Geoffrey A. Manne
Geoffrey A. Manne is the president and founder of the International Center for Law and Economics (ICLE), a nonprofit, nonpartisan research center based in Portland, Oregon. He is also a distinguished fellow at Northwestern University’s Center on Law, Business, and Economics. Geoff earned his JD and AB degrees from the University of Chicago and is an expert in the economic analysis of law, focusing particularly on antitrust, consumer protection, telecom, intellectual property, and technology regulation.
Prior to founding ICLE, Manne was a law professor at Lewis & Clark Law School where he taught law & economics, corporations, international economic regulation, and other courses. In 2006, he decamped from Lewis & Clark to work in Microsoft’s legal department, heading up a program on law & economics academic engagement. He subsequently founded ICLE in 2009.
Manne has also served as a Bigelow fellow and lecturer in law at the University of Chicago Law School and a faculty fellow at the University of Virginia School of Law. He practiced antitrust law and appellate litigation at Latham & Watkins, clerked for Hon. Morris S. Arnold on the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, and worked as a research assistant for Judge Richard Posner. He was also once (very briefly) employed by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).
In 2017, he was appointed by Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Ajit Pai to a two-year term on the FCC’s Broadband Deployment Advisory Committee, and before that he was appointed by FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler to serve on the FCC’s Consumer Advisory Committee.
Geoffrey A. Manne
Jan 18, 2006
We all know that our securities regulatory regime is predominantly a disclosure regime, meaning the regulators, for the most part, don’t impose substantive regulations on securities issuers, but require only accurate, timely disclosure of certain information. And as against a more intrusive, substantive regime, I think this is preferable, even in its current, fairly intrusive ... On disclosure, a continuing series
Geoffrey A. Manne
Jan 17, 2006
I’m no expert on the topic (I anxiously await Randy Barnett’s comments), but does anyone else think the opinion in Gonzales v. Oregon issued today (limiting the application of the Controlled Substances Act and upholding Oregon’s assisted suicide law) could have been a masterful dissent in Gonzales v. Raich (reading the Controlled Substances Act to ... Drugs and federalism
