Dru Stevenson, Professor of Law

My STCL colleague  Derek Fincham  has a new article on SSRN entitled  The Parthenon Sculptures and Cultural Justice , which I recommend to my readers - it's a very interesting subject.  Here is the abstract: From government and philosophy to art drama and culture, the ancient Athenians, as most everyone knows, gave future generations so much. Yet the pinnacle of their artistic achievement, the Parthenon, remains a damaged and incomplete work of art. 2012 marks the two-hundredth anniversary of the last removal of works of art from the Parthenon. That taking was ordered by an English diplomat known to history as Lord Elgin, and it reminds us that cultures create lasting monuments. But not equally.  Cultures which remove the artistic achievements of other nations have increasingly been confronted with uncomfortable questions about how these objects were acquired. Nations of origin are increasingly deciding to press claims for repatriation of works taken long ...

I keep hearing other law profs say that the peer review system is vastly superior to the law review system for academic articles, and I always wonder if they really know much about the problems with peer review academic journals...here is another reason why I like the law review system better:  Journals' Ranking System Roils Research .     The article is about scientific journals rejecting papers due to excessive citations to articles in rival journals. The rejection is apparently for the crass, strategic purpose of preventing rival journals from getting more citations and thereby climbing in the rankings of "scholarly impact" lists.

My writing project this summer is now taking shape as a draft manuscript, and is available for download on SSRN.  I would really appreciate current or former students, colleagues, and friends downloading it and giving me feedback on it, as I plan to spend the Fall revising it and then submit it to journals in February.  The title/link is Codification and Transaction Costs , and here is the tentative abstract: The consensus view in the academic literature has been that rules present lower transaction costs – in the form of information costs – for the courts and citizenry, when compared to standards. Rules are more specific and detailed, so there is less uncertainty and less need for sophisticated interpretation. At the same time, the prevailing wisdom holds, specific rules impose higher enactment costs for legislatures. Systematic codification, which became of universal feature of American statutes in the twentieth century, seems to invert this relationship, lowering transa...

This semester I am teaching Administrative Law and the Law & Economics Seminar at my institution (South Texas College of Law) - two courses I really enjoy.  I'm a little disappointed that the enrollment is so high - I have 81 students in Administrative Law, and I'm fairly certain there are not that many students interested in the subject (lack of interest from a large portion of the students makes teaching the course more difficult). I've noticed an inverse correlation of class discussion to the size of the class - we had active class discussions  last summer in my Administrative Law course, which had about 15 students, but so far this semester (two weeks in) most of the students sit in stone silence while I prattle on about the nondelegation doctrine and such. I am also teaching Administrative Law at the University of Houston Law Center, but classes don't start there until next week. For students wanting to find me in my office this semester, Tuesdays and Thurs...