Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (1)
- Arab Americans (1)
- Assets (1)
- Banks (1)
- Bond v. United States (1)
-
- Categorization (1)
- Causes of action (1)
- Census (1)
- Chemical Weapons Convention (1)
- Chemical weapons (1)
- Classification (1)
- Constitutionality (1)
- Countering Violent Extremist policing (1)
- Crimes (1)
- Department of Homeland Security (1)
- Financial services (1)
- Funding (1)
- Iran (1)
- Law reform (1)
- Liability (1)
- Middle East and North Africa (1)
- Naturalization Era (1)
- Nonwhite (1)
- Office of Management and Budget (1)
- Race (1)
- Sanctions (1)
- Surveillance (1)
- Suspicious Activity Reporting (1)
- Terrorism (1)
- Terrorist financing (1)
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
A Demographic Threat? Proposed Reclassification Of Arab Americans On The 2020 Census, Khaled A. Beydoun
A Demographic Threat? Proposed Reclassification Of Arab Americans On The 2020 Census, Khaled A. Beydoun
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
“Arab Americans are white?” This question—commonly posed as a demonstration of shock or surprise—highlights the dissonance between how “Arab” and “white” are discursively imagined and understood in the United States today. These four words also encapsulate the dilemma that currently riddles Arab Americans. The population finds itself interlocked between formal classification as white, and de facto recognition as nonwhite. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the government agency that oversees the definition, categorization, and construction of racial categories, currently counts people from the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) as white. The United States Census Bureau (Census Bureau), the …
Lost In Translation: The Accidental Origins Of Bond V. United States, Kevin L. Cope
Lost In Translation: The Accidental Origins Of Bond V. United States, Kevin L. Cope
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
One of the unusual features of cases about the constitutionality of federal statutes is that they are nearly always foreseeable. Even before the bill’s introduction in Congress, lawmakers are often aware that they are inviting a federal lawsuit. Anticipating a legal challenge, legislators and their staffs attempt to predict the courts’ views of the statute and adapt the bill accordingly. Generally speaking, the bigger the bill’s potential constitutional impact, the more foreseeable the resulting case. By this logic, jurists should have seen the constitutional issues in Bond v. United States from a mile away. In reality, they were foreseen by …
In Search Of Justice: Increasing The Risk Of Business With State Sponsors Of Terror, Gabriel C. Lajeunesse
In Search Of Justice: Increasing The Risk Of Business With State Sponsors Of Terror, Gabriel C. Lajeunesse
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
If the aims of tort law are deterrence, compensation, and provision of equitable distribution of risks, U.S. anti-terrorism laws have been margin-ally effective at best. Though Congress has passed legislation providing causes of action to U.S. victims of terrorism, compensation of victims is often difficult and terrorists are rarely deterred. Attempts to provide such recourse include the Antiterrorism Act of 1991 ("ATA"), the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 ("AEDPA"), and the Flatow Amendment to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act ("FSIA"). These attempts, however, are not enough.