Thompson Reuters has published its list of Super Lawyers for 2015. Adjunct Professors Neil Pedersen, Doug Schroeder and Bill Shapiro have all been named Southern California Super Lawyers. This distinction is conferred on select attorneys based on a process that involves peer nomination, independent research and evaluation by the publisher, resulting in only about 5% of all attorneys in the state being named to the list. The full list of Super Lawyers can be found at here.
In an online symposium hosted by a leading blog on criminal and immigration law, CrImmigration.com, Professor Jennifer Koh has weighed in with her thoughts on Mellouli v. Holder, a case currently pending before the United States Supreme Court. In her entry, Rethinking Removability for Possession of Drug Paraphernalia (aka a Sock), Professor Koh discusses the application of the categorical approach – the methodology used by the courts to determine the immigration consequences of criminal convictions. She urges the Supreme Court to find that the noncitizen’s one-time conviction for possession of drug paraphernalia (in this case, a sock) should not have formed the basis of a removability finding. In law review articles published in the Georgetown Immigration Law Journal and Florida Law Review, Professor Koh has written extensively regarding the categorical approach and on the intersection of criminal and immigration law.
The field trip to the U.S.-Mexico border taken last year by students in Professor Jennifer Koh’s Immigration Law class was described in the January 2015 issue of the ABA publication The Student Lawyer. Students participating in the day-long trip visited first with Customs and Border Patrol officials, and then with volunteers from a humanitarian organization that works with migrants. The trip formed the basis of an experience-based memo assignment. Professor Koh was quoted on her observation that the experience caused students to question their assumptions, gave students a much broader sense of possible immigration law career paths, and that students were “exposed to the legal system in a new way, and . . . able to see how the law has a deep influence in our country and on people’s individual lives.”