Current Affairs

Subscribe to Current Affairs via RSS

I am pleased and proud to report the recent publication of an article I coauthored last year with a former student, Cody Dethlefs, for the Stetson Law Review‘s 2025 symposium on Prosecutorial Discretion & White Collar Crime. The article, The Fraud Remains the Same . . . Or Does It?, explores blockchain frauds, combining my experience with securities regulation considerations and Cody’s with bank regulation. The SSRN abstract is as follows:

Although blockchain technology has proven itself to be useful and has significant potential for expanded usage, certain blockchain applications pose fraud and systemic risks. This article identifies and assesses financial fraud committed in or in connection with blockchain transactions as a form of white-collar crime. In some cases, criminal activity is facilitated—or even originated—by blockchain technology. Yet in other cases, criminal activity is merely hosted on a blockchain. Law enforcement activities relating to blockchain fraud are similarly both conventional and unique.

As the blockchain environment expands, fraudsters will indisputably continue to innovate. It will be incumbent upon enforcement agents to keep pace in an environment complicated by rapid technological advances, privacy and security protections, and cross-border activity. Increasing reliance on blockchains for financing and other…

Every day, Americans reach into their wallets and pull out a piece of currency that is fundamentally failing them and their nation: the one-dollar bill. We hold onto paper out of habit, resisting the mathematical realities of our monetary system. As we navigate a modern economy, the United States relies on an outdated physical currency structure. It is time for a comprehensive overhaul of our cash.

To bring our currency into the

…

As I noted here a few weeks ago, I flew out to Detroit for the third annual Peter J. Henning Memorial Lecture two weeks ago. This year’s distinguished speaker, Jerry Israel, regaled us with observations on how federal courts take (or do not take) wealth into account in pre-trial release decisions. This can be, of course, a matter of interest in white collar crime proceedings, given that some white collar criminal defendants are wealthy individuals.

Taking us back to language in the First Judiciary Act and the Bail Reform Act of 1966, Jerry offered us a history of, and various standards for, bail. These standards are, of course, subject to interpretation in context. And Jerry was armed with court opinions in a number of cases that serve as interesting examples.

A former student of mine, Willie Santana, has been active in attempting to enforce pre-trial release standards under Tennessee law in our trial courts. Willie explains the issues in this article for the Tennessee Bar Association. Willie’s work led me to ask a question of Jerry about parallels between state and federal law bail determinations.

The lecture was engaging and a lovely tribute to Peter’s life and work. And it…

I am in Detroit today for the third annual Peter J. Henning Memorial Lecture. As many of you know, Peter was a mentor and friend who died way too young. Peter’s teaching and work spanned business and criminal law. He and I, perhaps predicatbly, shared an interest in insider trading law.

A number of folks, including a few of us academics, help to support this lecture series financially and through attendance. If you would like to join in that effort, please contact me or Jennifer Bird-Pollan. The first two speakers were the Honorable Jed S. Rakoff and Mary Jo White. I look forward to Professor Israel’s talk as the third in the series later today!

Tina L. Stark Emory Law, October 2007

Transactional lawyering and the education of transactional lawyers has been transformed by Tina L. Stark (Weisenfeld). You may have known her for her wonderful books–Drafting Contracts: How & Why Lawyers Do What They Do and Negotiating and Drafting Contract Boilerplate are on my bookshelves and those of so many others. You may have heard her speak at a conference or symposium.

Yet, many of us also knew Tina on a more personal level. Some of us had her as an instructor or as a colleague. Long a consultant and advisor to law schools, bar associations, and legal employers on transactional legal education and training, Tina also held full-time administrative and teaching appointments at Emory University School of Law and Boston University School of Law and was a visitor at Fordham University School of Law. Earlier in her career, she was an adjunct law professor at Fordham Law and the Maurice A. Deane School of Law at Hofstra University.

Tina passed away earlier this week. But her presence will continue to be felt in so many ways. She and I initially bonded over our not only our love of teaching plainly…

Following on my Weinberg Center blog post back on October 27, I write today to promote participation in a survey hosted by the University of Delaware’s John L. Weinberg Center for Corporate Governance on public company Rule 14a-8 shareholder proposals under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. The survey website explains that the Weinberg Center “seeks to gather practical insights from companies, investors, and related professionals about the scope and effectiveness of the current federal shareholder proposal rule (Rule 14a-8).” I suspect that the referenced professionals include lawyers representing both public companies and shareholders, as well as other advisors to each. More information about the survey can be found on the website.

In the spirit of that October 27 blog post, I am appreciative of the effort to gather information from a wide variety of constituents. I have taught group-oriented change leadership to undergraduate honors students here at The University of Tennessee using design thinking methods, in which the first step is undertaking to empathize. This step involves the team researching, and endeavoring to understand, the needs of various stakeholders. One design thinking website describes this first stage of a group-oriented process of innovation through design thinking…

Back in June of 2024, in connection with the legislative debate in Delaware over the approval of § 122(18) of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware (DGCL § 122(18)), I authored a blog post in which I raised concerns about whether there was adequate understanding of the public policy impacts of the proposal to adopt DGCL § 122(18).  I then wrote:

I have one large and important question as Senate Bill 313 continues to move through the Delaware legislative process: do members of the Delaware General Assembly voting on this bill fully understand the large shift in public policy represented by the introduction of DGCL § 122(18)?  If so, then they act on an informed basis and live with the consequences, as they do with any legislation they pass that is signed into law.  If not, we all must work harder to enable that understanding.

Later that month, I authored and published a second blog post that cross-referenced the earlier blog post and offered several policy-related values relevant to the proposal.

Two-and-a-half weeks ago, I found myself affected by similar concerns about the need for serious, thoughtful policy engagement in Delaware.  The occasion was the Gala Celebration…