Faculty in the News

Faculty News

  • Bloomberg Quotes Prof. Hickman on Nonprofit Donor Disclosure Case

    August 1, 2019

    Professor Kristin Hickman was quoted in a Bloomberg article, IRS Could Face More Court Battles After Nonprofit Donor Ruling, regarding a federal district court’s holding in Bullock v. IRS, No. CV-18-103-GF-BMM (D. Mt. July 30, 2019), that the IRS violated the Administrative Procedure Act when, without public notice and comment procedures, the agency issued subregulatory guidance allowing politically active nonprofit organizations to avoid reporting the names and addresses.  The article quoted Professor Hickman as saying, ”The fact that the judge declared a revenue procedure to be a legislative rule is a big deal,” particularly because such cases to date have been “rare.”  


  • Prof. Vaaler Co-Authors Op-Ed on Why Some International Airlines Discriminate Against Israel and Taiwan by Erasing Them from Online Route Maps

    July 30, 2019

    Professor and John and Bruce Mooty Chair in Law & Business, Paul M. Vaaler, published an op-ed in the Star Tribune explaining why several international airlines, including major U.S. carriers, single out Israel or Taiwan for erasure from online route maps. Some airlines discriminate against one or both countries by erasing them from their own online route maps—American Airlines erases Taiwan from its online route maps. Other airlines accommodate erasure by others in their alliance—Delta Airlines accommodates erasure of Israel and Taiwan from the online route maps of its SkyTeam alliance partner, Saudia. Airlines erasing these countries or accommodating erasure by alliance partners seem to be catering to the discriminatory preferences of customers and countries in the region, even though this business strategy contradicts U.S. foreign policy and may be objectionable to many U.S. customers, shareholders, and lawmakers.

    More detail about Professor Vaaler’s research on “discriminatory product differentiation” in the international airline industry is available in his new article co-authored with Professor Joel Waldfogel, Frederick R. Kappel Chair in Applied Economics at the Carlson School of Management: “Discriminatory Product Differentiation: The Case of Israel’s Omission from Airline Route Maps.” Strategy Science, 4(2): 70-93 (July 2019).

  • Law360 Quotes Professor Cotter on Predatory Pricing

    July 25, 2019

    Professor Tom Cotter was quoted in Law360 article titled “EU’s 1st Fine In 16 Years Shows Predatory Pricing Challenges.” The article discusses the European Commissions’ recent decison to fine Qualcomm €242 million ($272 million) for allegedly engaging in a predatory pricing scheme to drive a potential competitor from the chipset market.  Cotter noted that internal documentation is usually needed to substantiate a claim that below-cost pricing was intended to exclude a rival, but that E.U. law makes it slightly easier for the complaining party to prevail in these types of antitrust claims by creating a presumption of anticompetitive harm for pricing below average variable cost.

  • Prof. Turoski Presents Research on the Internet of Things

    July 24, 2019

    Prof. Turoski presented his research on the patent landscape of the Internet of Things at the National Association of Patent Practitioners (NAPP) Annual Meeting and Conference.

    NAPP is a nonprofit organization dedicated to supporting patent practitioners and those working in the field of patent law in matters relating to patent prosecution and its practice. The NAPP mission is to provide networking, education, collegial exchange, benefits, and a collective voice in the larger IP community on patent law and prosecution practice, so that patent practitioners can flourish and achieve the highest levels of competence and professionalism in their practice.

  • FTC Watch Quotes Professor Cotter on the FTC's Authority to Regulate Prices

    July 23, 2019

    Professor Tom Cotter was quoted in the newsletter FTC Watch in an artcle titled “In tackling high drug prices, FTC shows partisan split.” The article discusses a recent Federal Trade Commission report in which the three Republican commissioners and the two Democratic commissioners disagreed on the Commission’s authority to invoke section 5 of the FTC Act to combat excessive drug prices.  Cotter states that he would have been  “surprised to see the FTC start using its Section 5 authority to regulate drug prices ” Cotter also said that, while “section 5 arguably does reach some practices that otherwise would not violate the Sherman or Clayton Acts, as the report states, for quite some time that reach has been interpreted pretty narrowly. Further, the conventional wisdom has long been that U.S. antitrust law doesn’t regulate prices.” Nevertheless, “the fact that two commissioners are open to the idea, at least with regard to drug prices, is interesting.”  

  • Prof. Vaaler Quoted in Star Tribune on Correlation Between Conspicuous Consumption Theory, CEO Pay

    July 21, 2019

    In a piece highlighting the economic thought of Minnesota native Thorstein Veblen, an economist in the late 19th and early 20th century who developed the theory of conspicuous consumerism, Prof. Paul Vaaler is quoted on the subject of Veblen’s economic ideas and their potential relevance to today’s burgeoning pay of CEOs.

  • Law360 Quotes Prof. Cotter on the DOJ’s Statement of Interest in FTC v. Qualcomm

    July 18, 2019

    Professor Tom Cotter was quoted in a Law360 story titled, “FTC Facing Qualcomm Alone as Trump Admin. Turns on Case.” The article discusses the recent filing of a Statement of Interest on behalf of the Departments of Justice, Defense, and Energy in support of a stay pending appeal in Federal Trade Commission v. Qualcomm, an antitrust case. (The FTC—an independent federal agency—won at trial, Qualcomm is now appealing, and the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice is arguing that the decision was wrongly decided.) The article quotes Professor Cotter as stating that “it’s really, really unusual to have the two federal [antitrust] enforcers at odds with each other in such a public way.”

  • Law360 Quotes Prof. Cotter on Justice Stevens’s Contributions to IP Law

    July 18, 2019

    A Law360 story titled “Justice Stevens Sought Careful Limits on Reach of IP Law” quotes Professor Tom Cotter on the late Justice’s contributions to IP case law. Cotter stated that Justice Stevens’s copyright and patent opinions “were consistent with an overall view that we should construe the IP statutes somewhat narrowly, and that there are significant risks of monopolization.” Cotter also stated that “[w]hether you ultimately agreed with his views or not, you knew that it would be [a] scholarly, well-thought-out, well-reasoned opinion. … That was the sort of lawyer and justice that he was.” Cotter shared some further observations on his blog earlier this week, after hearing of the Justice’s death.

  • Prof. Hickman’s Amicus Brief in Tax Case Published, Reported by Tax Notes

    July 17, 2019

    An amicus brief filed by Prof. Kristin Hickman in support of rehearing en banc in CIC Services LLC v. Internal Revenue Service, 925 F.3d 247 (6th Cir. 2019), was published and commentary on the brief was reported by Tax Notes (subscription required). The case concerns whether the tax code’s Anti-Injunction Act precludes pre-enforcement judicial review of Administrative Procedure Act challenges to tax regulatory actions. A three-judge panel of the Sixth Circuit divided over that issue, with both the majority and dissenting opinions citing and addressing arguments raised by Prof. Hickman and Gerald Kerska ’17 in Restoring the Lost Anti-Injunction Act, 103 Va. L. Rev. 1683 (2017). Prof. Hickman drew extensively from the article in encouraging the court to order rehearing en banc.

  • Prof. Kitrosser Discusses Census Case on The Rick Ungar Show

    July 10, 2019

    Professor Kitrosser spoke to Rick Ungar of the nationally syndicated radio program, “The Rick Ungar Show,” about the ongoing census litigation. In the broadcasted conversation, Professor Kitrosser weighed in on various matters including the reasoning in the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 2019 opinion in the case, possible Justice Department legal theories on remand, and the Justice Department’s recent request to switch attorneys in the litigation. Professor Kitrosser’s segment begins at the 19 minute mark.


E.g., Oct 22 2019
E.g., Oct 22 2019

Contact Information

University of Minnesota Law School

Walter F. Mondale Hall | 229 19th Avenue South | Minneapolis, MN 55455

P: 612-625-5000

Email Us

Connect on Social Media