Law Commons^™

Marriage Penalty: How Stacking Income Affects The Secondary Earner’S Decision To Work, Kevin M. Walsh

Kevin M Walsh

Our progressive tax rate structure is aimed at taxing citizens fairly and based on their ability to pay. The rate structure, however, partially loses its purpose when analyzing the income taxation of married individuals. If a married couple decides to file jointly they are sometimes taxed at higher rates than individuals are depending on the incomes of the couple. This has created what we know today as the “marriage penalty,” and it can serve as a deterrent to the secondary earner from working.

There is no simple solution to address how the marriage penalty, in combination with necessary expenses, affects …

Unfulfilled Promise: Mental Disability Voting Rights And The Halving Of Hava’S Potential, Benjamin Hoerner

Benjamin O Hoerner

In 2012, the heated presidential election between President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney reanimated the debate surrounding the voting rights of mentally disabled citizens in the United States. A decade earlier, in October 2002, President George W. Bush signed into law the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA), aiming to protect the voting rights of the country’s disabled population. At the time of its enactment, legislators and commentators lauded HAVA as “the most important voting rights bill since the passing of the Voting Rights Act in 1965.” However, since its passage, HAVA has been subjected to a flurry of …

Montes-Lopez V. Holder: Applying Eldridge To Ensure A Per Se Right To Counsel For Indigent Immigrants In Removal Proceedings, Soulmaz Taghavi

Soulmaz Taghavi

Part I of this Comment reviews the historical and current state of procedural due process and its role in Immigration Law, specifically removal proceedings. Part II extends certain legal arguments in the opinion of Montes-Lopez v. Holder, which held among divided federal Circuit Courts that an immigrant in removal proceedings has a statutory and constitutional right to appointed counsel. Last, Part III demonstrates how a non-citizen in deportation hearing has a per se right to counsel outlined by the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) and brought to life by the Fifth Amendment’s due process clause.