Works by the Law Students
Permanent URI for this collection
Except as otherwise indicated, visitors should assume that items are copyrighted by the author.
Browse
Browsing Works by the Law Students by Title
Now showing 1 - 20 of 73
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Open Access Journal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 19, No. 1, p. 001-003 : Welcome Speech to the Twenty-Second Annual Public Interest Environmental Law Conference(University of Oregon School of Law, 2004) Melver, NaomiItem Open Access Journal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 19, No. 2, p. 472-478 : Farmers' Rights(University of Oregon School of Law, 2004) Haapala, John E., Jr.Item Open Access Journal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 20, No. 1, p. 001-004 : Welcome Speech to the Twenty-Third Annual Public Interest Environmental Law Conference(University of Oregon School of Law, 2005) Mazer, ZackItem Open Access Journal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 20, No. 1, p. 005-008 : Living as if Nature Mattered(University of Oregon School of Law, 2005) Kastenberg, RachelItem Open Access Journal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 20, No. 2, p. 213-244 : A Practical Guide to Measure 37(University of Oregon School of Law, 2005) Sommers, LaurenItem Open Access Journal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 20, No. 2, p. 245-272 : Incomprehensible, Uncompensable, Unconstitutional: The Fatal Flaws of Measure 37(University of Oregon School of Law, 2005) Cook, Rebekah R.Item Open Access Journal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 20, No. 2, p. 273-328 : Trading Spaces: Measure 37, MacPherson v. Department of Administrative Services, and Transferable Development Rights as a Path Out of Deadlock(University of Oregon School of Law, 2005) Aoki, Keith, 1955-; Briscoe, Kim; Hovland, BenItem Open Access Journal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 21, No. 1, p. 207-250 : Shaping Oregon Climate Policy in Light of the Kyoto Protocol(University of Oregon School of Law, 2006) Robison, Jason A.This Comment focuses on the frontier of climate policy in the State of Oregon. Specifically, in light of the implementation of a global cap-and-trade system for greenhouse-gas (GHG) emissions under the Kyoto Protocol (Protocol), this Comment examines the policy option of implementing a regional GHG cap-andtrade system in Oregon and among the West Coast states. Much terrain is covered to give context. Part I provides a primer on climate science that describes the potential impacts of climate change on the global level and in the Pacific Northwest. After illuminating the potential threats posed by climate change, Part II describes the international community’s response, focusing almost exclusively on the Protocol’s cap-and-trade regulatory system for GHG emissions. In contrast, Part III shifts attention to the state and local levels. It begins by providing a cursory discussion of the climate policies and programs established by states and localities as well as some of the cutting-edge litigation brought by states and localities involving climate change. Part IV examines climate policies and programs in the State of Oregon, paying particular attention to the carbon dioxide (CO2) standard for new energy facilities (the Standard). Finally, Part V provides a comparative analysis of the Protocol and the Standard, discusses how Oregon and the other West Coast states can use the Protocol as a model to design a regional cap-and-trade system, and concludes by examining some of the potential obstacles and benefits associated with implementing such a system.Item Open Access Journal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 21, No. 1, p.157-206 : Putting the €Sustainable€ Back in Sustainable Development: Recognizing and Enforcing Indigenous Property Rights as a Pathway to Global Environmental Sustainability(University of Oregon School of Law, 2006) Jaksa, Matthew F.This Comment proceeds in four parts. Part I traces the historical development of the colonialist conception of indigenous property rights, and describes how that conception continues to facilitate the developed world’s exploitation of indigenous peoples, territories, and resources. Part II discusses the failings of the sustainable development model in international environmental law. Part III proposes that using international law to decolonize the developed world’s conception of indigenous property rights can play a significant role in realizing the goal of environmental sustainability. Part IV examines the Inter-American Human Rights System as a positive model for further advancements in the field of indigenous property rights, both in terms of its expansive interpretations of existing human rights documents and a draft proposal directly addressing indigenous rights.Item Open Access Journal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 22, No. 1, p. 153-196 : The Pacific Salmon Treaty: A Historical Prescription for the Future(University of Oregon School of Law, 2007) Williams, AustinWhile the Pacific Salmon Treaty was reauthorized in 1999 (1999 Agreement), management of Pacific salmon under the Treaty has remained contentious and many salmon populations have continued to decrease in abundance. Moreover, the longterm fishing arrangements originally established under the 1999 Agreement are nearing expiration.10 As such, this Note seeks to inform future negotiations on Pacific salmon management through an analysis of past failures and successes, and the identification of possible solutions to foreseeable challenges. Part I summarizes the historical developments in Pacific salmon management and international agreements leading up to the 1985 Treaty. Part II identifies many of the threats to Pacific salmon. Part III analyzes the circumstances surrounding the 1985 Treaty’s signing, as well as its collapse. Part IV discusses the reauthorization of the 1999 Agreement. Finally, part V highlights the current challenges facing Pacific salmon management and outlines possible solutions to the ongoing disputes over salmon in the Pacific Northwest.Item Open Access Journal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 22, No. 1, p. 197-200 : Welcome Speech to the Twenty-Fifth Annual Public Interest Environmental Law Conference: Cultivating Corridors for the People: The Next Twenty-Five Years(University of Oregon School of Law, 2007) Welcker, ZachItem Open Access Journal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 22, No. 2, p. 383-414 : Assimilation, Enclaves, and Take: How States Might Protect Wildlife on Federal Reservations(University of Oregon Law School, 2007) Miller, BenPart I of this Note briefly discusses the interrelationship between state and federal regulation of wildlife and the constitutional constraints. Part II provides a primer on federal enclave law. Part III discusses the background and application of the Assimilative Crimes Act. Part IV discusses exclusive and concurrent jurisdiction. Part V discusses state endangered species acts as criminal laws. Part VI walks through the assimilation of a state wildlife law. Finally, Part VII concludes with some of the challenges of enforcing state prohibitions. The goal of this Note is not to challenge federal authority over wildlife generally, but rather, to ensure there are alternatives available if the federal government is not living up to its stewardship responsibilities.Item Open Access Journal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 23, No. 1, p. 035-072 : Massachusetts v. EPA: Rescuing Icarus with Environmental Federalism(University of Oregon School of Law, 2008) Biering, Raymond A.; Biering, Brian S.This Article first addresses the ultimate impact of Massachusetts [v. EPA] in the context of the law of climate change in the United States. We analyze the immediate implications of probable regulatory actions at the federal level which are either mandated by Massachusetts or will likely follow as a result of the Supreme Court’s decision. The Article then considers the existing regional and state climate protection efforts evolving independently of federal climate change initiatives. We argue that these “sub-national” initiatives are evolving in a “federal vacuum.”18 As a case study of sub-national climate change initiatives evolving in the federal vacuum, California’s pioneer programs are looked to as an important economy-wide program that may also play a key role in furthering notions of environmental federalism. In light of the evolution of programs like those in California, this Article considers the potential federal and state conflicts that may arise as a result of regional, state, and local climate change initiatives. Finally, the Article considers goals of environmental federalism, wherein preemption is limited and both federal and sub-national coordination of policy is maximized. By viewing the states as laboratories for effective policy, this conception of environmental federalism would further national reductions in greenhouse gases through the encouragement of sub-national efforts.Item Open Access Journal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 23, No. 1, p. 241-274 : Watering Down Federal Court Jurisdiction: What Role Do Federal Courts Play in Deciding Water Rights?(University of Oregon School of Law, 2008) Wood, AlexanderWithin the context of water rights issues, this Note discusses how federal courts have analyzed Colorado River in deciding whether to exercise jurisdiction or abstain because of “exceptional circumstances.”8 Part I provides a brief overview of judicially created abstention doctrines. Part II discusses the tension among federal reserved water rights, the prior appropriation doctrine, and a state’s authority over allocating its own water. Part II also focuses on the reasons federal agencies may choose to assert water rights claims in federal court and how the McCarran Amendment has limited that choice. Part III describes the Colorado River decision in detail and analyzes how courts have applied and misapplied its doctrine when resolving water rights issues. Part IV examines the doctrine of prior exclusive jurisdiction, a narrow abstention exception focusing on situations where the court that originally adjudicated a water-rights determination, whether state or federal, would have exclusive jurisdiction over all subsequent adjudications concerning the same water body. Part V explains how Colorado River abstention and the prior exclusive jurisdiction doctrine connect in the realm of water rights conflicts. The Note concludes by providing a final assessment of the subject at hand.Item Open Access Journal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 23, No. 1, p.191-222 : Climate Change 101: Urgency and Response(University of Oregon School of Law, 2008) Galpern, DanItem Open Access Marine Protected Areas off the Coast of Oregon: Legal Framework, Initial Recommendations, and Proposed Oregon Legislation Establishing a Heceta-Stonewall Banks Marine Protected Area(2008-10-10T17:30:34Z) Brown, Kassandra A.This paper addresses some current federal and state legal authorities that may serve as a framework for establishing transboundary MPAs (MPAs across both federal and state waters) off the Oregon coast, makes some initial recommendations for that process, and contextualizes proposed Oregon legislation establishing a "Heceta-Stonewall Banks Marine Protected Area."Item Open Access Oregon Law Review : Vol. 78, No. 1, p. 315-346 : Oregon's New Character Evidence Rules(University of Oregon School of Law, 1999) Foltz, Andrew C.Item Open Access Oregon Law Review : Vol. 78, No. 1, p. 347-364 : Piercing the Corporate Veil: A Comparison of Contract Versus Tort Claimants Under Oregon Law(University of Oregon School of Law, 1999) Wuepper, Kyle D.Item Open Access Oregon Law Review : Vol. 78, No. 1, p. 365-384 : Obstacles to Oregon Campaign Finance Reform: Vannatta v. Keisling(University of Oregon School of Law, 1999) Muraski, Courtney C.Item Open Access Oregon Law Review : Vol. 78, No. 2, p. 551-586 : Our Vulnerable Constitutional Rights: The Supreme Court's Restriction of Congress' Enforcement Powers in City of Boerne v. Flores(University of Oregon School of Law, 1999) Kuerschner, Caroline E.