Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Digital Commons Network

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 8 of 8

Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network

A Provocative Defense, Aya Gruber Feb 2014

A Provocative Defense, Aya Gruber

Aya Gruber

It is common wisdom that the provocation defense is, quite simply, sexist. For decades, there has been a trenchant feminist critique that the doctrine reflects and reinforces masculine norms of violence and shelters brutal domestic killers. The critique is so prominent that it appears alongside the doctrine itself in leading criminal law casebooks. The feminist critique of provocation embodies several claims about provocation's problematically gendered nature, including that the defense is steeped in chauvinist history, treats culpable sexist killers too leniently, discriminates against women, and expresses bad messages. This article offers a (likely provocative) defense of the provocation doctrine. While …


Denying Freedom Rather Than Securing The Country: National Security Is Undermined By Laws Governing Battered Immigrants, Eve Tilley-Coulson Jan 2014

Denying Freedom Rather Than Securing The Country: National Security Is Undermined By Laws Governing Battered Immigrants, Eve Tilley-Coulson

Eve Tilley-Coulson

Relief for battered immigrants is not an obvious national security matter per se, yet remedies are enacted in conjunction with stringent interpretations of immigration law, as though victims pose a security threat. Discrepancies exist between the immigration laws themselves—which attempt to secure the United States from disease, violence, and illegal activity—and the loopholes within remedies under these laws, unnecessarily removing victims and perpetuating a cycle of fear and abuse. By displacing the victim, rather than the abuser, the government allows the cycle of violence to continue, while simultaneously breaking up families and creating disorder and instability. The economic and societal …


Denying Freedom Rather Than Securing The Country: National Security Is Undermined By Laws Governing Battered Immigrants, Eve Tilley-Coulson Jan 2014

Denying Freedom Rather Than Securing The Country: National Security Is Undermined By Laws Governing Battered Immigrants, Eve Tilley-Coulson

Eve Tilley-Coulson

Relief for battered immigrants is not an obvious national security matter per se, yet remedies are enacted in conjunction with stringent interpretations of immigration law, as though victims pose a security threat. Discrepancies exist between the immigration laws themselves—which attempt to secure the United States from disease, violence, and illegal activity—and the loopholes found within remedies under these laws, unnecessarily removing victims and perpetuating a cycle of fear and abuse. This paper addresses how relief for battered immigrants, when implemented with the priority of protecting national security and immigration legislation, creates and perpetuates negative societal consequences. The economic and societal …


U.S. Institutionalized Torture With Impunity: Examining Rape And Sexual Abuse In Custody Through The Icty Jurisprudence, Allison Rogne Jul 2013

U.S. Institutionalized Torture With Impunity: Examining Rape And Sexual Abuse In Custody Through The Icty Jurisprudence, Allison Rogne

Allison Rogne

It is a well-established principle, both domestically and internationally, that rape is torture when suffered as part of confinement. It is also well documented, both domestically and internationally, that rape is rampant in U.S. prisons. And it is well established, both domestically and internationally, that those who torture should not do so with impunity, that that impunity is an affront to civilization and the human rights principles to which we all strive. And yet, in U.S. prisons, shocking numbers of women are systematically raped and sexually abused by those that would rehabilitate them. Female prisoners are victims of vaginal and …


It’S Gender, Stupid: Towards A Multifaceted Response To Forced Marriage In The United States, Aryn Seiler Jun 2013

It’S Gender, Stupid: Towards A Multifaceted Response To Forced Marriage In The United States, Aryn Seiler

Aryn Seiler

No abstract provided.


Head Of The Household: Hegemonic Masculinity And The State, Laura B. Wolf Apr 2013

Head Of The Household: Hegemonic Masculinity And The State, Laura B. Wolf

Laura B. Wolf

In this paper, I will attempt to bridge feminist legal scholarship with masculinities scholarship to lay bare the ways in which our patriarchal structure simultaneously oppresses men while subordinating women. My hope is that this connection between the theories will lead to greater coalition-building between men and women to bring about the end of state-sponsored patriarchy.


Women At The Forefront: An Examination Of The Disproportionate Exposure Of Mothers To Liability Under Parental Responsibility Laws, Portia Allen-Kyle Apr 2013

Women At The Forefront: An Examination Of The Disproportionate Exposure Of Mothers To Liability Under Parental Responsibility Laws, Portia Allen-Kyle

Portia Allen-Kyle

This Note discusses the social and legislative affinity for parental responsibility laws in response to juvenile delinquency and victimization and examines the discriminatory impact of such laws on mothers. This Note argues two-fold that: 1) the mere existence of parental responsibility statutes perpetuates “mother blaming” and disproportionately exposes mothers to liability and are thus discriminatory in their effect, and 2) the use of vicarious, strict liability for parents is ineffective and inappropriate in affecting juvenile behavior. Section I provides a discussion about the history of parental responsibility laws and argue the symbolic purpose of many parental responsibility laws. Section II …


Sex Is Less Offensive Than Violence: A Call To Update Obscenity Jurisprudence, Rachel Simon Mar 2013

Sex Is Less Offensive Than Violence: A Call To Update Obscenity Jurisprudence, Rachel Simon

Rachel Simon

This article addresses the gender bias presented by the disparate treatment of sex and violence under current obscenity jurisprudence. Under the controlling standard set forth by the Supreme Court in Miller v. California, sexual works may readily be regulated as obscenity, while violent works unequivocally may not. This article posits that this disparate treatment is the product of entrenched stereotypes about the way men and women “should” react to sex and violence, and notes the hypocrisy of failing to apply the same reasoning to assessments of violent versus sexual material.

First, reliance on “community standards” to define what material …