Georgetown University Law Center

About: Georgetown University Law Center is a based out in . It is known for research contribution in the topics: Supreme court & Public health. The organization has 585 authors who have published 2488 publications receiving 36650 citations. The organization is also known as: Georgetown Law & GULC.

The Renminbi and Systemic Risk

Abstract: The internationalization of China’s currency, the renminbi (“RMB”), is arising in ways that depart considerably from historical precedent and what “law and macroeconomic” theory would predict. Instead of waiting for international markets for its currency to evolve organically, the Chinese government has undertaken a quasi-mercantilist strategy designed to promote the currency and its own national RMB-based infrastructure. This strategy has emphasized tightly managed capital account deregulation over prudential reforms and robust market supervision, and incentivizes foreign jurisdictions to compete for RMB-based transactions. China’s monetary strategy introduces novel systemic risks to the global financial system, including a potentially inadequate provision of renminbi liquidity, a regulatory race to the bottom between offshore RMB-hubs, and significant transmission belts of financial risk to even non-renminbi markets. To mitigate these risks, this Article outlines a policy recipe of stronger macroprudential oversight, transparent countercyclical capital account reforms and credible commitments to refrain from competitive currency devaluations.

What a Difference a State Makes: California’s Authority to Regulate Motor Vehicle Emissions Under the Clean Air Act and the Future of State Autonomy

Abstract: Air pollutants from motor vehicles constitute one of the leading sources of local and global air degradation with serious consequences for human health and the overall stability of Earth’s climate. Under the Clean Air Act (“CAA”), for over fifty years, the state of California has served as a national “laboratory” for the testing of technological solutions and regulatory approaches to improve air quality. On September 19, 2019, the Trump Administration revoked California’s authority to set more stringent pollution emission standards. The revocation of California’s authority frustrates ambitious initiatives undertaken in California and in other states to reduce local air pollution and mitigate the effects of climate change from mobile sources. This Article argues that the reasons offered by the Administration to justify its rollback of California’s authority are not persuasive. They do not find support in the history and longstanding interpretation of the CAA, in the Environmental Protection Agency’s implementation practice, or in the regulated industry, and, coupled with halting the rise in federal fuel economy standards, constitute unsound policy at a crucial moment for greenhouse gas emissions mitigation. In addition, this Article advances the idea that instead of aiming to suppress California’s experimentation with zero emissions vehicles, this and future Administrations should embrace new ways to cooperate with California and a growing number of states that have begun thinking creatively about reforming the transportation sector. By building on a flexible and multilevel model of governance, grounded on forms of cooperative federalism that leverage state innovation and regulatory expertise, the federal government together with the states will ensure a more competitive future for America.

A Process of Natural Correction: Arbitrage and the Regulation of Exchange-Traded Funds Under the Investment Company Act

Abstract: This Article seeks to distill the underlying assumptions, goals, and regulatory values that inform the history of exemptive relief under the Investment Company Act for equity index ETFs and, more recently, actively managed, transparent ETFs. The Article concludes that the common principles behind various exemptions unite to support a general theory of how regulators believe the ETF market should function. Transparency, at both the index and the portfolio level, has been the cornerstone of exemptive relief from various provisions of the Act, because it fosters an arbitrage mechanism that protects retail investors by creating price effects that ripple through the secondary market and push prices toward net asset value. Embedded within exemptions from various strictures of the Act is an implicit recognition that the natural corrective abilities of a liquid and transparent ETF market adequately protect investors from price dislocations.

The Interplay of Foucauldian Biopolitics and Jewish Nationalism in the Israeli Supreme Court Decision-Making Process

Abstract: If we concur with Foucault‘s view of racism as an elementary, structural characteristic of the modern nation-state (through the use of biopolitical technologies ranging from social exclusion to mass murder), there is little doubt that Israel can be theorized as a racial state. Israel‘s biopolitics largely operates in what Eyal Weizman has termed ― the politics of verticality — namely, Israel‘s simultaneous attempt to control three spatial levels — the land, the air, and even the subterranean level — in order systematically manage (and subjugate) its Palestinian neighbors. Because there was never an intention to constitute the Palestinian inhabitants as part of the Israeli citizenry or view them as a distinct people per se, Israeli biopolitics formed Palestinians as subjects susceptible to unchecked domination. The subsequently enacted controlling apparatuses utilized by Israel to reproduce power relations have taken on numerous features, coercive and noncoercive, legalistic and nonlegalistic, in an attempt to both normalize the occupation and perpetuate its existence. The population in Israel discursively forms a separate Jewish nationalist identity, while Palestinians and the Arab minority within Israel proper are inferiorly constituted. By mere virtue of their presence in the Occupied Territories (OT), Palestinians are thus collectively punished. For the sake of maintaining a Jewish state, Israel has also applied varying pressures on the Palestinian citizens of Israel in order to slow their rate of reproduction while not applying those same pressures to Jewish-Israelis. In the following essay, I will argue that the Israeli Supreme Court (ISC) has largely institutionalized a form of bio-politics in its decision-making process. An examination of caselaw generated by the ISC vis-a-vis the OT since the outbreak of the second intifada in late 2000 not only reveals a largely deferential mode of judicial review, but also a continued perpetuation of population control as resembled within Foucault‘s formulation of biopolitics. The Court‘s significance lies primarily in its willingness to use law as a mean to stall, defer, postpone, suspend, and generally legitimate conditions on the ground. This ― new hegemony has also generated extensive ― interest in the age-old demographic question among Israeli academics, policy planners, and government officials who have argued for a ― policy of containment‖ to preserve ― the Jewish character of Israel. Appreciating the Jewish nationalist identity foundational to Israel‘s existence is crucial in the broader examination of Israel‘s conduct toward the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip and the ISC‘s foundational role in legitimating these practices.