Forthcoming Articles

2012, Volume 89

Preview: Prost v. Anderson and the Enigmatic Savings Clause of 2255: When is a Rememdy by Motion "Inadequate or Ineffective?"
Bryan Florendo

Preview: The Federal Arbitration Act, The Preemption Doctrine, and the Impact of AT&T Mobility L.L.C. v. Concepcion 
Kristopher Kleiner

Preview: Thomas v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co.: Semantics, Fiduciary Duty, and an Outdated Distinction
Jeremy Liles

Preview: Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization v. Winn: Reconsidering Flast’s Exception to the Rule Against Taxpayer Standing and Establishing the Tax Credit Distinctio
Edward R. Shaoul

2011, Volume 88.4

Special Issue: Socioeconomic Diversity and American Legal Education

Foreword: Social Class, Race and Legal Education 
Joyce Sterling & Catherine E. Smith

Class in American Legal Education
Richard H. Sander

Reflections on Class in American Legal Education
Richard Lempert

Reflections on Richard Sander’s Class in American Legal Education
Richard D. Kahlenberg

Class Privilege in Legal Education: A Response to Sander
Deborah C. Malamud

Meeting Across the River: Why Affirmative Action Needs Race & Class Diversity
Deirdre M. Bowen, J.D., Ph.D.

An Ounce of Prevention is Worth a Pound of Cure: Reframing the Debate about Law School Affirmative Action
Daniel Kiel

Class, Classes, and Classic Race-Baiting: What’s in a Definition?
Angela Onwuachi-Willig & Amber Fricke

Race as a Red Herring? The Logical Irrelevance of the Race vs. Class Debate
Arin N. Reeves

Race and Socioeconomic Diversity in American Legal Education: A Response to Richard Sander
Danielle Holley-Walker

Commentary on Professor Richard Sander’s Class in American Legal Education
L. Darnell Weeden

The Visibility of Socioeconomic Status and Class-Based Affirmative Action: A Reply to Professor Sander
Eli Wald

Listening to the Debate on Reforming Law School Admissions Preferences
Richard H. Sander

 

Events & Announcements

Marijuana at the Crossroads: A Symposium

On January 27, the Denver University Law Review presented our annual symposium. This year we explored the state of medical marijuana laws today, the issues attorneys confront in practice, the constitutional issues, and the ethical issues. For more information, please click here. This event created some buzz with the local media.

Thanks to all our speakers and everyone who worked behind the scenes to help make this a successful event. 

Denver University Law Review Creating a Buzz  

Our most recent issue, Issue 88.4, on Socioeconomic Diversity and American Legal Education is already creating buzz in the legal and education community.

The ABA Journal recently highlighted Richard H. Sander's article "Class in American Legal Education," available here.

In addition, Richard Kahlenberg commented on Prof. Sander's article in The Chronicle of Higher Education blog. Click here to read Prof. Kahlenberg's article on The Chronicle of Higher Education, and here to read Profs. Sander's article and Kahlenberg's reflection. 

Monday
Jan162012

 

 

Thanks to everyone who helped make this a successful event! 

Denver University Law Review presents

Marijuana at the Crossroads: A Symposium

Friday, January 27, 2012

University of Denver Sturm College of Law

CLE Credits: 7 credits (1.8 Ethics credits)

 

 Sponsored by the Constitutional Rights & Remedies Program at the University of Denver Sturm College of Law.


Wednesday
Feb082012

Ethical Issues, Medical Marijuana & the Practice of Law Panel 

Randy Robinson[1]

Mr. John Gleason, Regulation Counsel for the State of Colorado, opened the panel with a discussion of the interplay between the Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct and state medical marijuana laws. Mr. Gleason discussed Rule 1.2(d), which provides:

A lawyer shall not counsel a client to engage, or assist a client, in conduct that the lawyer knows is criminal or fraudulent, but a lawyer may discuss the legal consequences of any proposed course of conduct with a client and may counsel or assist a client to make a good faith effort to determine the validity, scope, meaning or application of the law.

Click to read more ...

Friday
Feb172012

Medical Marijuana and the Constitution Panel

Nathan Downing[1]

In the Medical Marijuana and the Constitution panel, moderated by Associate Dean Alan Chen of the University of Denver Sturm College of Law, Professor Robert Mikos from Vanderbilt University spoke first. He looked at the federalism issues surrounding medical marijuana and how the political process can protect states’ rights, even when the Constitution fails to do so. The Controlled Substances Act of 1970 made no exception for the medical use of marijuana and it is unlikely Congress will soon act to reschedule marijuana. Yet today, public opinions show about 70% of Americans favor the legalization of marijuana in some form. Are political safeguards a failure; is more judicial review necessary to give a voice to the will of the people? Not necessarily, certain political safeguards can protect state rights even in the face of opposite federal legislation.

Click to read more ...

Friday
Feb172012

The State of Medical Marijuana Today

Betsy Proffitt[1]

Brian Vicente, founder of Vicente Sederberg, LLC, a law firm working intensively with the medical marijuana community, began the panel discussing the legal issues and solutions for medical marijuana patients and providers. Mr. Vicente explained that Colorado is one of sixteen states that allow medical marijuana, and eighteen additional states are considering passing laws this year. Although not all states will succeed in passing the laws, it demonstrates the trend occurring across the nation. Mr. Vicente compared the progress of medical marijuana to gay rights. “Our parents generation thirty years ago didn’t think gay marriage was possible and now several states allow it. Anyone under 35 thinks it isn’t a big deal.”

Click to read more ...

Wednesday
Feb222012

Marijuana at the Crossroads: Issues Confronted in Practice  

Zoe Laird[1]

The day began with a heated discussion regarding the legality of marijuana in Colorado, created by the tension between the state amendment allowing medical marijuana and the federal prohibition on growing and distributing marijuana, a Class 1 drug. In addition to a fundamental introduction to medical marijuana, the panel explored issues attorneys confront in practice when working with marijuana growers and caregivers.

Click to read more ...