Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication
- File Type
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Marriage Penalty: How Stacking Income Affects The Secondary Earner’S Decision To Work, Kevin M. Walsh
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 …
Natural Law, Natural Rights, And Same Sex Marriage, Shannon Holzer
Natural Law, Natural Rights, And Same Sex Marriage, Shannon Holzer
Shannon Holzer
ABSTRACT The Definition of Rights and Same-Sex Marriage The claim that same-sex couples have the right to be married needs to be explained according to particular theories of rights. This presents a problem for same-sex marriage (SSM) advocates for two reasons. First, if SSM advocates suggest that they have a natural right to be married (as rights were understood by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence), then they have the burden to prove that this is the case. Yet, Natural Rights entail Natural Law (NL), and NL tends to support teleological definitions of marriage. Thus, the SSM advocate must …
Montes-Lopez V. Holder: Applying Eldridge To Ensure A Per Se Right To Counsel For Indigent Immigrants In Removal Proceedings, Soulmaz Taghavi
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.