to the United States as we currently know it. It was the defining event of the Twentieth Century in terms of the values that many have embraced as particularly American (e.g., work ethic, coming together in patriotism, and a “fierce defense of freedom of democratic institutions”). It was also the defining mind-set of those who now are considered part of the Baby Boomer generation. Sadly, the world, which has never been free from war, is seeing a resurgence in the type of hatred that resulted in the existence of Hitler. This may be cyclical in nature for the very reason that the survivors and their stories are now leaving us. Not letting their stories go with them might give us our last and best chance to make sure that the worst that comes from extremist populism does not happen again, or is at least hindered. 

Professor Sterio Advises on Sudan Peace Negotiations

Professor Milena Sterio attended the first round of peace negotiations between the Government of Sudan and one of the Sudan rebel movements, the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM)-North, in Juba, South Sudan.  Professor Sterio (pictured below right) provided legal expertise and guidance for the ongoing negotiations, as an academic expert and representative of the Public International Law and Policy Group (PILPG). 

The PILPG, along with representatives of the United Nations Integrated Transition Assistance Mission in Sudan, has been involved in mediating the peace talks, and providing legal assistance in terms of identifying compromise positions and drafting legal language to correspond to such compromise positions.  

In October 2020, the Government of Sudan signed a comprehensive peace agreement, the Juba Peace Agreement, with several different rebel groups across Sudan.  SPLM-North did not sign the Juba Peace Agreement, and is instead negotiating currently with the Government of Sudan, in order to develop a separate peace agreement.  Negotiations are likely to continue throughout the summer, and Professor Sterio is continuing to provide legal assistance remotely, and is likely to return to Juba in July or August.  

Professor Sterio Co-Authors Op-Ed on Rohingya Genocide

Professor Milena Sterio co-authored an op-ed with Dean Michael Scharf (Case Western Reserve University School of Law) and Professor Paul Williams (American University Washington College of Law) on June 1.  The op-ed, titled “Why the US Should Recognize the Rohingya Genocide,” argues that the Biden Administration should be willing to label the atrocities committed against the Rohingya ethnic group as genocide.  The op-ed is available here: Why the US Should Recognize the Rohingya Genocide – The Diplomat