New Article For The Journal of the James WIlson Law Society

Playing God: The Constitutionality of Genetic Enhancement 

By Scott Lee

            
The rise of gene therapy technologies and the human genome project has made the idea of playing God feasible. The ability to manipulate an organism’s genes using biotechnology has opened up countless doors for medical science, such as using gene therapy to treat existing diseases. But when it comes to making genetic enhancements beyond what is ‘natural’ to the human body, a host of ethical and constitutional issues come to the fore. Suppose two parents opt to genetically enhance their child before birth to affect her physical traits like beauty, personality characteristics like charisma, or mental capabilities such as creativity and memory. Generally, the law has tried to preserve parents’ reproductive rights, but this may change in the near future as society continues to chart new and murky legal territories. Would the US Constitution presumptively protect parents’ right to genetic enhancement?

Read the rest here

How Constitutional Romanticism hurts Progress and Debate

By Sam Murray

The American Constitution is and remains one of the great legal achievements of human history. It paved the way for the conception of constitutionally entrenched rights, and the idea of system of government being embodied in a universally accessible document. However, in American public debate over controversial public policy issues, discourse becomes bogged down not in normative issues of what is best for the American people but rather “Is this constitutional?”

Read the rest here

Corruption 101 with Phil Nichols

Today the James Wilson Law Society hosted a conversation with Professor Phil Nichols of Wharton's Legal Studies Department on Corruption 101 - Corruption From a Global Perspective. We would like to thank the Penn Government and Politics Association for co-hosting this event.

Professor Nichols is a renowned expert on corruption, having engaged in field studies in Mongolia, France, Singapore, Guatemala, and various other countries across the globe.

At the outset of our discussion, Nichols defined corruption as 'a misuse of a position of power or trust for self-interest (instead of the public interest, or the purpose for which the position was endowed)'. Going from there, Nichols elaborated on the domestic and global anti-corruption regime, the latter being spearheaded by institutions such as the IMF, the World Bank, and lately the World Trade Organization. 

Professor Nichols went on to discuss corruption in various countries, such as Burma (Myanmar), Ukraine, Russia, and the United States. Unsurprisingly, Western, democratic countries fall prey to corruption as much as non-Western, authoritarian nations do, even though corruption takes manifold forms and different polities. In the United States, Nichols argued, corruption was especially an issue with Congress on the federal level (earmarking), but even more prevalent on the state and city level. 

However, Nichols was careful to point out that corruption is highly specific to a country and its history, as well as its political and economic system. Accordingly, anti-corruption measures must be tailored to the specific economic and political circumstances in order to heed success. 

Professor Nichols' research and talk showed the importance of tackling issues from an interdisciplinary perspective. To understand a complex phenomenon such as corruption, it is imperative to integrate political, economic and legal thinking into a more holistic approach. This is one of the key lessons participants could take away from this fascinating discussion. 

Afternoon Tea with Kermit Roosevelt

Our Afternoon Tea Chat with Penn Law's Kermit Roosevelt III on Drones today was a great success - a big thank you to all of you who came, and to the ladies and gentlemen of the Philomathean Society for co-hosting and planning this event with us! We are looking forward to more talks with faculty in the future!

Our next faculty talk will take place on Wednesday, April 17th, at 7 pm in Huntsman Hall (F 36) - Professor Phil Nichols of the Wharton Legal Studies Department will talk to us on Corruption From a Legal (And Global) Perspective. 

March 27th: Gay Marriage Fireside Chat

For our next event this Wednesday, March 27th, we will attend a fireside chat organized by Penn Democrats. The conversation with Professor Rogers Smith will shed light on the Supreme Court's recent 'gay marriage cases', US v. Windsor and Hollingsworth v. Perry. We will attend the event as a group and potentially engage in an after discussion over coffee. Please find more information below.

Penn Democrats presents a conversation with Professor Rogers Smith: 

On Wednesday, March 27th, join Penn Democrats for a Fireside Chat with Penn Constitutional Law Professor Rogers Smith!  Fireside Chats are an opportunity to have an intimate discussion with professors and local politicians about political issues.  Professor Smith will review the Supreme Court's recent cases, including the cases regarding the Defense of Marriage Act and Proposition 8.  It will be held in the Goodhand Room at the LGBT Center (3907 Spruce Street) at 6pm.  Seeing as the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on the care to challenge DOMA on the 26th, this will be an insightful and timely discussion that you will not want to miss!  Come with questions!  

Visit to Kline & Specter

Today, the James Wilson Law Society had its first field trip, an excursion to the renowned Philadelphia law firm Kline & Specter. Their attorneys - David Williams, Ruth Yang and Braden Lepisto, all Penn alumni - were so nice as to meet up with our group.

During a one-hour discussion in Kline & Specter's conference room, they provided us with invaluable insights into the practice of law in general and their individual work in particular. 

They shared some thoughts on applying to and choosing the right law school, as well as launching one's legal career by exploring different opportunities through summer internships.

  

Other topics that were covered included work-life balance and 'the beauty of what we (as attorneys) do'. All attorneys agreed that their job was fulfilling because, among other reasons, they enjoyed the contact with their clients, and how their job enabled them to help their clients claim their rights. This was also a point that distinguished work at a smaller firm, such as Kline & Specter, from practice in a typical big law firm - whereas attorneys at Kline & Specter represent clients and handle cases on their own very early on, this is typically not the case in a big firm. 

All participants agreed that we had a very informative conversation. A big thank you to Kline & Specter, Ms. Yang, Mr. Williams, Mr. Lepisto, and everyone who participated! 

Call For Submissions

Submissions for the James Wilson Law Journal are

now open

About the Journal

The James Wilson Law Journal is the online law journal published by students

at the University of Pennsylvania in association with the James Wilson Law

Society. It publishes original, accessible and relevant articles by

undergraduate and postgraduate students from all universities on topics

reflecting contemporary ideas and relevant discussions on the law, both

American and international. The Journal aims to serve as an open and

accessible platform of interaction by connecting students with their peers,

leading academics and legal professionals across America.

Submissions

Students are encouraged to write about the contentious legal issues that

they’re passionate about and to explore the people and events that shape the

law. At this stage, the editorial team envisions three sorts of content:

Feature Articles (1200-1500 words): In a objective manner investigate a

particular contemporary legal issue, examine all the sides, and offer a

journalistic opinion. The focus should be on educating and reporting in an

engaging manner.

Opinion Piece (600-800 words): A subjective article professing and

advocating for a particular viewpoint on some legal issue or debate. The

emphasis should be on solid arguments and advocacy over merely presenting

information.

In The Law Today (150-300 words): These are just short and engaging pieces

on something interesting that has happened in the legal world. It can range

anything from summarizing an important recent Supreme Court decision, to

the bizarre, such as a particularly curious case or piece of legislation passed.

It doesn’t have to be relevant to national debate, only engaging to the lawminded

reader.

Style

The Journal’s content is to be written in a journalistic style. We believe this is

a more readable and engaging format for our audience. That means, no

lengthy footnotes or references – just interesting and relevant content.

Going Forward

Pitches (100-150 words) should be sent to pennlawsociety@gmail.com,

ideally containing what you plan to write about, what angle you intend to take,

and how to intend to argue the angle. We’ll get back to you as quickly as

possible, with whether we are interested in publication, and if so, the direction

we would like you to take the article. We will then provide a deadline for the

first draft and keep you involved in the editing process.

Join us: First Meeting today 7pm at Penn Law's Sidebar Cafe!

Weekly Discussion Meetings

Our first event idea was to have weekly informal meetings where we read discuss current as well as historical cases of the US Supreme Court, along with other legal issues. We considered this to be a great regular activity that would be engaging both socially and intellectually! Do you agree, or do you have any other suggestions?

If you want to take part, please be sure to fill out this doodle survey to help us determine the date and time: http://doodle.com/69t8as5it3gchmqc

Our first meeting is scheduled for Thursday, February 14th, 7-9pm at Penn Law (Sidebar Cafe - walk in the Sansom Street entrance, take the right, walk down the stairs and there it is). 

The Genesis of the James Wilson Law Society

At the moment, there is no inclusive undergraduate law society at Penn. The John Marshall Pre-Law Honors Society and the Penn Mock Trial team serve only a limited number of students with a very specific mission. However, we think there is a need for a more inclusive undergraduate law society that hosts public events and engages people from different backgrounds at an institution like Penn.

We are currently envisioning three types of events to be organized by the James Wilson Law Society: (1) weekly or bi-weekly meetings dedicated to the discussion of legal issues, such as past and current Supreme Court cases; (2) talks with faculty members; (3) excursions to legal institutions, such as the US Supreme Court, the Philadelphia District Attorney, the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, or a major law firm.

If you would like to get involved with this exciting project, either as a member or in a leadership position, please e-mail rihs@sas.upenn.edu. 

This would be a great way to boost your resume, to engage with the law, and to meet interesting new people!