Jennifer Carter-Johnson
Associate Professor of Law; Associate Dean for Academic Affairs | Michigan State University
East Lansing, MI, UNITED STATES
Professor Jenny Carter-Johnson focuses her interests on intellectual property law, food and drug regulation and bioethics.
Media
Publications:
Documents:
Videos:
Audio/Podcasts:
Biography
Professor Jenny Carter-Johnson (JCJ) focuses her interests on intellectual property law, food and drug regulation and bioethics. She combines her scientific and legal training to investigate issues at the intersection of biological research and the law.
Professor Carter-Johnson joined Michigan State University College of Law in fall 2010. Prior to joining MSU, JCJ was a visiting faculty fellow at Washington University School of Law in St. Louis, Missouri, and practiced law in Seattle, Washington, specializing in intellectual property licensing and representation of biotechnology companies.
Since joining MSU College of Law, Professor Carter-Johnson has served in a variety of roles including as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, the faculty lead for development of the MSU Ethics Institute, Co-Associate Director for the Intellectual Property, Information, and Communications program, faculty mentor the first generation law student group (JCJ is the first in her family to graduate from college), and coach for the college’s three intellectual property moot court teams. JCJ also served as the Council Chair for the Michigan State Bar Section on Intellectual Property Law.
Professor Carter-Johnson graduated with highest honors from Union University with a B.S. in mathematics and biology. She earned her Ph.D. in microbiology from the University of Virginia, where her research concentrated on immune system development. She then received her law degree with honors from the University of Michigan Law School, where she was an articles editor and symposium coordinator of the Michigan Law Review. A member of the Michigan State Bar, she is registered to practice before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
Areas of Expertise (2)
Biological Research & the Law
Patent Law
Education (3)
University of Michigan Law School: J.D. 2006
University of Virginia: Ph.D., Microbiology 2003
Union University: B.A., Mathematics and Biology 1996
Affiliations (1)
- American Association for the Advancement of Science
Links (2)
News (1)
What to Expect in 2025: AI Legal Tech and Regulation (65 Expert Predictions)
The National Law Review online
2024-12-15
Jennifer Carter-Johnson | Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, Michigan State University College of Law 2025 Prediction: As the capabilities of legal AI continue to grow in 2025, law schools will begin to more fully embrace the challenges that the technology brings to the training of new attorneys. Legal AI scares many in legal academia with its potential to be used as a crutch in learning or for outright cheating. These challenges will force law schools to innovate in how they teach law students (and faculty!) how to leverage advancing AI capabilities in an ethical manner and with practical applications. Biggest Surprise 2025: We will hit a tipping point in legal education as to how many schools will begin to purposefully address AI challenges. In the future, we will look back at the AI educational models developed in 2025 as the backbone of a new era of legal education.
Event Appearances (1)
Developing a Legacy Crop Industry
September 2019 | Life Sciences in Law Conference, Loyola University College of Law
Research Grants (2)
Science, Society and State (S3) Grant
Michigan State University $10,000
2019 Grant to bring together team of law, medical and ethicists to conduct research on the way in which cognitive capacity is determined in various medical scenarios.
Science, Society and State (S3) Grant
Michigan State University, $10,000
2016 Grant to bring together team of law and science graduate students to conduct research on the impact of scientific research on law and society. Held primary responsibility for team oversight.
Journal Articles (3)
Emergent Neurotechnologies and Challenges to Responsibility Frameworks
Akron Law Review2021 This article examines the emerging medical technology of deep brain stimulation (DBS), a type of brain implant, to determine its ethical and legal ramifications. Lawyers, philosophers, and ethicists have labored to define the conditions under which individuals are to be judged legally and morally responsible for their actions. But where does responsibility lie if a person acts under the influence of her brain implant? Do we hold the individual solely responsible for her actions? Can we attribute any blame to the device? What about the engineers who designed it, or the manufacturer? The neurosurgeon who implanted it, or the neurologist who programmed the device parameters?
Ritalin to Roundup: Expanding the Pharmaceutical Industry Statutory Experimental Use Exception to Agriculture
University of Cincinnati Law Review2018 The modern agricultural biotechnology industry developed from a small cottage industry based on selective crop breeding into a multi-billion dollar industry based on the isolation and insertion of genes that code for commercially valuable crop traits. As it grew, the industry relied on patent protection to recoup its investment into new research and development of genetically engineered (GE) crops. A recent billion dollar patent infringement damage award to Monsanto based only on research activities of its competitors testifies to the importance of that patent protection.
Ritalin to Roundup: Expanding the pharmaceutical industry statutory experimental use exception to agriculture
University of Cincinnati Law Review2016 The modern agricultural biotechnology industry developed from a small cottage industry based on selective crop breeding into a multi-billion dollar industry based on the isolation and insertion of genes that code for commercially valuable crop traits. As it grew, the industry relied on patent protection to recoup its investment into new research and development of genetically engineered (GE) crops. A recent billion dollar patent infringement damage award to Monsanto based only on research activities of its competitors testifies to the importance of that patent protection.
