Law Commons^™

A Denial Of Personhood: Why Hate Crime Legislation Is Necessary To Assure Proportionality In Punishment, Clare Godfryd

JCLC Online

The term “hate crime” entered the mainstream in the United States during the 1980s, when advocates began to track incidents of bias-motivated violence. Since then, hate crimes have continued to garner significant attention. Advocates and legislators have traditionally justified hate crime law under the “expressive theory,” the idea that the purpose of such laws is to condemn prejudice and express messages of tolerance and equality.

In this Comment, I offer a distinct justification for hate crime legislation. Specifically, I argue that, when a perpetrator targets a victim because of perceived immutable characteristics, the hate crime offender denies the victim’s agency …

Zero-Option Defendants: United States V. Mclellan And The Judiciary's Role In Protecting The Right To Compulsory Process, Wisdom U. Onwuchekwa-Banogu

JCLC Online

How does one obtain evidence located outside the United States for a criminal trial? For prosecutors, the answer is an exclusive treaty process: Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties (MLATs). Defendants, on the other hand, may only use an unpredictable, ineffective, non-treaty process: letters rogatory. The result is a selective advantage for law enforcement at the expense of the defendant. Though this imbalance necessarily raises Sixth Amendment Compulsory Process Clause concerns, MLATs have remained largely undisturbed because defendants still have some form of process, albeit a lesser one. But what happens when the letters rogatory process is also closed off to the …