1. YEAR
  2. 2019
  3. 2018
  4. 2017
  5. 2016
  6. 2015
  7. 2014
  8. 2013
  9. 2012
  10. 2011
  11. 2010
  12. 2009
  • « Back
    01.30.12 Brooklyn Law School Faculty Foster Thought Provoking Scholarship in All Areas of Law
    photo of bls

    Brooklyn Law School’s faculty has produced a remarkable collection of work that has reached readers worldwide. They have influenced legislation, judicial decisions, and teaching methodologies. The Law School’s online brochure highlights the last three years of their work, exemplifying the range of topics and level of placement in top law journals.

    “Brooklyn Law School’s mission of combining theory and practice is perhaps best exemplified in the scholarly work of its faculty,” said Interim Dean Michael Gerber. “I’m proud of their commitment to contributing to their respective fields.”

    Some of their most recent work includes both new books and articles in top law journals. For example, with regard to intellectual property law, Professor Jason Mazzone’s published a new book, Copyfraud and Other Abuses of Intellectual Property to address the need to reform the law. Professor Mazzone said, “The issue is not that intellectual property rights are too easily obtained, too broad in scope, and too long in duration. Rather, the primary problem is overreaching by publishers, producers, artists, and others who abuse intellectual property law by claiming stronger rights than the law actually gives them.”

    Reflecting on 9/11 ten years later in her new book, Taking Liberties: The War on Terror And The Erosion Of American Democracy, Professor Susan Herman expounds upon how the laws have changed. She said, “A decade is a long enough time to allow us to step back and try to look at the whole picture of the costs and benefits of strategies that were forged during the panicky days right after 9/11. We must correct the lack of balance in our perceptions of the War on Terror by exposing how innocent Americans have been prosecuted, incarcerated, blacklisted, watchlisted, conscripted as antiterrorism agents, spied on, and gagged.”

    On the issue of tax deregulation, Professor Steven Dean argued its harm in his latest article published by New York University Law Review. He says, “Taxpayers--particularly sophisticated taxpayers--have never had more freedom to achieve favorable results through careful planning. Tax deregulation provides both a taxonomy of taxpayer autonomy and a clear normative account of the costs and benefits of its growth.”

    In “Nonbelievers,” published in the Virginia Law Review, Professor Nelson Tebbe asks, “How should courts handle nonbelievers who bring religious freedom claims?” and argues that no wholesale response is adequate. “Nonbelievers and believers should receive comparable protection in some situations but not in others,” he says. The method he applies is “polyvalent—it seeks to capture the full range of values that should matter, recognizing that the mix of relevant concerns may differ from doctrine to doctrine.”

    Finally, Professor Robin Effron focuses on how class actions have been viewed by Congress and the Courts. In her article, “The Shadow Rules of Joinder,” published by the Georgetown Law Journal, she argues that, “In the past decade, both Congress and the Supreme Court have shown increasing hostility to the use of class actions as a tool for aggregating large numbers of claimants. This development makes it even more urgent for scholars to confront the issues presented by other non-class action joinder devices. Lawyers and judges must make a more rigorous assessment of the viability of other joinder tools.”

    Learn more about our faculty scholarship.