Writ 2010 - Ohio Northern University Pettit College of Law

Writ_Fall10_Covers 3/9/11 2:03 PM Page 1
A Publication of the Ohio Northern University Pettit College of Law
Ohio Northern University
College of Law
525 Main St.
Ada, OH 45810
CCallenddarr ooff Evvenntts
2010
AUGUST
30 First Day of Law Classes
SEPTEMBER
29 Ohio Supreme Court in Session
at ONU
OCTOBER
6 Carhart Lecture, William Patry
8 Phi Alpha Delta CLE
8-10 Homecoming 2010
� For more details see page 22 inside
ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED
16-17 Law Class of 1990 Reunion
21-24 Law School Recess
28 Kormendy Lecture, Sanford Levinson
NOVEMBER
5 UMC Legal Forum
10 Planned Giving CLE
23 Fall Semester Classes End
Non-Profit Org.
U.S. Postage
PAID
Permit No. 54
New Washington, OH
2011
JANUARY
4 January Term Begins
18 Third District Court in Session
21 January Term Ends
28 Spring Classes Begin
FEBRUARY
12 Barrister’s Ball
16 Inn of Court
17 Dean’s Lecture Series, Markus Zimmer
21 Accepted Students Day 1
27-3/6 Spring Break
MARCH
12 Accepted Students Day 2
16 BLSA Diversity Forum
25-27 Biltmore Law Alumni Event
� For more details see page 27 inside
30 Carhart Law Review Symposium
APRIL
6 Celebrezze Competition final round
8 Women in Law Symposium, Reception
& Portrait Dedication
13 Honors Banquet
15 Public Interest Auction
20 Inn of Court
22-25 Easter Recess
29 Spring Semester Classes End
MAY
5 Woodworth Lecture
15 Law Commencement
Sports Center, 2:00 pm
DECEMBER
19 Fall Graduation
31 Summer Classes Begin
For details about these events or other activities at the ONU College of Law, please see
www.law.onu.edu/Calendar

Writ_Fall10_Covers 3/9/11 2:03 PM Page 2
DEAN’SLetter
This is an exciting year for the Pettit College of Law at Ohio Northern University. Not only are
we celebrating 125 years of preparing students for the legal profession, but we are also
celebrating our largest total enrollment in 5 years, a number of new faculty members and an
enhanced curriculum.
This issue of the Writ focuses on some of the many exciting things going on here. We hope you enjoy
the “ONU Law by the Numbers” feature and the articles which touch upon many key accomplishments of
our talented students, alumni, faculty and staff. These markers are an indication of the progress of the college
over the years. I am confident that ONU Law will continue to rise to the challenge of preparing students
for the legal profession well into the future while staying true to its ambitions of providing a solid
legal education with a focus on practical skills in an environment which features personal attention supported
by a number of dedicated faculty and professionals.
While celebrating this milestone year in the college’s history and recognizing its successes, we must be
mindful of the challenges which continue to face ONU Law. We need your continued support in a number
of ways, including assisting Career Services with identifying employment opportunities for students
and alumni and providing financial support for the college and its initiatives. We are sincerely grateful for
the generosity of our alumni and friends who continue to give to programs such as the Northern Fund,
the Public Interest Fellowship, and the Hanson Fellows
Program. Alumni support is critical to the success of
the college.
As we continue to celebrate this momentous
occasion in the college’s history, we
invite you back to Ada to visit the campus
and see the wonderful things that
are happening here. I look forward to
seeing you back on campus in the
near future!
Sincerely yours,
David C. Crago
Dean and
Professor of Law
“Know Thyself ”
–Socrates
“Control Thyself ”
–Cicero
“Give Thyself ”
–Jesus
Your support of the Pettit College of Law
is greatly appreciated.

WINTER 2010
Featured
INSIDE
EDITOR:
Mindi Wells, BSBA ’95, JD ’98,
Assistant Dean for
Administration & Student Services
COPY EDITORS AND
CONTRIBUTING WRITERS:
Eric Pheneger, L-3
Carol Wilson, Senior
Professional Writing Major
DESIGN/LAYOUT:
Gary Stuart, BSED ’67
Studio II
A Publication of the Ohio Northern University
Pettit College of Law
2 ONU LAW BY THE NUMBERS
A look at some of the intriguing numbers over the 125 years of education
10 INCORPORATING PROFESSIONALISM
INTO LEGAL EDUCATION
48 FIRST AMENDMENT VS. FREEDOM OF
EXPRESSION IN OTHER DEMOCRACIES
By Jean-Marie Kamatali
DEPARTMENTS
COLLEGE UPDATES
15 Legal Clinic Offers Real World Experience
16 Employment Rate Surpasses National Average
18 Entering Class of 2010
20 Moot Court Room Goes High Tech
24 Alumni Events
FEATURED SPEAKERS
28 Carhart Lecture
29 Kormendy & Woodworth Lectures
30 Dean’s Lecture Series
STUDENT ACTIVITIES
34 Moot Court Year in Review
37 Law Review Symposium
38 Public Interest Stipends Awarded
39 ONU Students Travel to Iceland
FACULTY & STAFF
41 Faculty Recognized at Honors Banquet
42 Streib Retires
44 Activities
46 New Faculty
The Writ is the official publication of the College of Law. The
Writ is published once a year and distributed to alumni and friends
of Ohio Northern University’s Claude W. Pettit College of Law.
Letters, alumni notes, requests for reprint permission and
manuscripts of articles should be sent to:
Mindi Wells
College of Law Dean’s Office
Ohio Northern University
525 N. Main • Ada, OH 45810
PHONE: (419) 772-3051
FAX: (419) 772-2318
m-wells@onu.edu
www.law.onu.edu/contact
+PLUS
8 COMMENCEMENT
22 HOMECOMING
32 OHIO SUPREME COURT
IN SESSION

Feature
ONU LAW… by the numbers
As ONU Law celebrates 125 years of preparing students
for the legal profession, we highlight some key
numbers about us.
125
2nd
Number of years Ohio Northern University Law has
been preparing students for the legal profession
STATS:
Oldest
Law School
LIBRARY
in Ohio LAW
2 OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW | Writ WINTER 2010
430,000
Current volumes in collection
306
Number of seats in library
113
Hours open per week

1,317
Average number of
applications received each year
BY LAW ADMISSIONS OVER THE LAST 3 YEARS
31 STATES REPRESENTED IN OUR CURRENT STUDENT BODY
26
16
19
UNDERGRADUATE INSTITUTIONS
REPRESENTED IN OUR
CURRENT STUDENT BODY
States represented
in the L-1 class
157
Writ WINTER 2010 | OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW 3
States represented in the
L-2 class
States represented
in the L-3 class

Feature
90
7,035 GRADUATES
OF ONU LAW
5,126 – LIVING
ONU LAW ALUMNI
50 +
TOP 5
4 OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW | Writ WINTER 2010
NUMBER OF CREDIT HOURS
TO EARN A JD DEGREE
(FOR THE 2010 ENTERING CLASS)
29,038LIVING ONU
ALUMNI
25
COUNTRIES OUTSIDE
States where ONU Law alumni reside, plus the District of
Columbia, Guam and the U.S. Virgin Islands
STATES WITH MOST ONU LAW ALUMNI
1] Ohio 1,852
2] Pennsylvania 581
3] New York 286 OF U.S. PROTECTORATES
4] Florida 226 WHERE ONU LAW ALUMNI RESIDE
5] New Jersey 177

AGE OF
OLDEST
VERIFIED
LIVING ALUM:
Belle Siegel, JD ’28,
Southfield, Mich.104
YEARS YOUNG
WHO HAVE GRADUATED
OF STUDENTS
FROM OUR LLM PROGRAM
39NUMBER
SINCE ITS INCEPTION 4 YEARS AGO
Tuition for 2010-11: $30,964/academic year
$3.5 MILLION
IN SCHOLARSHIPS TO ALL THREE CLASSES THIS ACADEMIC YEAR
Number of students
who have traveled to
Iceland through the
Icelandic Legal
Exchange Program
• 2010-11: ONU Law has the largest total enrollment in 5 years.
• The 2010 entering class is the largest entering class in 4 years.
Writ WINTER 2010 | OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW 5

Feature
19 TH
EDITION OF THE
BLUEBOOK
CURRENTLY USED
FOR RESEARCH AND
WRITING COURSES
132
ISSUES OF
LAW REVIEWS
DISTRIBUTED
94%
EMPLOYMENT RATE
FOR CLASS OF 2009
539
FANS OF ONU LAW
ON FACEBOOK
6 OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW | Writ WINTER 2010
1,800
Blue exam booklets used
during the last academic year
VOLUME
36TH
10:
OF THE LAW
REVIEW THAT
WILL BE
COMPLETED
THIS YEAR
STUDENT
TO FACULTY
RATIO
102
FOLLOWERS OF ONU
LAW ON TWITTER
AND COUNTING…

COLLEGE UPDATES
Social Media @ ONU Law
A great way to stay connected
Are you following ONU Law on Twitter?
Are you a fan of ONU Law on Facebook?
Have you joined the ONU Law group on LinkedIn?
Have you seen the ONU Law photo album on Flickr?
Twitter is estimated to have more
than 18 million registered users in
the United States, with 400 million
users worldwide. LinkedIn has over
50 million visitors worldwide.
These social media outlets provide
a fantastic opportunity to stay connected
with classmates, faculty,
staff, students and friends of ONU Law. We regularly post
notices about events, student, faculty and alumni accomplishments,
and news about ONU Law, as well as photos
from events such as homecoming, class reunions and the
donor dinner. Feel free to post discussion items, job openings
and updates.
Find out what you are missing. Now’s the time to
connect with us to get the lastest updates and to
show your support.
■ On Twitter, you can follow ONU Law at
twitter.com/ONULaw
■ On Facebook, you can become a fan
of ONU Law at
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Ohio-
Northern-University-Claude-W-Pettit-
College-of-Law/150883254878?ref=mf
■ On LinkedIn, you can join the ONU Law group at
http://www.linkedin.com/groupRegistration?gid=84070
Have you seen the new ONU Law website?
Take a look at what is available at www.law.onu.edu
and send any feedback to lawwebmaster@onu.edu
* Upcoming events
* Update your information
* Alumni achievements
* Order transcripts
* View past issues of the Writ, Sidebar Journal and
other publications
* View ONU yearbooks back to 1911
You can
connect to all
of them from
our website at
www.law.onu.edu
Check us
out
ON THE WEB @ LAW.ONU.EDU
Writ WINTER 2010 | OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW 7

COMMENCEMENT 2010
May 16, 2010
Justice Robert R. Cupp speaks
at ONU Law Commencement Ceremony
The 2010 Ohio Northern University
Pettit College of Law commencement
took place on Sunday, May 16,
at 2 p.m. in the ONU Sports Center.
One hundred one students graduated in the May
and December classes. Dr. Kendall L. Baker,
Ohio Northern president, presided over the ceremony.
In addition to juris doctor degrees, ONU
conferred LLM degrees to 11 lawyers from transitional
and emerging democracies who completed
a yearlong course of intensive study in the
Democratic Governance and
Rule of Law program.
The Sports Center opened
for the commencement exercises
at 12:30 p.m. A musical prelude
began at 1:30 p.m., followed by
the procession of faculty and
juris doctorate candidates.
Robert R. Cupp, BA ’73, JD
’76, current justice on the
Supreme Court of Ohio, delivered
the commencement address.
He has committed much of his
30-year career to effective public
service. Prior to his election to
Justice Robert R. Cupp, Elijah A. Osiro, Megan
R. Roby, Aaron M. Baker,
Dean David C. Crago
the Supreme Court of Ohio in 2006, Cupp
served on the Ohio Court of Appeals, Third
Appellate District and as a member of the Ohio
Senate for 16 years, from 1985-2000.
Academically ranked at the top of her class,
Megan R. Roby, of New Brighton, Pa., delivered
the student address, and David C. Crago, dean
of the College of Law, gave remarks. Graduating
law students Aaron M. Baker, of Ohio City,
Ohio, gave the invocation; Sean A. Mott, of
Biglerville, Pa., performed a musical benediction,
and Elijah A. Osiro, of Kisumu, Kenya, gave the
8 OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW | Writ WINTER 2010
spoken benediction. Jacqueline A. Cook, of West
Chester, Ohio, sang the national anthem.
Crago, assisted by members of the tenured
law faculty, placed the academic hood upon each
candidate, followed by Baker’s presentation of
the diplomas.
A reception for graduates and families was
held in the College of Law immediately following
the ceremony.
■ Sean A. Mott

■ Rachel Kasper, JD '10, and family
■ Jacqueline A. Cook
Writ WINTER 2010 | OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW 9

Feature
Professionalism Focus of
Supreme Court Symposium
The Supreme Court of Ohio hosted a Student to Lawyer
Symposium on Friday, Dec. 3, 2010, at the Ohio Judicial
Center. Law school academics, law school students, experienced
practicing attorneys, judges and new lawyers were invited
to attend. Coordinated by the Commission on
Professionalism, the Student to Lawyer Symposium’s goal was
to encourage discussion on how professionalism may become more incorporated
throughout the law school experience, so that law schools may
better prepare their students to be exemplary legal professionals.
Presentations were made regarding Washington & Lee’s professional development
program and the University of St. Thomas School of Law’s mentoring
program. Additional sessions focused on effective teaching methods
and a panel discussion. In addition, each Ohio law school submitted a
video highlighting their school’s professionalism initiatives. A bound volume
containing the symposium’s materials, which also contained professionalism
training information from each of the law schools, was distributed
to all participants. Several individuals associated with Ohio Northern
attended the event, including Robert R. Cupp, BA ’73, JD ’76, justice,
Supreme Court of Ohio; Kalpana Yalamanchili, JD ’82, director of bar
services, Ohio State Bar Association; Richard Warren, JD ’66, judge,
Allen County Court of Common Pleas; Steve Holland, JD ’81, administrative
director, Supreme Court of Ohio; Nancy Paine Sabol, director of
academic support and associate professor of law, Ohio Northern; and
Mindi Wells, BSBA ’95, JD ’98, assistant dean for administration and student
services, Ohio Northern.
Students to Lawyers at
Ohio Northern University
By Stephen C. Veltri, associate dean and professor of law
Ohio Northern University began educating lawyers 125 years ago.
Personal attention to its students and hands on skills training has long
been a feature of education at the University and generations of skilled,
practicing attorneys have begun their careers at the College of Law.
Building on this tradition,
the College of Law
began a comprehensive
review of its curriculum
in 2007. As part of this
process, the law faculty
solicited the advice of
practitioners and leaders
of the bar including the
10:
STUDENT TO FACULTY RATIO
members of the College of Law Alumni Association. The faculty also drew
on the insights published in 2007 by the Carnegie Foundation for the
Advancement of Teaching in its report “Educating Lawyers Preparation for
the Profession of Law.” Both the faculty and the members of the bar it
consulted shared the view of the Carnegie Foundation that effective legal
education should integrate formal knowledge with the experience of practice.
With this in mind, Ohio Northern revamped its program of legal
education to modernize its core curriculum, expand the opportunities for
student training in practical skills and lead its graduates to share the values
10 OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW | Writ WINTER 2010
Both the faculty and the members
of the bar it consulted shared the
view of the Carnegie Foundation
that effective legal education
should integrate formal knowledge
with the experience of practice.
of the profession. The revised program of study will be implemented over
a three year period. The first year law class admitted in the 2010-11 academic
year, notably the 125th in the history
of the law college, will be trained
entirely in the new curriculum.
THE ACADEMIC CALENDAR
In order to achieve the objectives of
the law faculty’s curricular reform, Ohio
Northern revised the academic calendar
of the law college. Like most academic
institutions, the law college had operated
under a standard calendar consisting of
13
WEEK SEMESTERS
two 15-week semesters. The traditional calendar was well suited to the
doctrinal courses that form the core of the law curriculum. It was not very
well suited, however, to concentrated skills courses where students work in
depth on a problem. Moreover, the faculty, in its effort to address the concerns
of the Carnegie Foundation, wanted to bring leading practitioners to
campus. While good lawyers can find a day or two to share their skills and
experiences with law students, it is very difficult for them to clear their calendars
for 15 to 30 short class sessions. Finally, the faculty felt strongly
that its students should have the opportunity to apply legal doctrine to the
cutting edge issues of the day and to travel and learn off-campus, where
that experience would be worthwhile.
To further these goals, the College of Law shortened its Fall and Spring
semesters from 15 to 13 weeks. In between these semesters, the law college
placed a new January term. The Spring and Fall semesters still provide a
framework for standard coursework. The new January term, however,
The new January term, however, offers a vehicle
for offering in-depth skills courses, mentoring by
experienced practitioners, exploring contemporary
issues and travelling off-campus where that
would enhance student learning.

offers a vehicle for offering in-depth skills courses, mentoring by experienced
practitioners, exploring contemporary issues and travelling off-campus
where that would enhance student learning.
THE FIRST YEAR OF STUDY
1
The reforms adopted by the faculty
to the first year of law study at Ohio
Northern seek to implement one of the
fundamental recommendations of the
Carnegie Foundation to incorporate
lawyering, professionalism and legal
analysis from the very beginning of law
school. The faculty’s new program of
study better integrates law school with
practice and introduces students to the
values of the profession from the day they enter the college. This effort
begins with the orientation program required of all incoming students.
The first session of the first day introduces all students to the expectations
of professionalism. In recent years, the college has been privileged to have
this session led by Ohio Supreme Court Justice Robert R. Cupp, whose
career in public service exemplifies the best values of the profession. At the
close of this session, Justice Cupp leads the students in an oath of professionalism
in which the students commit to approach their craft as a calling
to serve their clients and the public good.
In addition, beginning with the 2010-11 first-year class, every student
entering Ohio Northern is introduced during orientation to experienced
lawyers who have agreed to serve as class mentors. These lawyers then
return to the campus during the January term of the first-year of study and
at other times throughout the students’ three year course of study.
Through this mentoring program, Ohio Northern hopes to give every student
who enters the college the chance to form a relationship with a role
model.
st
YEAR
The faculty’s new program of study
better integrates law school with
practice and introduces students to
the values of the profession from the
day they enter the college.
The new curriculum employs the January term to further serve the
objectives of the Carnegie report. All first-year students take only one
course during the January term titled Legal Problem Solving and Analysis.
This course is designed to help the students see how lawyers use legal doctrine
to solve problems. It is entirely problem based and gives the students
the experience of approaching problems as lawyers do in firms, as part of a
group or team. A major goal of the course is to bring the profession to the
students. Practicing lawyers, including the class mentors, are part of the
instructional team leading the course. These lawyers bring their experience,
skills and ethical concerns to the class. In this fashion, the course seeks to
wed doctrine with practice. During the upcoming January term, for example,
students will be given an opportunity to interview a prospective client
injured by a tort and then fashion a complaint. The practitioner, however,
will discuss with the students the other concerns he raises with a prospective
client in his initial meeting, making sure, for example, the client
understands the demands and expense of litigation and is situated to face
it. In future class sessions, the students will be presented with a police
report and will be asked to formulate a proposed indictment on multiple
Writ WINTER 2010 | OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW 11

Feature
charges. An experienced prosecutor will then discuss with the students the
ethical and other concerns she has when she makes charging decisions. In
this fashion, the course hopes to move the students beyond the standard
fare of first-year law school, the antiseptic analysis of the elements of a tort
or crime, with what the Carnegie Foundation called the “rich complexity
of actual situations that involve full-dimensional people.”
As part of the new January term course in the first-year curriculum, the
students will observe an actual session of the Ohio Third District Court of
Appeals held at the law school. Following the session, the students will be
given the opportunity to interact with the members of the bench and the
advocates. Again, the effort will be to have the students observe lawyers
and understand how the choices the attorneys make during the course of
the litigation frame the issued presented to the court.
The final change made to the first-year curriculum addresses what has
long been seen as a shortcoming of legal education. The standard first-year
curriculum was designed in the late nineteenth century, when most
American law was crafted by judges as common law. Today, statutes and
administrative regulations form a much greater part of the law.
Consequently, the faculty has added a course titled Public Law and the
Legal Process in the Spring semester of the first-year that will introduce
students to legislative and administrative law.
UPPER CLASS CURRICULUM
Following the publication of the MacCrate Report by the American
Bar Association in 1992, Ohio Northern revised its upper class curriculum
to require more training in professional skills. The College of Law requires
that every student complete at least 10 credit hours in classes designated as
skills courses or in clinical placements. To be designated as a skills course, a
class must involve simulations, drafting assignments or other exercises that
12 OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW | Writ WINTER 2010
mirror practice. Some skills courses
involve live client experiences.
Students enrolled in Alternative
Dispute Resolution, for example,
mediate actual disputes that have
reached a local court. The skills
courses offered by the College of
Law include Advanced Appellate
Advocacy, Interviewing, Counseling
and Negotiation, Advanced Legal
Research, Law Office Economic
Management, Alternative Dispute
Resolution, Bankruptcy: Practice &
Procedure, Business Planning, Real
Estate: Residential Conveyances,
UPPER
CLASS
COURSES
Complex Litigation, Real Estate Commercial Development, Civil Practice:
An Introduction, Criminal Practice: An Introduction, Criminal Practice:
Advanced, Trial Advocacy, Estate Planning, Trial Advocacy: Advanced and
International Commercial Arbitration Law and Guardian-ad-litem Law
and Practice.
The law college also offers a number of clinical opportunities to its students.
The college maintains and staffs a law clinic in the City of Lima
that provides legal services to the low income individuals. It also offers a
civil litigation clinic in conjunction with a local legal aid society. The corporate
transaction clinic of the college provides services to local non-profit
organizations and churches in matters such as incorporating, obtaining tax
exempt status and real estate work. The bankruptcy clinic involves work
with a bankruptcy trustee or debtor’s counsel. Students enrolled in the
environmental clinic work with a non-profit environmental group in

Ohio. The college also offers clinical placements in various state and local
government agencies. Students have the opportunity to work under the
supervision of local prosecutors representing the state in misdemeanor proceedings.
They can also have a similar experience in the public defender’s
office. Finally, students can work under the supervision of federal and state
judges in judicial externships.
Generally, the local bench and bar have been very supportive of Ohio
Northern students participating in clinic. In many ways, the location of
the college has been an advantage. A judge in the court of common pleas
of Kenton, Lima or Findlay, often can give a law student representing the
clinic more time than it would be possible to give a student in a larger city.
The University’s affiliation with the United Methodist Church has also
been beneficial. The legal needs of local churches and affiliated non-profit
organizations enable Ohio Northern to offer its clinic students transactional
and real estate work.
Both skills courses and clinical placements offer students the opportunity
to enjoy a “capstone” experience in curricular sequences of the kind
recommended by the Carnegie Foundation. For example, once a student
has completed core doctrinal courses in Property, Estates, Wills & Trusts,
and Taxation of Estates, Gifts and Trusts, the student can enroll in Estate
Planning. That course, given the small size of the college, generally has an
enrollment of fewer than 10 students. The professor who teaches the
course has wide experience and leads the students through problems in
counseling, planning and drafting wills, trusts and other documents. By
the end of the semester, the students have completed an accomplished
portfolio. Similarly, once a student completes the foundational courses in
the bankruptcy sequence, the student is able to take part in a series of clinical
placements with a bankruptcy trustee, debtor’s counsel and a bankruptcy
judge. In addition to these curricular sequences, the College of Law
offers others in corporate law, criminal law, international law, public law
and policy, real estate law, civil litigation and taxation. Each of these
sequences builds on a foundation of doctrinal courses and culminates in
skills course or clinical placements. Students who excel in a curricular
sequence are recognized by the faculty with certificates of achievement.
In planning its new curriculum, the faculty sought guidance from the
bar. Practicing lawyers consistently stated that new lawyers would have
benefited from more writing experiences in law school. As the law college
already had a rigorous upper division writing requirement and an
advanced legal research course, the faculty addressed this concern of the
bar by requiring more written exercises as a method of assessment, particularly
in classes designated as skills courses. Members of the bar were also
concerned that young associates were often insufficiently conversant with
business terminology and concepts. Larger firms, in particular, frequently
provide younger associates with training in fundamental principles of
accounting. The faculty determined that all lawyers should have some
familiarity with these concepts. Accordingly, the revision of the curriculum
requires students who do not have a background in accounting to take a
required course in the beginning of their second year in fundamental principles
of accounting. The faculty viewed the course as providing foundational
knowledge of a kind that the Carnegie Foundation recommended
be provided early in a student’s course of study. Placed early in the second
year of study, the course enhances student learning in business organizations,
tax, commercial law, real estate and corporate finance.
The new January term provides a framework for bridging the gap
between law school and practice. The faculty hopes to develop classes that
will bring practitioners to the campus during the term to help with specialized
courses. The term also provides a space for travel, where the experience
would be worthwhile in the teaching of a course. Finally, the
January term is ideal for skills courses in which students devote large
blocks of time to work in depth on assignments.
JOINT PROGRAMS
The College of Law has developed joint programs that also offer students
meaningful opportunities for experiential learning. A number of
years ago, the college developed a graduate program for foreign students
from transitional countries leading to an award of an LLM in Democratic
The skills courses offered by the
College of Law include Advanced
Appellate Advocacy, Interviewing,
Counseling and Negotiation,
Advanced Legal Research, Law Office
Economic Management, Alternative Dispute Resolution, Bankruptcy: Practice
& Procedure, Business Planning, Real Estate: Residential Conveyances,
Complex Litigation, Real Estate Commercial Development, Civil Practice: An
Introduction, Criminal Practice: An Introduction, Criminal Practice: Advanced,
Trial Advocacy, Estate Planning, Trial Advocacy: Advanced and International
Commercial Arbitration Law and Guardian-ad-litem Law and Practice.
Writ WINTER 2010 | OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW 13

Feature
Governance and Rule of Law. This program is
designed to train the students in legal mechanisms
to encourage the development of democracy,
strengthen the rule of law, build market
economies and combat corruption. Ohio
Northern supports the LLM students in return
for their commitment to return to their home
countries to work in order to further the aims of
the program. The College of Law now offers
American students who desire to work in international
development to earn both their law
degree and the master’s degree in three calendar
years. As part of this joint degree program, the
students engage in two summer externships, one
in the United States and one overseas. The
domestic externships involve placements with
groups like CARE, the United Nations
Development Program and the Urban Institute.
The overseas placements have generally been in Central Asia and Africa
with governmental agencies, courts and programs sponsored by United
States Agency for International Development and the American Bar
Association. A graduate in the joint degree program is currently clerking
for the Chief Justice of the Rwandan Supreme Court.
The College of Law also has a joint degree program with Ohio
14 OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW | Writ WINTER 2010
Northern’s College of Pharmacy in which students earn
both the Pharm. D. and the JD. The program involves
externship placements with agencies such as the State
Board of Pharmacy and the Food and Drug
Administration. Finally, the business college of the
University expects to soon receive final approval from
accreditation agencies allowing it to award a masters of
professional practice in accounting. The business college
and the law school will then offer a joint degree that
will include experiential learning in the combined curriculum.
CONCLUSION
The recommendations of the Carnegie Foundation
informed Ohio Northern’s revision of its curriculum.
The new curriculum of the college offers foundational
coursework suited to the practice of law today by
adding new required courses in legislation, administrative
law and principles of accounting. It also offers its students a rich array
of experiential learning opportunities in which students can apply what
they have learned in practice settings. From the first day of orientation
through these capstone experiences, the college emphasizes the values of
professionalism and builds on a long tradition of preparing law students
for the practice of law.
The revision of the curriculum requires students who do not
have a background in accounting to take a required course
in the beginning of their second year in
fundamental principles of accounting.

COLLEGE UPDATES
Legal Clinic Offers
“Real World” Experience
During the 2009-10 school year, students at the
clinic worked on 118 cases and received 217
inquires for assistance.
Since 1960, the Ohio Northern Legal Clinic has been providing legal
assistance to residents of Allen and Hardin counties, while offering law students
the opportunity to receive critical experiential training. Students
assist with matters ranging from child support issues to incorporating community
organizations. The recent economic downturn increased the number
of inquires for assistance fielded by the clinic, which is located in Lima,
Ohio. During the 2009-10 school year, students at the clinic worked on
118 cases and received 217 inquires for assistance. Each student had roughly
six clients while working at the clinic and handled various cases from
divorce to criminal expungement. Students working in the Legal Clinic are
given the opportunity to work on some cases from the initial stage and
others that are already in progress. This experience allows students to work
with cases at various points from client interviews to final hearings.
Students at the Legal Clinic appear before local judges and magistrates regularly
in the Domestic Relations Division of Allen County Common Pleas
Court, Allen County Juvenile Court and the Domestic Relations Division
of Hardin County Common Pleas Court. This “real world” experience is
invaluable for students in developing their advocacy skills. Not only does
ONU Law offer students the opportunity to work in its Legal Clinic, but
also in a number of other clinical sites throughout the state and area. Over
70% of the current L-3 class will have participated in a clinic or judicial
externship opportunity prior to graduation.
Over
70%
of the current L-3 class will have participated in a clinic
or judicial externship opportunity prior to graduation.
For more information on experiential
opportunities at ONU Law, contact
Bryan H. Ward, director of legal
clinics and professor of law at
b-ward1@onu.edu
Recent clinic placements include:
■ Judge Walter Rice, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Ohio, Western
Division, in Dayton
■ Judge Gregory Frost, JD ’74, U.S District Court, Southern District of Ohio,
Eastern Division, in Columbus
■ Judge Edmund A. Sargus, Jr., U.S. District Court, Southern District of Ohio,
Eastern Division, in Columbus
■ Judge C. Kathryn Preston, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of Ohio
■ Federal Public Defender, Columbus, Ohio
■ Judge Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., U.S. District Court, Wheeling, W. Va.
■ U.S. Attorney General’s Office, Detroit, Mich.
■ Ohio Attorney General’s Office, Columbus, Ohio
■ Fair Elections Network, Washington, D.C.
■ Indiana Attorney General’s Office, Indianapolis, Ind.
■ Ohio Supreme Court
■ Ohio Environmental Council
■ Common pleas courts throughout Ohio and Indiana
■ Municipal public defenders throughout Ohio
■ Municipal prosecutors throughout Ohio
Writ WINTER 2010 | OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW 15

COLLEGE UPDATES
Despite these hard economic times, Ohio Northern
University College of Law Graduates Surpass the
National Employment Rate Eight Years in a Row.
By Cheryl A. Kitchen, director of law alumni and career services
The 2009 national Employment Report was released in June
2010 from the National Association for Law Placement (NALP),
with an overall national rate of 88% employed nine months
after graduation. Ohio Northern’s employment rate for the class
of 2009 was 94%.
marked the 37th consecutive year
2009that NALP, the National
Association for Law Placement, compiled annual
statistics on the employment rate of law graduates
throughout the United States. Nationally,
for the past eight years, the ONU College of
Law employment rate has been higher than the
national average. The 2009 National
Employment report was released in June 2010
from the National Association for Law
Placement (NALP), with an overall national rate
of 88% employed nine months after graduation.
Ohio Northern’s employment rate for the Class
of 2009 was 94%.
The legal job market continues to be in what
some call a “crisis,” but even in a crisis situation
there are opportunities that may arise. Indeed, in
this economic downturn, we are forced to sift
through and sort out what we think will solve
this crisis in the employment world. What Ohio
Northern has always had is a strong connection
to its alumni, which continues to be our most
powerful marketing agent for our students.
As alumni, you are our connection to
employment for the students. With the help of
our alumni, our students will be able to survive
this economic crisis and forge ahead to a successful
legal career. The many ways in which you
could help include mentoring a student, speaking
on a panel, networking with students or
being a resource for a student in your practice,
setting or geographical location.
Although we continue to report a slight
increase in our employment statistics over the
national average, 2010 is going to be a very difficult
year in the legal market. ONU Law’s
employment rate is due to the hard work and
tenacity of the students, along with the help and
support of the faculty and alumni and the continued
efforts of the Career Services Office.
These efforts, along with the current employment
success of our alumni, continue to help
strengthen the status of the law school among
employers and increase the demand for our stu-
Nationally, for the past eight
years, the ONU College of
Law employment rate has
been higher than the
national average.
dents. The growing recognition of the quality of
our students is demonstrated by the increasing
number of employers using the Career Services
Office to recruit students. In the 2009-10 school
year, over 600 employers from across the country
posted job announcements with our office.
These employers come from all segments of the
legal profession including federal judges, The
American Lawyer’s 100 top corporate firms, government
agencies, public interest organizations
and corporations. Our students represent over
30 states and their job searches span nationwide.
The placement statistics for the Class of 2009
show the diversity of employment not only in
the areas of the legal practice, but also in the
employment of our students throughout the
country.
AREAS OF THE COUNTRY
Mid-Atlantic...............................................13%
East North Central .....................................74%
South Atlantic...............................................4%
East South Central........................................6%
Mountain .....................................................3%
Even though the legal market has had a significant
downturn, we continue to have success
in our placement rate. We still need to draw
upon our alumni network to uncover job leads
for our students and graduates.
16 OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW | Writ WINTER 2010
Class of 2009
AREAS OF PRACTICE
Private Practice ...........50%
Business ......................13%
Government .................12%
Judicial Clerkships .........8%
Other .............................8%
Public Interest ...............5%
Academic ...................... 4%
What Ohio Northern has always
had is a strong connection to its
alumni, which continues to be
our most powerful marketing
agent for our students.
If you can assist us in uncovering job leads
for our students and graduates,
please let us know. You can do this by calling
(419) 772-2249, faxing (419) 772-1487, or
emailing the Office of Career Services at
lawcareer@onu.edu

The College of Law
Needs Your Help!
The College of Law regularly calls upon our alumni
to assist us in many ways. If you have a desire to assist
the College of Law with any of the following activities,
we welcome your involvement.
■ I would host a student who is interviewing in my area.
■ Please contact me about posting a job opening with Career Services.
■ I would be interested in assisting with mock interviews.
■ I would be interested in speaking on the following topics:
■ Non-legal careers ■ Large firms
■ Corporate opportunities ■ Lobbying & government
■ Non-profits & public interest groups ■ Judicial clerkships
■ Small & medium firms ■ Other topic(s):
■ I would host an alumni event at my home or office.
Name: __________________________________________________
Business Name: ___________________________________________
Address: _________________________________________________
is this ■ work ■ home
Phone: __________________________________________________
Email: __________________________________________________
is this ■ work ■ home
Please fax to (419) 772-3151 or visit us online at www.law.onu.edu
Writ WINTER 2010 | OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW 17

COLLEGE UPDATES
Entering Class of 2010
By Linda K. English, director of admissions and assistant dean
The national and international dimensions
of a challenging curriculum at Ohio Northern
University College of Law are paralleled by an
accomplished, expert faculty and a diverse,
multi-talented student body. The approachable
faculty enables students to thrive in a rigorous,
yet humane environment. We believe students
deserve not only academic rigor, but also a personalized
and respectful experience. Ohio
Northern Law has been ranked by the Princeton
Review’s Best 170 Law Schools 2008 Edition as
one of the top 10 schools with the most competitive
law students in the nation. The quality
and reputation of our program continues to
grow as a result of our JD students’ scholarship
and contributions to the legal field.
The entering class of 2010 is one of the
most academically talented classes in the history
of the law school. Nearly 1,300 applications
were carefully reviewed in selecting the members
of this class. The 120 first-year students
hail from 26 states, with 35% in-state and 65%
out-of-state. They received their bachelor’s
degrees from nearly 84 different undergraduate
colleges and universities throughout the nation.
Although the majority of entering students are
traditionally aged and have recently graduated
from a bachelor’s program, the age range is 20-
44. The entering class is over 10% minority.
ONU Law Admissions is committed to the
mission of seeking students who are capable of
undertaking the rigorous study of law and will
uphold the highest standards as citizens and
future lawyers. The fall 2010 entering class is
showing great promise not only in continuing a
rich history and tradition of excellence at the
Pettit College of Law, but also in demonstrating
great potential for being “architects of justice”
in a complex and dynamic society.
The more traditional pre-law majors in history,
political science, English and criminal justice
continue to dominate, yet, a very diverse
selection of disciplines provides multiple perspectives
and a rich forum in which to study
the law.
130 schools
We are actively recruiting students for our 2011 entering class.
This Fall, ONU Law representatives visited nearly 130 schools. A
special thanks to those who assisted the Office of Admissions in
representing ONU Law throughout the country:
• Amy Archambault, JD ’06
• Aaron Baker, JD ’10
• Patrick Brutus, L-2, Ridge,
N.Y.
• C. Antoinette Clarke,
Professor of Law
• David C. Crago, Dean and
Professor of Law
• Theresa Daniel, L-2,
Granville, Ohio
• Jeana Harbison, JD ’07
• Joshua Jones, JD ’08
• Christopher Keller, JD ’07
• Steven Kochheiser, BA ’06,
L-3, Lexington, Ohio
• Cheryl Kitchen, Director of
Law Alumni and Career
Services
2010 ENTERING CLASS
62%
MALES
38%
FEMALES
18 OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW | Writ WINTER 2010
IN-STATE
• Michael Lewis, Associate
Professor of Law
• Louis Lobenhofer, Professor of
Law
• Jackie (Jay) Matheny, JD ’06
• Kristi Miller, L-2, Orlando,
Fla.
• Nicole Rataski, L-3, Akron,
Ohio
• Stephen Veltri, Associate Dean
for Academic Affairs and
Professor of Law
• Mindi Wells, BSBA ’95, JD
’98, Assistant Dean for
Administration and Student
Services
OUT-OF-STATE
35% of 2010 entering class is
from Ohio
65% of 2010 entering class is
from out-of-state

2010 ENTERING CLASS PROFILE
Class Percentiles LSAT GPA
Median 154 3.33
25th 149 2.94
75th 156 3.70
84
Undergraduate Schools
Represented in
2010 Entering Class
including:
■ University of Michigan
■ Indiana University
■ Gettysburg College
■ Washington & Jefferson College
■ Emory & Henry College
■ Morehouse College
■ The Ohio State University
■ Depauw University
■ Clark Atlanta University
■ Fordham University
■ Allegheny College
■ Princeton University
ONU Law’s
application is
free online.
3Ohio Northern’s placement rate
consistenly exceeds
94%
the national average.
of the class of 2009 were employed fulltime
or enrolled in an LLM program within
nine months after graduation
LIFE ON CAMPUS
ONU Law has over
20 student organizations
including Moot Court, Law Review,
Student Bar Association, Environmental
Law Society, Veteran’s Association, Legal
Association of Women, Sports Law
Society, LAMBDA, Black Law Students
Association and the Christian Legal
Society, among others.
WWW.LAW.ONU.EDU
DEGREE PROGRAMS OFFERED
1] JD
2] JD/LLM
3] JD/MPAA*
*Pending approval
CAREER
PLACEMENT
The graduating class of 2009 had a
94% job placement rate within nine
months of graduation, outpacing the
national average of 88%
Types of Employment
Private Practice 50%
Business 13%
Government 12%
Judicial Clerkships 8%
Other 8%
Public Interest 5%
Academic 4%
Writ WINTER 2010 | OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW 19

COLLEGE UPDATES
Alumni Moot Court Room to go “High Tech”
The Alumni Moot Court Room, which serves
as a trial court room and a 24-seat classroom, is
scheduled for an upgrade this summer. Originally
renovated in 1997 from a portion of the law
library, the courtroom has seen increased use as a
classroom in recent years. The courtroom is also
used for trial advocacy classes, appellate advocacy
classes and Moot Court activities. The renovation
will include replacing the armchairs with standard
chairs and tables wired for electrical and internet
access, moving the back wall to increase seating in
the room and installing multi-media technology
in the room.
The goal is to have the courtroom outfitted
with technology currently in use in federal and
state courtrooms throughout the country. This
equipment not only provides state-of-the-art
instructional technology for use by our faculty,
but also gives students the opportunity to learn
first-hand how to utilize equipment they will find
in practice. Technology enhancements include a
multi-media podium with a document camera,
� MARK
YOUR
CALENDAR
Dedication of the
Alumni Moot Court Room
Homecoming 2011
Oct. 1, 2011
Rachel Kasper, Dean David C. Crago, Megan Schenk, John Fenz, Keesha Warmsby, Brian
Anderson, President Kendall Baker and Randy Petrouske.
ONU Law Receives Class Gift
The class of 2010 continued the tradition of presenting ONU Law with a class gift.
This year’s class, which saw over 33 students pledge, has earmarked their gift for
the renovations to the Alumni Moot Court Room. Members of the class gift committee
presented President Kendall Baker and Dean David C. Crago with a check
for $16,651 at the college’s Honors Banquet on April 14, 2010.
computer and controls for the projection system
and recording. Future enhancements include cameras
which allow the advocate
to be recorded from the judge’s
perspective and the jury’s perspective.
Funding for the reno-
20 OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW | Writ WINTER 2010
Ways to Support
Artist’s rendering of Alumni Moot Court Room
vation was generously provided by the Walter
White family: Walter L. White (deceased), BA
’41, JD ’48, LLD ’00; Virginia White (deceased);
William White, BA ’64, JD ’67; Patricia White
King, BA ’74, JD ’83; and the ONU Law classes
of 2008 and 2010.
IF INTERSETED IN HELPING FUND THIS PROJECT, PLEASE
CONTACT THE OFFICE OF LAW DEVELOPMENT AT 419-772-2256.
The College of Law is grateful to our alumni for its past support
and invites you to be a part of Ohio Northern University’s
Tomorrow. You can support the Campaign by:
* Making an outright gift
* Becoming a contributor to the Northern Fund for the College of
Law or increasing your current level of support
* Taking advantage of deferred gift options
For more information about the Campaign for Ohio Northern
University’s Tomorrow and the College of Law Campaign priorities,
please contact the Office of Law Development at (419) 772-2256 or
e-mail lawdevelopment@onu.edu

Scholarship Recipients Named at Donor Dinner
Hanson Fellows: Stephanie Swiger, L-3, Ian Weber, L-3 and Shane McClelland, L-3. Not pictured:
Ryan Beouy.
25
ONU Law welcomed
25 students
into its inaugural PLUS program.
Charitable Giving
Burgess Scholarship: Dean David C. Crago, Millicent Burgess, Rhett Burgess, JD ’79, Carol Burgess
and Ian (Seth) Martin, L-3.
Consider making a gift to The Northern Fund this season! The Northern Fund is an essential element in providing
revenue for current needs of the University, including the College of Law. The Northern Fund supports student
scholarships, faculty research and campus improvements. If you have yet to make your annual gift this year, you
are invited to support the College of Law with a gift to The Northern Fund. For your convenience, you may give
online at www.onugive.com or contact Kelly Brant at 419-772-2072 or k-brant@onu.edu for more information.
ONU Law Selected for PLUS Program Grant
The Ohio Northern University Pettit College of Law was awarded a grant from the Law School Admissions Council and DiscoverLaw.org for the purpose of providing a
Pre-Law Undergraduate Scholars (PLUS) program on its campus. Schools selected for such grants can receive up to $100,000 per year for a maximum of three years.
PLUS programs are targeted to, but not restricted to, college students from racial and ethnic minority groups underrepresented in the legal profession. The programs
are designed for students in the first two years of college and preference is given to students who have registered with DiscoverLaw.org.
Ohio Northern, one of three law schools nationwide to receive the PLUS grant, was selected based on the
strength of its program combined with the law school’s commitment, geographic location and target population.
ONU Law welcomed 25 students into its inaugural PLUS program. The program, which ran from June 7
through July 2, 2010, provided students with an intense focus on the skills required to succeed in law school,
the law school admission process and legal career opportunities. The students also participated in field trips to
the Ohio Supreme Court in Columbus, the National Underground Railroad Freedom Center in Cincinnati, a
local court, and the Cedar Point amusement park in Sandusky.
The PLUS Program is now
accepting applications for 2011.
Contact lawplus@onu.edu for
more information.
Writ WINTER 2010 | OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW 21

COLLEGE UPDATES
Oct. 8–10, 2010
Homecoming 2010
ONU’s Got Talent!
The College of Law hosted a number of activities for the Homecoming
weekend. Historical tours were held throughout the weekend to celebrate
the 125th anniversary of the college, showcasing important moments and
people in the College of Law’s rich history. Video interviews of alumni
were collected to obtain first-person memories of ONU. On Friday, Phi
Alpha Delta hosted its annual continuing legal education program, with
over 70 attendees. That evening, a Law Donor Dinner was held to recognize
those who have generously provided financial support to the college
over the past year. In addition, the 2010-11 Hanson Scholars were named
and Rhett Burgess, JD ’79, was present to award the first William James
& Millicent Marie Burgess Scholarship for veterans.
On Saturday, many alumni and family members joined Dean David C.
Crago and members of the faculty at a breakfast in the Wishing Well of
McIntosh Center. Alumni and friends then made their way to the tailgate
party outside Dial-Roberson Stadium where the Student Bar Association
hosted a photo booth, and the Icelandic Exchange Program sold 125th
apparel. The College of Law also distributed 125th commemorative yardsticks
and fans.
■ Law Donor Dinner in
Hanson Reading Room.
22 OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW | Writ WINTER 2010

College Hosted Historical Tours
The College of Law conducted Historical Tours over Homecoming
weekend. The tours were indoor, guided walking tours celebrating the last
125 years at ONU Law. The tours, approximately 45 minutes in length,
covered the origin of the college, historical deans, notable alumni and faculty,
student life, campus and community, and curriculum, along with
interesting architecture and historical acknowledgments.
The tours were organized by assistant dean Mindi Wells and involved
several members of the faculty, staff and student body as speakers. Cheryl
Kitchen, director of law alumni and career services, was the tour guide and
discussed various college highlights throughout the tour, including the
Narol Smart Classroom.
Tour stops and presenters:
■ Stephen C. Veltri, associate dean for academic affairs and professor of
law, discussed the evolution of the curriculum over the past 125 years.
■ Stephanie Swiger, L-3, Findlay, Ohio, discussed student life.
■ John P. Christoff, JD ’77, and Louis F. Lobenhofer, both professors of
law, discussed notable ONU Law faculty members.
■ Paul Logsdon, director of Heterick Library, presented information and a
video on the Ada community's development over the past 125 years.
■ Howard N. Fenton, director of LLM program and professor of law, discussed
the college's international education component.
■ Nancy A. Armstrong, director of the law library, showcased the recent
creation of the Hanson Reading Room, discussed attributes of the law
library and provided a historical account of the law library.
Historical Tour: Law Library.
Historical Tour: Faculty offices.
Historical Tour: Narol Smart Classroom.
Law Alumni and Friends Breakfast.
START MAKING YOUR
PLANS NOW FOR
HOMECOMING 2011…
Sept. 30
thru
Oct. 2, 2011
Writ WINTER 2010 | OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW 23

COLLEGE UPDATES
Alumni Visit the Greenbrier
The Ohio Northern College of Law hosted an alumni weekend at the
famed Greenbrier Hotel in White Sulphur Springs, W. Va. from April 9-
11, 2010. The weekend included a tour of the Congressional Bunker and
subsequent reception, an alumni dinner in the Crystal Room and a meeting
of the Law Alumni Board. Nearly 60 law alumni and friends participated
in the weekend’s events.
The Greenbrier opened in 1778 and has hosted 26 U.S. presidents and
countless dignitaries throughout its distinguished history. It is located on
6,500 acres of beautiful land in the Allegheny mountains and has 721
rooms, 10 lobbies and a 40,000 square foot spa. The hotel was chosen by
the U.S. Government to serve as a safe haven for Congress if nuclear war
broke out between the United States and the Soviet Union. This bunker
was “hidden in plain sight” until 1992 when the U.S. decommissioned it.
Since this time, the bunker has been one of the hotel’s most popular attractions.
ONU Law alumni also had the opportunity to play golf at three 18hole
championship golf courses, eat gourmet food and enjoy the many
amenities that the hotel has to offer.
24 OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW | Writ WINTER 2010
April 9-11, 2010
Greenbrier Hotel,
White Sulphur Springs, W. Va.
ONU Law Alumni Weekend

50 TH
ANNIVERSARY
OF THE ICELANDIC LEGAL EXCHANGE
PROGRAM CELEBRATED
The Ohio Northern University Pettit College
of Law and the University of Iceland
celebrated the 50th anniversary of the
student exchange between the two
institutions with a commemorative dinner in
Reykjavik, Iceland, on Friday, June 18,
2010. Nearly 100 guests attended the
dinner including several Icelandic
dignitaries and former exchange students
and a delegation from ONU Law. A special
plaque was presented to the University of Iceland
honoring the founders
of the exchange
program, Ármann
Snævarr and Eugene
Hanson, who began the
program in 1960.
■ ONU group standing
at the foot of the
Mt. Eyjafjallajokul volcano.
The history of the
program will be
covered fully in the
upcoming 125th
anniversary edition
of the Writ.
1960-2010
ONU group – Supreme Court of Iceland.
�Left to Right: Markus Sigurbjörnsson Supreme Court Justice of Iceland; Björg
Thorarensen, Dean and Professor of Law, Faculty of Law, University of Iceland;
Gudrun Erlendsdottir, Former Supreme Court Justice and Charter Member of the Icelandic
Student Exchange Program; and Birgir Gunnarsson, Chairman of the Board of Governors,
Icelandic Central Bank and Charter Member of the Icelandic Student Exchange Program.
Writ WINTER 2010 | OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW 25

COLLEGE UPDATES
Fifth Class of International LLM Students Begin Their Studies
By Howard N. Fenton III, director of LLM program and professor of law
Four students from around the world arrived
in Ada this fall to begin the fifth year of the
Democratic Governance and Rule of Law LLM
program. The lawyers from Botswana and
Guyana are the first representatives of their
countries in the LLM program, while the
Uzbekistan and Georgia students continue the
program’s strong relationship with their countries.
The two women and two men have a rich
variety of legal backgrounds and commitment to
advancing the rule of law in their home countries.
Two other students, from Kosovo and
Afghanistan, who were scheduled to join the
2011 class had to withdraw for family medical
reasons.
■ Azeena Baksh from Guyana is the first LLM
student from the Western Hemisphere. She
comes to ONU from the Governance Unit of
the Office of the President of Guyana.
The summer externships are probably the
most exciting feature of the JD/LLM program at
Ohio Northern. After the first year of law
school, the concurrent degree students spend
their summer working for an organization devoted
to law reform or international development
located in the United States. During their second
summer the students participate in externships
abroad. This past summer, the five
JD/LLM students in the first class worked overseas
in some challenging environments.
Three of the students were in Africa. Jemel
Liverpool worked in Monrovia, Liberia with the
American Bar Association’s Rule of Law
Initiative office assisting the new Liberian
National Bar Association. During his time there
he had the opportunity to meet the President of
Liberia and a number of other government and
professional leaders. Daniel Bey and Nicole
Rataski worked in Kigali, Rwanda with the
Ministry of Justice. Nicole worked with the
Department of Civil Litigation and the Legal
Advisory Office, assisting in the preparation of
pleadings and international agreements. Daniel
worked with the Legislative Department providing
research and comments on proposed legislation,
assembling legislative data bases and participating
in legislative training.
The externships for Ryan Nuss and Geoffrey
Lawson were in Tbilisi, Georgia where they
worked on a USAID-funded court management
project. During the summer they observed a
Baksh Kambai Abduraimov Ghvinianidze
■ Onalethata Kambai is a former prosecutor
from Botswana, who is now in private practice
and representing human rights clients on a pro
bono basis.
■ Dilshod Abduraimov is from Uzbekistan,
where in addition to his law practice he advises a
women’s entrepreneur organization and a rural
entrepreneur’s group on economic development
issues.
■ Lina Ghvinianidze is the sixth Georgian student
to study at ONU. She has been working on
variety of legal proceedings in Georgia and provided
research on different judicial practices
from the United States and European judicial
systems. Both Geoff and Ryan had the opportunity
to meet with Georgian judges and court
administrators and to make presentations on the
American legal system.
The second class of concurrent students
spent their summers working in different nongovernmental
organizations in New York,
Washington and Atlanta. Two new organizations
hosted externs, with Chris Hill spending the
summer with Transparency International’s office
in Washington, D.C., and Zack Smith working
in the General Counsel’s office at CARE USA in
Atlanta. Tim Rodes was at the United Nations
Development Programme in New York, and
Kristi Miller worked at Urban Institute in
Washington.
26 OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW | Writ WINTER 2010
governance and accountability issues for the
Georgian Young Lawyers Association in Tbilisi.
The LLM program also welcomed a new visiting
faculty member for the 2010-11 year. Boris
Mamlyuk is a visiting assistant professor teaching
the new course of the concurrent JD/LLM students
on the international law of non-governmental
organizations and the capstone Rule of
Law Seminar for the international students and
graduating concurrent students. Professor
Mamlyuk spent the past year as a Visiting
Scholar at Cornell Law School, and has his BA
magna cum laude from California State
University Fullerton and his JD from the
University of California Hastings College of Law
where he was Articles and Symposium Editor of
the Hasting International and Comparative Law
Review. He is completing his Ph.D. in international
law at the University of Turin, Italy.
Concurrent JD/LLM Candidates Participate in
International Externships in Rwanda, Liberia and Georgia
Professor Howard Fenton, director of
the LLM program, met in Tbilisi,
Georgia this past July with four
graduates of the LLM program and
two concurrent program externs.
Pictured from left to right are Eliso Chabrava, LLM ’09;
Ryan Nuss, L-3, from West Liberty, Ohio; Professor Fenton;
Eka Popkh adze, LLM ’10; Tamar Vashakidze, LLM ’07;
Rusadan Tabatadze, LLM ’07; and Geoffrey Lawson, L-3,
from Lima, Ohio.

ONU Law
PHOTO
CONTEST
Save-the-Date…
Join the Ohio Northern University
Pettit College of Law
this spring at…
HAVE A GREAT PHOTO OF ONU LAW?
Submit your photo(s) into our contest celebrating the
college’s 125th anniversary.
A Photos may be published in an upcoming publication
and/or on the college’s website.
B Photos may be emailed to m-wells@onu.edu or mailed to
Mindi Wells, ONU College of Law, 525 S. Main Street,
Ada, OH 45810.
C Please include the date, location and names of those
individuals in the photographs.
Spring 2011
Law Alumni Event
March 25-27, 2011
Friday, March 25
Private ONU tour of the Biltmore House and
reception at the Stables Café Loft
7:00 p.m.
Saturday, March 26
Reception and Alumni Dinner
6:00 p.m.
Biltmore Estate
www.biltmore.com
For additional information contact the
Law Alumni Office at
419-772-1980 or lawalumni@onu.edu
Details online at www.law.onu.edu
Writ WINTER 2010 | OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW 27

FEATURED SPEAKERS
CARHART LECTURE
Patry Speaks on Copyright Law
As part of the Fred L.
Carhart Memorial Program
in Legal Ethics, copyright
expert William Patry spoke at
the Pettit College of Law on
Oct. 6, 2010. Patry’s lecture
titled “What Will it Take to
Fix Copyright Law?”, addressed the flaws of
modern copyright laws in the United States.
Patry is senior copyright counsel for Google Inc.
and author of five treatises on copyright law
including his most recent book, Moral Panics and
the Copyright Wars, which was published in 2009.
Patry’s lecture focused on the inherent problems
of U.S. copyright laws that arise from the moral
motivations behind these laws.
“There are perpetual problems with copyright
law that no one can agree upon because they
have different perspectives for different reasons,”
Patry said. “Those problems are business problems.
They are never conflicts caused by the
alleged show of moral shortcomings of others.
We use moral claims in debates about economic
issues.”
Using the music industry as an example, Patry
demonstrated that business solutions were the
best answer to current problems with copyright
law. In 1998, the U.S. extended the copyright on
music by 20 years, so that an artist’s music was
protected for 70 years after his or her death. The
law was created in the hope that this added protection
would stimulate more new works and
allow artists to make more money from their previously-released
music. However, Patry argued
that no empirical data has been collected to prove
that this extension of copyright has achieved the
intended effects.
“If we want effective laws, we can’t have that
if it’s based upon an alleged moral case,” Patry
argued. “For politicians or lawmakers to act in an
effective way, they have to act like economists.
You have to investigate the real world consequences
of what you’re doing and decide whether
those laws, if enacted, do the things you want
them to do.”
Pointing to economist Andrew Gower’s 2006
report on the impact of existing copyright law in
the UK, Patry said, “Data show that [music
copyright laws] don’t actually help the people
they are intended to help; but [lawmakers] are
� MARK
YOUR
CALENDAR
actually doing it
because there is a
moral case at the heart
of copyright law.”
According to Patry,
Gower concluded that
many artists sell a
majority of their
records in the first ten
years after their release.
So, extending the
copyrights on music
does little to help the
artist and actually
hurts the public by
limiting access to the
music.
CARHART SYMPOSIUM
ON LEGAL ETHICS
in conjunction with Ohio Northern
University Law Review
March 30, 2011
“Crisis in the Legal Profession”
©
“If we want effective laws, we can’t have that if
it’s based upon an alleged moral case,” Patry
argued. “For politicians or lawmakers to act in an
effective way, they have to act like economists.
You have to investigate the real world consequences of what
you’re doing and decide whether those laws, if enacted, do the
things you want them to do.”
“In the music world, the joke is that people
aren’t composing, they’re decomposing,” said
Patry.
Patry concluded that business solutions are
the best way to curb copyright infringement. He
28 OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW | Writ WINTER 2010
explained that online venues like iTunes, which
provide people with a legitimate way to buy
music, are far more effective than extended copyright
laws.
ABOUT THE CARHART PROGRAM…
The Fred L. Carhart Memorial Program in Legal Ethics, which was
established in 2007, brings eminent scholars, jurists, and lawyers to
Ohio Northern to actively engage in lectures, seminars and panel
discussions for the benefit of ONU Law students, the college and
university communities and the public. The endowment to fund the
program came from the estate of Dw ight L . C arh art, JD ’47, in
memory of his father, Fred L . C a r h a r t, BS 1902.

KORMENDY LECTURE
Kormendy Lecture Brings Prominent Scholars to Campus
Barbara Aronstein
Black, the George
Welwood Murray
Professor Emerita of
Legal History and
dean emerita at
Columbia University
presented, “Who
Judges? Who Cares?
History Now and
Then” on Oct. 28,
2009, as part of ONU
Law’s Kormendy
Barbara Aronstein Black
Lecture. Aronstein
Black has published numerous articles on legal
history and contracts. She received her undergraduate
degree from Brooklyn University and
her LLB from Columbia Law School, as well as a
Ph.D. in history from Yale.
On Oct. 28, 2010, Sanford Levinson, the W.
St. John Garwood and W. St. John Garwood, Jr.,
Centennial Chair in Law and professor of government
at the University of Texas School of
Law, presented “Who, if Anyone, Really Trusts
‘We the People’?” In his talk, Levinson challenged
the notion of popular government. The
Thomas Barthold, chief of staff of the
Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation, discussed
“Tax Policy in the 21st Century:
Challenges and Changes from the Time of Larry
Woodworth,” for the 2010 Laurence Neal
Woodworth Lecture on Federal Tax Law and
Policy, held May 6, 2010, in Washington, D.C.
Burthold’s lecture brought up many interesting
points regarding the changes in tax law that were
later discussed the following two days during the
American Bar Association Tax Section’s May
meeting.
Barthold, as chief of staff of the Joint
Committee, is generally considered to hold the
most influential staff position on tax matters in
the legislative branch of the federal government.
Sanford Levinson
Preamble to the
United States
Constitution famously
speaks (and “ordains”
the document) in the
name of “We the
People.” But Levinson
argued the actual
structures of government
established by
the Framers in
Philadelphia express
relatively little faith in
popular judgment, as
WOODWORTH LECTURE
Barthold Delivers 2010 Woodworth Lecture
By Louis F. Lobenhofer, professor of law
Woodworth was the
chief of staff of the
joint committee for
15 years, and is still
revered, more than
30 years after his
death, as the model
for members of the
Congressional tax
staffs. Barthold
joined the
Committee staff in
1987 and worked his way up to the deputy chief
of staff before becoming chief of staff in 2009.
He received his BA and MS from Northwestern
University and an MA and Ph.D. from Harvard.
ABOUT THE WOODWORTH LECTURE…
can be easily confirmed by reading, say, The
Federalist Papers. He challenged the extent to
which we today trust “the people” (i.e., ourselves)
to make fundamental political decisions.
He further queried, “Would we want a ‘democratic
Constitution’ even if we could get one?”
Levinson also spoke to a combined class of
Constitutional Law I students and participated
in a debate with Scott Gerber, professor of law at
Ohio Northern, on the topic of healthcare
reform. The event, sponsored by the Federalist
Society with funding from the Templeton
Foundation, drew a near capacity crowd in the
college’s Celebrezze Moot Court Room.
In 1980 a lectureship in the College of Law was established through an endowment gift from Helen E.
Kormendy, widow of the late D r . S t e v e n W . K o r m e n d y. The Dr. Steven W. Kormendy and Helen E.
Kormendy Law Lecture Fund is used each year to bring prominent individuals to campus to address
matters of law in a public forum in the College of Law.
Dr. Kormendy, who died on January 6, 1985, graduated from the ONU College of Law in 1928 and was
posthumously awarded the honorary LLD degree in 1985. The Ohio State Bar Association honored him
for 50 years of law practice, and he was long active in events in the Hungarian community in Cleveland.
At ONU he was a member of the Henry Solomon Lehr Society, the Leadership Gifts Committee and the N Men. He was a
President’s Fellow for 10 years. Mrs. Kormendy passed away in 1998.
The Woodworth Lectures honor D r . L a u r e n c e N e a l W o o d w o r t h, BA ’40, a graduate of ONU in
economics, who served as both chief of staff on the Joint Committee on Taxation and assistant
secretary of the Treasury for Tax Policy before his untimely death in 1977. In addition to his work
on the Joint Committee, Woodworth also found time to serve as a trustee of Ohio Northern and as a
mentor to a generation of tax professionals who had a major impact on the tax bar, bench, academia
and in government. The funds that support the lecture have come from Woodworth’s friends and
former colleagues.
ABOUT THE KORMENDY LECTURE…
Larry Woodworth, Dean David C. Crago, Dr. Thomas Barthold, and Esther Woodworth, JD ’82.
Barthold’s published papers cover a range of topics
including capital gain realizations, charitable
bequests, distribution of the tax burden and
comparative transfer taxes.
2011
WOODWORTH
LECTURE
May 5, 2011
Grand Hyatt
Washington, D.C.
� MARK
YOUR
CALENDAR
Writ WINTER 2010 | OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW 29

FEATURED SPEAKERS
Dean’s Lecture Series
The 2009-10 Dean’s Lecture Series brought
three national legal scholars to campus to discuss
a variety of current topics in the law.
On Oct. 1, Kathryn Abrams, the Herma Hill
Kay Distinguished Professor of Law at the
University of California-Berkeley School of Law,
discussed “Empathy and Experience in the
Sotomayor Hearings.” She has published many
articles on numerous subjects ranging from femi- Kathryn Abrams Keith Aoki Daniel W. Hamilton
nist jurisprudence to election law. Abrams
received her undergraduate degree in Government from Harvard-Radcliffe
College in Government and her JD from Yale Law School.
Keith Aoki, professor of law at the University of California, Davis
School of Law presented “Theft! A History of Music” on Jan. 28,
2010. His presentation focused upon his comic book that detailed
the theft of music and copyright law throughout the ages. Aoki
received a BFA from Wayne State University, his MA in Fine Arts
from Hunter College, his JD from Harvard Law School and his
LLM from the University of Wisconsin Law School. He has published
many articles regarding intellectual property.
The final lecture was presented on Feb. 24 by Daniel W.
Hamilton, professor of law at the University of Illinois College of
Law. Hamilton presented “Emancipation and the Common Law:
Slavery Litigation after the Civil War.” He received his BA in history
from Oberlin College, his JD from George Washington University
and his Ph.D. from Harvard University. He has published on
American legal history and Civil War legal history.
LGBT Legal Issues Focus of Inaugural LAMBDA CLE
Ohio Northern University’s
Pettit College of Law presented
“Emerging LGBT Legal Issues:
What you should know to protect
your client,” on April 9, 2010. The
continuing legal education program
was sponsored by the ONU
LAMBDA Law Students’
Association and the American Civil
Liberties Union of Ohio.
Robert S. Salem, of the
University of Toledo College of
Law, presented “Domestic
Partnerships and Family Law.”
Salem has published articles regarding
gay rights and education issues
in the Cleveland State Law Review,
Louisiana Law Review and the
Albany Law Review. Salem serves on
several non-profit boards and advisory
panels, including the National
Gay and Lesbian Task Force, the
ACLU of Ohio and Equality
Toledo. Salem received his JD from
the University of Toledo.
Attorney Karen Ball presented
“Estate Planning Issues for LGBT
Individuals and Couples.” Ball has
practiced law for nearly 25 years
and has a long history of involvement
with community and family
issues. Prior to practicing law, Ball
worked with the Fair Housing
Contact Service in Akron, Ohio,
and with several nonprofit civil
rights groups. Ball received her
bachelor’s and master’s degrees from
Cornell University and her JD
from Capital University.
Carrie Davis, Staff Attorney for
ACLU of Ohio presented
“Employment and Housing Nondiscrimination.”
Davis joined
ACLU of Ohio in 2003 and travels
the state working on important
civil liberties litigation, lobbying all
levels of Ohio government, helping
Ohioans to lobby their officials and
30 OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW | Writ WINTER 2010
Robert S. Salem, Carrie Davis, Karen Ball, Bobbi Lyon, L-3, LAMBDA president and Amanda
Compton, visiting assistant professor of law.
speaking on a variety of subjects.
Davis has served as counsel on
landmark cases involving voting
rights, free speech and individual
liberties, including Carswell v.
Ohio. Davis has a BA in philosophy
and public policy from Albion
College and a JD from Case
Western Reserve University.

Phi Alpha Delta Sponsors Program on Ethics, Abuse,
Professionalism and Substance
Phi Alpha Delta offered its annual continuing legal education program
as part of the University’s Homecoming activities on Oct. 9, 2009 and
again on Oct. 8, 2010. The CLE program provided the ethics, professionalism
and substance abuse training required for all attorneys licensed in
Ohio. Featured speakers at the 2009 event included Edward Erfurt, III,
JD ’77, an attorney in Columbus, Ohio, Dr. Michael Schafer, director of
counseling at Ohio Northern University and Victor Streib, professor of law
at Ohio Northern. Erfurt, who has practiced as a sole practitioner for over
30 years and presented programs at various professional seminars and other
professional associations, provided a case law update on ethics decisions
from 2009. Schafer, a clinical psychologist and licensed independent chemical
dependency counselor whose professional work experiences include
providing psychological assessments and counseling services in inpatient
day treatment and private practice settings, discussed trends and best practices
in substance abuse treatment. Streib, a nationally recognized scholar
and death penalty expert who has taught criminal law and ethics to over
5,000 students at 10 institutions since 1971, spoke on professionalism.
Over three dozen attorneys attended the program. Erfurt and Shafer spoke
again at the 2010 event, where Bryan H. Ward, director of clinics and professor
law, presented on professionalism. Over 70 attorneys participated in
the 2010 event.
� MARK
YOUR
CALENDAR
Ethics, Professionalism & Substance Abuse
Continuing Legal Education Program
Sept. 30, 2011
Information online at www.law.onu.edu
Erfurt
Schafer
Edward Erfurt, Bryan Ward and Michael Schafer.
2010-11
Phi Alpha Delta
Executive Board
Chief Justice - Matthew Mitchell, L-2 from New Market, Md.
Vice Chief - Lierin Rossman, L-2 from Greenville, Pa.
Clerk - Laura DellAntonio, L-2 from Pittsburg, Pa.
Treasurer - Jessica Wright, L-2 from Eastlake, Ohio
Marshall - Jennifer King, L-2 from Strongsville, Ohio
Writ WINTER 2010 | OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW 31
Streib

FEATURED SPEAKERS
Ohio Supreme Court in Session at ONU Law
The Supreme Court of Ohio
held an official session at Ohio
Northern University on Wednesday,
Sept. 29, 2010. The visit is part of
the court’s semiannual Off-Site
Court Program.
Chief Justice Eric Brown and
Justices Paul E. Pfeifer, Evelyn
Lundberg Stratton, Maureen
O’Connor, Terrence O’Donnell,
Judith Ann Lanzinger and Robert
R. Cupp, BA ’73, JD ’76, heard oral
arguments in several cases beginning
at 9 a.m. on campus in Ada, Ohio.
Ohio Northern extended a formal
invitation to the Supreme Court
in celebration of the 125th anniversary
of the Claude W. Pettit College
of Law. This was the court’s second
visit to the law school as part of the
Off-Site Court Program, the first
having come in 1999.
College of Law Dean David C.
Crago said, “The College of Law
was privileged to host the Ohio
Supreme Court as part of our 125th
anniversary celebration. The Off-Site
Court Program provides an out-
standing opportunity for both our
law students and area high school
students to experience the judiciary
in person.”
The Off-Site Court Program,
initiated by former Chief Justice
Thomas J. Moyer, LLD (hon.) ’04,
in 1987, has gained national recognition
as a model program for education
about the judiciary. The program
enhances students’ understanding
of the legal system by providing
an opportunity for hundreds of students
to attend and observe the proceedings
of the Supreme Court in
person and to interact with justices,
attorneys and court staff.
ONU law students and area high
school students participated. The
students, faculty and teachers
received curriculum material to
study before the session, including
summaries of the specific cases to be
argued. Local attorneys teamed with
ONU law students and educators to
explain Ohio’s judicial system and
review case materials.
On the morning of Sept. 29,
32 OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW | Writ WINTER 2010
Hardin County high school students
attended a special briefing during
which they asked questions and
interacted with the justices. In addition,
the students were assigned to
attend one of the oral arguments.
After the assigned case had been
argued, students met with the case
attorneys for a debriefing and discussion
of the legal issues in the
argument they just heard.
The ONU session marked the
60th time the Supreme Court has
heard oral arguments outside
Columbus during the past 23 years
and has enabled 33,750 Ohioans,
27,715 of them high school students,
to observe the Supreme Court
in action without leaving their communities.

STUDENT ACTIVITIES
BLSA Hosts Eleventh Annual Diversity Forum
On Feb. 17, 2010, the Ohio Northern University
Black Law Students Association hosted its
Eleventh Annual Diversity Forum titled, “From
the White House to the classroom: A look at the
changing face of America.” The panel included
Kevin L. Boyce, Ohio Treasurer of State; Patricia
Hardaway, president of Wilberforce University;
Brian Thomas, partner
with Graydon,
� MARK
YOUR
CALENDAR
The Street Law program at Ohio
Northern continues to bring the
law to area classrooms. For the
2009-10 school year, the Street Law
program brought together eight
teams of high school students from
four local schools for a mock trial
competition held in April. Students
from Ada, Kenton, Upper Scioto
Valley and Lima Christian
Academy took part in the program.
Law students visited the classrooms
of the local schools over the course
of several weeks, teaching the students
about the American legal system
and specifically about civil procedure.
After researching the case
and learning about the trial process
Head & Ritchey
LLP; and Jason
Upthegrove, president
of the Lima
Chapter of National
Association for the
Advancement of
Colored People
(NAACP). Visiting
12th Annual Diversity Forum
March 16, 2011
Information online at www.law.onu.edu
ONU Law Professor
Amanda E. Compton
moderated the panel
which discussed the social, economic and political
impact of President Barack Obama’s election
on the American landscape.
Street Law Teaches the Litigators of Tomorrow
2010-11 Street Law
Executive Board
President: Nicole York, L-2 from Ada, Ohio
Vice President: Heather Armstrong, L-2 from Elmira, N.Y.
Secretary: Nichole Mahrt, L-2 from Groveland, Ill.
Treasurer: Vestonia Viddy, L-2 from Smyrna, Del.
Head Coordinator: Shiva Varghai, L-2 from Cleveland, Ohio
Students from Lima Christian Academy celebrate after coming in first place at the annual Street Law
competition.
from the law student educators, the
young litigators came to Ohio
Northern to try their cases in front
of a panel of judges. Ultimately, the
students from Lima Christian
Academy took first place, Kenton
took second and team two from
Upper Scioto Valley finished in
third place. The high school students
enjoyed the opportunity to
learn about the law and to have an
active role in the mock trial, while
law students enjoyed the opportunity
to share some of their legal
knowledge with the high schoolers.
Writ WINTER 2010 | OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW 33

STUDENT ACTIVITIES
MOOT COURT
2009-10 Year in Review
By Michael Perehinec, incoming chief justice, L-2, Altoona, Pa.
2009-10 EXECUTIVE BOARD
Chief Justice - Keesha Warmsby, L-3 from Atlanta, Ga.
Administrative Justice - Anna Russell, L-3 from Atlanta, Ga.
Presiding Judge - Tom Burkhart, L-3 from Mercer, Pa.
Associate Justice - Tyler Haslam, L-3 from Bluffton, S.C.
Associate Justice - Luke Overmeyer, L-3 from Groveport, Ohio
Associate Justice - Rachel Kasper, L-3 from Hunlock Creek, Pa.
Associate Justice - Brett Schlender, L-3 from Stevensville, Mich.
The 2009-10 edition of the Moot Court program carried on the tradition
of success and high achievement from years past. As always, the year began
with the Burke E. Smith competition, the intra-school mock trial competition.
Teams of two law students practiced and developed their trial advocacy
skills in a courtroom setting by trying a fictitious case. Not only does
this competition provide the students with valuable experience and the
chance to hone their public speaking and trial skills, but the participants
also compete for a cash prize. This year’s competition saw the veteran team
of Brian Anderson, L-3, Johnson Creek, Wis., and Randall Petrouske III,
L-3, Tomahawk, Wis., win first place. The team composed of Jemel
Liverpool, L-2, Bronx, N.Y., and Mary Ellen Ditchey, L-2, Warren, Ohio,
took second place.
At the beginning of the fall semester each year, the Executive Board members
of the Moot Court program hold tryouts for incoming L-2s and L-3s
to become members of the six Moot Court teams. This year, after being
chosen, the members of the appellate teams were given the chance to take
Advanced Appellate Advocacy in order to prepare them for the brief writing
and oral advocacy components of their Moot Court competitions. This
was an invaluable class that had positive effects on the team members, as
each team’s brief writing grades and oral advocacy improved from years
past and will be a staple for members in the future.
ONU Tax Team
The ONU Tax Team kicked
off the Moot Court competition
season by traveling to
beautiful St. Petersburg, Fla.,
in early February to compete
in the Florida Bar Association
National Tax Competition.
34 OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW | Writ WINTER 2010
Traditionally, we have done very well at this tournament, and the 2009-10
season was no exception. The team placed 3rd overall among a field of
many quality schools. The team also received 2nd place for Best Brief. We
look to continue our strong showings at this competition in the years to
come. This year’s team was made up by Andrew Johnson, L-2, Troy, Ohio;
Randall Petrouske III, L-3, Tomahawk, Wis.; and Brett Hillyer, L-2,
Dennison, Ohio. The team was coached by Brett Schlender, L-3,
Stevensville, Mich. The advisor was Professor Kevin Hawley.
Philip C. Jessup
International
Moot Court Team
Next, in the middle of
February, the International
Moot Court team traveled to
Chicago, Ill. to take part in the
Philip C. Jessup International
Moot Court Competition. This is one of the largest Moot Court competitions
in the nation and is attended by almost every law school in the
United States and many schools from abroad. The issues presented to the
teams deal with many different kinds of legal issues from around the globe.
Team members this year included Jemel Liverpool, L-2, Bronx, N.Y.;
David Silverman, L-2, Lyndhurst, Ohio; Geoff Lawson, L-2, Lima, Ohio;
and Paul Foley, L-2, Walkersville, Md. The team was coached by Tyler
Haslam, L-3, Bluffton, S.C., and advised by Professor Howard Fenton.
ONU Burke E. Smith
Trial Team
The ONU Burke E. Smith trial
team took part in the Texas
Young Lawyer’s Association
National Mock Trial
Competition in Columbus,
Ohio. While the team did not
move on past the preliminary
round, they gave a great effort, and we look forward to future success in
this tournament. Team members included Brandon French, L-3, Columbia
Station, Ohio; Nick Laudato, L-3, Mentor, Ohio; Nicole Rataski, L-2,
Akron, Ohio; Samantha Phillips, L-2, Orwigsburg, Pa.; Greg Reichart, L-2,
Sharpsville, Pa.; and Andrew Wick, L-2, Mount Gilead, Ohio. The team
was coached by Tom Burkhart, L-3, Mercer, Penn., and the advisor was
Professor Sherry Young.
American Bar Association Team
This year the ABA Team took
part in the National Appellate
Advocacy Moot Court
Competitions in Boston,
Mass. The competition
focused on complicated questions
of law dealing with the
U.S. Constitution. While the
team failed to move on past
the preliminary rounds, they
did, however, beat each of
their opponents in the oral advocacy component of the competition. We

hope to use this as a springboard for successes in the future in this competition.
The team was comprised of Joe Sellers, L-3, Hamburg, N.Y.; Mary
Ellen Ditchey, L-2, Warren, Ohio; and Jeff Hiatt, L-2, Dubuque, Iowa.
The team was coached by Anna Marin Russell, L-3, Atlanta, Ga. and
advised by Professor Joanne Brant.
John J. Gibbons Criminal
Procedure Team
The Criminal Procedure Law Team
is one of our more efficient teams
because they are required to write
and then argue their brief at the
competition. These events are separated
by a mere two weeks in
March. This year the team competed
at the John J. Gibbons Criminal
Procedure Moot Court
Competition at Seton Hall
University in New Jersey. Stephanie Swiger, L-2, Findlay, Ohio, took home
First Place Oralist for the preliminary rounds, while her partner, Matthew
Oyster, L-3, Hilliard, Ohio, took home the Second Place Oralist for the
preliminary rounds. The team made it to the semifinal round, where they
came up a little short of the eventual champions of the competition and
ANTHONY J. CELEBREZZE COMPETITION
ANTHONY Each spring, J. the Moot CELEBREZZE Court program holds COMPETITION
the annual Anthony J. Celebrezze Competition, which is an
intra-school appellate competition open to all second and third year law students. The competition is
Each named spring, in the honor Moot of the Court late Honorable program Anthony holds the J. Celebrezze, annual Anthony LLB ’36, J. LLD Celebrezze ’63, distinguished Competition, alumnus
which of the College is an of intra-school Law and former appellate Senior Justice competition of the Sixth open Circuit to of all the second United and States third Court year of Appeals. law stu- The
problem presented to competitors usually focuses on a controversial issue that will be heard by the United States
dents. The competition is named in honor of the late Honorable Anthony J. Celebrezze,
Supreme Court. The 2010 competition, held on April 15, was based on McDonald
v. LLB City ’36, of Chicago LLD ’63, and focused distinguished on whether alumnus the Second of Amendment the College right of to Law keep
and bear former arms Senior is incorporated Justice against of the the Sixth states Circuit by the Fourteenth of the United Amendment’s States
Court Privileges of or Appeals. Immunities The or Due problem Process presented Clause, thereby to competitors invalidating ordinances usually
Carter Foley
focuses prohibiting on possession a controversial of handguns issue in the that home. will Presiding be heard over by the the final United round,
held April 15, 2010, in the Celebrezze Moot Court Room, were Thomas F. Bryant,
States JD ’66, LLD Supreme ’06, Ohio Court. Third District This year’s Court of issue Appeals came (Ret.); from John the R. case of
Willamowski, McDonald v. JD City ’85, of Ohio Chicago Third District and Court focused of Appeals; on whether and Dean the David Second C.
Crago. Amendment Ultimately, right Chase to Carter, keep and L-2, Bainbridge, bear arms Ohio, is incorporated won, with Paul Foley, against L-2,
Walkersville, the states Md., by the taking Fourteenth second place Amendment’s in a fiercely contested Privileges final or round.
Immunities or Due Process Clause, thereby invalidating ordinances
�
2011 Celebrezze Competition
April 6, 2011, 4:30 p.m.
Information online at www.law.onu.edu
prohibiting possession of handguns in the home. Presiding over the final round, held April 15, 2010, in the Celebrezze Moot Court
Room, DANIEL were Thomas S. GUY F. Bryant, INTRA-SCHOOL JD ’66, LLD ’06, FIRST Ohio Third YEAR District Court APPELLATE of Appeals (Ret.); ADVOCACY John R. Willamowski, COMPETITION JD ’85, Ohio
Third District Court of Appeals; and Dean David C. Crago. Ultimately, Chase Carter, L-2, Bainbridge, Ohio, won, with Paul Foley, L-2,
Walkersville, The annual Md., Daniel taking S. Guy second Intra-School place First in a fiercely but alsocon
tested Year final Appellate round. Advocacy Competition also because stu-
took place in April. This competition is dents are
mandatory for all first-year students and is named switching
MARK
YOUR
CALENDAR
DANIEL in honor of the S. former GUY Dean INTRA-SCHOOL of the Pettit College of FIRST sides and
Law, Daniel S. Guy, JD ’52, LLD ’05. The compe-
YEAR APPELLATE ADVOCACY
tition is an integral part of the first-year Legal
COMPETITION
Research and Writing Course. Each L-1 is required
took home third place. The team was advised by Rachel Kasper, L-3,
Hunlock Creek, Pa., and was coached by Professor Toni Clarke. We congratulate
this team on their great achievements and look forward to continuing
that success in the future.
Jerome Prince
Evidence Team
The final team to compete was the
inaugural Evidence Team which
was composed of Ryan Kirk, L-2,
Powell, Ohio; Sean Mott, L-3,
Biglerville, Pa.; and Michael
Perehinec, L-2, Altoona, Pa. The
team was coached by Luke
Overmeyer, L-3, Groveport, Ohio,
and advised by Professor John
Christoff. The team participated in
the Dean Jerome Prince Memorial
Evidence competition in Brooklyn, N.Y. for the first time in the program’s
history this past April. While the team did not advance past the preliminary
rounds, they competed admirably and gained valuable experience for future
teams. We hope to build on that experience in order to achieve success in
the future at this respected competition.
issues for
each round -
not to men-
to write an appellate brief and then participate in tionprepar- Smith Leister Smith
Rodabaugh
The
oral
annual
arguments
Daniel
in front
S. Guy
of
Intra-School
their respective
First
profes-
Year Appellate
ing for final
Advocacy
sors and members
Competition
of Moot
also took
Court.
place
After
in
the
April.
prelim-
This competition
exams! The
is
final round of the 2009-10 Dan Guy Perehinec, L-2, Altoona, Pa. The winner was
mandatory
inary round
for
in
all
which
first-year
all L-1s
students
must take
and
part,
is named
the
in honor
Competition,
of the former
held April
Dean
27,
of
2010,
the Pettit
was
College
judged
of
by
Law, Daniel Zachary S. Smith, Guy, JD L-1, ’52, Kennesaw, LLD ’05. Ga.; The first competition runner-upis
an
field
integral
is narrowed
part of
to
the
the
first-year
16 students
Legal
that
Research
scored
and
the
Writing
Mark
Course.
L. Pietrykowski,
Each L-1 is
JD
required
’79, Sixth
to write
District
an
Court
appellate Laura brief and Leister, then L-1, participate Harleysville, in oral Pa.; arguments second runner- in front
of
best,
their
then
respective
to the Elite
professors
Eight, and
and
then
members
to the
of
Final
Moot Court.
of Appeals;
After the
Michael
preliminary
Bernstein,
round
BA
in which
’65, JD
all
’68,
L-1s must up take Hannah part, the Smith, field L-1, is narrowed Upper Arlington, to the 16 Ohio; students and
that
Four.
scored
This is
the
a difficult
best, then
competition
to the Elite
not
Eight,
only
and then to
Mercer
the Final
County
Four.
Common
This is a
Pleas
difficult
Court
competition
(Ret.); and
not only third because runner-up of the Ashley many Rodabaugh, qualified first-year L-1, Lima, students, Ohio.
but
because
also because
of the many
students
qualified
are switching
first-year students,
sides and issues
incoming
for each
Moot
round
Court
- not
Chief
to mention
Justice Michael
preparing for final exams! The final round of the 2009-10 Dan Guy
Writ WINTER 2010 | OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW 35

STUDENT ACTIVITIES
2010-11 MOOT COURT EXECUTIVE
BOARD
Chief Justice - Michael Perehinec
L-3 from Altoona, Pa.
Administrative Justice - Stephanie Swiger
L-3 from Findlay, Ohio
Presiding Judge - Andrew Johnston
L-3 from Troy, Ohio
Associate Justice - Geoff Lawson
L-3 from Lima, Ohio
Associate Justice - Mary Ellen Ditchey
L-3 from Warren, Ohio
Associate Justice - Ryan Kirk
L-3 from Powell, Ohio
Associate Justice - Greg Reichart
L-3 from Sharpsville, Pa.
36 OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW | Writ WINTER 2010
BOARD OF ADVOCATES 2010-11
Karrie Pratt
Brett Hillyer
Nicole York
Robert Capovilla
Andrea Brown
Timothy Warren
Paul Foley
Craig Sweeney
Kyle Novak
Hannah Smith
Elizabeth Marrs
Christopher
Tackett
Joshua Lunsford
Jennifer King
Ashley
Rodabaugh
Lindsey
Alexander
2010-11 MOOT COURT COMPETITIONS
COMPETITION REGIONAL COMPETITION DATES
Texas Young Lawyers National Trial Competition February 18 - 19
Louisville, Ky.
Florida Bar Association National Tax Moot Court Competition February 3 - 5
St. Petersburg, Fla.
John J. Gibbons Criminal Procedure Moot Court Competition April 1 - April 3
Newark, N.J.
Philip C. Jessup International Law Moot Court Competition February 10-12
. Chicago, Ill.
ABA National Appellate Advocacy Competition March 3-5
Seattle, Wash.
Jerome Prince Evidence Moot Court Competition March 31 - April 3
New York, N.Y.
David Maldonado
Michael Perehinec
Stephanie Swiger
Andrew Johnston
Geoff Lawson
Mary Ellen
Ditchey
Ryan Kirk
Greg Reichart

2010 Symposium Explores the Influence of the
Constitution on the Development of Foreign Law
By Daniel Bey, L-2, Conover, Ohio
On March 19, 2010, the Ohio
Northern University Law Review
held its 33rd Annual Law Review
Symposium. The symposium was
titled “The Role and Influence of
the Constitution in Formulating
Law and Policy Outside the United
States.” Many professionals, professors
and students joined together to
attend the event. Joseph Calimeri,
the 2009-10 Symposium Editor,
worked with the Dean’s Office and
the rest of the Law Review to successfully
organize the event.
Professor Jean-
Marie Kamatali acted
as the moderator and
presenter for the event.
Kamatali is the assistant
director of the
LLM program and vis- Kamatali
iting assistant professor
of law at Ohio
Northern University. He earned a
Doctor of Laws from the Karl-
Franzens Universitat-Graz, a Master
of Arts from the University of Notre
Dame, a License en Droit and a
Bachelier en Droit from the
National University of Rwanda.
Previously, Kamatali served as the
dean of the law school at the
University of Rwanda, as a senior
post-doctoral research associate and
adjunct professor at the University
of Notre Dame and as an adjunct
professor at Indiana University,
South Bend. He has also been a
consultant for a USAID project in
2009-10
LAW REVIEW
MEMBERS
Burundi, the United Nations
Children Fund and the Agricultural
Organization of the United
Nations.
Professor Susan
Bitensky of Michigan
State University
College of Law made
the first presentation
of the day titled “The
Mother of All Human
Rights: The Child’s
Right to be Free of Corporal
Bitensky
Punishment as ‘Hard’ International
Law.” Bitensky argued, through the
use of customary international law
and treaties, that over the last few
decades there has developed the
principle that corporal punishment
of children is a violation of international
human rights law. In addition
to the legal aspects, Bitensky discussed
some of the sociological and
psychological aspects of corporal
punishment on children.
The second speaker of the day,
Kamatali, gave a presentation titled
“The Impact of the First
Amendment in the Judgments of
the International Criminal
Tribunals: Recent Developments.”
He opened his presentation by
examining the First Amendment
and equivalent laws in Canada,
France, Germany and South Africa,
then compared cases concerning
hate speech from the United States,
Canada and Denmark, extrapolating
three different schools of
thought. After examining the results
of free speech cases that have come
before international tribunals,
Kamatali concluded that international
tribunals have followed the
example of the United States more
than other liberal democracies.
The symposium’s
keynote speaker,
Professor Mark Kende,
is a former Fulbright
Scholar at the
University of
Stellenbosch in South Kende
Africa, and is professor
of law and the codirector
of the LLM in Global
Human Rights and Citizenship
Plan at Drake University. Kende
also serves as the James Madison
Chair in Constitutional Law at
Drake University. His presentation
was titled “Reviving Pragmatism in
Constitutional Law: U.S.
Opportunities and South African
Examples.” Kende argued that the
U.S. Supreme Court’s decisions are
too abstract and formalistic. He
encouraged the Court to look to
foreign courts for a more contextbased
and pragmatic approach to
decision making. During his presentation,
he compared decisions from
the U.S. Supreme Court with those
from the South African
Constitutional Court on capital
punishment, poverty, the duty to
protect and affirmative racial measures.
He also compared cases
regarding freedom of religion from
the U.S. Supreme Court with those
of the Canadian Supreme Court.
Kende concluded that should the
Supreme Court adopt a pragmatic
approach, its decisions would have
more influence over foreign courts.
The final speaker,
Professor Stanley
Laughlin, is a professor
of law at The Ohio
State University
Moritz College of Law.
Laughlin concluded
the symposium with
his presentation titled
“Should the Constitution be
Laughlin
Interpreted the Same Way in a U.S.
Territory as in a State?” During his
presentation, Laughlin examined
constitutional interpretation in
United States territories and free
association states. Using the example
of American Samoa, he highlighted
how a strict interpretation
could damage the native culture. He
concluded by advocating an interpretation
of the Constitution in
these territories that protected core
values, while being flexible when
local culture made strict application
impractical.
Prominent speakers are featured
at the annual symposium to discuss
important topics in the legal field. If
interested, each speaker will have
their presentations published in the
upcoming edition of the Ohio
Northern Law Review. This year, all
symposium speakers will publish
articles in Volume 36 of the Ohio
Northern University Law Review, in
its third issue, set to be published in
the fall 2010.
�
CARHART SYMPOSIUM
ON LEGAL ETHICS
in conjunction with ONU Law Review
March 30, 2011 “Crisis in the Legal Profession”
MARK
YOUR
CALENDAR
Writ WINTER 2010 | OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW 37

STUDENT ACTIVITIES
Summer Public Interest Stipends Awarded
By Cheryl A. Kitchen, director of law alumni and career services
These students, along with the ones who have gone through the program
in the past, are dedicated to public service. We continue to encourage our
students to participate in making a difference and effecting social change.
ASHLEY AHRENS, L-2
Davenport, Iowa
Maryland PIRG (Public Interest Research Group),
Toxic-Free Future Campaign
LINDSEY ALEXANDER, L-1
Pittsburgh, Pa.
Equal Justice Works AmeriCorps, Legal Aid of Western
Ohio, Inc.
AZA GRAY, L-2
Bloomfield, Conn.
Department of Consumer Protection, Legal Division
MARIANELLA MEDELIUS-MARSANO, L-1
Hampstead, N.C.
Mil Mujeres, 5013C family and immigration legal
services- Spanish-speaking victims of domestic violence
ROSS MILTNER, L-1
Massillon, Ohio
Cleveland Department of Public Health
TYSHIA RIDDLEY, L-2
Minneapolis, Minn.
Neighborhood Justice Center, Inc.
Summer Scholar
Studies Fair Use
First-year law student Amy Jeffries, of
Modesto, Calif. was selected as the 2010
Summer Scholar. Each spring, an
outstanding first or second-year student is
selected for the ONU Pettit College of Law
Summer Scholar Award. This student spends the summer working with a
member of the law faculty on a substantial research project. Students in the top
15 percent of their classes are invited to apply. The selected student is chosen for
his or her research and writing skills and then matched with a selected faculty
member who is encouraged to undertake a new project or expand the scale of a
current project. The Summer Scholar Award comes with a $300 stipend, an
hourly wage and a tuition waiver for a summer class at ONU Law.
Jeffries worked with Deidré Francis, assistant professor of law, in researching
derivative works and fair use, specifically where fair use does not appropriately
38 OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW | Writ WINTER 2010
Law students at Ohio Northern University College of Law continue the
history of public service. Many students enter law school with the desire to
work in the public sector and to make a difference in the world by “doing
good” for our society. Despite their good intentions, very few students
actually go into the public sector area of law after law school. Only about
2-4% actually end up in public interest law after graduation.
For the past 13 years, the Office of Law Alumni & Career Services at Ohio
Northern University College of Law has sponsored a Public Interest
Auction to support students who want to pursue a public interest career,
and who volunteer their time during the summer. Each year businesses
from the area, as well as individuals, donate items for the auction. The auction
provides the funds for students to participate in legal positions over
the summer in the public service sector. No salaries are paid for these positions,
but students receive a stipend to help with their expenses. In the past
13 years, we have raised over $72,000 and have been able to award
stipends to 70 students.
The annual auction has grown each year, and we encourage its expansion,
which allows even more students the opportunity to gain valuable experience
in the public service area of law. In the summer of 2010, six more students
were awarded each a $1,000 stipend for their volunteer work over
the summer. This summer law students will serve with judges and government
agencies to help people in many areas who are in desperate need of
legal representation, but cannnot afford it.
� MARK
YOUR
CALENDAR
The next Public Interest Auction
will be held April 15. To donate
items for the auction or to provide
financial support, contact Cheryl
Kitchen at (419) 772-2249 or
c-kitchen@onu.edu
protect freedom of speech. She began her research by
reviewing all briefs, transcripts and amici briefs submitted to
and leading up to the opinions dealing with fair use and the
First Amendment. She then created a memo analyzing each
side’s arguments concerning the topic and compiled a
comprehensive bibliography of cases she felt were relevant to
the topic.
When asked about the value of serving as the Summer
Scholar, Jeffries responded: “I have found the Summer Scholar
position to be valuable not only for the opportunity to refine my
research and writing skills surrounding a topic that has no model answer, but the
experience also helped me realize that while law firms desire efficiency, academia
requires comprehensiveness, and I think learning these skills separately can only
help to improve the other.” Francis said that for her, the Summer Scholar Program
was particularly beneficial, noting “Amy has been central in helping me to
appreciate the universe of relevant scholarship I must master in order to be in a
position where I can write the article I want to write. She has gone through a lot of
information and created bibliographies so that my research and writing is more
efficient and directed, which helps my writing process.”

ONU Law Students Travel to Iceland
By Ryan Nuss, L-2, West Liberty, Ohio
From March 2, 2010 through March 8, 2010, Ohio Northern
College of Law sent four law students to Iceland for a cultural
exchange with students from the law school at the University of
Iceland: Ian Martin, L-2, Plain City, Ohio, Ryan Nuss, L-2, West
Liberty, Ohio, Adrienne Rines, L-2, Portland, Ind. and Ashley
Rodabaugh, L-1, Chicago, Ill.
Our journey began
with breakfast in Ada,
lunch in Detroit and
dinner in Boston.
Following the red-eye
flight from Boston, we
arrived in Keflavik
International Airport
just before 6:00 a.m.
local time. As the sun
began to peek over the
horizon we rolled into
the capital of
Iceland—Reykjavik. A
few hours later, our
hosts took us into the
Icelandic countryside.
After more than 30 minutes
of taking in the scenic, snow-covered beauty,
we arrived at “Logberg” (Law Rock). This is
an opening between two rocky cliffs where the
Icelandic Parliament fist began meeting in 930
A.D.
The next morning we traveled to Iceland’s
“Geysir” geothermal area. The original Icelandic
“Geysir” is where the English language eventually
derived the name for the same natural formation,
geyser. The Geysir area is comprised of
large and small geysers, which are aptly named as
such (The Great Geysir & Litli-Geysir). The
smaller geysers consist of nothing more than tiny
holes filled with bubbling water. One of the
large geysers erupts every ten minutes.
After we left there, we toured Iceland’s largest
prison, Litla-Hraun, which features living quarters
more extravagant than a college dormitory.
Many inmates have single rooms with flat-screen
televisions and computers. As we toured the living
quarters, inmates were preparing a meal with
fresh ingredients and knives.
The highlight of the day, however, was the
opportunity to speak with Iceland’s prisoners.
The inmates with whom we met advocate for
prisoner’s rights. They shared their concerns
about Iceland’s justice system. For over an hour,
two drug dealers, a computer scientist-turned
meth lab proprietor, attempted murderers, and
an organized crime enforcer educated us on
Iceland’s prison and legal systems. One of their
biggest concerns was the lack of a jury trial – a
cornerstone of the American legal system. One
of the inmates declared that after he witnessed a
Old Parliament Building, Reykjavik: Adrienne Rines, Ashley
Rodabaugh, Ian Seth Martin and Ryan Nuss.
judge sleeping during his appeal, he decided a
jury would be a nice check on the all-powerful
Icelandic judge!
To relax after an exciting yet exhausting day,
we headed to downtown Reykjavik to explore
the local nightlife. We discovered Icelanders have
a bit of Ohio Northern school spirit as well –
Polar Beer is one of their national brews! To
make an Icelandic toast, raise your glass and say,
“Skal,” which is pronounced like “scowl” without
the “l.”
The third day began with a trip to downtown
Reykjavik to see the branches of government.
Al?ingishúsi? (The Parliament House) is in
Reykjavik and houses Althingi, the Icelandic parliament.
We were shown the debating room
where the parliament members argue and vote
on issues. The 65 members of parliament represent
five different political parties and are seated
by drawing names from a bowl. Often, members
are assigned seats next to members of opposite
political parties with very different beliefs and
agendas. After our tour of Parliament, we met
with Ragnhei?ur E. Árnadóttir who represents
the Independence Party for the Southwest
Constituency of Iceland and an attorney who
helps all of the members of the Independence
Party. They informed us that Iceland’s government
recently voted a new party into the majority
in hopes of solving a major banking crisis in
the country.
A few blocks from parliament is Iceland’s
new Supreme Court building that opened in
1996. We learned that Iceland’s judicial system
consists of two levels of courts, the district courts
and one Supreme Court. The Supreme Court
consists of nine justices, two of which hold office
as president and vice president for two years.
Cases are either heard by three justices in a small
court room or five justices in a large court room.
After enjoying the cultural and political conversation
for a few hours, we departed to a posh
restaurant, which offered us some foreign fare we
had yet to experience. At the restaurant we traded
parts of our dishes, consuming such things as
whale (both raw and cooked), horse and puffin
(penguin-like creature).
The final sunrise came a little too early, and
we all barely made it to the bus station in time
to exchange heart-felt goodbyes with those who
have become certain lifelong connections with
whom we still regularly keep in contact.
Icelandic Countryside: Adrienne Rines, Ian Seth Martin, Ashley
Rodabaugh, and Ryan Nuss.
Writ WINTER 2010 | OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW 39

College of Law 125th Anniversary Shirts!
Short Sleeved T-shirt Short Sleeved Polo
WHITE
125th ANNIVERSARY Shirts
T-SHIRTS
Size: S M L XL XXL
(Circle One)
Color: White Grey
(Circle One)
Quantity: _____________
Price: $12 ea. _________
TOTAL: ______________
POLOS
Size: S M L XL XXL
(Circle One)
Color: White Grey Black
(Circle One)
Quantity: _____________
Price: $25 ea. _________
TOTAL: ______________
GREY
Plus…
40 OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW | Writ WINTER 2010
GREY
College of Law 125 th Anniversary Shirts!
WHITE
BLACK
Ohio Northern University Logo Overstock!
ONU LOGO OVERSTOCK SALE!
ITEM SIZE
(CIRCLE
CHOICE)
White Polo M, XL,
XXL
Black Polo L, XL,
XXL
Black
Hooded
Sweatshirt
Grey
Hooded
Sweatshirt
Black Fleece
Vest
White
Fleece Vest
M, L, XL,
XXL
S, M, L,
XL, XXL
PAYMENT INFORMATION
Name: _____________________________________
Email: _____________________________________
Shipping Charge: $7.00
TOTAL: $ ________________
Delivery Address:____________________________________________________
Please make checks payable to the ICELANDIC LEGAL EXCHANGE PROGRAM
Checks and order forms can be mailed to: ONU Pettit College of Law, Dean’s Office, 525 S. Main St. Ada, OH 45810
If paying by Credit Card, orders may be faxed to the Dean’s Office at 419-772-2318 or call 419-772-2214.
Please see reverse side for payment information
PRICE QUANTITY TOTAL
$15 $
$15 $
$15 $
$15 $
S, L $15 $
S, M $15 $
Type of Card (check one):
■ VISA ■ MASTERCARD
■ AMERICAN EXPRESS
■ DISCOVER
Cardholder’s’ Name:___________________________________ Credit Card Number: ________________________ Exp. ___________

FACULTY & STAFF
Faculty Recognized at Annual Honors Banquet
The College of Law held its annual Honors Banquet on April
14, 2010. Academic honors were presented, as well as
awards for Law Review, Moot Court and Student Bar
Association. Several faculty members were also recognized:
Professor John P. Christoff and Dean David C. Crago.
■ Professor John P. Christoff, JD ’77, was selected
for the Ella A. & Ernest H. Fisher Chair in Law.
Appointment to the Fisher Chair in the College of
Law is recognition of singular achievement as a legal
educator. Because the selection is made by colleagues
on the faculty based primarily on sustained excellence
in legal scholarship and teaching, the appointment
reflects the highest recognition the College of
Law has to offer to a member of its faculty.
Christoff was also honored by the Student Bar
Association with the Most Effective Teacher award,
which recognizes the professor who, in the students’
view, has been the most effective teacher.
Professor John H. Martin and Dean David C. Crago.
■ Professor John H. Martin was recognized with
the Fowler V. Harper Faculty Scholarship Award. A
faculty committee selected him based on his contribution
to legal scholarship during the current year.
This is the first time Martin has received the award.
Professor Kevin D. Hill and Dean David C. Crago.
■ Professor Kevin D. Hill was recognized with the
Teaching Excellence Award. The candidates for
this award are selected based upon student evaluations
for overall teaching effectiveness for the prior
two semesters and/or nominations from the faculty.
This is the fourth time Hill has received the
award since its inception in 1990.
Professor Sherry Young and Keesha Warmsby,
chief justice, Moot Court.
■ Sherry Young, professor of law,
was recognized by Moot Court
with its Outstanding Team
Advisor of the Year.
2010
Faculty &
Administrative
Staff
■ Karen Elliott, JD
’83, adjunct instructor
of legal research and
writing, was recognized
by the Student
Bar Association with
the Faculty
Appreciation Award.
Congratulations
Congratulations to the following College of Law staff members who were
recognized for their years of service to Ohio Northern
at a special recognition dinner on August 18, 2010:
■ Peggy Cain, 35 years of service
■ Paula Butler, 15 years of service
■ Lena Smith, 10 years of service
■ Sharon Stechschulte, 5 years of service
Cain Butler Smith
Professor Jean-Marie Kamatali and Brian D. Anderson, editor in
chief, Law Review.
■ Jean-Marie Kamatali, assistant director of the
LLM program and visiting assistant professor of
law, was recognized by Law Review with its
Dean Daniel S. Guy Award for Excellence in
Legal Journalism.
Stechschulte
Writ WINTER 2010 | OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW 41

FACULTY & STAFF
Streib
Retires
Victor L. Streib, professor of law
and former dean of the College
of Law, retired at the conclusion
of the Fall, 2010, semester.
Streib, who came to ONU Law in
1996, taught legal profession,
death penalty seminar, criminal
law, criminal procedure and
juvenile law.
A reception in Streib’s honor
was held Nov. 17, 2010, at the
Inn at Ohio Northern. We wish
Victor and his wife, Lynn Sametz,
all the best as they transition into
the next phase of their lives!
42 OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW | Writ WINTER 2010
Ohio Northern University
Pettit College of Law
PROCLAMATION OF GRATITUDE AND APPRECIATION
Presented to
Professor Victor L. Streib
Whereas, Victor Streib has been a member of the Faculty of the Pettit College of Law for
fourteen years;
Whereas, he has authored over three hundred articles, books, chapters and papers over his
academic career;
Whereas, his research has been cited twenty-eight times by the Supreme Court of the United
States;
Whereas, his research and writings have had a lasting and positive effect on the law regarding
capital punishment of juveniles, women and the mentally incompetent.
Whereas, he has served as a model of a committed advocate for countless students;
Whereas, he has been an inspiring classroom teacher;
Whereas, he provided leadership as Dean of the College of Law with grace and poise.
Therefore, the Faculty of the College of Law wishes to express gratitude and appreciation by recognizing
him with this official proclamation on this
17th day of November, 2010
in recognition of these and other accomplishments and distinguished service
Victor L. Streib has bestowed upon the Pettit College of Law of Ohio Northern University, its students,
the Bar and the Nation.

LUXURIOUS COMFORT, DISTINCTIVE
ELEGANCE...A TRUE DESTINATION
So much more than just a place to rest your
head. Nestled in Hardin County, Ohio The Inn at Ohio
Northern University is a destination like no other. Conveniently
located on the campus of Ohio Northern University, offering an
exciting location with top entertainment, theater, music, walks, and
art galleries. Enjoy truly luxurious accommodations, exquisite
amenities, distinctive cuisine, and fine dining in a warm and elegant
atmosphere. Drinks by the fireplace, live jazz, lunch in the garden
courtyard, traditional high tea, special wine tasting events are just
some of the activities at The Inn. The Executive boardroom and
meeting rooms that accommodate up to 100 people are also available
at The Inn.
Call us or visit our
Web site at
www.innatonu.com
419.772.2500
866.713.4513
401 West College Avenue
Ada, Ohio 45810
Business
Travel
Conferences
Training
Events
Weekend
Leisure
Social
Events
Romantic
Retreats
Wedding
Receptions
Writ WINTER 2010 | OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW 43

ACTIVITIES
FACULTY & STAFF
Nancy A. Armstrong
Director of the Law Library
and Professor of Law
Professor Nancy Armstrong
participated in the ONU
law alumni trip to Iceland
commemorating the 50th
anniversary of the Icelandic
Legal Exchange program. During the dinner
program she presented four books by ONU law
faculty to the dean of the law school at the
University of Iceland. While presenting the
books she read the special greetings each author
had written inside the book recognizing the
long-standing friendships and success of the
Icelandic Legal Exchange program. Earlier this
year, Armstrong was a member of an American
Bar Association law school site inspection team.
These teams are responsible for visiting law
schools during the reaccreditation process and
writing reports documenting the visit. This was
her fourth time serving on an ABA site inspection
team.
Joanne C. Brant
Professor of Law
Professor Joanne Brant
spent the summer teaching
her seminar on church-state
relations at the University of
Alabama School of Law.
She is also preparing a new
seminar on Media Law, which will be offered at
Ohio Northern in the Fall of 2010. Brant
recently completed a solicited book review of
Law and the Humanities: An Introduction (Ed’s
Sarat, Anderson and Frank, Cambridge 2010),
which will soon be published in the peerreviewed
journal, America Journal of Legal
History.
C. Antoinette Clarke
Professor of Law
Professor Toni Clarke was
elected to the Executive
Committee of the Ohio
American Civil Liberties
Union Board of Directors
(OACLU) as Affirmative Action Officer and
will serve in that capacity for the next two years.
She appeared on a WGTE-TV (Toledo Public
Television) program discussing current issues
with the ACLU. In May, she spoke to over 500
Reynoldsburg High School students on the
dangers of “sexting.” In addition, she was the
keynote speaker at the Toledo OACLU chapter’s,
annual dinner, speaking on
“(de)Criminalizing Kids: The Call for Juvenile
Justice Reform.” Clarke moderated a panel and
gave a presentation titled, “From Cradle to
Prison,” discussing the ease with which juveniles
are incarcerated in Ohio.
Howard N. Fenton III
Director of LLM Program
and Professor of Law
Professor Howard Fenton
was elected Chair-elect of
the American Association of
Law Schools Section on
Post-Graduate Legal Education for 2010-11 at
the AALS 2010 Annual meeting. In January
2010, he presented a one week course on legislative
drafting to approximately 50 lawyers in
Adama, Ethiopia as part of a United States
Agency for International Development capacity
building program to assist Ethiopia in its efforts
to become a member of the World Trade
Organization. Fenton was the 2010 Law Day
speaker for the Hancock County Bar
Association in Findlay, Ohio, where he spoke
on “Law in a Globalizing World: What America
Offers and What We Can Learn.”
Bruce Comly French
Professor of Law
Professor Bruce French
serves as a Chapter 7 Trustee
in Bankruptcy for the Office
of the United States Trustee,
Region 9, Cleveland, Ohio.
He has also been appointed as an out-of-district
trustee for a liquidating business bankruptcy in
Detroit. This role has allowed French to manage
a portion of the College of Law’s Bankruptcy
Clinic, wherein law students with an Ohio
Legal Intern Certificate are assigned for a semester
each to the Trustee, a chapter 7 debtors’
attorney and a United States Bankruptcy Judge.
French’s principal interests at the moment
include monitoring debt relief agencies. He also
serves on the Board of Trustees for Legal Aid of
Western Ohio (LAWS) and Advocates for Basic
Legal Equality, Inc. (ABLE), which are the
providers of legal aid for western Ohio from
Toledo to Dayton. He is on the Executive
Committee on the Lima Branch of the Lima
Chapter or the National Association for the
Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), and
serves as a member of the Attorney Constituent
Group for the United States Bankruptcy Court
for the Northern District of Ohio, Cleveland, as
a convener of the Allen County Citizens for the
Environment, Inc. (ACCE), Lima, and as a
guest lecturer on the Bill of Rights for the past
16 years at North Middle School, Lima. He is
the administrator and a frequent presenter at
the William Howard Taft American Inn of
Court at Ohio Northern University, Ada. He
44 OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW | Writ WINTER 2010
continues to engage in pro bono public work in
representing low-income domestic relations’
clients in the Courts of Common Pleas of
Hardin and Allen Counties. His recent scholarship,
Willowbrook Reclaimed, will be published
at 2 Charlotte L. Rev. 297 (2010).
Bruce P. Frohnen
Associate Professor of Law
In January, 2010, two of
Professor Bruce P. Frohnen’s
books, The American
Nation: Primary Sources
(editor) and Rethinking
Rights (editor, with Kenneth
L. Grasso) were named
Outstanding Academic Titles by Choice: Reviews
for Academic Libraries. In June, he delivered
the keynote address at the Academy of
Philosophy and Letters on the question
“Whatever Happened to the Rule of Law?” He
hosted a conference for Liberty Fund on the
topic of “Liberty in the Debate over American
Empire” in September of 2009. His chapter,
“Conservatism, Historical Consciousness, and
the Will to Ignorance” appeared in the volume
History on Proper Principles: Essays in Honor of
Forrest McDonald. Frohnen’s law review article,
“A Problem of Power: the Impact of Modern
Sovereignty on the Rule of Law in Comparative
and Historical Perspective,” will appear in
Transnational Law and Contemporary Problems.
Elena Helmer
Visiting Assistant Professor
of Law
During the last academic
year, Professor Elena
Helmer was appointed Vice
Chair of the American Bar
Association Section of
International Law
Anticorruption Committee. She has also
become editor of the Anticorruption Committee
Newsletter, a monthly electronic publication of
the Committee (available online at
www.abanet.org/dch/committee.cfm?com=IC7006
00). Concurrent JD/LLM students serve as student
editors, and a number of the ONU LLM
graduates have become regular contributors to
the newsletter. Several ONU law students have
also published their articles in the newsletter.
Last spring, Helmer launched the
Anticorruption Teaching Listserv, an email list
intended to facilitate the exchange of ideas and
information among the professors and practitioners
involved in teaching corruption-related
courses and in anticorruption training and education.
She also delivered a presentation,
“Comparison of the Judicial Systems of the

United States and Ukraine,” in November at
the Supreme Court of Ohio to a group of
Ukrainian judges. The program was part of the
ongoing exchange between the Supreme Courts
of Ohio and Ukraine.
Jean-Marie Kamatali
Assistant Director of LLM
Program and Visiting
Assistant Professor of Law
Professor Jean-Marie
Kamatali presented
“Human Rights and Justice
in Post-Genocide Rwanda”
at the University of
Richmond Law School in January. In March
2010, he presented “The Impact of the First
Amendment in the Judgements of International
Criminal Tribunals: Recent Developments” at
the 33rd Annual Law Review Symposium at
Ohio Northern University. In May 2010, he
presented “The Truth about Rwanda: Causes
and Aftermath” for the Jefferson Educational
Society, Erie’s Think Tank for Community
Progress in Erie, Pa.
From February –March 2010, Kamatali served
as consultant for United States Agency for
International Development (USAID), training
judges, prosecutors and attorneys on professional
practice for two weeks in Rwanda. He is currently
a consultant for the United States Justice
Department as an expert advisor and witness on
ongoing genocide trials in the U.S.
Kamatali published a book review of Christianity
and Genocide in Rwanda by Timothy Longman,
Cambridge University Press, 2009, for the
Journal of Church and State (forthcoming summer
2010), a paper commenting on “contentious
issues in the new Kenyan
Constitution,” for publication by the
International Commission of Jurist (forthcoming)
and several articles, including “Transitional
Justice: Kosovo Case Study,” Lavinia Stan and
Nadya Nedelsky, (Eds) Encyclopedia of
Transitional Justice, Cambridge University Press,
(accepted for publication); International Center
for Transitional Justice, Lavinia Stan and Nadya
Nedelsky, (Eds) Encyclopedia of Transitional
Justice, Cambridge University Press, (accepted
for publication); “The Impact of the First
Amendment in the Judgements of International
Criminal Tribunals: Recent Developments,” to
be published in the 33rd Annual Law Review
Symposium, Ohio Northern University.
Kamatali attended the 104th Annual Meeting of
the American Society of International Law
(ASIL): theme “International Law in a Time of
Change,” in Washington, D.C. in March. His
article, “From the ICTR to ICC: Learning From
the ICTR Experience in Bringing Justice to
Rwandans,” 12 New Eng. J. Int’l & Comp. L. 89,
90-93 (2005), was cited in the Winter, 2010,
19 Minn. J. Int’l L. 201, in the article, “Closer
to Justice: Transferring Cases from the
International Criminal Court,” by George H.
Norris.
Michael Lewis
Associate Professor of Law
Professor Michael Lewis
published a number of articles,
including: “Should
Bush Administration
Lawyers Be Prosecuted for
Authorizing Torture?” [158
U. Pa. L. Rev. PENNumbra 195 (2010),
http://www.pennumbra.com/
debates/pdfs/AuthorizingTorture.pdf. (Debate with
Prof. Claire Finkelstein of the University of
Pennsylvania], “A Dark Descent Into Reality:
Making the Case for an Objective Definition of
Torture”, 67 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. 77 (2010),
and “Battlefield Perspectives on the Laws of
War” in The War on Terror and the Laws of War:
A Military Perspective, Oxford University Press
(2009). He also published “Comedy or Tragedy:
The Tale of Diversity Jurisdiction Removal and
the One-Year Bar” 62 SMU L. REV. 201 (2009)
which, among other things, criticized the
Lowery v. Alabama Power decision of the 11th
Circuit, was cited by the 11th Circuit Court of
Appeals in Pretka v. Kolter City Plaza II which
limited Lowery to its facts and overturned
Lowery’s policy impact. His submission on the
use of drones in Pakistan, “Examining the
Legality of Unmanned Targeting,” was included
in the Congressional Record as a submission to
the United States House of Representatives,
Committee on Oversight and Government
Reform, Subcommittee on National Security
and Foreign Affairs, April 28, 2010 hearing.
Lewis gave lectures at Northwestern University
College of Law and the University of Chicago
School of Law, participated in debates at
Columbia University School of Law, George
Washington University School of Law, The
Ohio State University Moritz College of Law,
the University of Tulsa School of Law and the
University of Pennsylvania School of Law. He
also moderated a panel at the American
Association of Law Schools conference in New
Orleans on the “Transformation of U.S.
Interrogation Policy,” which examined the
changes in interrogation policy that the Obama
administration made during its first year. Panel
members were Sanford Levinson of Texas,
Diane Amann of University of California-Davis,
Nathan Sales of George Mason and Julian Ku
of Hofstra.
Allison Mittendorf
Instructor of Legal Writing
Allison Mittendorf served as
an assistant editor for volume
16 of The Journal,
published by the Legal
Writing Institute.
Mittendorf also served on
the mock trial case committee
through the Ohio Center for Law Related
Education. The committee developed and prepared
materials for the high school mock trial
competition, which focused on student speech
on the internet.
Victor L. Streib
Professor of Law
Professor Victor Streib’s
publications in 2010 included
“Intentional Wrongful
Conviction of Children” in
the Chicago-Kent Law
Review and “Protecting
Preteens: A Child’s Portion of the Fourth
Amendment” in the Mississippi Law Review. In
2009, Streib’s “Children and the Death Penalty”
was published in The Child: An Encyclopedic
Companion (University of Chicago Press). He
also published two death penalty articles in the
2009 Elon University Law Review. Otherwise,
Streib continues to speak at academic and professional
conferences and to be interviewed by
the media.
Vernon L. Traster
Professor of Law
Professor Vernon Traster
attended the American
Association for Justice (AAJ)
2010 Annual Convention
July 10-14 in Vancouver,
British Columbia, Canada
and the “Litigating The Uninsured &
Underinsured Motorist Claim” National
Business Institute (NBI) seminar July 23 in
Toledo. Traster is writing a book for the
American Bar Association Book Publishing
Insurance Company titled Bad Faith, Fraud,
and Other Misconduct.
Mindi L. Wells
Assistant Dean for
Administration & Student
Services
Dean Mindi Wells concluded
her service on the Florida
Bar Association Young
Lawyers Division Board of
Governors, where she served
three two-year terms as an
elected representative for the out-of-state members.
She chaired the YLD’s Law Practice
Transition committee tasked with developing
resources for a statewide mentoring initiative for
young lawyers, including the development of a
mentoring website. She also served on the
YLD’s Quality of Life and Budget committees
and served as a liaison to the Out-of-State
Practitioners Division of the Florida Bar. Wells
served on the legal education committee of the
National Association of College and University
Attorneys (NACUA), where she worked with
the Spring employment law continuing legal
education program in San Diego, Calif. She
attended NACUA’s 50th anniversary conference
held in Washington, D.C. Wells was selected to
be part of the 2011 Fellows Class of the Ohio
State Bar Foundation.
Writ WINTER 2010 | OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW 45

FACULTY & STAFF
NEW FACULTY
The College of Law is pleased to
announce the appointment of four new
professors for 2010-11:
Deidré A. Francis
Professor Deidré A.
Francis joined the
College of Law faculty
in August 2010 as
assistant professor.
She teaches property,
law and literature and
advanced trademark
and copyright. Her
teaching interests also
include First
Amendment (freedom of speech). Prior to
joining the faculty, Francis practiced law in
Atlanta, Ga., with the firms of Sutherland,
Asbill and Brennan, LLP, and Seyfarth Shaw,
LLP. She specialized in the procurement, registration
and enforcement of intellectual property
rights with a particular emphasis on trademarks
and copyrights. Francis’s experience
includes trademark portfolio management,
counseling clients on matters including the
adoption of trademarks, potential defenses to
copyright infringement and issues related to
litigating patent disputes. Francis has represented
both plaintiffs and defendants in
patent, trademark and copyright litigation.
Her clients ranged from start-ups to publiclytraded
companies. She earned her JD with
honors form Emory and her BA from Yale.
Bruce P. Frohnen
Professor Bruce
Frohnen joined the
College of Law in
2008 as visiting associate
professor of law
and was named associate
professor of law
in 2010. Prior to joining
the faculty, he
served as a visiting
scholar with the Johns
Hopkins School of Advanced International
Studies, as a legislative aide to United States
Senator Spencer Abraham, and as a senior fellow
at Liberty Fund, Inc. His co-edited volume
American Conservatism: An Encyclopedia was the
subject of a front page article in the New York
Times. His two most recent volumes, The
American Nation: Primary Sources and
Rethinking Rights (edited with Kenneth Grasso)
were named Outstanding Academic Titles by
Choice: Current Reviews for Academic Libraries.
His articles have appeared in journals including
the George Washington Law Review, Harvard
Journal of Law & Public Policy and the American
Journal of Jurisprudence. His research interests
focus on the nature, development and prospects
for constitutionalism and human rights given
changing views regarding the nature of human
community and the person. He holds a JD
from the Emory University School of Law and
a Ph.D. in Government from Cornell
University.
Hilary R. Kao
Professor Hilary Kao
joined the College of
Law faculty in
August 2010 as assistant
professor. He
teaches Business
Organizations I,
Business
Organizations II and
Securities Regulation
for the JD program and Legal Concepts of
American Business for the LLM in Democratic
Governance and Rule of Law program. His
current research focuses on legal and public
policy elements of federal and state incentives
to the renewable energy electrical generation
industry. Before joining the College of Law
faculty, Kao practiced law for over a decade at
the international law firm of Milbank, Tweed,
Hadley & McCloy, LLP, in the Global Project
Finance Group in their New York offices.
While at Milbank, he represented syndicates of
domestic and international lenders and private
investors in a wide range of domestic and
international finance and corporate transactions
across many industries, including conventional
and renewable energy, oil and gas,
biofuels, transportation infrastructure and
telecommunications industries. He earned his
JD from Georgetown and BA from Bradeis
University.
Boris N. Mamlyuk
Professor Boris Mamlyuk joined the College of
Law faculty in August 2010 as visiting assistant
professor of law. He is teaching International
NGOs, Administrative Law and Jurisprudence
and will lead the Rule of Law Seminar.
Mamlyuk joins ONU from Cornell Law
School, where he served as a visiting scholar in
46 OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW | Writ WINTER 2010
2007-08 and 2009-
10. He earned his JD
from the University of
California (Hastings)
in 2005. He then
practiced in the
Irvine, Ca., office of
Watt, Tieder, Hoffar
& Fitzgerald, a leading
nationwide litigation
and construction
law practice, representing clients in local complex
commercial litigation. In the 2007-08 academic
year, Mamlyuk returned to academia to
pursue doctoral work at the CLEI Centre, a
research center founded by Cornell Law School
and the University of Turin, Faculty of Law.
During the course of his doctoral studies,
Mamlyuk held a number of joint appointments,
including visiting scholar at Columbia
University’s Harriman Institute for Russian,
Eurasian and Eastern European Studies. In
2008-09, he was selected as a Fulbright Fellow
to study Russian law and transition at Moscow’s
Institute of State and Law. While in Russia,
Mamlyuk taught courses on Civil Society and
Russian Law and Politics at Moscow’s Higher
School of Economics. Mamlyuk’s research interests
include international legal theory, law and
development and issues of legal transition and
Rule of Law reforms in developing and postsocialist
states. His current research project
focuses on Russia’s attempts to harmonize
domestic legal structures in anticipation of
WTO accession. Mamlyuk has delivered
numerous conference presentations on these
topics in more than five countries.

African Trip Unraveled
By Bruce Comly French, professor of law
Professor Bruce Comly French and
retired Union County Common Pleas
Judge Richard Parrott, JD ’60, visited
southern and eastern African this summer
for the purpose of French making
presentations on the rights of African
Americans under the U.S. Constitution
and Parrott making presentations on the
state judicial systems. Speaking engagements
were planned at the law schools
at the University of Nairobi, Malawi
and Lesotho.
But a new plan emerged as the trip continued.
The visit to Nairobi occurred on
the day after Kenya adopted its new
constitution and was celebrating the
occasion. All schools were closed, so no
presentation was made. However, extensive
review of the College of Law
Library resulted in an initiative by Judge
Parrott to provide for the delivery of upto-date
legal materials not needed by
the Union County Law Library.
The visit to the Malawi school was
aborted after Judge Parrott’s passport
was lost or stolen on the train from
Nairobi to Mombasa. The U.S.
Embassy in Nairobi efficiently issued a
new temporary passport, but the limited
air service to Lilongwe precluded a
rescheduled visit.
The final visit to the National
University of Lesotho Law School in
Roma saw the initial discussions of a
possible student or faculty exchange
program with students and faculty at
ONU. A proposal is being readied for
law faculty consideration. The National
University served as the university for
Lesotho, Botswana and Swaziland prior
to the three nations’ independence in
the 1960s from colonial relationships
with the United Kingdom. The law
school faculty and the university administration
welcomed a number of law
school books that the faculty of the
ONU Law School had collected and
sent in the past several years. In 2005,
French had visited the National
University and
made a presentation
on the
rights of Africa
Americans
under the U.S.
Constitution.
The summer
visit included a
tour of facilities
and meetings
with faculty, as
well as an indepth
study of
the law library
and an inspection
of how the
books donated
by ONU facultysupplemented
the library
collection.
When French
and Parrott
arrived at the
Maseru,
Lesotho
Airport, it was
quickly deter-
Sign outside the University of Nairobi.
mined that
President Jacob
Zuma of the
Republic of South Africa (which completely
surrounds Lesotho) was in the
capital for a state dinner. The
Commandant of the Lesotho National
Police inquired of French “are you the
Ambassador from Libya?” French
advised the officer that he was from the
United States. The officer responded
that it did not appear that the American
Ambassador (presumed to be French)
was not on the state dinner’s invitation
list. Zuma was staying at the hotel
where French and Parrott stayed.
Finally, before leaving Johannesburg for
the United States, the intrepid travelers
visited the Apartheid Museum and its
recognition of President Nelson
Mandela.
Judge Parrot and Professor French at the National University of Lesotho. L-R: Ms. A. Masefinela
Mphuting, Registrar; Judge Richard Parrott; Professor A.F. Ogunrinade, Vice-Chancellor; and
Professor Bruce Comly French.
The Honorable Richard Parrott, JD ’60, and the
Librarian from the University of Nairobi.
The outside of the lecture hall at the
National University of Lesotho.
Some of the books donated by the Hardin
County Law Library.
Writ WINTER 2010 | OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW 47

Feature
The U.S. First Amendment Versus Freedom of
Expression in Other Liberal Democracies and
How Each Influenced the Development of
International Law on Hate Speech
By Jean-Marie Kamatali, assistant director of LLM program and visiting assistant professor of law
I. INTRODUCTION
There is a large gap between the American concept and delimitation
of the freedom of speech and freedom of press and those of other liberal
democracies. The protection afforded to free speech under American law
is much stronger than that of other liberal democracies. Unlike the First
Amendment of the United States Constitution, which removed the
power to adopt laws “abridging the freedom of speech or of the press”
from Congress, constitutional provisions in most other liberal democracies
are more flexible and open-ended in balancing the exercise of freedom
of expression with other rights, goals, and interests. This contrast
has brought some to see the First Amendment as both a “recalcitrant outlier”
to an international consensus on what freedom of expression entails
and a reflection of American exceptionalism. 1
Beyond the differences of approach between the United States and
most other liberal democracies, each side has tried to influence the concept
and interpretation of the freedom of expression in international law.
This article attempts to analyze how these two camps have shaped the
interpretation of freedom of expression in both international human
rights law and international criminal law, particularly with regard to hate
speech. While acknowledging that the influence of the United States in
the development of freedom of expression in international human rights
law seems to have been low compared to that of other liberal democracies,
this article highlights how recent developments in international
criminal law demonstrate a different trend. Examining how international
criminal courts, from the Nuremberg Tribunal to the recently created
International Criminal Court, via the ad-hoc tribunals, have tried to
interpret the concept and delimitations of the freedom of speech, particularly
with regard to hate speech, this article argues that unlike international
human rights law, international criminal law seems to more closely
follow the American approach to First Amendment jurisprudence.
Further, these new developments prove that international human rights
law is not correcting the blind spots of international criminal law on hate
speech, as some have argued. 2 Rather, hate speech is likely to develop separately
in international human rights and international criminal law, the
latter more closely following the First Amendment track and the former
following that of a majority of other liberal democracies.
II. COMPARING THE FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IN THE UNITED STATES TO
OTHER LIBERAL DEMOCRACIES
A. Early Tests for Protected and Unprotected Speech in the United States
The standard test to define what speech is protected or unprotected
under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution has
evolved over time. The “bad tendency” test that dominated the pre-
World War I era 3 was later overturned by the “clear and present danger”
test 4 that, in turn, was later replaced by the “imminent lawless action”
test. 5 Despite this evolution, however, the Supreme Court of the United
States has remained consistent in refusing to distinguish protected from
unprotected speech on the basis of the point of view espoused.
Reliance on the “bad tendency” test is most clearly illustrated by
Patterson v. Colorado. 6 Thomas M. Patterson, a Senator from Colorado,
48 OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW | Writ WINTER 2010
owned and edited newspapers in his home state. 7 In his editorials, cartoons,
and letters, he ridiculed the Supreme Court of Colorado for invalidating
the home rule amendment on state constitutional grounds and
overturning elections in Denver. 8 Essentially, he accused the judges of acting
as tools of the utility corporations, which controlled the Republican
Party. 9 Following his conviction in Colorado, 10 Patterson appealed to the
Supreme Court of the United States, arguing that his conviction constituted
a violation of his First Amendment rights. 11 The Court, in an opinion
authored by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., rejected Patterson’s
claim. 12 Justice Holmes wrote that the First Amendment prevents all “previous
restraints upon publications[,]” but allows “the subsequent punishment
of such as may be deemed contrary to the public welfare.” 13 In supporting
his argument, he alluded to Blackstone’s Commentaries, which
defined criminal libel as a writing “of immoral or illegal tendency.” 14
The “clear and present danger” test was first developed by the Court
in Schenck v. United States. 15 Charles Schenck was convicted for distributing
15,000 leaflets to young men of draft age, advocating opposition to
the draft. 16 In a unanimous decision, the Court held that Schenck’s conviction
was constitutional. 17 Justice Holmes, writing for the Court,
argued that “[t]he question in every case is whether the words used are
used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear
and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that
Congress has a right to prevent.” 18
Brandenburg v. Ohio serves as the genesis of the “imminent lawless
action” test, which still prevails today. 19 At least one commentator has
argued that with this case, the Court “combined significant aspects of
several previous First Amendment cases into a single, high standard of
protection for all speech advocating violation of the law.” 20
A comparison between Brandenburg in the United States, Mugesera
in Canada, and Jersild in Denmark is necessary here in order to understand
how these three similar cases were dealt with in those countries.
The protection afforded
to free Wspeech under
American law is much
stronger than that of
other liberal
democracies.

B. The Brandenburg Case
Brandenburg began when Clarence Brandenburg, the leader of a local
chapter of the Ku Klux Klan (“KKK”), invited a Cincinnati television
reporter to a Klan rally being held at a farm in Hamilton County, Ohio. 21
The rally was filmed and portions were later broadcasted on both local
and national networks. 22 Hooded individuals, some holding guns, were
present at the rally. 23 Brandenburg made speeches conveying racist and
anti-Semitic statements to those present. 24 In one of these statements, he
said that “the Klan has more members in the State of Ohio than does any
other organization. We’re not a revengent [sic] organization, but if our
President, our Congress, our Supreme Court, continues to suppress the
white, Caucasian race, it’s possible that there might have to be some
revengeance [sic] taken.” 25 Brandenburg was convicted for violating
Ohio’s criminal syndicalism statute, which prohibited “advocat[ing] . . .
the duty, necessity, or propriety of crime, sabotage, violence, or unlawful
methods of terrorism as a means of accomplishing . . . political
reform[.]” 26 He was sentenced to a year in prison and fined $1,000. 27 The
state intermediate appellate court and the Supreme Court of Ohio
affirmed his conviction, 28 but the Supreme Court of the United States
reversed. 29 In doing so, the Court held that
the constitutional guarantees of free speech and free press do not
permit a State to forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force
or of law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting
or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or
produce such action. 30
C. The Mugesera Casea
The statements leading to Brandenburg’s conviction in the state
courts, for example, “[p]ersonally, I believe the nigger should be returned
to Africa, the Jew returned to Israel[,]” 31 were similar to those of Leon
Mugesera. 32 In November 1992, Mugesera, during a political rally in
Rwanda, stated, referring to the Tutsi, “I am telling you that your home
is in Ethiopia that we will send you by the river Nyabarongo so you can
get there quickly.” 33 Though Mugesera’s speech contained other words
likely to be qualified as hateful and incendiary, 34 his speech was mostly
remembered for this particular portion. 35 Following these statements, in
August 1993, Mugesera immigrated to Canada. 36 In 1994, Rwanda suffered
a genocide that claimed close to one million lives. 37 In July 1996, a
Canadian adjudicator concluded that Mugesera’s speech constituted “an
incitement to murder, hatred and genocide, and a crime against humanity”
and issued a deportation order. 38 The Immigration and Refugee Board
(Appeal Division) (“IAD”) upheld the decision. 39 After different levels of
appeals, the Canadian Federal Court of Appeals reversed several findings
of fact made by the IAD and ultimately the deportation order itself. 40 The
case was appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada, which interpreted
Mugesera’s speech in the context of Rwandan history of the Tutsi massacres
and the dominant teaching about Tutsi’s immigration from
Ethiopia to Rwanda. 41 In earlier massacres, the Tutsi had been killed and
their bodies thrown into the Nyabarongo River, which runs through
Rwanda to Ethiopia. 42 Thus, Mugesera’s request that Tutsi return to
Ethiopia by way of the Nyabarongo, a river unnavigable by boat, was
interpreted as a call for the former. 43 As a result, the Court held that
Mugesera’s speech constituted an incitement to murder, hatred, and genocide
and a crime against humanity. 44
D. The Jersild Case
The circumstances of Brandenburg can also be compared to those of
Jersild v. Denmark 45 in two respects: the words of Brandenburg with
those of the “Greenjackets” (“gr√∏njakkerne”) 46 and the fate of Jens Olaf
Jersild, the Danish Journalist who produced and broadcasted the interview
with the “Greenjackets” with that of the journalist who covered the
KKK rally where Brandenburg gave his problematic speech. 47
Jersild began on May 31, 1985 when a newspaper, Information, published
an article describing the racist attitudes of a number of young people,
all members of a group who called themselves “the Greenjackets”
(“gr√∏njakkerne”). 48 In response, the Sunday News Magazine, which had
Writ WINTER 2010 | OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW 49

Feature
a reputation “as a serious television program[ ] intended for a wellinformed
audience, dealing with a wide range of social and political
issues, including xenophobia, immigration and refugees[,]”decided to
produce a documentary on the “Greenjackets.” 49 Subsequently, its journalist,
Jens Olaf Jersild, set up a television interview with three representatives
of the group. 50
During the interview, the “Greenjacket” members made “abusive and
derogatory” statements about immigrants and ethnic groups in
Denmark. 51 After being asked by Jersild if they were racists, one of the
“Greenjackets” responded, “Yes, that’s what I regard myself as. It’s good
being a racist. We believe Denmark is for the Danes.” 52 Expressing their
support for the KKK, one said
[t]he Ku Klux Klan, that’s something that comes from the States
in the old days during - you know - the civil war and things like
that, because the Northern States wanted that the niggers should
be free human beings, man, they are not human beings, they are
animals, right, it’s completely wrong, man, the things that happened.
People should be allowed to keep slaves, I think so
anyway. 53
Asked if this was due to the fact that “because blacks are not human
beings[,]” the member responded,
No, you can also see that from their body structure, man, big flat
noses, with cauliflower ears etc., man. Broad heads and very broad
bodies, man, hairy, you are looking at a gorilla and compare it
with an ape, man, then it is the same [behavior], man, it’s the
same movements, long arms, man, long fingers etc., long feet . . . .
Just take a picture of a gorilla, man, and then look at a nigger, it’s
the same body structure and everything, man, flat forehead and all
kinds of things. 54
After being asked what the KKK means to him, he said, “It means a
great deal, because I think what they do is right. A nigger is not a human
being, it’s an animal, that goes for all the other foreign workers as well,
Turks, Yugoslavs and whatever they are called.” 55 Based on this speech,
the Danish court convicted the three “Greenjackets.” 56 Jersild and his
program controller, Lasse Jensen, were also convicted for aiding and abetting
the three “Greenjackets” by conducting and broadcasting the interview.
57
A comparison between Jersild and Brandenburg illustrates how the
United States, Denmark, and Europe, generally, differ in dealing with
hate speech. More specifically, the European Court of Human Rights
noted, in Jersild, that “there can be no doubt that the remarks in respect
of which the Greenjackets were convicted were more than insulting to
members of the targeted groups and did not enjoy the protection of
Article 10” 58 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Further,
while finding that Jersild was protected by Article 10, the court held it
50 OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW | Writ WINTER 2010
was undisputed that the interference with Jersild’s rights was “prescribed
by law” and pursued a legitimate aim, “namely the ‚ ‘protection of the
reputation or rights of others.’” 59 The only point with which it disagreed
with the Danish court was on the question of whether the measures were
“necessary in a democratic society.” 60 Accordingly, the court did not dispute
the need for Denmark to adopt such laws. 61 Rather, it was more
concerned that “the means employed were disproportionate to the aim of
protecting ‚ ‘the reputation or rights of others.’” 62
The Danish provisions criminalizing hate speech can be found in a
number of other liberal democracies. For instance, the South African
Constitution does not extend the right to freedom of expression to
“advocacy of hatred that is based on race, ethnicity, gender and religion,
and that constitutes incitement to cause harm[;]” 63 the Canadian
Criminal Code prohibits communicating statements in a public place to
incite hatred against any identifiable group and communicating statements,
other than in private conversation, to willfully promote hatred
against an identifiable group; 64 the French Criminal Code punishes those
who by publication by any of various means, provoke discrimination,
hatred, or violence with regard to a person or a group of persons
by reason of their origin or their membership or non-membership
in an ethnic group, nation, race, or particular religion . . .
by a term of imprisonment of one year and by a fine[;] 65
and the German Criminal Code provides “for the punishment of those
who incite hatred, or invite violence or arbitrary acts against parts of the
population, or insult, maliciously degrade, or defame part of the population,
in a manner likely to disturb the public peace.” 66
Unlike the countries mentioned above, 67 the United States, pursuant
to Brandenburg, sets the bar very high. In proscribing the “imminent
lawless action” test, the Court held that incitement to violent racial
hatred is simply not enough for a conviction. 68 Such an incitement has to
be “unmistakably call[ing] for immediate violent action, and even then
only under the more rare still circumstances in which members of the listening
audience are in fact likely immediately to act upon the speaker’s
suggestion.” 69 Based on this test, federal and state courts have reversed
rulings and ordinances prohibiting or restricting racial intimidation, 70
membership in racial groups, 71 or racist speech on university campuses. 72
A comparison between Jersild and
Brandenburg illustrates how the United
States, Denmark, and Europe, generally,
differ in dealing Swith hate speech.
Despite this evolution, however,
the Supreme Court of the United
States has remained consistent in
refusing to distinguish protected
from unprotected speech on the
basis of the point of view
espoused.

The courts in Collin v. Smith and National Socialist Party v. Village of
Skokie considered regulations that prohibited the Nazi Party from marching,
wearing the swastika, distributing pamphlets, or displaying materials
inciting or promoting hatred against Jews or persons of any faith, ancestry,
or race to be a form of speech protected by the First Amendment. 73
III. FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IN INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS
CONVENTIONS RATIFIED BY THE UNITED STATES
From the early stages of the negotiation of the International Bill of
Human Rights, the United States did not hide its opposition to clauses
restricting free speech. 74 When the draft of the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights was being debated by the Commission on Human Rights,
its chair, Eleanor Roosevelt, opposed several attempts by countries such as
the U.S.S.R., France, Belgium, China, Chile, and Lebanon to include in
Article 19 of the UDHR a specific provision limiting the freedom of
expression. 75 Despite her effort, however, Articles 2976 and 30, 77 both limitation
clauses on the Declaration, were generally understood as providing
a legal basis for restricting freedom of speech. 78 Regardless, many countries
were waiting to reintroduce their restriction to free speech in the
more binding convention, the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights (ICCPR), which was already being drafted by the UN
Commission on Human Rights at the time. 79
Since the beginning of the negotiation of the ICCPR in 1947, two
blocs were created: one supporting the inclusion of an anti-hate clause in
the provisions on freedom of expression and another opposing it. 80 The
former was mainly supported by the U.S.S.R., France, and Third World
countries, while the latter was led by the United States. 81 From the early
phases of negotiations, the United States cautioned against including in
the Covenant “any provision likely to be exploited by totalitarian States
for the purpose of rendering the other articles null and void.” 82 Regarding
the inclusion of specific provisions prohibiting incitement to hatred,
Eleanor Roosevelt warned that this would be an “extremely dangerous”
move, “since any criticism of public or religious authorities might all too
easily be described as incitement to hatred and consequently prohibited.”
83 While the majority of other liberal democracies shared the United
States’ views that including anti-hate provisions would be handing totalitarian
regimes a tool to “silence free men[,]” 84 they were not comfortable
with the “absolutist” 85 position of the United States, which was viewed as
wishing “to permit full freedom of expression for the purpose of incite-
In proscribing the
“imminent lawless
action” test, the
Court held that
incitement to violent
racial hatred is
simply not enough
for a conviction.
ment to hatred and violence.” 86 This attitude seems to have favored the
inclusion of the anti-hate clause in the ICCPR provisions on freedom of
expression. 87 The result was the adoption, by vote, of Article 19, 88 which
contains restrictions going beyond those permissible under current First
Amendment jurisprudence, and Article 20, 89 which is “in plain conflict
with the strictures of the U.S. Constitution.” 90
Although some have argued that the controversial Article 20, which
the United States opposed the most, was overwhelmingly adopted with
the support of a broad range of political and economic systems, 91 the
record of the vote on this article shows that most liberal democracies
joined the United States in voting against it. 92 The opposition of most
liberal democracies to the provisions of Article 20, Paragraph 2, however,
was not transformed into resisting its incorporation into their domestic
laws. 93 Rather, of the 165 countries which have ratified the ICCPR, only
Malta and United States have made a reservation to this provision. 94 In
1992, when the United States finally ratified the ICCPR, it included a
reservation aimed at blocking the application of Article 20 domestically. 95
This reservation, which came first on the list of U.S. reservations to the
ICCPR, states that “Article 20 does not authorize or require legislation or
other action by the United States that would restrict the right of free
speech and association protected by the Constitution and laws of the
United States.” 96
The Human Rights Committee, a body in charge of monitoring the
implementation of the ICCPR, has been supportive of countries that
strictly implement the terms of Articles 19 and 20. 97 It has found, for
instance, France’s punishment of Robert Faurisson, for his speech denying
the existence of certain extermination tactics used in the Holocaust,
to be in conformity with these articles. 98 The committee also found that
Canada did not violate Article 19 by taking disciplinary action against a
teacher who published anti-Semitic tracts outside the classroom. 99
However, the opposition and outcry of the United States regarding
the provisions of Article 20 of the ICCPR did not stop or intimidate the
wide adoption of the International Convention on the Elimination of All
Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD) under the auspices of the
United Nations. Article 4 of CERD went beyond simply prohibiting hate
speech; it made it a criminal offense. 100 This Article requires that
States Parties condemn all propaganda and all organizations which are
based on ideas or theories of superiority of one race or group of persons
of one colour or ethnic origin, or which attempt to justify or promote
racial hatred and discrimination in any form, and undertake to
adopt immediate and positive measures designed to eradicate all incitement
to, or acts of, such discrimination and, to this end, with due
regard to the principles embodied in the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights and the rights expressly set forth in article 5 of this
Convention, inter alia:
(a) Shall declare an offence punishable by law all dissemination of
ideas based on racial superiority or hatred, incitement to racial discrimination,
as well as all acts of violence or incitement to such
acts against any race or group of persons of another colour or ethnic
origin, and also the provision of any assistance to racist activities,
including the financing thereof[.] 101
It also places a duty on state parties to “declare illegal and prohibit
organizations, and also organized and all other propaganda activities,
which promote and incite racial discrimination, and shall recognize participation
in such organizations or activities as an offence punishable by
Since the beginning of the negotiation of the
ICCPR in 1947, two blocs were created: one
supporting the inclusion of an anti-hate
clause in the provisions on freedom of
expression and another opposing it.
Writ WINTER 2010 | OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW 51

Feature
law[.]” 102
Having failed to convince other UN members of the efficacy of its
First Amendment interpretation of free speech, the United States decided
to join other delegations in voting in favor of Article 4, but its representative
declared that the United States interpreted the “due regard” clause
as “not imposing on a State party the obligation to take any action
impairing the right to freedom of speech and freedom of association.” 103
When it ratified the Convention, the United States distanced itself even
further from the Convention’s provisions by adopting a reservation stating
that
the Constitution and laws of the United States contain extensive
protections of individual freedom of speech, expression and association.
Accordingly, the United States does not accept any obligation
under this Convention, in particular under [A]rticles 4 and 7,
to restrict those rights, through the adoption of legislation or any
other measures, to the extent that they are protected by the
Constitution and laws of the United States. 104
The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, the
body in charge of monitoring the implementation of CERD, has continuously
recommended that states go beyond enacting criminal provisions
punishing hate speech to effectively enforcing them. 105 Further, it has
found states refusing to punish hate speech, under the theory that such
speech is incompatible with the right to free speech, to be in breach of
Article 4. 106
The European Commission and European Court on Human Rights,
which has become a reference in the development of human rights
jurisprudence, have been consistent in supporting states’ prosecution of
hate speech. 107 For instance, in Glimmerveen v. Netherlands, 108 the
European Commission on Human Rights found the Netherlands’ convic-
These IMT
cases
made two
important
contributions
to the
issue of
incitement in
international
criminal law.
52 OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW | Writ WINTER 2010
tion of Glimmerveen and Hagenbeek, for distributing racist leaflets, to be
in conformity with the provisions of the ECHR. 109 Similarly, in Garaudy
v. France, 110 France was found not to have violated Garaudy’s freedom of
speech when it condemned him for his revisionist theories denying the
existence of crimes against humanity. 111 Also, in B.H. v. Austria, 112 the
Commission found the applicants’ claim that their conviction, for adhering
to National Socialist doctrine, was a violation of their freedom of
expression to be manifestly ill-founded. 113
On November 28, 2008, the European Union moved a step further
and adopted a supranational law requiring EU member States to adopt
the necessary measures to ensure that the following intentional conduct is
punishable:
(a) publicly inciting to violence or hatred directed against a group
of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to
race, color, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin;
(b) the commission of an act referred to in point (a) by public dissemination
or distribution of tracts, pictures or other material;
(c) publicly condoning, denying or grossly trivializing crimes of
genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes as defined
in Articles 6, 7 and 8 of the Statute of the International
Criminal Court. 114
Effective December 2008, this Framework Decision also orders EU
Member States to punish any instigation and aiding or abetting of the
commission of crimes mentioned above. 115
IV. INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURTS AND THE FREEDOM OF
EXPRESSION: FINDING THE MIDDLE GROUND
A. The Nuremberg International Military Tribunal (IMT)
The Nuremberg International Military Tribunal was the first interna-
U

tional criminal tribunal to try acts tantamount to incitement to
genocide. 116 Its first case in this regard concerned Julius Streicher, the editor
of Der Sturmer, an anti-Semitic weekly newspaper, from 1923 to
1945. In 1935, Der Sturmer’s circulation was nearly 600,000 people.
Streicher’s regular anti-Semitism and incitement of German people to
active persecution can best be illustrated by a September 1938 article that
termed the Jew a “germ and a pest, not a human being, but ‘a parasite, an
enemy, an evil-doer, a disseminator of diseases who must be destroyed in
the interest of mankind.’” 117 In January 1943, Streicher wrote and published
an article stating that “Hitler’s prophecy was being fulfilled, that
the world Jewry was being extirpated, and that it was wonderful to know
that Hitler was freeing the world of its Jewish tormentors.” 118 In February
1944, he published yet another article that stated, “Whoever does what a
Jew does is a scoundrel, a criminal. And he who repeats and wishes to
copy him deserves the same fate: annihilation, death.” 119 Since incitement
to commit genocide was not yet part of international criminal law,
Streicher was convicted of committing a crime against humanity, which
“involved, among other things, the murder and persecution of all who
were or who were suspected of being hostile to the Nazi Party and all
who were[,] or who were suspected of[,] being opposed to the common
plan.” 120
The second IMT case concerned Hans Fritzsche, the head of the
Radio Division of the Propaganda Ministry and Plenipotentiary for the
Political Organization of the Greater German Radio. 121 Fritzsche was subordinate
to Otto Dietrich, the Reich Press Chief, who was in turn a subordinate
of Joseph Goebbels, the Reich Minister of Propaganda. 122
However, near the end of World War II, Fritzsche was the sole authority
for radio activities within the Ministry. 123 He was accused of “incit[ing]
and encourag[ing] the commission of [w]ar [c]rimes by deliberately falsifying
news to arouse in the German [p]eople those passions which led
them to the commission of atrocities.” 124 Though the Tribunal found that
the “[e]xcerpts in evidence from his speeches show[ed] definite anti-
Semitism on his part[,]” it concluded that these “speeches did not urge
persecution or extermination of Jews.” 125 Unlike Streicher, Fritzsche was
acquitted of a crime against humanity. 126
These IMT cases made two important contributions to the issue of
incitement in international criminal law. First, it was agreed that hate
speech, even in crucial times such as the Holocaust, was not punishable
as long as it does not urge the commission of genocide or crimes against
humanity. 127 Second, even in cases where it does, it was not a separate
crime. 128 Rather, it requires that the criminal act it was inciting actually
occur for the speech to be punishable. This last point came to be the subject
of long discussions during the drafting of the United Nations
Genocide Convention, 129 leading the “direct and public incitement to
commit genocide” 130 to be a punishable act “even when such incitement
failed to produce the result expected by the perpetrator.” 131
S Although
B. Hate Speech in the Genocide Convention
The drafting history of the Article III (c) of the Genocide
Convention, which prohibits “direct and public incitement” to commit
genocide, illustrates the different conception of and commitment to free
speech between the United States and other countries and how this difference
influences the outcome of international treaties. 132
The Original Draft Convention on the Crime of Genocide, as prepared
by the Secretary General of the United Nations, contained two key
provisions likely to conflict with the freedom of expression. First, Article
II (II) (2) prohibited “direct public incitement to any act of genocide
whether the incitement be successful or not.” 133 Second, Article III prohibited
“all forms of public propaganda tending by their systematic and
hateful character to provoke genocide, or tending to make it appear as a
necessary, legitimate or excusable act[.]” 134 Commentary of the UN
Secretariat indicates that the term “incitement,” as used in Article II (II)
(2), “refers to direct appeals to the public by means of speeches, radio or
press[] inciting it to genocide.” 135 In proposing this article, drafters were
worried that the “lightly or imprudently spoken word of a journalist or
speaker himself capable of doing what he advises will be taken seriously
by some of his audience[,] who will regard it as their duty to act on his
recommendation.” 136 Furthermore, the commentary to Article III explains
that general propaganda should be prohibited because it “would, if successful,
persuade those impressed by it to contemplate the commission of
genocide in a favorable light.” 137 According to the Secretariat’s report, in
order to be punishable, “the propaganda must necessarily be heavily
charged with hatred and must be systematic, that is to say, repeated
methodologically.” 138
In its comments on this Draft Convention, the United States categorically
opposed these two provisions as contradictory to the First
Amendment, arguing that “free speech is not to be interfered with unless
there is a clear and present danger that the utterance might interfere with
a right of others.” 139 Later, as the Ad Hoc Committee on Genocide was
reviewing the Draft Genocide Convention in light of comments from
member states, the United States worked hard to get these two articles
In its comments on this Draft Convention,
the United States categorically opposed
these two provisions as contradictory to
the First Amendment, arguing that “free
speech is not to be interfered with unless
there is a clear and present danger that
the utterance might interfere with a right
of others.
some have argued that the
controversial Article 20, which the United
States opposed the most, was
overwhelmingly adopted with the support
of a broad range of political and
economic systems, 91 the record of the
vote on this article shows that most
liberal democracies joined the United
States in voting against it.
Writ WINTER 2010 | OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW 53

Feature
removed from the draft. 140 Ultimately, the United States successfully managed
to get the majority of the Ad Hoc Committee to reject Article III
on propaganda, but could not convince them to reject Article II (II) 2 on
incitement to genocide. 141 Accordingly, the majority vote of the Ad Hoc
Committee endorsed a draft that punished “direct public or private
incitement to commit the crime of genocide[,] whether such incitement
be successful or not.” 142
When the Sixth Committee of the General Assembly was revising the
Ad Hoc Committee’s draft of the Genocide Convention, the United
States once again expressed its worries that
[i]f it were admitted that incitement was an act of genocide, any
newspaper article criticizing a political group, for example, or suggesting
certain measures with regard to such group for the general
welfare, might make it possible for certain States to claim that a
[g]overnment . . . was committing an act of genocide; and yet that
article might be nothing more than the mere exercise of the right
of freedom of the [p]ress. 143
The United States, therefore, submitted an amendment aimed at
deleting the provision dealing with incitement, but it was defeated. 144
Faced with this defeat, the United States declared that it reserved its position
on the subject of incitement to commit genocide, 145 and it abstained
during voting on the entire article. 146
The U.S. efforts were not, however, fruitless because they persuaded
the Sixth Committee to defeat numerous attempts by countries, such as
the U.S.S.R., to reintroduce the “propaganda provision” that had previously
been rejected by Ad Hoc Committee. 147 Additionally, its effort contributed
to the persuasion of the Sixth Committee to adopt the Belgian
proposals to remove the phrases “or in private” and “whether such incitement
be successful or not” 148 from the original draft of the Ad Hoc
Committee that read “[t]he following acts shall be punishable: . . . (c)
direct incitement in public or in private to commit genocide whether
such incitement be successful or not.” 149 Therefore, the final text adopted
as Article III of the Genocide Convention became narrower, stating,
“The following acts shall be punishable: (a) Genocide; (b) Conspiracy to
commit genocide; (c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;
(d) Attempt to commit genocide; (e) Complicity in genocide.” 150
It was not, until recently, with the creation of the International
Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the
International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), that the interpretation
of Article III, particularly with regard to the application of subsection
(c), was undertaken. 151
C. The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) and the
International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY)
There have been a number of attempts to prosecute hate speech as a
crime against humanity and genocide before the ICTR and ICTY. In
Prosecutor v. Kordic & Cerkez, 152 the ICTY was the first to deal with an
indictment for “instigating and promoting hatred . . . by propaganda and
speeches.” 153 Dario Kordic, a former journalist, was indicted for publicly
advocating the political-military campaign to persecute and terrorize
Bosnian Muslims and for encouraging and instigating the ethnic hatred,
strife, and distrust, “which involved, or resulted in, the commission of
serious violations of international humanitarian law.” 154 The indictment
stated that his “persecution against Bosnian Muslims was . . . accomplished
by encouraging, instigating and fomenting hatred, distrust and
division on political, racial, ethnic or religious grounds, by propaganda,
speeches and otherwise.” 155
However, the Tribunal rejected this indictment, arguing that convicting
the accused for such acts would violate the principle of legality. The
Tribunal based its legality decision on three arguments, stating that
[First, this act] is not enumerated as a crime under the
International Tribunal Statute . . . [Second, such an act] does not
54 OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW | Writ WINTER 2010
rise to the same level of gravity as the other acts enumerated in
[the Statute] . . . . [Third,] the criminal prohibition of this act has
not attained the status of customary international law. 156
Curiously, however, this last argument was based on the balancing of
a long list of countries decisions regarding hate speech and a number of
treaties, which called for its prosecution, on one hand and the United
States’ free speech standards, which the tribunal itself acknowledged as
“exceptional in the extent of its free speech guarantees,” on the other. 157
As illustrated in Prosecutor v. Nahimana, et al. 158 [hereinafter “the
Media Case”], 159 the contribution of the ICTR was significant because it
decided whether international criminal law would follow the practice of
the majority of most liberal democracies and international human rights
treaties or the American exceptional free speech approach, a higher bar
than the other approaches. Most notably, the tribunal’s decision in the
Media Case was “the first judgment since the conviction of Julius
Streicher at Nuremberg[,] after World War II[,] in which the role of the
media was examined in the context of international criminal justice.” 160
Surely, this case made a significant contribution in the development of
“direct and public incitement to commit genocide” by radio and printed
media; 161 however, more relevant to the present discussion is how the
ICTR Trial Chamber and its Appeal Chamber diverged on which
approach the court should follow when defining elements of “direct and
public incitement to commit genocide.” 162
D. The Media Case before the ICTR Trial Chamber
In the Media Case, Ferdinand Nahimana, Jean-Bosco Barayagwiza,
and Ngeze Hassan were accused of “direct and public incitement to commit
genocide, complicity in genocide, and crimes against humanity.” 163
Nahimana was director of the Rwandan Office of Information from 1990
to 1992 and one of the founding members of the initiative committee to
set up the notorious Radio Téléveision Libre des Mille Collines, S.A.
(RTLM). 164 Barayagwiza was also a member of the initiative committee
that organized the founding of the RTLM. 165 Hassan worked as journalist
since 1978 and was the founder and Editor-in-Chief of Kangura, a
Rwandan newspaper. 166
Kangura was mainly known for its publication of the “Ten
Commandments” of the Hutu. 167 The commandments included the following:
4. Every Hutu male must know that all Tutsi are dishonest in their
business dealings. [ ]They are only seeking ethnic supremacy[;]…
7. The Rwandan Armed Forces should be exclusively Hutu . . . . No
soldier must marry a Tutsi woman[;]
There have been a
number Cof attempts to
prosecute hate speech as
a crime against humanity
and genocide before the
ICTR and ICTY.

8. Hutu must cease having any pity for the Tutsi. 168
However, the tribunal also considered the cover of Kangura No. 26,
which had a drawing of a machete accompanied by the words “what
weapons shall we use to conquer the Inyenzi once and for all[,]” as evidence
of incitement to genocide. 169 Additionally, in a number of
Kangura’s editorials, “Hutu were portrayed as generous and naive, while
the Tutsi were portrayed as devious and aggressive[ ]”. 170 Also, making
“reference to snakes, the Tutsi were portrayed as mean and vengeful, and
their weapons were again defined . . . to be women and money.” 171 The
editorials also highlighted “the divide between the wily, devious Tutsi and
the innocent, vulnerable Hutu, and the association of the Tutsi population
with the Inyenzi-lnkotanyi.” 172
The ICTR also referenced a long list of statements made by the
RTLM it considered “direct and public incitement to commit genocide.”
173 Included within those statements were the broadcasts of May 13
and June 4, 1994. 174 In the May broadcast, the statement was made that
“[s]omeone must have signed the contract to exterminate Inkotanyi . . .
to make them disappear for good . . . to wipe them from human memory
. . . to exterminate the Tutsi from the surface of the earth . . . to make
them disappear for good.” 175 Likewise, the June broadcast consisted of the
following statement:
One hundred thousand young men must be recruited rapidly. They
should all stand up so that we kill the Inkotanyi and exterminate
them, all the easier that . . . the reason we will exterminate them is that
they belong to one ethnic group. Look at the person’s height and his
physical appearance. Just look at his small nose and then break it. 176
Moreover, the RTLM provided the names of people to be targeted for
killing. 177 On May 28, 1994, for example, they broadcasted:
a young man called Yirirwahandi Eustache . . . [i]n his identity card it
is written that he is a Hutu though he acknowledges that his mother
is a Tutsi . . . Aloys and other Interahamwe of Cyahafi took Eustache
aside . . . they are going to kill him . . . . If you are an Inyenzi, you
must be killed, you cannot change anything. 178
In defining the contour of crimes committed by Ngeze, Barayagwiza,
and Nahimana, the Trial Chamber rejected the option of using American
free speech standards, stating that
Counsel for Ngeze has argued that United States law, as the most
speech protective, should be used as a standard, to ensure the universal
acceptance and legitimacy of the Tribunal’s jurisprudence. The
Chamber considers international law, which has been well developed
in the areas of freedom from discrimination and freedom of expression,
to be the point of reference for its consideration of these issues,
noting that domestic law varies widely while international law codifies
evolving universal standards. 179
It proceeded to cite hate speech
jurisprudence from the UN Human
Rights Committee and the European
Court of Human Rights as useful guides
for determining the factors to be
considered in defining the elements of
the crimes of “direct and public
incitement to commit genocide.” 180
It proceeded to cite hate speech jurisprudence from the UN Human
Rights Committee and the European Court of Human Rights as useful
guides for determining the factors to be considered in defining the elements
of the crimes of “direct and public incitement to commit genocide.”
180
For example, the decision in Faurisson181 was cited as a reference case
in determining “whether . . . the purpose in publicly transmitting the
material was of a bona fide nature[;]” 182 Jersild183 was used to emphasize
the need for the “interviewer to distanc[e] himself from the racist remarks
made by his subject[;]” 184 and the S√ºrek v. Turkey (No.l) 185 and S√ºrek
& Özdemir v. Turkey186 cases, both European Court of Human Rights
decisions, were used to assess whether the “the language intended to
inflame or incite to violence[ ]” and to determine the scope of liability
for editors and publishers. 187
In examining the jurisprudence on incitement, the Trial Chamber
“highlight[ed] the importance of taking context into account when considering
the potential impact of expression[ ]” and once again referenced
Faurisson, in which the Human Rights Committee argued that “challenging
the existence of gas chambers, a well-documented historical fact,
would promote anti-Semitism.” 188 For the same purpose, the Trial
Chamber referenced Incal v. Turkey, another decision of the European
Court of Human Rights, noting that “a text may ‘conceal objectives and
intentions different from the ones it proclaims.’” 189 Again referencing
European Court of Human Rights jurisprudence, the Trial Chamber
agreed that “in cases where there are issues of national security and where
statements incite to violence, a ‘wider margin of appreciation’ is given to
the discretion of authorities to restrict freedom of expression.” 190
The Trial Chamber only used the United States’ jurisprudence on hate
speech to show that it “accept[ed] the fundamental principles set forth in
international law.” 191 In this regard, the Trial Chamber cited Virginia v.
Black. 192 However, instead of interpreting Black for its majority holding,
that “the actual intent behind the words and deeds [were] important, not
how that speech was interpreted[,]” the Trial Chamber understood this
case from Justice Clarence Thomas’ dissent, which advocated a finding of
“intent through the plain meaning of the words and actions.” 193
It is clear that the Trial Chamber’s approach, using international and
European jurisprudence on hate speech as “point of reference for its consideration
of these issues,” 194 was trying to fill the “lacuna in the
Genocide Convention with respect to hate propaganda.” 195 Indeed, the
Trial Chamber did not bother to clearly distinguish “mere hate speech”
from speech that directly and publicly incites one to commit genocide. 196
Rather, it limited its discussion of the point by noting that “[h]ate speech
is not protected speech under international law.” 197 Thus, no distinction
was made between hate speech in international human rights law and
international criminal law. 198
Accordingly, the Trial Chamber’s exercise of analyzing International
Human Rights treaties and the practices of different countries, which
sought to limit free speech, was likely done in an effort to support the
Chamber’s conclusion that customary international law calls for prohibition
and prosecution of hate speech. This is best illustrated by the chamber’s
statement that
[t]he Chamber considers, in light of well-established principles of
international and domestic law, and the jurisprudence of the
Streilher case in 1946 and the many European Court and domestic
cases since then, that hate speech that expresses ethnic and
other forms of discrimination violates the norm of customary
international law prohibiting discrimination. Within this norm of
customary law, the prohibition of advocacy of discrimination and
incitement to violence is increasingly important as the power of
the media to harm is increasingly acknowledged. 199
Moreover, Navanethem Pillay, the presiding judge in the case200 and
the current UN High Commissioner of Human Rights, 201 has recently
reiterated this conclusion. 202
E. The Media Case Before the ICTR Appeal Chamber
Although the Appeal Chamber was prudent not to embarrass the Trial
Writ WINTER 2010 | OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW 55

Feature
Chamber, it is clear that it disagreed with it on fundamental issues. One
of the fundamental disagreements was over the role international human
rights law should play in interpreting genocide provisions on direct and
public incitement to commit genocide. 203 Regarding this, the Appeal
Chamber adopted the position that “to the extent that not all hate
speeches constitute direct incitement to commit genocide, the jurisprudence
on incitement to hatred, discrimination and violence is not directly
applicable in determining what constitutes direct incitement to commit
genocide.” 204
Additionally, the Appeal Chamber sought to make a clear and
unequivocal distinction between hate speech in general (or inciting discrimination
or violence) and direct and public incitement to commit
genocide. 205 Accordingly, it held that
[d]irect incitement to commit genocide assumes that the speech is
a direct appeal to commit an act referred to in Article 2(2) of the
Statute; it has to be more than a mere vague or indirect suggestion.
In most cases, direct and public incitement to commit genocide
can be preceded or accompanied by hate speech, but only
direct and public incitement to commit genocide is prohibited
under Article 2(3)(c) of the Statute. 206
While the prosecutor argued that Trial Chamber did not confuse
speech which amounted to an incitement to commit genocide with general
hate speech, its ambiguous statements and failure to draw a clear line
between the two concepts made many worry that the Trial Chamber’s
decision “could be interpreted to subsume hate speech that does not contain
a call to action of violence under the rubric of direct and public
incitement to commit genocide.” 207 Accordingly, the Appeal Chamber
answered its call and clarified that speech that does not incite its audience
to commit genocide does not constitute the crime of direct and public
incitement to commit genocide. 208 Thus, in reaffirming that hate speech
without incitement to commit genocide is not punishable under international
criminal law and that jurisprudence on incitement to hatred, discrimination,
and violence is not directly applicable to the determination
of what constitutes direct incitement to commit genocide, the Appeal
Chamber reaffirmed that there is a difference between hate speech in
international human rights law and international criminal law. 209
It is clear that the Trial
Chamber’s approach, using
international and European
jurisprudence on hate
speech as “point of
reference for its
consideration of these
issues,” 194 was trying to fill
the “lacuna in the Genocide
Convention with respect to
hate propaganda.”
56 OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW | Writ WINTER 2010
V. CONCLUSION
The ICTR Appeal Chamber’s refusal to allow the use of human rights
jurisprudence on incitement to hatred, discrimination, and violence to
determine what constitutes direct incitement to commit genocide, the
conclusion in Cerkez that the criminal prohibition of hate speech has not
attained the status of customary international law, and the Statute of the
International Criminal Court that makes incitement a crime only insofar
as it is direct and public and aimed at the commission of genocide alone,
not simply one of the other crimes within its jurisdiction, 210 illustrate
where international criminal law stands with regard to hate speech. Those
opinions demonstrate that hate speech standards in international criminal
law have been influenced more by U.S. standards than those of the
majority of other liberal democracies and international human rights law.
Recent developments in international criminal law, as illustrated in this
article, demonstrate that its refusal to punish hate speech is not a lacuna
but a deliberate choice. This choice proves the exceptionalism of international
criminal law when compared to the rest of international law, just as
the United States is considered an exception when its free speech standards
are compared to other liberal democracies. ■

Feature
1 See Frederick Schauer, THE
EXCEPTIONAL FIRST AMENDMENT, in
AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM AND HUMAN
RIGHTS 29, 30 (Michael Ignatieff
ed., 2005).
2 See William A. Schabas, Hate
Speech in Rwanda: The Road to
Genocide, 46 McGill L.J. 141, 162-
71 (2000). Schabas argues that
although the drafters of the
Genocide Convention “rejected
efforts to include the prohibition of
hate propaganda within the scope
of the convention. The convention’s
blind spot has, to an extent, been
corrected by subsequent international
human rights instruments
dealing with racial discrimination.”
Id. at 162-63.
3 See David M. Rabban, FREE SPEECH
IN ITS FORGOTTEN YEARS 16 (Arthur
McEvoy & Christopher Tomlins
eds., 1997). See also Patterson v
Colorado, 205 U.S. 454, 462-63
(1907).
4 Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S.
47, 52 (1919).
5 Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S.
444, 447 (1969).
6 See 205 U.S. at 462-63 (stating
that if the speech or publication
"tends" to "to obstruct the administration
of justice" than the speech
is not protected).
7 See The People ex rel. The Attorney
General v. News-Times Publ'g Co.,
84 P. 912, 916, 919 (Col. 1906),
aff’d sub nom. Patterson, 205 U.S.
454 (1907).
8 See News-Times, 84 P. at 918, 923-
25.
9 See id. at 913-14.
10 See id. at 956.
11 See Patterson, 205 U.S. at 458,
462.
12 Id. at 458, 463.
13 Id. at 462 (quoting Commonwealth
v. Blanding, 3 Pick. 304, 313-14
(Mass. 1825); Respubica v.
Oswald, 1 Dall. 319, 325 (Pa.
1788)).
14 Id. at 462-63; 4 WILLIAM
BLACKSTONE, COMMENTARIES *150-53.
See also Geoffrey R. Stone, The
Origins of the "Bad Tendency"
Test: Free Speech in Wartime,
2002 Sup. Ct. Rev. 411, 413.
15 249 U.S. at 52.
16 See id. at 48-50.
17 Id. at 53.
18 Id. at 52.
19 249 U.S. at 448-49.
20 David Goldberger, Protecting
Speech We Hate, 32 LITIGATION 40,
42 (2006).
21 395 U.S. at 444-45.
22 Id. at 445.
23 Id.
24 Id. at 445-46, n.1.
25Id. at 446.
26 Brandenburg, 395 U.S. at 444-45.
27 Id. at 445.
28 See id.
29 Id. at 449.
30 Id. at 447.
31 Brandenburg, 395 U.S. at 447.
32 See generally Mugesera v. Canada,
[2005] 2 S.C.R. 100 (Can.)
FOOTNOTES Continued on next page
33 Id. at app. III, 25.
34 See generally id. at app. III (reprinting
speech).
35 See generally Gregory S. Gordon,
From Incitement to Indictment?
Prosecuting Iran's President for
Advocating Israel's Destruction and
Piecing Together Incitement Law's
Emerging Analytical Framework, 98
J. CRIM. L. & CRIMINOLOGY 853, 879
(2008).
36 Mugesera, [2005] 2 S.C.R. 100,
3.
37 Id. at 8; Jennifer M. Hentz, The
Impact of HIV on the Rape Crises
in the African Great Lakes Region,
12 Hum Rts. Br. 12, 12 (2005).
38 Mugesera, [2005] 2 S.C.R. 100,
4-5.
39 Id. at 5.
40 Id.
41 See id. at 90-93.
42 Id. at 92.
43 Mugesera, [2005] 2 S.C.R. 100,
92
44 Id. at 180.
45 298 Eur. Ct. H.R. (ser. A) (1994).
46 Compare Brandenburg, 395 U.S.
at 447, with Jersild, 298 Eur. Ct.
H.R. (ser A.) at 10-12.
47 Compare Jersild, 298 Eur. Ct. H.R.
(ser. A) at 9, 37, with
Brandenburg, 395 U.S. at 444
(noting that the speaker,
Brandenburg, not the reporter, was
convicted under the Ohio Criminal
Syndicalism statute).
48 Jersild, 298 Eur. Ct. H.R. (ser A.)
at 10.
49 Id. at 9-10.
50 Id. at 9-10.
51 Id. at 10.
52 Id. at 11.
53 Jersild, 298 Eur. Ct. H.R. (ser. A) at
11.
54 Id.
55 Id. at 11.
56 Id. at 14.
57 Id.
58 Jersild, 298 Eur. Ct. H.R. (ser. A) at
35. Article 10 of the ECHR reads:
1. Everyone has the right to freedom
of expression. This right shall
include freedom to hold opinions
and to receive and impart information
and ideas without interference
by public authority and regardless of
frontiers. This article shall not prevent
States from requiring the licensing
of broadcasting, television or cinema
enterprises.
2. The exercise of these freedoms,
since it carries with it duties and
responsibilities, may be subject to
such formalities, conditions, restrictions
or penalties as are prescribed
by law and are necessary in a democratic
society, in the interests of
national security, territorial integrity
or public safety, for the prevention of
disorder or crime, for the protection
of health or morals, for the protection
of the reputation or the rights of
others, for preventing the disclosure
of information received in confidence,
or for maintaining the
authority and impartiality of the judiciary.
Id. at 25.
59 Id. at 27.
60 Id.
61 See id.
62 Jersild, 298 Eur. Ct. H.R. (ser. A) at
37.
63 S. AFR. CONST. 1996, § 16(2)(c).
64 Canada Criminal Code, R.S.C.
1985, c. C-46, § 319(1), (2).
65 7 ANNOTATED LEADING CASES OF
INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNALS:
THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL
FOR THE FORMER YUGOSLAVIA 2001,
294 n.272 (André Klip & Göran
Sluiter eds. 2005).
66 Id.
67 For a longer list of countries and
national provisions that criminalize
hate speech in Europe, see generally
MICHAEL MCCLINTOCK, HUMAN
RIGHTS FIRST, EVERYDAY FEARS: A
SURVEY OF VIOLENT HATE CRIMES IN
EUROPE AND NORTH AMERICA (2005),
available at http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/discrimination/pdf/e
veryday-fears-080805.pdf.
68 See Brandenburg, 395 U.S. at
448-49.
69
SCHAUER, supra note 1, at 36.
70 See generally Collin v. Smith, 578
F.2d 1197, 1199, 1204 (7th Cir.
1978); Nat’l Socialist Party v.
Village of Skokie, 432 U.S. 43, 43-
44 (1977) (invalidating an injunction
issued to forbid intimidating
public marches and displays as a
prior restraint); R.A.V. v. City of St.
Paul, 505 U.S. 377, 379 (1992).
71 See Dawson v. Delaware, 503 U.S.
159, 160 (1992).
72 See Doe v. Univ. of Michigan, 721
F.Supp. 852, 853, 862-63, 867-69
(E.D. Mich. 1989); Corry v.
Stanford, No. 740309, 1, 9
(Cal. Sup. Ct. Santa Clara Co.
1995), available at
http://www.ithaca.edu/faculty/cdu
ncan/ 265/corryvstanford.htm.
73 Collin, 578 F.2d at 1199-1201;
Village of Skokie, 432 U.S. at 43-
44.
74 See Stephanie Farrior, Molding the
Matrix: The Historical and
Theoretical Foundations of
International Law Concerning Hate
Speech, 14 BERKELEY J. INT'L L. 1,
14-16 (1996).
75 See id. at 11-19.
76 Article 29:
(1) Everyone has duties to the community
in which alone the free and
full development of his personality
is possible.
(2) In the exercise of his rights and
freedoms, everyone shall be subject
only to such limitations as are
determined by law solely for the
purpose of securing due recognition
and respect for the rights and freedoms
of others and of meeting the
just requirements of morality, public
order and the general welfare in a
democratic society.
(3) These rights and freedoms may
in no case be exercised contrary to
the purposes and principles of the
United Nations.
Universal Declaration of Human
Rights, G.A. Res. 217A, at 71, U.N.
GAOR, 3d Sess., UN Doc. A/810
(Dec. 12, 1948), available at
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/UDHR/Pa
ges/SearchByLang.aspx (presently
available in over 365 translations).
77 Article 30: “Nothing in this
Declaration may be interpreted as
implying for any State, group or
person any right to engage in any
activity or to perform any act aimed
at the destruction of any of the
rights and freedoms set forth herein.”
Id.
78 See Farrior, supra note 75, at 19-
20.
79 See id. at 20-21.
80 See generally id. at 21-24.
81 See id. at 21-41.
82 Id. at 27 (citing U.N. Commission
on Human Rights, U.N. Doc.
E/CN.4/SR.174, at 7 (May 8,
1950)).
83 Farrior, supra note 75, at 27 (citing
U.N. Commission on Human
Rights, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/SR.174,
at 6).
84 Id. at 30 (citing U.N. Commission
on Human Rights, U.N. Doc.
E/CN.4/SR.174, at 9).
85 Id. at 30 (citing U.N. Commission
on Human Rights, U.N. Doc.
E/CN.4/SR.320, at 13-14 (June
18, 1952)).
86 Id. (citing U.N. Commission on
Human Rights, U.N. Doc.
E/CN.4/SR.174, at 9).
87 See id.
88 Farrior, supra note 75, at 20.
Article 19 reads:
1. Everyone shall have the right to
hold opinions without interference.
2. Everyone shall have the right to
freedom of expression; this right
shall include freedom to seek,
receive and impart information and
ideas of all kinds, regardless of
frontiers, either orally, in writing or
in print, in the form of art, or
through any other media of his
choice.
3. The exercise of the rights provided
for in paragraph 2 of this article
carries with it special duties and
responsibilities. It may therefore be
subject to certain restrictions, but
these shall only be such as are provided
by law and are necessary:
(a) For respect of the rights or
reputations of others;
(b) For the protection of national
security or of public order (ordre
public), or of public health or
morals.
International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights, G.A. Res. 2200A
(XXI), at 55, U.N. GAOR, 21st Sess.,
1496 plen. mtg., Supp. No. 16, U.N.
Doc. A/6316 (Dec. 16, 1966).
89 Article 20:
1. Any propaganda for war shall be
prohibited by law.
2. Any advocacy of national, racial
or religious hatred that constitutes
incitement to discrimination, hostility
or violence shall be prohibited by
law.
Id.
90 David Filvoroff, et al., The
Substantive Rights and United
States Law, in U.S. RATIFICATION OF
THE INTERNATIONAL COVENANTS ON
HUMAN RIGHTS 71, 119 (Hurst
Hannum & Dana D. Fischer eds.,
1993).
91
NATALIE HEVENER KAUFMAN, HUMAN
RIGHTS TREATIES AND THE SENATE: A
HISTORY OF OPPOSITION 148, 169
(1990).
92 See Farrior, supra note 75, at 39,
n.231 (citing U.N. GAOR, 16th
Sess., U.N. Doc. A/C.3/SR.1083,
57-59 (Oct. 25, 2961)). The
vote on the phrase “to discrimination,
hostility or” of Article 20 was
as follows:
IN FAVOR: Afghanistan[,] Ethiopia[,]
Nigeria[,] Albania[,] Ghana[,]
Poland[,] Brazil[,] Guinea[,]
Romania[,] Bulgaria[,] Haiti[,]
Saudi Arabia[,] Burma[,]
Hungary[,] Sudan[,] Byelorussian
S.S.R. [,] India[,] Togo[,]
Cambodia[,] Indonesia[,] Ukranian
S.S.R.[,] Cameroon[,] Iraq[,]
U.S.S.R.[,] Central[ ]African [
]Republic[,] Liberia[,] United Arab
Republic[,] Ceylon[,] Libya[,] Upper
Volta[,] Chad[,] Mali[,] Venezuela[,]
Congo(Brazzaville)[,] Mexico[,]
Yemen[,] Congo(Leopoldville)[,]
Morocco[,] Yugoslavia[,] Cuba[,]
Nicaragua[,] Czechoslovakia[,]
Niger[;]
[ ]
AGAINST: Belgium[,] France[,]
Norway[,] Canada[,] Greece[,]
Peru[,] Chile[,] Iceland[,] Sweden[,]
Colombia[,] Ireland[,] Turkey[,]
Denmark[,] Israel[,] U.K.[,]
Federation[ ]of[ ]Malaya[,] Japan[,]
U.S.A. [,] Finland[,] Lebanon[,]
Uruguay[;]
[ ]
ABSTAINING: Argentina[,] Iran[,]
Portugal[,] Australia[,] Italy[,] South
Africa[,] Austria[,] Netherlands[,]
Spain[,] China[,] New[ ]Zealand[,]
Thailand[,] Cypress[,] Pakistan[,]
Tunisia[,] Dominican[ ]Republic[,]
Panama[,] Ecuador[,] Philippines[.]
Id. at n.231. The vote on paragraph 2
of Article 20 was as follows:
IN FAVOR: Afghanistan[,] Ghana[,]
Pakistan[,] Albania[,] Guinea[,]
Philippines[,] Brazil[,] Haiti[,]
Poland[,] Bulgaria[,] Hungary[,]
Romania[,] Burma[,] India[,] Saudi
Arabia[,] Byelorussian S.S.R.[,]
Indonesia[,] Sudan[,] Cambodia[,]
Iraq [,] Thailand[,] Cameroon[,]
Israel[,] Togo[,] Central[ ]African[
]Republic[,] Lebanon[,] Tunisia[,]
Ceylon[,] Liberia[,] Ukranian S.S.R.
[,] Chad[,] Libya[,] U.S.S.R. [,]
Congo(Brazzaville)[,] Mali[,] United[
]Arab[ ]Republic[,]
Congo(Leopoldville) [,] Mexico[,]
Upper Volta[,] Cuba[,] Morocco[,]
Venezuela[,] Czechoslovakia[,]
Nicaragua[,] Yemen[,] Dominican
Republic[,] Niger[,] Yugoslavia[,]
Ethiopia[,] Nigeria[;]
[ ]
AGAINST: Belgium[,] Finland[,]
Norway[,] Canada[,] Iceland[,]
Sweden[,] Colombia[,] Ireland[,]
Turkey[,] Denmark[,] Japan[,] U.K.
[,] Ecuador[,] Netherlands[,] U.S.A.
[,] Federation[ ]of[ ]Malaya[,] New[
]Zealand[,] Uruguay[;]
[ ]
ABSTAINING: Argentina[,]
Cypress[,] Panama[,] Australia[,]
France[,] Peru[,] Austria[,]
Greece[,] Portugal[,] Chile[,] Iran[,]
South Africa[,] China[,] Italy[,]
Spain[.]
Id. at 40, n.232 (citing U.N. GAOR,
16th Sess., U.N. Doc.
A/C.3/SR.1083, 58). The vote on
Article 20, as a whole, was as follows:
IN FAVOR (52) Afghanistan[,]
Ethiopia[,] Pakistan[,] Albania[,]
Ghana[,] Peru[,] Brazil[,] Guinea[,]
Philippines[,] Bulgaria[,] Haiti[,]
Poland[,] Burma[,] Hungary[,]
Romania Byel. S.S.R.[,] India[,]
Saudi Arabia[,] Cambodia[,]
Indonesia[,] Sudan[,] Cameroon[,]
Iraq[,] Thailand[,] Central Afr. R.[,]
Israel[,] Togo[,] Ceylon[,]
Lebanon[,] Tunisia[,] Chad[,]
Liberia[,] Ukr. S.S.R.[,] Chile[,]
Libya[,] U.S.S.R. [,]
Congo(Brazzaville)[,] Mali[,] Upper[
]Volta(BurkinaFaso)[,]
Congo(Zaire)[,] Mexico[,]
Venezuela[,] Cuba[,] Morocco[,]
Yemen[,] Czechoslovakia[,]
Nicaragua[,] Yugoslavia[,]
Dominican[ ]Republic[,] Niger[,]
Egypt (U.A.R.) [,] Nigeria[ ;]
[ ]
AGAINST (19) Australia[,] Ireland[,]
Sweden[,] Belgium[,] Italy[,]
Turkey[,] Canada[,] Japan[,] United
Kingdom[,] Denmark[,] Malaysia[,]
U.S.A.[,] Ecuador[,] Netherlands[,]
Uruguay[,] Finland[,] New[
]Zealand[,] Iceland[,]Norway[;]
[ ]
ABSTAINING (12) Argentina[,]
Cypress[,] Panama[,] Austria[,]
France[,] Portugal[,] China[,]
Greece[,] South Africa[,]
Colombia[,] Iran[,] Spain.
Id. at n.234 (citing U.N. GAOR, 16th
Sess., U.N. Doc. A/C.3/SR.1083,
59).
93 See International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights: Declarations
and Reservations, available at
http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewD
etails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no
=IV-4&chapter=
4&lang=en&clang=_en.
94 See id.
95 See id.; Farrior, supra note 75, at
43, n.250.
96 Farrior, supra note 75, at 43,
n.250.
97 See id. at 44-46.
98 See U.N. H.R. Comm’n., Views on
Faurisson v. France, 1, 2.1, 9.5,
U.N. Doc.
CCPR/C/58/D/550/1993 (Dec.
16, 1996).
99 See U.N. H.R. Comm’n., Views on
Ross v. Canada, 1-2.3, 11.1,
U.N. Doc.
CCPR/C/70/D/736/1997 (Oct.
18, 2000).
100 See International Convention on
the Elimination of All Forms of
Racial Discrimination, G.A. Res.
2106 (XX), U.N. GAOR, 20th Sess.,
Supp. No. 14, U.N. Doc. A/6014,
at 48 (1966).
Writ WINTER 2010 | OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW 57
101 Id.
102 Id.
103 Farrior, supra note 75, at 49-50
(citing U.N. GAOR, 59, 20th
Sess., 1318th mtg., U.N. Doc.
A/C.3/SR.1318 (1965)).
104 International Convention of the
Elimination of all Forms of Racial
Discrimination, 660 U.N.T.S. 195
(Mar. 7, 1966), available at
http://treaties.un.org/doc/Publicat
ion/MTDSG/Volume%20I/Chapter
%20IV/IV-2.en.pdf.
105 See Report of the Comm. on the
Elimination of Racial
Discrimination, at 115-116, U.N.
Doc. A/48/18, 48th Sess., 981st
mtg. (Sept. 15, 1993) (stating that
“States Parties have not only to
enact appropriate legislation but
also to ensure that it is effectively
enforced. Because threats and acts
of racial violence easily lead to
other such acts and generate an
atmosphere of hostility, only immediate
intervention can meet the
obligations of effective response”).

Reference to this recommendation
was made in almost every annual
report of the Committee on the
Elimination of All Forms of Racial
Discrimination, for each individual
annual report of this Committee.
See generally
http://tb.ohchr.org/default.aspx?Co
nvType=17&docType=36.
106 See Onder Bakircioglu, Freedom of
Expression and Hate Speech, 16
Tulsa J. Comp. & Int'l L. 1, 29-31
(2008).
107 See id. at 32-43.
108 App. Nos. 8348/78 & 8406/787,
18 Eur. Comm’n H.R. Dec. & Rep.
187 (1979).
109 Glimmerveen, 18 Eur. Comm’n
H.R. Dec. & Rep. at 188, 197.
110 App. No. 65831/01 (Eur. Ct. H.R.
2003), available at
http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197
/view.asp?item=1&portal=hbkm&ac
tion=html&highlight=65831&sessionid=57968116&skin=hudoc-en.
111 Garaudy, App. No. 65831/01, at
24.
112 App. No. 12774/87 (Eur. Comm.
H.R. 1989), available at
http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197
/view.asp?item=1&portal=hbkm&ac
tion=html&highlight=12774&sessionid=57968116&skin=hudoc-en.
113 B.H., App. No. 12774/87, at 1, 4.
114 Council Framework Decision on
Combating Certain Forms and
Expressions of Racism and
Xenophobia by Means of Criminal
Law, No. 2008/913/JHA, at 56
(Nov. 28, 2008), available at
http://eurlex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:L:
2008:328:SOM:EN:HTML [hereinafter
“Council Framework
Decision”].
115 Id.
Feature
116 See Susan Benesch, Vile Crime or
Inalienable Right: Defining
Incitement to Genocide, 48 VA. J.
INT'L L. 485, 509 (2008).
117 22 TRIAL OF THE MAJOR WAR
CRIMINALS BEFORE THE INTERNATIONAL
MILITARY TRIBUNAL 548 (1948) [here-
inafter “TRIAL OF THE MAJOR WAR
CRIMINALS VOL. 22”].
118 Id. at 549.
119 Id. at 548.
120 Id. at 547, 549; 1 TRIAL OF THE
MAJOR WAR CRIMINALS BEFORE THE
INTERNATIONAL MILITARY TRIBUNAL 65
(1947) [hereinafter “TRIAL OF THE
MAJOR WAR CRIMINALS VOL. 1”].
121
TRIAL OF THE MAJOR WAR CRIMINALS
VOL. 1, supra note 121, at 336.
122 See id. at 337.
123 Id.
124 Id. at 337-38.
125 Id. at 338.
126 Compare TRIAL OF THE MAJOR WAR
CRIMINALS VOL. 22, supra note 118,
at 547, 549, with TRIAL OF THE
MAJOR WAR CRIMINALS VOL. 1, supra
notes 122-125, at 336-338.
127 See TRIAL OF THE MAJOR WAR
CRIMINALS VOL. 22, supra note 118,
at 549; TRIAL OF THE MAJOR WAR
CRIMINALS VOL. 1, supra note 121, at
338.
128 See TRIAL OF THE MAJOR WAR
CRIMINALS VOL. 22, supra note 118,
at 549.
129 Schabas, supra note 2, at 149.
130 G.A. Res. 260(III), at 174-75, 3d
Sess., 179 plen. mtg., U.N. Doc.
A/810 (Dec. 9, 1948).
131 Prosecutor v. Akayesu, Case No.
ICTR-96-4-T, Judgment, 562
(Sept. 2, 1998). See also Schabas,
supra note 2, at 149 (noting that,
in establishing the “direct act of
‘direct and public incitement,’ the
drafters of the Genocide
Convention sought to create an
autonomous infraction, one that,
like conspiracy, is an inchoate
crime, in that the prosecution need
not make proof of any result).
132 For more details and comments
on the drafting history of the Article
III (c) of the Genocide Convention,
see generally Matthew Lippman,
The Drafting of the 1948
Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of the Crime Genocide,
3 B.U. INT’L L J. 1 (1985);
Schabas, supra note 2, at 149-157.
133 U.N. Secretary-General, Draft
Convention on the Crime of
Genocide, at 7, U.N. DOC. E/447
(June 26, 1947) [hereinafter “Draft
Convention on the Crime of
Genocide”].
58 OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW | Writ WINTER 2010
134 Id.
135 Id. at 30-31.
136 Id. at 31.
137 Id. at 32.
138 Draft Convention on the Crime of
Genocide, supra note 134, at 33.
139 Schabas, supra note 2, at 150
(citing Prevention and Punishment
of Genocide: Comments by
Government on the Draft
Convention Prepared by the
Secretariat, at 14, UN ESCOR, U.N.
Doc. E/623 (1948)).
140 Id. at 150-51.
141 See Ad Hoc Committee on
Genocide, Report of the Committee
and Draft Convention Drawn up by
the Committee, at 21, 23, U.N.
Doc. E/794 (May 24, 1948).
142 Ad Hoc Committee on Genocide,
Summary Record of the
Seventeenth Meeting, at 9, U.N.
Doc. E/AC.25/SR.17 (Apr. 30,
1848).
143 UN GAOR, 6th Comm., 3d Sess.,
84th mtg., U.N. Doc.
A/C.6/SR.84, at 213 (Oct. 26,
1948) (statement of Mr. Maktos,
United States) [hereinafter “84th
mtg.”].
144 UN GAOR, 6th Comm., 3d Sess.,
85th mtg., U.N. Doc. A/C.6/SR.85,
at 229 (Oct. 27, 1948) [hereinafter
“85th mtg.”] (There were twentyseven
votes against the amendment,
sixteen in favor, and seven
abstentions).
145 Id.
146 UN GAOR, 6th Comm., 3d Sess.,
91st mtg., U.N. Doc. A/C.6/SR.91,
at 301 (Nov. 4, 1948).
147 For a complete discussion of these
efforts, see generally Lippman,
supra note 133, at 46-49.
148 See UN GAOR, 6th Comm., 3d
Jean-Marie Kamatali
Biographical Note:
Sess., U.N. Doc. A/C.6/217, at 2
(Oct. 5, 1948) (Belgium’s proposed
amendments to the Draft
Convention); 84th Mtg., supra note
144, at 207 (statement of Mr.
Kaeckenbeeck, Belgium); 85th
mtg., supra note 145, at 233.
149 Draft Convention on the Crime of
Genocide, supra note 134, at 55.
150 G.A. Res. 260 (III), at 174-175, UN
GAOR, 3d Sess., 179 plen. mtg.,
U.N. Doc. A/260 (Dec. 9, 1948).
151 See generally Schabas, supra note
2, at 156-62.
152 Case No. IT-95-14/2-T, Judgment
(Int’l Crim. Trib. for the Former
Yugoslavia Feb. 26, 2001).
153 See Diane F. Orentlicher,
Criminalizing Hate Speech: A
Comment on the ICTR's Judgment
in The Prosecutor v. Nahimana, et
al., 13 Hum Rts. Br. 1, 4 (2005);
Kordic, Case No. IT-95-14/2-T,
209.
154 Kordic, Case No. IT-95014/2-T,
467; Amended Indictment 25;
Kordic, Case No. IT-95-14/2-T,
Judgment (Feb. 26, 2001).
155 Id. at 32.
156 Id. at 209.
157 Id. at 59-60 n.272.
158 Case No. ICTR-99-52-T, Judgment
& Sentence (Dec. 3, 2003).
159 Recent Case, 117 HARV. L. REV
2769 (2004).
160 International Criminal Tribunal for
Rwanda, Achievements of the ICTR,
http://69.94.11.53/ENGLISH/
factsheets/achievements.htm (last
visited July 7, 2010).
161 See generally id.
162 Compare Nahimana, ICTR-99-52-T,
, with Nahimana, et al. v.
Prosecutor, Case No. ICTR-99-52-A,
Judgment, 692 (Nov. 28, 2007).
163 Nahimana, ICTR-99-52-T, 8-10.
164 Id. at 5.
165 Id. at 6.
166 Id. at 7.
167 See generally id. at 138-51.
168 Nahimana, ICTR-99-52-T, 139.
169 Id. at 160 (typeface omitted).
170 Id. at 176.
171 Id. at 180.
172 Id. at 178.
173 See generally Nahimana, ICTR-99-
52-T, 367-974.
174 Id. at 396-97.
175 Id. at 397.
176 Id. at 396.
177 See id. at 425-31.
178 Nahimana, ICTR-99-52-T, 427.
179 Id. at 1010.
180 See id. at 1004-07; George
William Mugwanya, Recent Trends
in International Criminal Law:
Perspectives from the U.N.
International Criminal Tribunal for
Rwanda, 6 Nw. U. J. Int’l Human.
Rts. 415, 437 (2008).
181 See supra note 99 and accompanying
text.
182 Nahimana, ICTR-99-52-T, 1001.
183 See supra note 46 and accompanying
text.
184 Nahimana, ICTR-99-52-T, 1001.
185 App No. 26682/95 (Eur. Ct. H.R.
July 8, 1999), available at
http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197
/view.asp?item=1&portal=hbkm&ac
tion=html&highlight=26682&sessionid=57969220&skin=hudoc-en.
186 App. Nos. 23927/94 & 24277/94,
(Eur. Ct. H.R. July 8, 1999), available
at
http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/
view.asp?item=1&portal=hbkm&acti
on=html&highlight=23927&sessionid=57969234&skin=hudoc-en.
187 Nahimana, ICTR-99-52-T, 1002-
03.
188 Id. at 1004.
189 Id. at 1005.
190 Id. at 1006.
191 Id. at 1010.
192 See Nahimana, ICTR-99-52-T,
1010 (citing Virginia v. Black, 538
U.S. 343 (2003)).
193 See Christopher Scott Maravilla,
Hate Speech as a War Crime:
Public and Direct Incitement to
Genocide in International Law, 17
Tul. J. Int’l & Comp. L. 113, 122,
126, 143 (2009) (citing Black, 538
U.S. at 347-48).
194 Nahimana, ICTR-99-52-T, 1010.
195 See Schabas, supra note 2, at
167.
196 See Nahimana, ICTR-99-52-T,
1074.
197 Id.
198 See id. 1074, 1076.
199 Id. 1076.
200 Id.
201 The Biography of Navanethem
Pillay, United Nations,
http://www.un.org/sg/senstaff_det
ails.asp?smgID=139 (last visited
Aug. 2, 2010).
202 See Navanethem Pillay, Freedom
of Speech and Incitement to
Criminal Activity: A Delicate
Balance, 14 NEW ENG. J. INT'L &
COMP. L. 203, 203 (2008).
203 See generally Nahimana, Case No.
ICTR-99-52-A, 693.
204 Id.
205 See id. at 692.
206 Id.
207 Id. at 689 (citing Amicus Curiae
Brief 2, 3, 9-18, Nahimana, et
al. v. Prosecutor, Case No. ICTR-99-
52-A, Judgment (Nov. 28, 2007)).
See also Orentlicher, supra note
155, at 562-63.
208 See Nahimana, Case No. ICTR-99-
52-A, 692.
209 See id.
210 See WILLIAM A. SCHABAS, AN
INTRODUCTION TO THE INTERNATIONAL
CRIMINAL COURT 30 (2d ed. 2004);
Report of the Preparatory
Committee on the Establishment of
an International Criminal Court, at
59, U.N. Doc. A/Conf.183/2/Add.1
(1998), reprinted in THE STATUTE OF
INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT: A
DOCUMENTARY HISTORY 142 (1998).
Jean-Marie Kamatali is visiting assistant professor of law and assistant director of the LL.M. program at Ohio
Northern. He previously served as dean of the Law School at the National University of Rwanda and contributed to
the post-genocide legal and institutional rebuilding in Rwanda. He has served as a visiting professor in different
universities throughout Africa, Europe and North America. Kamatali is a consultant for USAID project in Burundi and
has participated in the 41st and 42nd Sessions of the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights held
respectively in Accra, Ghana, and Brazzaville, Congo. He has been published in various outlets across different
languages and is actively involved in both U.S. and Rwandan human rights and legal organizations, including
serving as a consultant to the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) and the Food and Agricultural Organization
of the United Nations (FAO), among others. Kamatali earned his bachelier en droit and his licence en droit from the
National University of Rwanda and received a master of arts from the University of Notre Dame and a doctor of laws
from the Institute of International Law and International Relations at the Karl-Franzens Universitat-Graz in Austria.

Law
QUIZ: WHAT DO YOU KNOW
ABOUT ONU LAW?
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
WHO WAS THE FIRST DEAN OF THE
LAW SCHOOL?
HOW MUCH WAS TUITION FOR LAW
STUDENTS IN 1885?
IN WHAT YEAR DID THE FIRST WOMAN
GRADUATE FROM ONU LAW?
FOR WHICH U.S. PRESIDENT WAS THE
LAW SCHOOL NAMED AT ONE POINT IN
TIME?
IN WHAT YEAR DID THE LAW SCHOOL
OBTAIN ABA APPROVAL?
NAMES OF THE BUILDINGS WHICH
HAVE HOUSED THE LAW SCHOOL
OVER THE YEARS?
FIND THE ANSWERS TO THESE QUESTIONS AND MORE, IN THE
UPCOMING SPECIAL 125TH ANNIVERSARY ISSUE OF THE WRIT.
ANSWERS TO MANY OF THESE QUESTIONS CAN ALSO BE FOUND ON
OUR WEBSITE, WWW.LAW.ONU.EDU
Writ WINTER 2010 | OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW 59

60 OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW | Writ WINTER 2010
APRIL 8, 2011
RECEPTION AND
PORTRAIT DEDICATION
Following the symposium,
Join us for a reception and portrait dedication of
Lena Wilcox Burgess Mason - First woman graduate of ONU Law
With special guest artist, Sandy Lampman-Byers, PSA, Seattle, Wa.
great-granddaughter of Lena Mason.
Additional info on these events can be found at www.law.onu.edu
Claude W. Pettit College of Law
525 South Main Street
Ada, OH 45810