19th Annual Howard B. Eisenberg Do-Gooders’ Auction—An Interview with PILS Fellow Meghan Refinski

The 19th Annual Howard B. Eisenberg Do-Gooders’ Auction on behalf of the Law School’s Public Interest Law Society (PILS) will be held on February 10 at the Law School. Proceeds from the event go to support PILS Fellowships to enable Marquette law students to do public interest work in the summer. Meghan Refinski, a current law student, shares her experience here as a PILS Fellow.

Where did you work as a PILS Fellow?

This past summer I served as a law clerk at the Cook County Office of the Public Guardian.

What kind of work did you do there? 

In my role there, I advocated for children who had been abused or neglected by their parents. This included client interviews (both in the community and in the office), drafting pre-trial motions, researching case law in preparation for an appeal, and standing up in court for permanency hearings.

Continue Reading19th Annual Howard B. Eisenberg Do-Gooders’ Auction—An Interview with PILS Fellow Meghan Refinski

Happy Birthday, ICA?

ICC BuildingTime was, a “multiple-of-25” anniversary of the Interstate Commerce Act would have been an event. Law review symposia and even a speech by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter variously marked the 50th, 75th, and 100th anniversaries of the passage, on February 4, 1887, of “An Act to Regulate Commerce,” as the Interstate Commerce Act was denominated. Such celebrations (as these events substantially were) and studies seemed entirely appropriate, not simply on account of the Act’s introduction of federal entry-and-exit and rate regulation into the world of interstate railroads, but also for its status as the harbinger of the administrative state.

How times have changed. Insofar as I have been able to tell, this past Saturday—February 4, 2012—seems to have come and gone without any public notice of its being the 125th anniversary of the Interstate Commerce Act. That, too, is logical enough: after all, the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) created by the Act was abolished by Congress in 1995, and the landmark building along Constitution Avenue (pictured here) has been rededicated to other purposes of the federal government. At the same time, the Act lingers: there is no sign of the coming abolition of most of the ICC’s various descendants (grandchildren, I suppose they must be, if the ICC is the “granddaddy of them all,” as we are sometimes told), such as the Federal Communications Commission and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. And no one would suggest that the now larger administrative state is in danger of passing away anytime soon.

In all events, whether for its lasting effects or for itself in its time, the Interstate Commerce Act is worth remembering. So we will fill the void, as it seems. I will be joined by six distinguished scholars of regulated-industries law in writing short remembrances of the Interstate Commerce Act:

  • Richard D. Cudahy, Senior Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
  • Paul Stephen Dempsey, Tomlinson Chair in Global Governance in Air and Space Law, McGill University
  • James W. Ely, Jr., Milton R. Underwood Professor of Law Emeritus and Professor of History Emeritus, Vanderbilt University
  • Thomas W. Merrill, Charles Evans Hughes Professor of Law, Columbia University
  • Randall C. Picker, Paul H. and Theo Leffmann Professor of Commercial Law, University of Chicago
  • James B. Speta, Professor of Law, Northwestern University

Prof. Speta and I will edit these essays for a future issue of the Marquette Law Review; we may find a spot for them on this blog during the next several months.

Continue ReadingHappy Birthday, ICA?

The Court of Appeals Speaks in the Recall Case

Today, the District IV Court of Appeals issued an opinion that reverses a ruling by the Waukesha County Circuit Court denying a motion to intervene in the case of Friends of Scott Walker v. Brennan.  The practical impact of today’s Court of Appeals decision is that the committees seeking the recall of Governor Walker and other Republican officeholders will be permitted to intervene in the case of Friends of Scott Walker v. Brennan.  As a result, all of the legal rulings made by Judge Davis subsequent to his denial of the motion to intervene must be vacated, so that these legal issues can be reargued with the participation of the recall committees.

This means that Judge Davis’ earlier ruling, interpreting the statutory procedures for recalls under Section 9.10, is now vacated.  On January 5, 2012, Judge Davis ordered the Government Accountability Board (GAB) to take affirmative steps to identify and strike any recall signatures that are fictitious, duplicative or unrecognizable.  Because of this earlier ruling, the GAB went ahead and adopted new procedures, purchased new signature recognition software, and sought additional time in which to review the recall petitions.

Continue ReadingThe Court of Appeals Speaks in the Recall Case