Professor Milena Sterio, with a group of experts convened under the auspices of the Public International Law and Policy Group, submitted observations as amici curiae to the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Court in the Case of the Prosecutor v. Dominic Ongwen.

Professor Sterio’s observations focused on the allocation of the burden of proof and the appropriate standard of proof in relation to the applicability of the grounds excluding criminal responsibility enshrined in art. 31(1)(a) and (d) of the Rome Statute. Professor Sterio, with Dean Michael Scharf (CWRU School of Law), appeared in person at the International Criminal Court in The Hague, Netherlands, in February 2022, to present these observations during the Ongwen appellate hearing.

The International Criminal Court, in this appellate judgement, generally accepted Professor Sterio’s advice and cited Professor Sterio’s amici curiae observations six times in the judgment and three additional times in the annexes to the judgement.

The ICC’s decision is available here, at the link titled, “Appeals judgment on the verdict, 15 December 2022.”

Professor of Law Emeritus Deborah A. Geier has published the tenth edition of her textbook for the first law school tax class: Federal Income Taxation of Individuals 2023. The textbook can be downloaded for free at https://www.cali.org/books/us-federal-income-taxation-individuals in pdf or Word format, as well as ePub (for iPads) and Mobi (for Kindles) formats. Very soon, the book can be ordered in hard copy at cost from Lulu.com at the same link above. CALI’s eLangdell publishing seeks to reduce student textbook cost by publishing free e-textbooks. This tenth edition will be Professor Geier’s last edition, as she transitions to full retirement.

On December 4, 2022, the Business Insider interviewed Professor Doron Kalir on the recent “Twitter Files” controversy. Professor Kalir explained that because Twitter is not a “state actor,” the First Amendment is not properly implicated in this story. The article was titled, “You may think Twitter was wrong to censor the Hunter Biden laptop story, but it was not a violation of the First Amendment.”

Professor Matthew Green spoke on the significance of Bostock v. Clayton County, Ga. and issues pertaining to religion and LGBTQ rights that Bostock raised but left unresolved. The discussion was part of a civil rights-civil liberties course at Barnard College. 

Professor Milena Sterio participated in two meetings at the U.S. Department of State, Office of Global Criminal Justice, on November 15 and on November 17.  The November 15 meeting, chaired by Professor Sterio, focused on the topic of the possibility of the establishment of a single residual mechanism for all international criminal tribunals.  The November 17 meeting, also chaired by Professor Sterio, focused on the possibility for the U.S. Government to contribute financially to the International Criminal Court’s Trust Fund for Victims (U.S. law prohibits the U.S. Government from contributing financially to the ICC itself).  

Professor Sterio has been working on both of these issues and advising the U.S. Department of State. Professor Sterio’s findings will be published in the form of a White Paper in the near future.

Professor Milena Sterio participated in the American Society of International Law Midyear Meeting in Miami, Florida, from November 10-12.  Professor Sterio was a panelist on a “Career in International Law” panel on November 10, and on a panel on November 12, where she presented her article, “The Ukraine Crisis and the Legitimacy of the International Criminal Court,” co-authored with Professor Yvonne Dutton (Indiana McKinney School of Law). This article will be published by the American University Law Review in its next issue. In addition, Professor Sterio attended ASIL Executive Council meeting (she is currently serving a 3-year term on the Executive Council).

Professor Milena Sterio is leading a series of trainings for Ukrainian civil society organizations during the week of November 28th.  One of such civilian society organizations participating in the trainings is the Center for Civil Liberties, which just won the Nobel Peace Prize.  The trainings focus on core international crimes, such as genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and aggression, the prosecution of such crimes, as well as defenses available to individuals accused of such crimes.

Professor Milena Sterio, along with a group of experts, submitted a Comment to the International Criminal Court’s Office of the Prosecutor on November 23.  The Comment was submitted in response to the Office of the Prosecutor’s Request for Comments from experts on its draft policy on the prosecution of the crime of sexual persecution.  Professor Sterio and her expert colleagues, in their Comment, focused on the distinction between motive and intent within the prosecution of the crime of sexual persecution, and on the need to develop a comprehensive regime of victim participation within the context of such prosecutions.  

Professor Doron Kalir was quoted in an article on Verify titled, “Whether 14th Amendment applies to Trump depends on 3 eligibility questions.”

In the wake of former President Trump’s announcement that he will run for the presidency again, House Democrat Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.) is considering legislation to disqualify him from doing so based on the 14th Amendment’s Disability Clause (Section 3). In short, the Clause prevents some persons who “engaged in insurrection” to run for certain offices.

Professor Kalir, who was interviewed by Verify about the issue, opined that the Clause cannot apply to Trump for two reasons: First, the President is not listed in the Clause as one of the persons who could potentially “engage in insurrection.” And second, even if he did, while the Clause prevents a run to many an office, it does not prevent a run for the office of Presidency itself. Accordingly, according to Kalir, the Clause does not apply to Trump, and cannot prevent him from running for office.

Professor Steven Chien presented his empirical project, Portrait Project 2.0 – A Portrait of Asian Americans in the Law, at the 2022 National Asian Pacific American Bar Association (NAPABA) Convention from November 3-6 in Las Vegas. 

The project originated with A Portrait of Asian Americans in the Law, the first comprehensive account of the progress of Asian Americans in the legal profession, which was presented at the 2016 NAPABA convention in San Diego.  The final report, published in 2017, has provided a crucial resource for advocacy by and on behalf of Asian Americans in law firms, the corporate sector, government, and many other settings where the Asian American community continues to be under-represented, especially at the top levels of leadership.  The report has been cited extensively in the media and in proceedings before Congress and state courts. 

Professor Chien served as part of the research team that completed this five-year update of the Portrait Project and presented it at the NAPABA convention.  The new report updates previous findings on Asian American representation in diverse sectors of the legal profession.  It also has several new components, including data on Asian American lawyers’ experiences and perceptions of their role in light of the pandemic and anti-Asian racism, as well as ethnic subgroup comparisons that shed light on diversity within the Asian American community.  The updated report gives a concrete representation of the experiences of Asian Americans in the legal profession, and it provides a comprehensive empirical foundation for continued advocacy to advance the interests and aspirations of Asian American lawyers.  As with the original 2017 report, the updated 2022 report will be a critical resource of interest to every member of our community.