• University of Pennsylvania
    The Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania (Legal Studies and Business Ethics Department)
    Assistant Professor
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America
  •  23
    Denying Corporate Rights and Punishing Corporate Wrongs
    Business Ethics Quarterly 25 (4): 517-534. 2015.
    Scholars addressing the moral status of corporations are motivated by a pair of conflicting anxieties: If corporations are not moral agents, we will be unable to blame them for their wrongs. But if corporations are moral agents, we will have to recognize corporate moral rights, and the legal rights that flow therefrom. In early and under-appreciated work, Tom Donaldson sought to allay both concerns at once: Corporations, he argued, are not moral persons, and so are not eligible for many of the r…Read more
  •  26
    Complicity and hypocrisy
    Politics, Philosophy and Economics 19 (2): 154-181. 2020.
    This article offers a justification for accommodating claims of conscience. The standard justification points to the pain that acting against one’s conscience entails. But that defense cannot make sense of the state’s refusal to accommodate individuals where the law interferes with their deeply meaningful but nonmoral projects. An alternative justification, we argue, arises once one recognizes the connection between conscience and moral address: One’s lived moral convictions determine when and w…Read more
  •  24
    Regulation of the Global Marketplace for the Sake of Health
    with Marion Danis
    Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 30 (4): 667-676. 2002.
    Mounting evidence suggests that socioeconomic status is a determinant of health. As nations around the globe increasingly rely on market-based economies, the corporate sector has come to have a powerful influence on the socioeconomic gradient in most nations and hence upon the health status of their populations. At the same time, it has become more difficult for any one nation to influence corporate activities, given the increasing ease with which corporations relocate their operations from coun…Read more
  •  10
    The merits of a general education in bioethics
    American Journal of Bioethics 2 (4). 2002.
    This Article does not have an abstract
  •  98
    Corporate Moral Responsibility
    Philosophy Compass 11 (1): 3-13. 2016.
    This essay provides a critical overview of the debate about corporate moral responsibility. Parties to the debate address whether corporations are the kinds of entities that can be blamed when they cause unjustified harm. Proponents of CMR argue that corporations satisfy the conditions for moral agency and so they are fit for blame. Their opponents respond that corporations lack one or more of the capacities necessary for moral agency. I review the arguments on both sides and conclude ultimately…Read more