Professor Sterio Publishes Blog Post on Venezuela

Posted on by
Reply

On January 6, Professor Milena Sterio published a blog post on Opinio Juris, a leading international law blog, where she discussed the legality of the U.S. attacks against Venezuela and the related abduction of Nicolas Maduro. Her post is titled “The United States’ Attack Against Venezuela: Might Does Not Make Right.”

Professor Sterio concludes that the U.S. violated Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter, as well as customary law, when it launched its January 3 attack against Venezuela, and when it kidnapped then-Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro. Professor Sterio also concludes that this type of military intervention by a Great Power represents problematic policy, as it opens the door to other similar interventions across the world.

Professor Sterio Interviewed Regarding Venezuela and Lindsay’s Halligan’s Appointment 

Posted on by
Reply

Professor Milena Sterio appeared on a segment of Bloomberg News live on January 7.  She discussed the legality of the U.S. attacks against Venezuela and the related kidnapping of Nicolas Maduro.  She also focused on legal issues surrounding Maduro’s now ongoing prosecution in the Southern District of New York. 

Professor Sterio also appeared on Fox News – DC on January 7, in a live news segment, where she discussed the recent decision by a federal district judge to request that Lindsay Halligan explain how and why she keeps acting as U.S. Attorney, in light of a November 2025 ruling by a different federal judge, who had ruled that she had been improperly appointed.  

Professor Sterio Comments in Media on US Attack on Venezuela

Posted on by
Reply

Professor Milena Sterio has been quoted in the media extensively regarding the United States’ attack against Venezuela on Jan. 3.  Professor Sterio was quoted in a Reuters article titled “Legality of US capture of Venezuela’s Maduro in focus at United Nations.”

She was also interviewed by Fox 5 (DC) on January 3, where she offered live commentary following President Trump’s Press Conference. In addition, she was interviewed on the Air Talk radio show (Los Angeles NPR station) on January 5; the episode is available for on-demand listening here.

Finally, she was quoted in a BBC article (“Trump’s seizure of Maduro raises thorny legal questions, in US and abroad“) on January 5.

Professor Debbie Hoffman Publishes on Cryptocurrency and Commercial and Real Estate Closings

Posted on by
Reply

Professor Deborah Hoffman, Visiting Assistant Professor of Law at CSU Law, has published an article titled “Locked Out at Closing: When Crypto Fails at the Closing Table,” co-authored with Wesley Brandi, CTO of Praefortis. The article is published in ACC Docket, the publication of the Association of Corporate Counsel.

The article addresses the increasing use of cryptocurrency in commercial and real estate transactions and the legal issues that can arise when digital assets are part of a closing. It examines problems such as custody failures, frozen wallets, lost private keys, and disruptions involving third-party platforms, each of which can delay or prevent a transaction from closing.

The article focuses on how these issues fit within existing real estate and transactional law frameworks and discusses the role of counsel in addressing them through diligence, deal structure, and contract drafting. It is aimed at in-house counsel and transactional attorneys advising clients where digital assets are involved.

Plain Dealer Publishes Professor Kalir’s Op-Ed on the Growing Rift Between The Supreme Court and Lower Courts

Posted on by
Reply

On December 17, Professor Kalir published an op-ed on Cleveland.com titled, “Texas redistricting case highlights growing judicial rift.” In the op-ed, Professor Kalir reviewed the recent Supreme Court “shadow docket” opinion in the Texas redistricting case. In that case, the Court reversed a 160-page opinion by the lower court with a short statement, without oral argument and without any real reasoning. In dissent, Justice Kagan highlighted the paradox of overruling such a thorough work product with a cursory review “over a holiday weekend.” Professor Kalir, following a New York Times survey among lower-court judges, argued that this opinion is a harbinger of a growing rift between the “one Supreme Court” and “other inferior courts” that the Constitution had invested with the “judicial power” of the United States. 

Professor Kalir’s Paper on Human Dignity Selected for Presentation at the Inaugural “Faith, Values, and the Rule of Law: An Interdisciplinary Conference”

Posted on by
Reply

On February 4-5, Seton Hall Law School will host its first-ever “Faith, Values, and the Rule of Law: An Interdisciplinary Conference.” The conference will examine “how the world’s greatest religious, theological, and philosophical traditions have all contributed to the understanding of justice and human dignity that underscore modern rule of law principles,” bringing together “scholars in law, theology, religious studies, philosophy, political science, international affairs, history, literature, ethics, and related disciplines.” 

Professor Kalir’s paper, “Jewish Human Dignity:  Equality Before God & Men,” was selected for presentation at the Conference. The paper traces the notion of “K’vod Ha’Adam” – human dignity – in the Jewish bible as one of the main origins of the modern notion of equality. It further claims that understanding equality in such terms should trigger a rebuttable presumption of “leveling up” of equality-violation remedies, an issue that has long been portrayed as “one of the most vexing issues of constitutional equality.”

Professor Laser Publishes Essay on Legal Empiricism

Posted on by
Reply

Christa Laser published the essay Ten Tips for Legal Empiricists in the Northwestern Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property. The essay, co-edited by Professor Laser and Professor Jordana Goodman, includes contributions from a range of leading empirical scholars on advice for empirical legal research.

In addition to Professor Laser and Professor Goodman, contributors to the essay include Mark Lemley, Lisa Larrimore Ouellette, Michael Frakes, Melissa Wasserman, Saurabh Vishnubhakat, Janet Frelich, Jennica Silbey, David Schwartz, and Neel Sukhatme.

The citation is Jordana Goodman and Christa Laser, Tep Tips for Legal Empericists, 23 N.W. J. Tech. & Intell. Prop. 227 (2025),

Professor Sterio Participates in Book Roundtable at Temple Law School

Posted on by
Reply

Professor Milena Sterio presented at a book roundtable at Temple University’s Beasley School of Law on December 11 in Philadelphia.  The book roundtable centered around Professor Harold Hongju Koh’s new book, The National Security Constitution in the 21st Century. Professor Koh, Yale Law School, is former Legal Advisor to the U.S. State Department and one of the most prominent scholars of international law worldwide. 

Professor Sterio’s remarks, on the topic of “Koh’s Mirror Approach as Restraint on Presidential Power in Matters of National Security,” focused on Professor Koh’s proposal, as described in his book, to require the same degree of congressional involvement when it comes to treaty withdrawal or exit as was required for joining the same treaty.  Professor Sterio’s remarks will be published in the form of a law review article by the Temple Journal of International and Comparative Law in 2026.

Professor Sterio Participates in International Criminal Court’s Assembly in The Hague, Netherlands

Posted on by
Reply

Professor Milena Sterio participated in the International Criminal Court’s Assembly of States Parties in The Hague, Netherlands, from December 1-5.  Professor Sterio participated as a delegate of the Public International Law and Policy Group, a Washington D.C.-based NGO (the ICC’s Assembly of States Parties is open to states and their delegates, as well as accredited NGO delegates). 

During the Assembly, Professor Sterio presented on a panel on the topic of “Practical Measures to Protect the International Criminal Court.”  Her remarks focused on the recent U.S. sanctions against three prosecutors as well as six judges at the ICC.  

Professor Sterio (top center) with other members of the Crimes Against Humanity Study Group at the American Branch of the International Law Association.

Professor Witmer-Rich Comments on Hospital Detention Policy

Posted on by
Reply

Professor Jonathan Witmer-Rich was quoted in an article by Signal Cleveland, titled “He brought a gunshot victim to the Cleveland Clinic. Hospital police cuffed and detained him.” The article tells the story of Ibrahim Alim, who was detained by the Cleveland Clinic police when Alim dropped off a friend who had suffered a gunshot wound. The police also seized Alim’s car.

The article reports that the Cleveland Clinic has a policy directing police to detain any person who drops off a gunshot wound victim, without regard to the circumstances of the case.

Professor Witmer-Rich explained that this policy likely violates the Fourth Amendment:

To legally detain a person and their vehicle, police must reasonably suspect they are involved in criminal activity, said Jonathan Witmer-Rich, co-director of Cleveland State University’s Criminal Justice Center. Police officers have to assess each individual on a case-by-case basis, he added, looking for specific facts that show the person is involved in criminal activity.

But the Cleveland Clinic Police Department’s gunshot wound policy does not mention the standard of reasonable suspicion. As written, Witmer-Rich said it very likely violates the Fourth Amendment.

“The problem here is that this is a blanket policy,” Witmer-Rich said. “… And so a blanket policy that has you seize the car and the person every single time, I think, is not legitimate from a Fourth Amendment perspective.”