Menu Toggle menu

2004 Harold C. Schott Scholarship Award

I am pleased to announce the third round of Faculty Scholarship Awards from the Harold C. Schott Foundation. College of Law faculty have increased the range, depth, and quality of its scholarship while truly distinguishing itself as a community of teachers and scholars of whom we can all be proud. The academic program at the College of Law is enriched deeply because of the efforts of the faculty as they extend their knowledge, engage colleagues in scholarly conversation, and contribute to the intellectual life of legal education, the legal profession, and the greater communities in which we live.

The reputation of the College of Law is largely made because of its faculty and over the years we are witness to the growing respect and esteem in whichthey are held. We are deeply proud of their accomplishments and hope that these awards are testimony to that pride.

This year the Schott Fund has been used to enhance the summer stipend awards. In addition to the Harold C. Schott Scholarship Award, three faculty have demonstrated extraordinary scholarly achievement that deserve special recognition.

Bradford C. Mank, James B. Helmer, Jr. Professor of Law. Professor Mank is an extraordinary scholar. His research and scholarship is outstanding and his work is among the best known of our faculty in the country. He has developed a superior reputation for his work in envirollinentallaw and he has been widely published in all the important environmental law journals throughout the country. He has firmly established a national reputation in the area of environmental justice. Professor Mank's work is exhaustively researched and his writing demonstrates a very serious commitment to the highest values of scholarship and contributes to the most significant scholarly dialogues and debates in his field.

Professor Mank is an extremely prolific writer. Since 2000, he has written the following articles:

  • Can Congress Regulate Intrastate Endangered Species Under the Commerce Clause (forthcoming in BROOKLYN LAW REVIEW)
  • The Murky Future of the Clean Water Act After SWANCC (ECOLOGY LAW QUARTERLY)
  • Suing Under § 1983: The Future after Gonzaga v. Doe (HOUSTON LAW REVIEW)
  • Are Title VI's Disparate Impact Regulations Valid? (essay in UNIVERSITY OF ClNCINNATI LAW REVIEW)
  • Legal Context: Reading Statutes in Light of Prevailing Legal Precedent (ARIZONA STATE LAW JOURNAL)
  • Protecting Intrastate Threatened Species: Does the Endangered Species Act Encroach on Traditional State Authority and Exceed the Outer Limits of the Commerce Clause? (GEORGIA LAW REVIEW)
  • South Camden Citizens In Action v. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection: Will Section 1983 Save Title VI Disparate Impact Suits? (ENVIRONMENTAL LAW REPORT)
  • Proving an Environmental Justice Case: Determining an Appropriate Comparison Population (VIRGINIA ENVIRONMENTAL LAW JOURNAL)
  • A Survey of Federal Agency Response to President Clinton's Executive Order 12898 on Environmental Justice (with Denis Binder et al) (ENVIRONMENTAL LAW REPORT)
  • Using Section 1983 to Enforce Title VI's Section 602 Regulations (KANSAS LAW REVIEW)
  • The Draft Recipient Guidance and Draft Revised Investigation Guidance: Too Much Discretion for the EPA and a More Difficult Standard for Complainants? (ENVIRONMENTAL LAW REPORT)
  • Should State Corporate Law Define Success or Liability? The Demise of CERCLA's Federal Common Law(UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI LAW REVIEW)
  • Do State Brownfield Programs Violate Title VI? (HARVARD ENVIRONMENTAL LAW REVIEW).

In the past few years Professor Mank has also written the book chapters, The Rights of Indigenous Peoples to a Healthy Environment and Use of Natural Resources Under International Human Rights Law from EFFECTIVE STRATEGIES FOR PROTECTING HUMAN RIGHTS: ECONOMIC SANCTIONS, USE OF NATIONAL COURTS, AND INTERNATIONAL FORA AND COERCIVE POWER, and Title VI and Environment Justice and Executive Order 12.898 (two chapters) in ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE.

From Professor Mank's distinguished colleagues, we hear that his scholarship is "of very high quality" and "well-written and meticulously researched." I will include two excerpts from letters written about his scholarship when he was given tenure:

  • "With deference to my learned colleague and friend Lazarus, I think Mank has written a persuasive critique. It is massively annotated with all of the relevant scholarship—drawing on the enormous Chevron literature as well as the next-textual ism literature—and makes an array oflogical arguments that are individually persuasive and collectively devastating. The article also, soberly, cautions that the litmus test for good statutory interpretation is not whether it is 'pro-environment,' but whether it is 'pro-public interest' generally. Good point." Professor William N. Eskridge, Jr., Georgetown University Law Center.
  • "In summary, Professor Mank's proposed system of compensation should significantly spur and shape future debate over how to address environmental justice concerns. Other scholars and policymakers will undoubtedly use Professor Mank's thorough and creative proposal as a departure point. The article therefore should count as a successful contribution to the literature." Professor Vicki Lynn Been, New York University School of Law.

Professor Mank has also been invited to make scholarly presentations at conferences throughout the country. Other activities of Professor Mank include service as a reviewer for the National Science Foundation and as a peer reviewer for the POLICY STUDIES JOURNAL. He is also a member of the editorial board of PROJECTIONS 3: MIT JOURNAL OF PLANNING: PLANNING FOR ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE where he reviewed and edited papers for their environmental justice issue.