Joel Paul

Albert Abramson '54 Professor of Law UC Hastings College of the Law

  • San Francisco CA

Contacts: paulj@uchastings.edu / 415-565-4638 / Office 312-200

Contact

UC Hastings College of the Law

View more experts managed by UC Hastings College of the Law

View all Experts

Biography

Professor Joel R. Paul teaches and writes about constitutional law, international business and trade, and foreign relations and national security law.

Professor Paul has taught on the law faculties at U.C. Berkeley, Yale, Leiden, University of Connecticut, and American University.

Professor Paul has lectured or published in Europe, Asia, and Latin America. His most recent book is "Unlikely Allies: How a Merchant, a Playwright, and a Spy Saved the American Revolution." His forthcoming book due out next year with Penguin Random House is "Without Precedent: How John Marshall Invented American Diplomacy." In his spare time Professor Paul writes stage plays and screenplays.

As the former Associate Academic Dean for Global Programs, he initiated the law school’s 18 global exchange programs and joint degrees, LL.M. program, summer program, and foreign visiting scholars program.

Professor Paul attended Amherst College, B.A. History, Economics and Political Science; the London School of Economics and Political Science; and Harvard Law School, J.D.; Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, MALD in international law and economic development.

Paul was the first openly gay man hired on a U.S. law faculty. He has drafted federal trade legislation, advised the Clinton presidential campaign on trade policy, challenged the military’s exclusion of gay service members and brought other first amendment cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, testified before Congress, managed political campaigns, and worked on affordable housing policies. In 1991 Professor Paul corroborated the testimony of Professor Anita Hill before the Senate Judiciary Committee Hearings on the nomination of Clarence Thomas.

Courses Taught: Constitutional Law I and II, International Business Transactions, International Trade Law and Policy, Seminar on Global Inequalities, National Security and Foreign Relations Law, and Public International Law.

Spotlight

1 min

Is repealing the Second Amendment possible or easier said than done?

On Tuesday, retired Supreme Court justice John Paul Stevens called for the repeal of the Second Amendment. It appeared an Op-Ed in the New York Times and has been taking the news and political worlds by storm. It’s not often a justice leaves his position of objectivity, even if retired. But at the age of 97, the former justice who was first appointed to the Supreme Court in 1975 by then President Gerald Ford weighed in calling the amendment a “relic of the 18th century.” However, it takes more than just a stroke of the pen or a simple impassioned vote to accomplish this. In fact, to repeal the Second Amendment would be require both houses of Congress proposing the amendment with a two-thirds vote, or two thirds of state legislatures calling on Congress to hold a constitutional convention. It would then have to be ratified by three-fourths of the states or state legislatures. There’s a lot of math involved there. As well, an equal amount of legal and constitutional perspective required. That’s where the experts from the UC Hastings College of Law can help. Joel Paul is an expert in the field of constitutional law. He is available to speak with media regarding just what it might take to repeal a constitutional amendment. Simply click on his icon to arrange an interview. Source:

Joel Paul

Media

Areas of Expertise

International Business Transactions
National Security Law
Foreign Relations Law
Constitutional Law
Public International Law
International Economic Law and Policy
Presidential Powers in Foreign Affairs

Education

Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy

MALD

International Law and Economic Development

Harvard Law School

J.D.

Law

The London School of Economics and Political Science

M.A.

Economics and Political Science

Show All +

Media Appearances

UC Santa Cruz professor to lecture on global trade

Santa Cruz Sentinel  online

2015-05-13

A UC Santa Cruz professor who advised the Bill Clinton presidential campaign on trade policy will give a lecture Thursday as part of the UC Hastings Social Justice Speakers Series on important topics concerning social justice. Professor Joel Paul’s talk “Trading Up: How to Make Globalization Work for People” is set for 7 p.m. Thursday at Media Theater at Performing Arts Room M110 at UCSC...

View More

Hobby Lobby Decision Has Limited Impact in California

KQED  online

2014-07-01

“The Court decided not to rely on the First Amendment claim, but instead to rely on the statutory claim,” says Joel Paul, law professor at U.C. Hastings College of the Law. “That means the decision only applies to federal laws. If a state, like California, requires employers to provide contraceptive coverage, that law survives this decision.”...

View More

The Obamacare contraception mandate and Hobby Lobby: Religious freedom in the balance?

Communities Digital News  online

2014-06-19

Joel Paul, a professor at the UC-Hastings College of Law, wrote this month in the Huffington Post, “The media misses the real point. Regardless of how the Court decides, women will still have access to contraception, and Obamacare will survive. But a decision in favor of Hobby Lobby would undermine both corporate law and the separation of church and state.”...

View More

Show All +

Selected Articles

Do International Trade Institutions Contribute to Economic Growth and Development?

Virginia Journal of International Law

2003-12-01

Proponents of trade liberalization routinely defend international trade institutions as engines of economic growth that benefit everyone. How trade proponents justify trade institutions matters because their justificatory rhetoric leads to certain policy conclusions about whether it is appropriate to link trade to environmental, labor, or human rights policies. This paper examines the theory and operation of international trade law and institutions and questions whether these institutions in fact promote economic growth as proponents claim. Neither neo-liberal economic theory nor empirical studies support the claim that international trade institutions promote economic growth. To the contrary, international trade institutions are internally inconsistent and may distort economic efficiency and result in negative growth under some circumstances. To the extent that international trade institutions have promoted economic growth, they have often contributed to a growing disparity of wealth within and between the industrialized and developing countries. Trade institutions like the WTO have succeeded in coordinating policies and resolving conflict through dispute-settlement, even if they do not necessarily promote significant economic growth. For this reason, it is entirely consistent with their policy-coordination function for these institutions to promote labor, human rights, and environmental standards.

View more

Cultural Resistance to Global Governance

Michigan Journal of International Law

2001-01-01

We often frame the debate over global governance as a conflict between some set of international legal norms, like free trade or human rights, something we posit as national "culture." State actors and legal scholars assert cultural claims as a justification for derogating from some international legal requirement. For example, European states seek exemption from some international trade agreements prohibiting barriers to imported films of music by arguing that the imports threaten their cultural identity or industries. Japan, Norway and some indigenous nations claim a cultural right to whale that supersedes the international moratorium on whale hunting. Some theocratic or developing states claim cultural exceptions to engage in practices that otherwise contravene the international human rights of women and sexual minorities. In general, the international community does not regard practices that implicate commercial trade or environmental resources as authentically cultural. By contrast, the international community implicitly, if not always explicitly, acknowledges that gender norms are authentically cultural and therefore are entitled to great deference by international law. How and why doe we posit some social behavior as authentically cultural and when does culture trump international legal norms? This article explores how state actors and legal scholars make cultural claims in different legal contexts and suggests a linkage between the deployment of cultural exceptions and the project of globalization.

View more

Holding Multinational Corporations Responsible Under International Law

Hastings International and Comparative Law Review

2001-01-01

We usually view international law as a set of legal norms generated by sovereign states. According to the conventional story, until the Nuremberg tribunal, only states possessed rights and obligations under international laws, not individuals. In other words, states were the exclusive subjects of international law. After Nuremberg and the emergence of the U.N. International human rights treaties, the conventional story teaches that international law began to recognize individual rights. States, especially major powers like the United States, often resist the development of international legal obligations.

View more

Show All +
Powered by