Our faculty are leaders in scholarship, teaching and service, as detailed in our faculty profiles. Here are highlights of their recent achievements:
University Professor & Kilpatrick Chair of Corporate Finance and Securities Law Usha Rodrigues was featured in The Washington Post regarding special purpose acquisition companies. The article titled "Trump Media merger wins investor approval, netting Trump a potential windfall" was written by Drew Harwell and published 3/22/24. The article was reprinted by other media outlets including Bloomberg Law.
Callaway Chair Elizabeth Chamblee Burch published "Against Bankruptcy: Public Litigation Values Versus the Endless Quest for Global Peace in Mass Litigation" in 133 Yale Law Journal Forum 525 (2024) (with A.R. Gluck and A.S. Zimmerman).
University Professor & Kilpatrick Chair of Corporate Finance and Securities Law Usha Rodrigues was featured in The Washington Post regarding special purpose acquisition companies. The article titled "Trump Media, Launched After an Insurrection, Faces Rebellion of Its Own" was written by Drew Harwell and published 3/21/24.
Almost 26 years ago, Georgia Athletic Association Professor David E. Shipley became a member of the University of Georgia School of Law community, initially serving as dean for five years before renewing his commitment to full-time teaching in 2003. In recognition of his service, several School of Law graduates have established a scholarship in his honor.
In a new test announced by the U.S. Supreme Court, public officials who censor their critics on social media only violate the First Amendment if the public official: (1) possessed actual authority to speak on the state’s behalf on a particular matter, and (2) purported to exercise that authority when speaking in the relevant social media posts. “Much of the litigation will now focus on the first part of the test,” according to Clinical Assistant Professor & First Amendment Clinic Director Clare R. Norins. “There will likely not be a clear-cut answer in many cases given that an official’s authority to speak on behalf of the state can be established not only by a ‘statute, ordinance, [or] regulation’ but also by ‘custom or usage.’ It will be left to the trial courts to decide how ‘custom or usage’ will be interpreted and applied in this context.”