In 2009, Judge Brett Kavanaugh and I published research
articles in Minnesota Law Review, a respected outlet for legal scholarship.
His article is titled "Separation of Powers During the Forty-Fourth Presidency and Beyond," is here, http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Kavanaugh_MLR.pdf).
In it, he makes the argument
that a sitting president should never be required to sit for any type of investigative
hearing, nor turn over documents. The constitutional framers, he argues, believed
that impeachment was the only recourse against lawless behavior of a sitting
president.
My article, “Do
Courts Create Moral Hazard? When Judges Nullify Employer Liability in
Arbitrations: An Empirical Analysis,” (here, http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Leroy_mlr.pdf),
argues that employers are incentivized to disregard sexual harassment because
(a) they force so many women to take their claims to arbitration, instead of
court, and (b) the financial consequences—which I measured— made breaking the law
more tolerable than eradicating harassment.
Kavanaugh’s research
article (with its obvious appeal to President Trump) and well-earned conservative credentials make him an attractive finalist
for Donald Trump’s nominee for the Supreme Court. He is a highly regarded judge.
No comments:
Post a Comment