Law Commons^™

California’S Capital Crisis Continues: Voter-Initiated Time Limit On Capital Appellate Review Upheld Under Improper Directive Interpretation, Stephanie Nathaniel

Golden Gate University Law Review

Part I begins with an overview of the separation of powers doctrine. Part II provides an overview of Proposition 66 and the California Supreme Court case that challenged its constitutionality. This section discusses Proposition 66’s statutory objective, the petitioners’ claim of unconstitutionality, the respondents’ claim about the initiative’s purpose, and the court’s separation of powers analysis. Part III discusses the state of California’s capital crisis by (1) examining the Briggs ruling’s effect on death-row inmates; (2) providing a brief background of California’s death-penalty system; and (3) evaluating the Briggs ruling in connection with the court’s duty to provide meaningful appellate …

Bringing Specificity To Child Custody Provisions In California, Shawn Mccall

Golden Gate University Law Review

This Comment evaluates the empirical evidence from social science studies to demonstrate that there is currently a sturdy body of social science research to justify using tangible evidence to define terms in the California Family Code, the California Family Courts, and beyond. Because the standard for custody determinations in California is the “best interest of the child” per the state’s legislation, social science research provides a vehicle that can define the “best interest of the child standard.” This Comment argues that this can be done empirically by calculating the minimum amount of time a child—in the aggregate— needs with each …

The Transformation Of The Antiquities Act: A Call For Amending The President’S Power Regarding National Monument Designations, Andrew Diaz

Golden Gate University Law Review

Part I of this Comment discusses the background of the Antiquities Act, including: the legislature’s intent in drafting the Act, changes to the law, and how it has been used throughout the years. This section then discusses various legal challenges to designations made under the Antiquities Act and looks at why these designations are sometimes controversial. Part II discusses the calls by many politicians to either amend or repeal the Act and explains why current proposed legislation is insufficient. This Comment critiques the proposed legislation and calls for the passage of sensible legislation that would require a more transparent designation …

Gagged By Big Ag: Whistleblower Silencing Bill Threatens The Employee’S Right To Uncover Workplace Wrongdoing, Tara Cooley

Golden Gate University Law Review

This Comment analyzes the court’s application of the standing doctrine in PETA v. Stein to demonstrate that the dismissal of a challenge to a whistleblower silencing statute because the plaintiff lacked standing is detrimental to First Amendment rights. This Comment argues that a relaxed standing requirement must be applied to future pre-enforcement challenges of legislation that aims to silence whistleblowers, and therefore chills First Amendment rights.

Part I examines the court’s relaxed application of the standing requirement to criminal statutes that chill First Amendment rights. Part II argues for a relaxed application of the standing requirement to whistleblower silencing statutes, …

Realism And Jurisprudence: A Contemporary Assessment, Kevin P. Lee

Golden Gate University Law Review

Book Review of Realistic Theory of Law, by Brian Z. Tamanaha, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2017, p. 202, $34.99.

The Kavanaugh Hearings And The Search For A Just Justice, Caroline Fredrickson

Golden Gate University Law Review

The evaluation of judicial nominees.

Front Matter

Golden Gate University Law Review

Includes Masthead, Table of Contents, Faculty, and Preface.

United States V. Arpaio: The Judicial Limit On The President’S Pardon Power, Alicia Villanueva

Golden Gate University Law Review

Article II of the United States Constitution grants the President unlimited authority to pardon. Specifically, the President “shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offences against the United States (“U.S.”), except in cases of impeachment.” Once a pardon is issued, it must be accepted by the pardoned individual for the pardon to take effect. On August 25, 2017, President Donald J. Trump pardoned Sheriff Arpaio of a conviction for contempt of court. The prior month, the District Court for the District of Arizona (“district court”) had convicted Sheriff Arpaio of criminal contempt of court for intentionally failing to …

Rizo V. Yovino: Another Step Toward Equality Through The Equal Pay Act, Corey Timpson

Golden Gate University Law Review

Still prevalent in today’s society is a vast inequality between men and women, such that men are oftentimes treated better than women in the same contexts. One realm of society where this inequality is evidenced is through the disparities in pay rates. On average, for each dollar a man earns, a woman earns only 80.5 cents. Despite the passage of the Equal Pay Act (“EPA”), the nearly 20% gap remains. The purpose of the EPA was to bridge the pay gap among men and women working similar jobs at the same workplace. Under the EPA, an employer cannot pay men …

Ledezma-Cosino V. Sessions: The Ninth Circuit Maintains Archaic View That Alcoholism Is A Moral Character Flaw, Corey Timpson

Golden Gate University Law Review

This Note focuses on one historically uncommon way in which courts decide to deport an undocumented immigrant seeking cancellation of removal. The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (“Ninth Circuit”) in Ledezma-Cosino v. Sessions found an undocumented immigrant seeking cancellation of removal ineligible because he was considered a “habitual drunkard.” Ultimately, his case was reheard en banc where the Ninth Circuit vacated the original three-judge panel opinion and upheld the Immigration Judge and the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision finding Ledezma-Cosino ineligible for cancellation of removal because he was a habitual drunkard.

The first part of this …

Cassirer V. Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection Foundation: The Holocaust Expropriated Art Recovery Act Was Unveiled But Congress Still Has Work To Do, Nicholas Joy

Golden Gate University Law Review

Section I of this Note discusses the case’s procedural history. Section II discusses the Cassirer family story and looks at the history of America’s legislative efforts aimed at impacting Holocaust-era art restitution litigation since the end of WWII. Section III discusses the Ninth Circuit’s application of HEAR and compares it to subsequent interpretations of the Act. Lastly, section IV discusses changes that Congress could make to HEAR that would help ensure that the Act has the impact that the legislature intended.

Introduction, The Hon. Michelle T. Friedland

Golden Gate University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Judges Of The United States Court Of Appeals For The Ninth Circuit

Golden Gate University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Front Matter

Golden Gate University Law Review

Front Matter includes Masthead, Table of Contents, Faculty, and Preface.