Suppose a court holds in the context of a habeas petition that a constitutional right is not yet “clearly established.” Can we conclude from this that the right does not exist? The answer, of course, is “no”—the court has only said that the right has not yet been explicitly recognized.  Yet in case after case, spanning areas of law from habeas, to patent law, to evidence law, judges (and their clerks) make precisely these types of “deference mistakes”: they rely on precedent without understanding the standard of review or burden of proof that governed that precedent.

5:30-6:00 p.m.: Registration
6:00-7:00 p.m.: Program
7:00-8:00 p.m.: Networking Reception

Light hors d'oeuvres will be served.

Please RSVP here.

The Law School thanks Steven Marenberg, ’80, Dan Lefler, ’90, and Irell & Manella LLP for hosting this event.