The Illinois Business Law Journal

The Failure and Future of E-Voting in America

    1.    Introduction
On September 28, 2007, Judge Winifred Smith of the Superior Court of Alamada County, California, took the extraordinary measure of invalidating an election result – an event that has only happened once before in California’s history.[1] Measure R, originally voted upon in November 2004, was ordered back onto next year’s ballot not because of electoral fraud or force majeure, but because 96% of the results from the election had vanished.[2] There was not any suggestion of dastardly doings; no ballots mysteriously vanished; no warehouses caught fire under unusual circumstances. These ballots had vanished because in a very real way they never existed in the first place. The election deciding Measure R’s fate took place entirely on computerized voting machines.

It’s Not Easy Being Green [1]: The Tech Industry Seeks Greener Solutions to Its Rapidly Increasing Energy Demands

I.  Introduction 
Why do companies go green?  A cleaner, more efficient energy solution certainly sounds progressive and looks great on paper, but aside from generating good public relations with environmental groups, is it an economically sound investment?   In the case of the tech industry and its rapidly increasing energy costs and demands, it may be their only option.  Put another way, the answer may be a resounding "Yes."

To illustrate this problem, take for example the ubiquitous IT data center, or the air-conditioned computer farms found at the heart of almost any large technology firm.  [2]  They offer increasingly more complex and useful applications, web pages, internet traffic and processing power, but at significantly increasing costs.  [3]  Data centers are massive energy consumers and may require as much as fifty times the power of a comparably sized office space.  [4]  Despite some recent notable improvements in hardware power efficiency [5], the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) released a report on August 7, 2007 that projected the tech industry’s overall electricity consumption to double between 2006 and 2011.  [6]

Turning Brownfields into Big Green: Practical Concerns Regarding Contaminated Real Estate

I.  Introduction to the Issue

Greenfields, otherwise known as pristine tracts of land, are becoming scarce as demand for residential property continues to rise, yet environmentalist groups are fighting to preserve these undeveloped areas. [1] How, then, can we provide more residential areas to meet the increasing demand, while refraining from construction on previously unused land?  Brownfields very well may be the answer to this fundamental conflict.  Brownfields are “real property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant.” [2] Some authorities report that there are more than 500,000 abandoned brownfields scattered throughout the United States. [3] While the thought of turning polluted land into a residential area may at first seem unappetizing, brownfield redevelopment is gaining more acceptance as lenders and insurers begin to give financial support for these projects. [4] As more and more builders are taking on these projects, the question remains as to whether the benefits really outweigh the risks.

No Just Compensation, Just Representation?

I. Introduction

To attain the office of the Chief Justice of the United States is to reach the culmination of a prestigious legal career in public service.  It is a guaranteed opportunity to go down in the history books, to impact the world - some might even call it attaining "legal immortality." [1]

But if this is so, why is Judge Judy making more than 100 times Chief Justice Roberts' salary?  Her $25 million annual salary [2] makes Roberts' newly inflated one of $212,000 [3] appear as laughable as some of the more ludicrous plaintiffs that walk into her made-for-TV courtroom.

The Future of U.S.-Cuban Transportation Law

The story has been told in many different ways, but for the most part it goes something like this: during the height of the Cold War, a newspaper reporter is flying on an Air Force jet interviewing a major general about a new missile designed to keep the Soviets on their side of the Iron Curtain.  During the conversation, the general opens a cigar box full of Cubans, takes one out, and lights it up.  “General,” the newspaper reporter asks, taken aback, “what are you doing?  Isn’t that behavior supporting the illegitimate regime of Cuba?”  The general taps his cigar, gives the newspaper man a wink, and replies, “No son, I consider it to be burning the communist’s crops.”  [1]

For half of the twentieth century and the entirety of the twenty-first, Cuba has been ruled by a communist government under the direction of Fidel Castro.  Castro took power during a communist revolution in 1959 and has led the country under tight communist control.  [2]  United States foreign policy since the end of World War II has been tailored to deny benefit to the nation’s direct enemies and enemies of her allies.  One of these policy decisions has been a complete embargo on trade with Cuba since January of 1959, designed to starve the Cuban economy of American currency.  [3]  The big questions are whether or not the embargo is still warranted in the post-Cold War world where there are no ties between Cuba and terrorism and what will happen in U.S.-Cuban relations once Castro is no longer in power due to incapacity or death.

U.S. Supreme Court Limits the Use of RICO in Business vs. Business Lawsuits

Written by Bradley C. Nahrstadt, Partner, Williams Montgomery & John, Ltd.

On June 5, 2006, the United States Supreme Court, in an 8-1 ruling, reined in the ever-broadening scope of lawsuits that businesses bring against their competitors under the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO). 18 U.S.C. § 1961, et seq. In Anza v. Ideal Steel Supply Corp., 126 S. Ct. 1991, 164 L. Ed. 2d 720, 2006 LEXIS 4510, the court held that in order to win a RICO case, the business that brings the lawsuit must show more than that the competitive injury it suffered would not have occurred but for the defendant’s racketeering. According to the court, such an "attenuated connection" between a violation of the law and harm to the plaintiff is insufficient to recover civil damages under the Act; instead, a business must show a closer, more direct nexus between the defendant’s alleged illegal activity and the plaintiff’s injury. Stated another way, when a court evaluates a RICO claim for proximate causation, the central question it must ask is whether the alleged violation led directly to the plaintiff’s injuries.

Universities and Intellectual Property: Potential Solutions

The stem cell quandary discussed in my previous article demonstrated the problems the university creates in intellectual property law space.  While the problems seem severe, especially in areas such as biotechnology where one patent can truly block an entire line of research [1], there are several viable solutions.

Where Have You Gone Doogie Howser M.D.? A Nation Turns Its Lonely Eyes To You. [1].

Collin Delaney, Staff Writer

A brief examination of the fiduciary, ethical, and professional paradigm shifts experienced by the health-care provider following the September 11th terrorist attacks.

As our nation recently observed the fifth anniversary of the September 11th attacks, one cannot help but reflect on the fundamental changes that have occurred since. Foreign and domestic policies have undergone watershed transitions, the effects of which are still being understood. Health-care in the United States, specifically the role of the health-care provider, is no exception.
Significant shifts have occurred and continue to occur in regard to how the government interacts, influences, and regulates health-care. New issues in medical ethics are now being vociferously debated. Even the day-to-day expectations of physicians and hospitals have seen marked change. 
While certainly no one with any experience in health-care will classify the pre-September 11th period as simple, the inordinate complexity of health-care administration seems to be metastasizing at ever growing rates. Long gone are the Doogie days of introspectively typing one’s thoughts on the practice of medicine while basked in the green glow of a word processor.

Delete at Your Own Risk: Application of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1030

Written by Bradley C. Nahrstadt, Partner, Williams Montgomery & John Ltd.

On March 6, 2006, the 7th U.S. Court of Appeals issued an important decision that provides added strength to the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) for companies whose computer data is destroyed by disgruntled former employees. International Airport Centers, LLC v. Citrin, 440 F.3d 418 (7th Cir. 2006).

Violent Video Games and 1st Amendment Protections

On April 4, 2006, Michigan became the latest state to lose a statute outlawing the sales of violent and sexually graphic video games to minors to a constitutional challenge in federal court. [1] Michigan, whose proposed law called for both civil and criminal penalties against anyone selling the material to minors, joined California as the second state to lose their battle against video game violence in the past five months. [2] The two states also joined Illinois, Washington, and various units of local government across the country to be stopped cold by the 1^st Amendment roadblock. Despite the cold reception video game violence statutes are receiving in federal courts, lawmakers at every level of local, state, and national government continue to explore means of drafting around 1^st Amendment challenges to what has become a hotly-contested issue.