Marquette to Host 2009 Central States Legal Writing Conference

As just reported on the Legal Writing Prof Blog, the law school will host this fall’s Central States Legal Writing Conference.  The conference planning committee (led by our wonderful Alison Julien) met last Friday, and I am already excited for the event.  The regional legal writing conferences tend to focus on ideas for improving our teaching, and the conference here next fall will especially emphasize reaching out to resources beyond the legal writing faculty–the librarians and other law school faculty.  The blurb from the Legal Writing Prof blog website:

[T]he 2009 Central States Regional LRW/Lawyering Skills Conference,”Climate Change: Alternative Sources of Energy in Legal Writing,” will be held on October 9-10 at Marquette University Law School in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Central States is also planning a Scholars’ Forum, which will be held on October 9 in conjunction with the conference.  At the end of the Scholars’ Forum and just before the welcome reception for the conference, conference attendees will be able to participate in an hour-long discussion on getting published and giving effective presentations.

Continue ReadingMarquette to Host 2009 Central States Legal Writing Conference

Law & Baseball

Matt Mitten has a new paper on SSRN entitled Baseball: An Illustration of How Professional Sports Are Structured, Internally Governed, and Legally Regulated in the USA.  The paper, which is based on a presentation Matt delivered at Dongguk University in Korea, provides an engaging overview of key legal issues in the regulation and administration of Major League Baseball.  I, for one, am still astonished whenever I read about that antitrust exemption!

Continue ReadingLaw & Baseball

Health Care Magnet?

Last January, I published a piece in WI Interest, the journal of the Wisconsin Public Policy Research Institute, arguing that the drafters of Healthy Wisconsin — or any similar program purporting to enact a universal entitlement to health care in a single state — could not constitutionally impose a residency requirement, creating the risk of health care migration and the associated problems of adverse selection. I did not seek to explore whether such migration would occur or who would migrate. I speculated, in fact, that the migrants would not be poor people, but those who are older or high risk.

WPRI has now published a study evaluating the probability of such migration. I have not yet carefully examined it, but I continue to believe that such migration (and the Supreme Court precedent that protects it) is a serious obstacle to state efforts to enact some form of universal health care and, for that matter, a variety of other initiatives that states may undertake in their once honored roles as “laboratories for democracy.”

Cross posted at PrawfsBlawg and Shark and Shepherd.

Continue ReadingHealth Care Magnet?