Law Review Annual Symposium
SECURITIES REGULATION AND THE GLOBAL ECONOMIC CRISIS:
WHAT DOES THE FUTURE HOLD?
At Seton Hall Law
October 30, 2009
The SETON HALL LAW REVIEW entertained a lively debate on corporate risk management and the future of international securities regulation during its annual symposium on Friday, Oct. 30. Entitled “Securities Regulation and the Global Economic Crisis: What Does the Future Hold?” the conference brought a host of leading minds in the field of corporate law to Seton Hall Law School.
Some of the day’s highlights included presentations by Profs. Eric Chaffee (University of Dayton School of Law) and Chris Brummer (Georgetown University Law Center) on the future of regulating securities on a global scale. Prof. Chaffee argued for the harmonization and centralizilation of international securities regulation, while Prof. Brummer analyzed the merits of, and difficulties inherent in, regulating securities across borders.
The day concluded with a ground-level view of how broader securities regulation might affect business. A five-person panel of practitioners and regulators, led by Robert A. Marchman, the Executive Vice President of NYSE Regulation’s Enforcement & Risk Group, debated the practical considerations to be accounted for in regulating securities. Specifically, the group addressed the concern that, despite regulators’ best efforts, risk and fraud will continue to pose a challenge to the U.S. economy.
Prof. Michelle Harner (University of Maryland School of Law) opened the day’s program by assessing how the United States’ culture of corporate risk played a role in the economic crisis of the past year, and Profs. Richard Painter (University of Minnesota School of Law) and Wulf Kaal (Mississippi College of Law) compared the divergent approaches of the United States and Germany to the business judgment rule.
In the day’s second panel, Prof. Lisa Fairfax (The George Washington University Law School) argued that recent efforts to increase shareholder power in corporations have come up short, while Profs. J.W. Verret (George Mason University School of Law) and Joan Heminway (The University of Tennessee College of Law) argued that the TARP bailout may have lasting and negative consequences for corporate law theory and the reliability of capital markets.
To learn more about the Seton Hall Law Review and their recent Symposium event, visit law.shu.edu/lawreview.