TEMPLETemple University James E. Beasley School of Law Alumni News • March 2018BRISHEN ROGERS ASKS ‘HOW IS THE GROWTH OF THE INTERNET LIKELY TO CHANGE WORK?’BREAKING NEWS: Temple Law’s Best U.S. News Ranking EverESQ_Mar18_Revised_CS6_crw2.indd 13/16/18 12:17 PMInside this issueDAVID KAIRYS Professor’s work in the 70s is featured in a Netflix series. 7ALUMNI NEWSClass notes and featured alumni achievements. WINTER EVENTS AT TEMPLE LAW Law school hosts ‘Walking While Black’ panel, and lots of other law school events.81014TRIAL ADVOCACY Trial team wins regionals, headsto the nationals. Edward Ohlbaum is honored posthumously.3CAREERS IN INTERNATIONAL LAW Neil Nolen ’95 and other alumni report on diverse career paths. FACULTY IN THE MEDIA Members of the law faculty are widely quoted on a wide range of timely issues. 4Temple University Beasley School of Law is #47 overall in the March 2018 U.S. News and World Report ranking of U.S. law schools. The ranking places Beasley in the top 50 for the first time, up from #53 in 2017. Individual Beasley programs ranked by U.S. News are: #2 Trial Advocacy #6 Part time programs #15 International Law #17 Legal Writing #24 Health Care LawESQ_Mar18_Revised_CS6_crw1.indd 23/13/18 10:23 PMBUILDING A BETTER PLATFORM ECONOMY Rogers teaches and studies labor law, which he says is “about workers using collective action to build economic power and using economic power to work towards justice.” Rogers says that innovative companies like Uber and Airbnb have created what he calls the platform economy, in which buyers and sellers conduct their transactions over an online platform provided by a third party. “What [Uber and Airbnb] do is set up apps that match consumers and workers or service providers,” explains Rogers. He’s quick to point out that the companies’ preference for the term, “sharing economy,” is misleading. “I use the term ‘platform economy’ instead of ‘sharing economy’ because we have to realize these are entirely economic relationships. Nobody is ‘sharing’ anything through Uber or Airbnb. To quote Robert Nozick, ‘these are capitalist acts between consenting adults.’”Rogers believes this innovative economy has the potential to open up a new frontier in how economic power is created and distributed—if we proceed with care. One of his goals as a scholar is to advocate for just that.“The emergence of the platform economy raises questions about how best to structure it,” he says. “How does it require us to adapt our thinking to new circumstances, and how do we adapt workers’ protections to those circumstances? How is the growth of the Internet likely to change work? How is that going to change the economy and political economy more generally? That’s the set of questions I have.”Rogers’ interest in these questions is driven in part by his involvement in worker justice issues dating back to his college days, when he joined a living wage campaign on behalf of campus workers at the University of Virginia, and discovered a passion for the organizing process. That led to a five-year stint in community and union organizing, including work for Service Employees International Union (SEIU), after which he enrolled at Harvard Law School to study labor law. After earning his J.D., Rogers served for two years as legal counsel at Change to Win labor federation in Washington, D.C. before returning to Harvard Law as a Climenko Fellow in 2008. A member of the Temple Law faculty since 2010, he has been a prolific scholar whose insight on labor issues is widely sought by legal and lay audiences alike.continued on next pageFor Temple Law professor Brishen Rogers, companies like Lyft and Uber offer more than just a convenient ride. They’re the first movers of an economic evolution, if not a revolution, and Rogers has some questions about where they will take us.ESQ_Mar18_Revised_CS6_crw1.indd 33/13/18 10:23 PM2 • TEMPLE ESQ. MARCH 2018One reason Rogers is in such demand is his keen understanding that the issues he studies are far from “academic.” “Union organizing, especially, was a really fascinating experience, because I saw workers standing up for their rights in a way that changed their understanding of themselves and even their place within society,” he recalls. “If you are a low-wage worker, you’ve been told for a very long time by most of the world that you’re not really valuable, your work isn’t valuable, and that you’re not contributing much to society. When workers decide to organize and are able to win some kind of a victory, they realize that if they work collectively, they have power. It’s a dramatic transformation. People go from feeling completely downtrodden to feeling very powerful, and you see changes in other parts of their lives as well.”It’s the impacts those human experiences of dignity and self-worth have on our choices about how to structure the economy that fascinate Rogers. And from that perspective, the “new and innovative” platform economy could turn out to be revolutionary—or it could be anything but.“In the 20th century,” Rogers explains, “white male workers in auto plants and elsewhere were making pretty high wages with great benefits, but people of color and women were working low-skill jobs that weren’t unionized, and so they were excluded from New Deal protections. The market for their labor was highly informal, contingent, and marked by all sorts of racial and gender inequalities. That continued from page 1Building a better platform economyremains true about a lot of work being performed today. This informal sector has in fact become the larger part of the economy. The platform economy contributes to that, and has the potential to push it in a good direction in some places.”Imagine, Rogers suggests, that services like home health care, child care, tutoring, and landscaping—all typically performed by low-income women and people of color—were available via an app like Uber. “Let’s say someone sets up a platform and that platform is the employer,” he begins. “The platform takes out the taxes, purchases a group health insurance plan, sets up a 401k. Whether the workers organize themselves or the platform is owned by some enterprise, now the workers have more protection. And the fact that it’s a potentially national scale company or cooperative that’s going to do that makes it economically feasible in a way that it has not been in prior generations. As a result, markets that are very informal can acquire a degree of formality that’s actually very helpful to both workers and consumers.”That’s a good outcome, in Rogers’ opinion, and one for which he advocates in his writing. The alternative, he says, is that the familiar pattern of inequality and exploitation simply unfolds in a new and innovative setting. Quoting his former boss at the SEIU, Rogers sums it up neatly: “Change is inevitable,” he says, “but progress is optional.”— Rebecca SchatschneiderIN THE NEWSJANUARY 2018 Professor Brishen Rogers is among “thirty-six economists and professors of law and economics [filing] an amicus curiae brief to assist the Supreme Court in understanding the free-rider problem at issue in Janus v. AFSCME. In the labor case, Janus v. AFSCME, the court will consider whether public-sector unions may require non-members to help pay for collective bargaining. The brief argues that the free-rider problem has broad application and acceptance in economics. While this is obvious to economists, it is at issue in this case. The key point the brief makes is that it is well established in economics that if an individual chooses not to pay for something that will be provided to them for free, that does not mean they do not value it.”—News from EPI (Economic Policy Institute)BRISHEN ROGERS, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF LAW Brishen Rogers, who earned a J.D. cum laude from Harvard and a B.A., with high distinction, from the University of Virginia, joined the faculty of Beasley School of Law in 2010. He teaches torts, employment law, employment discrimination, and various labor law courses. Rogers’ current research explores the relationship among labor and employment law, technological development, and economic and social equality. He is writing a book on those questions, entitled Rethinking the Future of Work: Law, Technology, and Economic Citizenship (under contract with MIT University Press). In addition to his law review publications, he has contributed to the Boston Review, the Washington Post Outlook, Onlabor.org, and ACSblog, the blog of the American Constitution Society.ESQ_Mar18_Revised_CS6_crw1.indd 43/13/18 10:23 PMTwo Temple teams advance to the nationals TEMPLE ESQ. MARCH 2018 • 3Edward Ohlbaum ’76 posthumously inducted into Trial Lawyer Hall of FameFEBRUARY 5, 2018 At the time of his tragic death in 2014 at the age of 64, Edward D. Ohlbaum ’76 had been a member of Temple Law’s faculty for almost thirty years. During that time the highly esteemed teacher conceived, built, and sustained a trial advocacy program that continues to draw national attention and accolades to Temple Law. In February, in honor of his contributions to the field of trial advocacy, Edward Ohlbaum was inducted into the Trial Lawyer Hall of Fame at a ceremony sponsored by the Trial Lawyers Summit in Miami, Florida. Ohlbaum’s wife, Karyn L. Scher, Provost JoAnne A. Epps, and Dean Gregory N. Mandel attended the posthumous induction of a tireless advocate and teacher.Professor Jules Epstein, who serves as director of Temple Law’s advocacy programs, says of his former friend and colleague: “This is a signal moment for the law school, as Eddie was not merely a pioneer and giant in advocacy and evidence education but a titan in the courtroom and a person who used his lawyering skills to fight for social justice.”The Trial Lawyer Hall of Fame, a project of the National Trial Lawyers Association, established a permanent home at Temple Law School’s Klein Hall in 2014 to honor “remarkable individuals, both past and present, who have left an indelible mark on the American legal tradition through a lifetime of service to the American public, the Constitution, and the American trial bar.” Trial team members Gregory Dachko ’19 and Gabrielle Green ’18 made it to the final four out of 22 teams at the Temple-hosted competition. Izabella Babchinetskaya ’19 and Yashesh Patel ’18 are regional trial advocacy champions, and will advance to the national competition. Babchinetskaya also won “best advocate” in her team’s final round. FEBRUARY 12, 2018 Two Temple Law teams were Region III finalists in the National Trial Competition, the lead-up to the national competition to be held in April. In a field of 22 teams from 12 regional law schools, both of Temple’s teams made the final four. YASHESH PATEL ’18 and IZABELLA BABCHINETSKAYA ’19 won their final round, making them regional champions and eligible to compete in the national finals in Texas. Babchinetskaya was also honored as best advocate in her team’s final round, an unusual achievement for a second year law student. GABRIELLE GREEN ’18 and GREGORY DACHKO ’19 finished as regional finalists. The victorious teams were coached by Professor Jules Epstein, the director of advocacy programs, along with Caroline Cinquanto, the former director of the LL.M. in Trial Advocacy program. The regional competition is hosted by Temple Law and directed by MARISSA BLUESTINE ’95, a former trial team champion and current director of the Pennsylvania Innocence Project.Trial team shines at civil competitionOCTOBER 24, 2017 National Trial Team members YASHESH PATEL ’18, IZABELLA BABCHINETSKAYA ’19, GABRIELLE GREEN ’18, and DYLAN SMITH ’19 earned semi-finalist honors at the annual National Civil Trial Competition held in Santa Monica, CA.The National Civil Trial Competition, co-sponsored by Loyola Law School, Los Angeles and the Santa Monica law firm Greene Broillet & Wheeler, pits teams from 16 of the nation’s top law schools against one another over three days of mock trial litigation. Now in its 16th year, the competition is one of the most prestigious in the nation, billed as a “Super Bowl” for law schools. The team was co-coached by Professor Jules Epstein and MARISSA BLUESTINE ’95. They were assisted by PROFESSOR SARA JACOBSON, J.D. ’97, LL.M. IN TRIAL ADVOCACY ’02, and former trial team members JOEL MICHEL ’16 and COURTNEY CHLEBINA ’17.Dean Gregory Mandel accepted the award from the Hall of Fame, with (left) Assistant Dean Debbie Feldman and (right) Temple University Provost JoAnne Epps.ESQ_Mar18_Revised_CS6_crw1.indd 53/13/18 10:23 PM4 • TEMPLE ESQ. MARCH 2018Law school applications on the rise, says Dean MandelA recent report from the Law School Admission Council shows that, after several years of plummeting demand for a legal education, the number of people seeking a J.D. has suddenly increased. As of mid-January, the number of law school applications submitted in the 2018-19 admissions cycle was nearly 11 percent higher than it was around the same time in the 2017-18 cycle.“As law school applications tend to be cyclical, I expect that we are in the beginning of a longer-term increase in applications,” GREGORY N. MANDEL, dean and professor at Temple University’s Beasley School of Law, said via email. “That said, given broader trends in the legal market and the extreme high before the recession, I do not expect that we will reach the level of law school applications that we were at ten years ago.” —U.S. News and World Report, January 29, 2018Dean Gregory MandelTom Lin comments on CEO privacy One difficult area with CEO health disclosures is that chief executives don’t always share all the information they have with their companies, said former SEC Chairman Harvey Pitt, who is also the founder of Kalorama Partners.Key executives such as the CEO, top officer, and directors should sign waivers when they are hired by public companies that would allow disclosure of health issues at the board’s discretion, said Allan Horwich, a partner at Schiff Hardin and Northwestern University law professor. He’s also proposed modifying SEC rules to specifically require disclosure of any health implications that might affect an executive’s ability to run the company in the ensuing two years.There’s been no formal move to change SEC rules, and any “pressure for rules has to come from the marketplace,” said TOM LIN, a Temple University law professor who researched CEO privacy and disclosure issues. Frankly, he said, one reason there’s no clear guidance is that some CEOs are less important to their company or industry than others.“Not every CEO is Warren Buffett or Steve Jobs,” Lin said. —Bloomberg, December 19, 2017Professor Tom LinJonathan Lipson and Andrea Monroe react to ‘fantasyland tax bill’A column authored by JONATHAN C. LIPSON, Harold E. Kohn Professor of Law, and ANDREA MONROE commented on Congress’ Tax Cuts and Jobs Act passed in December, 2017. Lipson and Monroe wrote: Congressional Republicans would certainly deny that they are modeling their tax legislation on Trump’s business failures. Yet, the resemblance to his mismanagement of the casinos—his only other real experience with large, public organizations—is unavoidable: run up huge debts based on implausible promises in order to benefit the few at the expense of the many.If Trump’s bankruptcy past is prologue, Republicans will eventually try to distance themselves from the future pain caused by their rushed and deeply misguided effort at tax reform. But the GOP tax bill’s passage means that the 278 congressional Republicans who supported this irresponsible tax legislation are all bankrupt Trumpists now. —USA Today, December 21, 2017POLICE MISCONDUCTJules Epstein says Philly police lying has ‘ripple effect’Officers in the Philadelphia Police Department’s narcotics unit have sued their bosses for allegedly ordering them to lie on arrest paperwork about their informants to “make the drugs go away,” a practice that experts say raises the possibility of corruption and illegitimate prosecutions. . . .The defense attorneys say that their clients are “suffering ongoing due process violations” because the lawyers don’t have access to material that could exonerate their clients, according to court documents. For instance, if the officer who detained a person is revealed to be under investigation for falsifying arrest paperwork, lawyers could point to that as a reason why the officer’s account of an incident may not be truthful.Prosecutors in that case have responded in a motion that called for the request to be dismissed because the information is part of a continuing investigation.Professor Andrea MonroeESQ_Mar18_Revised_CS6_crw1.indd 63/13/18 10:24 PM TEMPLE ESQ. MARCH 2018 • 5OPIOID CRISISScott Burris to Jeff Sessions: ‘Bring it on’A number of obstacles [to supervised injection sites] loom—reluctance by some officials, opposition by residents in the neighborhoods hardest hit by the epidemic, and a legal gray area that could put operators in danger of violating federal law. While injection facilities are not explicitly banned by the US government, they could possibly violate certain sections of the Controlled Substances Act, depending on how they are interpreted.Temple University law professor SCOTT BURRIS, however, said during the meeting in Philadelphia that given the immediate need, the city should plow forward anyway, just as it did for a needle exchange program more than 25 years ago despite its prohibition under state law. “I think we should dare the feds to shut it down and not worry about their legal opinion one bit,” Burris said. “Tell Jeff Sessions to bring it on.”—Vice.com, September 1, 2017 Colleges are increasingly stocking up on an easy-to-use opioid overdose antidote as the number of incidents keeps rising with young adults among those most at risk. . . .“For all channels of naloxone distribution, the guiding principle should be to put the drug in the hands of actual opioid users or people most likely to be around during an overdose,” SCOTT BURRIS, director of the Center for Public Health Law Research at Temple University, said. “Doses in cops’ trunks or university cupboards won’t help. I suspect the main issue at colleges will be how effective the outreach is to students using opioids.” —Politico, February 2, 2018“We never want a police department that teaches people that it’s OK to falsify records because we never know what’s going to happen next,” said JULES EPSTEIN, a law professor at Temple University in Philadelphia. “Once a cop’s lied once and gets caught that’s going to have a ripple effect in other cases where the cop may have told the truth.”—Morning Call, December 30, 2017‘You need a process’ for handling problematic officersLarry Krasner, Philadelphia district attorney, is developing a policy for how to handle testimony from potentially untrustworthy officers. . . .JULES EPSTEIN, a law professor at Temple University, said there could be a middle ground for handling both new and old cases involving problematic officers—one in which prosecutors and defense attorneys work together to determine the officer’s level of involvement and how much any misconduct might impact the case. Judges could resolve disagreements. You need a process,” Epstein said.—Philadelphia Inquirer, February 14, 2018Professor Jules Epstein“We never want a police department that teaches people that it’s OK to falsify records because we never know what’s going to happen next. Once a cop’s lied once and gets caught that’s going to have a ripple effect in other cases where the cop may have told the truth.”Top Philadelphia officials are advocating that the city become the first in the U.S. to open a supervised injection site, where people suffering from heroin or opioid addiction could use the drugs under medical supervision. . . .“The first and most important condition for a successful safe-injection facility in Philadelphia is the political buy-in within Philadelphia,” said SCOTT BURRIS, who leads Temple University’s Center for Public Health and Law Research. “All the law enforcement, health, and community stakeholders have to agree that this is an important thing worth trying.” —WHYY News, January 4, 2018Professor Scott BurrisConvince feds not to get involved, says Robert ReinsteinCould a provision of the 40-year-old Controlled Substances Act immunizing local officials against federal prosecution for drug crimes clear the way for Philadelphia’s proposed safe injection sites? “This is a real stretch,” said BOB REINSTEIN, a law professor at Temple University. “I don’t see any way around the federal government having the power to close this down and arrest everyone involved.” Reinstein said the best bet would be for advocates to convince federal authorities not to get involved on public health grounds. “It’s a political case, not a legal case,” Reinstein said.—WHYY Newsworks, January 12, 2018ESQ_Mar18_Revised_CS6_crw1.indd 73/13/18 10:24 PM6 • TEMPLE ESQ. MARCH 2018Professor Jan TingJennifer Lee: ‘The climate is really different . . .’ICE says it’s keeping Americans safe and enforcing the law. In fiscal 2016, ICE made 3,672 arrests in the Philadelphia district. In 2017 that grew to 4,938.One result is undocumented people may not speak up even when they’re victims of crimes, knowing ICE agents have shown up at courthouses and arrested people in hallways. In a poll by the National Network to End Domestic Violence, 80 percent of surveyed agencies and law firms reported that immigrant victims were afraid to contact the police. Many believed that would be a fast route to deportation, especially if their abuser was a U.S. citizen.“The climate is really different,” said JENNIFER LEE, a clinical assistant professor of law at Temple University and co-legal director of the Sheller Center for Social Justice. “It’s much harder to advise clients that coming forward won’t have real repercussions.”IMMIGRATIONJan Ting: ‘Illegal aliens can [claim] tax credits’The Republican tax reform package agreed upon by House and Senate lawmakers contains language allowing illegal immigrants with American citizen children to get a tax credit… JAN TING, a professor of law at Temple University, wrote an analysis recently about the Senate bill’s language. “Because of birthright citizenship, any children born to illegal aliens become automatic U.S. citizens. Thus, illegal aliens can still receive billions of dollars in tax credits for their U.S.-born children,” Ting wrote in a post on the Center for Immigration Studies website.—Daily Caller, December 16, 2017Professor Jennifer LeeIn a poll by the National Network to End Domestic Violence, 80 percent of surveyed agencies and law firms reported that immigrant victims were afraid to contact the police. Many believed that would be a fast route to deportation.Peter Spiro predicts ‘less luck’ for Trump foes at SCOTUS A judge’s ruling blocking the Trump administration from deporting hundreds of thousands of younger undocumented immigrants added to the urgency on lawmakers to craft a fast solution to a political quagmire. The White House plans to appeal [the] decision. . . .Despite the San Francisco judge’s solid reasoning, Trump’s foes will have less luck at the nation’s highest court, where the strong emotions surrounding the case will have less impact, said PETER SPIRO, an immigration law professor at Temple University. “I think the Supreme Court looks at these questions more broadly and looks at the administrative law more generally, and it’s less likely to be affected by atmospherics,” he said.—Bloomberg Politics, January 10, 2018Some fear DACA sends wrong message overseas, says Jan TingProfessor JAN TING recorded a video Immigration Brief on the DACA negotiations in Congress: “There’s concern that this would send the wrong signal overseas, suggesting that the U.S. was receptive to illegal immigration and prepared to grant amnesty to such illegal aliens. We’re in the process of negotiating trade-offs. Should there be an off-setting reduction in other forms of immigration, chain immigration, or the so-called lottery? The big idea of the American Revolution is that the American people can govern themselves through their elected representatives without a king and that’s the very process we’re engaged in today.” ESQ_Mar18_Revised_CS6_crw1.indd 83/13/18 10:24 PM TEMPLE ESQ. MARCH 2018 • 7David Kairys Featured in Netflix Documentary ‘Wormwood’In the 1970s, when Professor David Kairys was a founding partner at the Philadelphia law firm now called Kairys, Rudovsky, Messing, Feinberg & Lin, the firm was just beginning to represent some high-profile national clients.Around this time, Eric Olson decided it was time to get some answers about the death of his father, Frank Olson, and reached out to the firm for assistance. Today, Frank Olson’s story is the subject of a Netflix mini-series, Wormwood, which debuted in December 2017. In the series, Kairys recounts that Eric Olson asked him to explore the facts surrounding the mysterious 1953 death of Eric’s father, Frank Olson, a CIA-employed chemist whom the government admitted to surreptitiously drugging with LSD days before he fell to his death from a New York City hotel room. They wound up suspicious of whether the CIA killed Frank, perhaps to cover up germ and chemical warfare.Four decades later, the Olson story caught the interest of Oscar-winning Errol Morris, director of The Thin Blue Line and The Fog of War. The six-part series is a blend of documentary and narrative film, in which Peter Sarsgaard plays Frank Olson. Kairys and his law partner David Rudovsky, along with other experts and Olson’s son Eric, provide the factual core to the story. Kairys offers this synopsis: “Frank Olson was a biological and chemical researcher employed by the government, mainly the CIA, and he was at a retreat connected to work in 1953 where he was unwittingly given LSD. Now this is before Timothy Leary and The Beatles—LSD became at least a known drug in the ’60s, but this is well before that. So he would’ve had no basis to know what these hallucinations and delusions going through his mind [as a result of the LSD] were. “He had a terrible time, and he was shuttled around by the CIA, was never given any treatment, and was not seen by a psychiatrist or psychologist. The one specialist they sent him to was an allergist. Can you imagine that? He’s going through these uncontrollable hallucinations and delusions, and they send him to an allergist up in New York. And then nine days later, he fell out of the window of the Statler Hotel, to his death.” In 2015, Kairys traveled to Cambridge, MA to be interviewed by Morris for the Netflix series. “He [Morris] had such an elaborate setup. I’ve never seen anything like it, and I’ve been interviewed on a lot of TV programs and films,” says Kairys. “This was six or sometimes ten cameras going simultaneously, synchronized from different angles, and each person from the documentary was interviewed in the same room. It’s sort of ’40s or ’50s-style office paneling. I was amazed, it was very interesting, and then in front of us was kind of a beat-up old wood desk, and Morris put himself opposite to you, maybe 10 or 15 feet away, and you basically just looked at him and had a conversation. The crew was 30 or 40 people.”The resulting Netflix series won critical success. The New York Times reviewer wrote: “Wormwood is haunted by doubleness. It’s a work of journalism and of imagination, of history and portraiture, of indignation and melancholy. . . . As such, it takes time to absorb, and invites repeated, obsessive watching. Mr. Olson and Mr. Morris make claims that are vitally important—about the credibility of the United States government during the Cold War and ever since—in a spirit that seems more weary than urgent. Mr. Morris presents a powerful historical argument in the guise of a beguiling work of cinematic art—and vice versa.”Kairys, who admits he had to both buy a Roku and subscribe to Netflix in order to watch Wormwood, was pleased with what he saw. “I’m proud to be part of this multi-genre film that explores what I believe was a terrible injustice.”Meanwhile, Kairys’ high-powered practice of law continues: In January, he was part of a legal team filing suit on behalf of the City of Philadelphia against opioid manufacturers. ESQ_Mar18_Revised_CS6_crw1.indd 93/13/18 10:24 PMNext >