Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Violation (2)
- American (1)
- Collective bargaining (1)
- Constitution (1)
- Courts (1)
-
- Empirical analysis (1)
- Empirical studies (1)
- Employers (1)
- Federal administrative process (1)
- Human rights (1)
- International (1)
- International law (1)
- Labor law (1)
- Laws (1)
- Movement (1)
- Restrictions (1)
- Retaliation claims (1)
- Sarbanes-Oxley Act (1)
- State courts (1)
- State law (1)
- U.S. (1)
- United States (1)
- Whistleblowers (1)
- Wisconsin (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Why Whistleblowers Lose: An Empirical And Qualitative Analysis Of State Court Cases, Nancy M. Modesitt
Why Whistleblowers Lose: An Empirical And Qualitative Analysis Of State Court Cases, Nancy M. Modesitt
All Faculty Scholarship
This Article was originally intended to be an analysis of the propriety, or impropriety, of the doctrines most commonly used by courts to decide employees’ whistleblowing retaliation claims against employers. However, upon conducting initial research, it quickly became apparent that there was very little data available on whistleblowing cases. Unlike employment discrimination cases, where several empirical studies have been conducted, there is only one empirical analysis of whistleblower claims, which focused solely on outcomes in the federal administrative process for claims brought under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX). That study revealed that whistleblowers fare poorly for a number of reasons, but …
International Law For American Courts: Why The “American Laws For American Courts” Movement Is A Violation Of The United States Constitution And Universal Human Rights, Maria Surdokas
University of Baltimore Journal of International Law
In recent years, the “American Laws for American Courts” movement has swept across the country in an attempt to ban international law from U.S. state courts. This article specifically examines the Oklahoma Save Our State Amendment and the Arizona Foreign Decisions Act. In doing so, it addresses both the constitutional and policy problems with these attempts, observing that what the states have been trying to do is neither legal nor practical. It analyzes the inability of individual states to unilaterally avoid compliance with the United States’ international law obligations. It notes the absurdity in outlawing international law in order to …
The Collective Bargaining Chips Are Down: How Wisconsin’S Collective Bargaining Restrictions Place The U.S. In Violation Of International Labor Laws, Amanda Webster
University of Baltimore Journal of International Law
On the surface, the United States serves as an international advocate and supporter of the basic principles of the International Labor Organization, which are to promote social justice and human rights through globally humane working conditions. Yet, on a deeper level, there exists a strained and contradictory relationship between the U.S. and the ILO. Despite being the largest ILO member state and a principal policymaker, the U.S. continues to refrain from ratifying key international labor law treaties. This inaction enables U.S. state and federal bodies to enact and uphold legislation that directly violate existing international labor law obligations. U.S. laws …
Referenda In Maryland: The Need For Comprehensive Statutory Reform, Michael D. Berman, Melissa O'Toole-Loureiro
Referenda In Maryland: The Need For Comprehensive Statutory Reform, Michael D. Berman, Melissa O'Toole-Loureiro
University of Baltimore Law Review
No abstract provided.