Washburn Law Journal
Editor's Note
Volume 47, No. 3 (Spring 2008)
In the United States today, there are more than 550 federally recognized Indian tribes. Because of the large number of tribes and the complexities of federal Indian laws, we have decided to dedicate three articles in this issue to various Indian law topics. In his article, Indian Gaming on Newly Acquired Lands, Erik M. Jensen explores whether the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act provides for Indian gaming on newly acquired lands that are not associated with traditional tribal activity. In The New Face of Justice: Joint Tribal-State Jurisdiction, the Honorable Korey Wahwassuck discusses a unique Joint Powers Agreement between the Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe Tribal Court and the Cass County District Court that established the first joint tribal-state court in the nation. She provides an overview of tribal court development, discusses how the joint jurisdiction evolved, and provides practical suggestions for cooperation in other jurisdiction. In her article, Shadow War Scholarship, Indigenous Legal Tradition, and Modern Law in Indian Country, Christine Zuni Cruz discusses the establishment of the Tribal Law Journal as the "first law journal dedicated exclusively to scholarship on Indigenous law, that is, the law of specific Indigenous nations and peoples." She encourages the creation of dialogue among Indigenous Peoples and between Indigenous Peoples and their allies and contends that the Tribal Law Journal "is a movement-a modest, humble movement-to encourage Indigenous Peoples to own their own law and to preserve the native intellect and philosophy."
This issue also contains two articles unrelated to Native American law. In The Fake Revolution: Understanding Legal Realism, Eric Engle argues that cyclical economic downturn triggered a war for resources and market share in Iraq as it did in Vietnam. He argues that the depression and world war triggered legal realism, Vietnam sparked the Critical Legal Studies, and that Iraq will create new legal movements. In Does the Attorney-Client Privilege Apply to Tax Lawyers?: An Examination of the Return Preparation Exception to Define the Parameters of Privilege in the Tax Context, Claudine Pease-Wingenter discusses the extent to which the attorney client privilege applies to certain documents and communications by attorneys in the tax return preparation context.
This issue and this volume conclude with several student-written articles discussing a variety of topics. In his note, Raising Penalty Standard "More Likely than Not" Creates Conflict Between Tax Lawyers and Their Clients, Eric M. Pauly argues that a recent amendment to the Internal Revenue Code that increased the standard a tax return preparer must meet before taking a particular position on a tax return creates a conflict of interest between the tax return preparer, with a "more likely than not" standard, and the taxpayer, with a "substantial authority" standard. In her case comment, Anna M. Krstulic analyzes the judicial standards that courts apply to pursuit related claims against police officers when innocent bystanders are killed or injured as a result of the police chase. She suggests that courts should consider the totality of the circumstances in each case to determine what police conduct-intent to harm or deliberate indifference to life-sufficiently "shocks the conscience" so as to hold the police and the government accountable for its actions during police chases. Finally, Jeremy K. Schrag analyzes a case of first impression for all federal appellate courts, whereby a statutory rape victim and alien sued the alleged perpetrator in a civil action under the Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA) claiming that statutory rape violated the law of nations. He contends that, in denying the claim, the "Tenth Circuit failed to recognize the prohibition of sexual violence against minors as a general principle of international law and further confused the ATCA's jurisdictional requirements."
T.R.H.
Professor of the Year
Each year the graduating class votes to honor a member of the Washburn University School of Law faculty as the William O. Douglas Outstanding Professor of the Year. Professor William G. Merkel was the recipient of this honor for the 2007-2008 academic year.
Professor Merkel's teaching responsibilities include Comparative Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law I, Constitutional Law II, and Public International Law. He received his B.A. degree in 1989 from Johns Hopkins University, his J.D. in 1996 from Columbia University School of Law and his D.Phil. in history from the University of Oxford in 2007. Following completion of his J.D., Professor Merkel worked in appellate litigation with Wiley, Rein & Fielding in Washington, D.C. He taught American history at Oxford University from 2001-2003 and Comparative Introduction to American Law to foreign trained LL.M. students at Columbia from 2003-2005. He is in the process of converting his doctoral thesis into a book to be called Jefferson and Slavery: A Legal History. Professor Merkel is a member of the New York and District of Columbia bars.
The class of 2008 selected John R. Wine, Jr., as Adjunct Professor of the Year. Professor Wine is Commissioner of the Kansas Corporation Commission and he teaches Administrative Law.
The Washburn Law Journal is pleased to recognize the contributions of Professors Merkel and Wine by acknowledging them in Volume 47, Issue 3.
