• Faculty Workshops/ Conferences

    The Politics of Preservation: An Interdisciplinary Discussion of Cultural Heritage and Historic Preservation

    by  • February 23, 2016 • Faculty Workshops/ Conferences • 0 Comments

    Over the past century we have steadily shifted more resources, both intellectual and monetary, to preserving historic properties and protecting cultural heritage. More recently we have added to this preservation focus increasing concerns about who is entitled to define and lay claim to material culture from the past. Here in the United States these debates play out in the context of historic properties, the National Historic Preservation Act, and a variety of legislative acts that protect the cultural heritage of Native Americans. In the international realm these debates focus on the identification and protection of world heritage sites and the illicit movement of antiquities.

    Regardless of the separate and at times even conflicting legal regimes that govern the preservation of domestic historic properties and international cultural heritage, they share some of the same historic and cultural roots and give rise to similar issues and questions. Why do we put so much stock in the preservation of our material culture and built environments, even at the expense of other social and economic goals? How do we define what is worth saving and whose voices are privileged in that process? How do we reconcile the communal goals at the heart of preservation with concerns about protecting private property and sovereignty?

    This one-day conference will explore these issues through a cross-disciplinary discussion between leaders in the fields of archeology, anthropology, history, architecture, and law.

    The Politics of Preservation
    Friday, April 29, 2016
    Morris Hall, IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law
    565 W Adams St, Chicago IL (more…)

    Lori Andrews at i3

    by  • January 22, 2016 • Faculty Workshops/ Conferences • 0 Comments

    Lori Andrews and Hoda Kotb

    Lori Andrews (right) and Hoda Kotb

    Last week, Professor Lori Andrews spoke in New York City at “i3 – Insight, Innovation, Impact – A Summit for Women.” Sponsored by the UJA-Federation, the Summit brought together female thought leaders to share their stories of impact and change. In a five-hour program kicked off by Hoda Kotb of The Today Show, Professor Andrews shared the spotlight with women who had excelled in their fields—including women in law, science, journalism, innovation, and philanthropy. Andrews spoke on the issue of “Civil Liberties and National Security.” She fielded questions on whether the government should have a key to unlock all encryption on the web, how data aggregators collect personal information about people and what they do with it, how businesses might use facial recognition software, and the extent to which European laws can be applied against US-based social media companies.

    Read more about the conference here.

    SCIPR 2015

    by  • October 23, 2015 • Faculty Scholarship, Faculty Workshops/ Conferences • 0 Comments

    On Friday September 25, Chicago-Kent hosted the sixth annual SCIPR (Supreme Court IP Review) conference, an event that brings together intellectual property practitioners, academics, jurists and students to review IP cases from SCOTUS’s past term.

    Conference Website: https://www.kentlaw.iit.edu/scipr

    Welcome Remarks & Morning Session

    Opening Remarks - KrentChicago-Kent’s Dean Harold J. Krent introduced the conference and gave the spotlight to Professor Edward Lee, who reflected on “the impact nine people can have on others” and the ways in which the Supreme Court could change the name “Alice” into something feared (referring to 2014’s Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l case on patent-eligible subject matter). “We’re trying to find this year’s Alice,” he said.

    (more…)

    Perritt Presents at National Association of Attorneys General Meeting

    by  • March 3, 2015 • Faculty Scholarship, Faculty Workshops/ Conferences, Multimedia • 0 Comments

    From February 23-25, the National Association of Attorneys General (NAAG) held its annual Winter Meeting in Washington, D.C., bringing together attorneys general, federal officials, and other professionals to discuss current legal issues. Professor Henry H. Perritt, Jr., spoke at the meeting in a panel on unmanned aircraft systems (“drones”) and the challenges that arise in regulating them. See a video of Prof. Perritt’s presentation above.

    In his presentation, Prof. Perritt urged lawmakers to resist the reflex to rush in and regulate drones with excessive restrictions—especially smaller “microdrones,” which pose little threat to safety or privacy but which are integral to the development of the technology. He commended the FAA’s recent notice of proposed rulemaking, which addresses some of the risks drones pose while leaving sufficient room for markets to drive technological innovation. In this proposal, regulations are tailored to reality, encouraging a culture of compliance and law-abiding autonomy appropriate to the technology. Contrary to a common opinion, Perritt argued that the law serves best when it follows technology in this manner, waiting to see how that technology plays out in the real world.

    Prof. Perritt has written extensively on drones for numerous law and trade publications. See more of his scholarship here.

    Notable speakers at the NAAG Winter Meeting included FTC Chairwoman Edith Ramirez, FBI Director James Comey, and US Vice President Joe Biden.

    Brown Delivers Keynote at IU Symposium

    by  • February 19, 2015 • Faculty Scholarship, Faculty Workshops/ Conferences • 0 Comments

    On February 12, the Indiana International and Comparative Law Review (IICLR) hosted its annual symposium at Indiana University’s McKinney School of Law, focusing on current trends in international criminal law. Professor Bartram Brown delivered the keynote address for this year’s main topic—“Is 2015 the Beginning of the End for the ICC and Guantanamo Bay, or a Turning Point for the Law and Practice of International Criminal Law?”

    Click here for a full schedule of the symposium, which featured panels on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and on U.S. military commissions at Guantanamo Bay.

    According to its website, IICLR “is a student-edited law Journal devoted to the study and analysis of current international legal issues and events. Published continuously since 1991, the Review provides a specialized and unique format for students to take broad legal topics and shed an international and/or comparative light onto them.” The scholarship presented at the symposium is later published in a special symposium issue of the IICLR.

    Andrews Presents on Privacy at CALL

    by  • November 25, 2014 • Faculty Scholarship, Faculty Workshops/ Conferences • 0 Comments

    By Clare Willis, Chicago-Kent Research Librarian


    Lori Andrews presents at CALL

    Photo credit: Emily Barney

    On November 20, 2014, the Chicago Association of Law Libraries welcomed Prof. Lori Andrews as the speaker for their quarterly business meeting. Prof. Andrews spoke on “Privacy’s Dying Gasp and How Librarians Can Resuscitate It.” She started the talk by sharing her life-long appreciation for libraries, including the law library at Yale. She pointed out that online sources allow her to research things that could not have been found in a bricks and mortar library. But even though there is more information online, she added, it comes at the cost of the tracking and aggregating of private information online. Prof. Andrews gave several examples of how information posted online can be used against the person who shared it: in one instance, the consultancy firm Deloitte encouraged a group of life insurers to look to an applicant’s social network pages, especially for evidence of such personal characteristics as being an avid reader; eating fast food; commuting to work; and having friends who are skydivers, to determine if the applicant is a bad underwriting risk. When asked why an avid reader might be a risk, she speculated that the insurer might believe that avid readers have more sedentary lifestyles.

    Prof. Andrews explained that the information collected online goes to advertising and while she believed that most people would not mind a coupon, other advertisements can be more intrusive, especially those that use someone’s name and/or likeness. For example, two work colleagues could both “like” drugstore.com on Facebook and that affinity could produce a Facebook advertisement that tells their mutual Facebook friends that the two “like” a brand of personal lubricant.

    Prof. Andrews explained how social media can infringe on the right to a fair trial. In one example, she noted that criminal penalties may be enhanced if there is evidence that a defendant wore gang colors in a picture on social media. She pointed out that the Los Angeles Police Department considers plaid and black, otherwise benign patterns or colors, to be gang colors. She also noted that jurors find it difficult not to Google the facts of a case or tweet about being a juror. She told of a librarian who was charged with contempt of court for conducting her own online research into shaken baby syndrome when she was a juror in such a case.

    (more…)

    The Second Amendment and Section 1983: A Podcast

    by  • November 11, 2014 • Faculty Scholarship, Faculty Workshops/ Conferences, Multimedia • 0 Comments

    Nahmod_Sheldon thumb By Sheldon Nahmod [Reposted from Nahmod Law]


    As many of you may know, Chicago-Kent’s CLE department has presented my two-day Conference on Section 1983 for over thirty years. The next one is scheduled for April  16-17, 2015.

    As part of the most recent Conference in April 2014, I spoke in depth about the Second Amendment (Heller, McDonald and circuit case law) and its relation to section 1983.

    I am pleased to present the 45 minute podcast of that presentation and hope you find it of interest. It’s a very good way to understand the basics.

    Here is the audio:

    I invite you to follow me on Twitter @NahmodLaw

    Nahmod Presentation on Religion Clauses

    by  • October 6, 2014 • Faculty Commentary, Faculty Workshops/ Conferences, Multimedia • 0 Comments

    On September 30, professor and constitutional law expert Sheldon Nahmod led a discussion on the theory and jurisprudence of the Religion Clauses of the First Amendment, with a focus on the recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions in Town of Greece v. Galloway and Burwell v. Hobby Lobby. View a video of the talk below:

    The event was sponsored by Chicago-Kent chapters of the American Constitution Society, Federalist Society, Christian Legal Society, Muslim Law Students Association and Jewish Law Students Association (Decalogue). Visit Professor Nahmod’s blog for more insights into constitutional law issues.

    The Fourth Amendment in a Brave New World

    by  • October 2, 2014 • Faculty Workshops/ Conferences, Student Contributions • 0 Comments

    By Hanna Kaufman, Student writer for the Institute for Law and Humanities


    It is no secret that technology can be used to violate a person’s privacy rights. However, in his faculty workshop presentation and paper on Sept. 16, 2014, Professor I. Bennett Capers from Brooklyn Law School challenged this conventional view and argued that technology also has the capacity to protect citizens’ rights. He focused on the Fourth Amendment and how technology could assist police in carrying out searches more effectively and less discriminatorily than they currently do. For example, the police could use an app to contact a magistrate and obtain a warrant almost immediately so that there will be judicial involvement from the outset without the need for so many exceptions to the warrant requirement. He argued that new technologies can lead to more effective and more equitable policing with greater accountability to the courts and the public at large.

    Professor I. Bennett Capers of Brooklyn Law School presented on “The Fourth Amendment in a Brave New World” as a part of Chicago-Kent’s faculty speaker series.

    The audience appreciated the intention behind Professor Capers’ proposals, but some faculty members expressed concerns over whether some of the interventions he suggested could actually undermine some of his main aims or have other unforeseen consequences. For example, Professor Capers suggested using electronic scanning devices to detect whether citizens are armed with guns. He thought that it would be less troubling to scan everyone than it would be to maintain the current system of stop- and-frisk policing, in which racial minorities are often targeted. Some faculty members worried that such technology might actually enhance discrimination, citing examples in England where people in charge of monitoring video surveillance have been found to zoom in more closely on people they do not like. They suggested that officers might turn their scanners on the same people they often choose to stop and frisk now. Professor Capers responded that there could be requirements for search by scanner that are similar to existing rules for subway searches and airport security scans, and that perhaps randomization and audits need to be built into the process.

    Additional questions centered on unforeseen consequences, particularly those that might follow from Professor Capers’ controversial idea of using facial recognition technology to access a person’s criminal and other records just by scanning a person’s face. Some in the audience wondered how such a large database of information would be safeguarded, especially when mug shots are often publicly traded. Some faculty members also expressed discomfort over increasing the ease of accessing such information at a time when the police force is highly militarized and might use the information as a justification for violence against undeserving citizens.

    These are challenging questions without clear answers. Of course, the discussion itself supports a main facet of Capers’ argument: technology is neither inherently rights-denying or rights-enhancing. It is neutral. And with situations like that in Ferguson seeming to increase in frequency, it is important that we follow down Professor Capers’ path and at least try to steer our use of technology toward creating a fairer world.