Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Of Orphans And Vouchers: Nevada's "Little Blaine Amendment" And The Future Of Religious Participation In Public Programs, Jay S. Bybee
Of Orphans And Vouchers: Nevada's "Little Blaine Amendment" And The Future Of Religious Participation In Public Programs, Jay S. Bybee
Scholarly Works
In December 1875, President Ulysses S. Grant delivered his last annual message to Congress. He warned of “the dangers threatening us” and the “importance that all [men] should be possessed of education and intelligence,” lest “ignorant men . . . sink into acquiescence to the will of intelligence, whether directed by the demagogue or by priestcraft.” He recommended as “the primary step” a constitutional amendment “making it the duty of each of the several States to establish and forever maintain free public schools adequate to the education of all of the children” and “prohibiting the granting of any school funds, …
Nevada’S Employee Inventions Statute: Novel, Nonobvious, And Patently Wrong, Mary Lafrance
Nevada’S Employee Inventions Statute: Novel, Nonobvious, And Patently Wrong, Mary Lafrance
Scholarly Works
In its Seventy-First Session, the Nevada Legislature enacted a new statute, S. B. 558, granting employers complete ownership of any work-related inventions created by their employees, regardless of whether the employer contributed any resources whatsoever to the inventive process. This stunning reversal of longstanding common law was little noticed by the public, and was debated only superficially in the state legislature before receiving its overwhelming vote of approval.
This Article examines Nevada's new employee invention statute from the perspectives of common law and public policy. It compares Nevada's new statute with the traditional common law rules governing employee inventions, as …
Defining Marriage: What Ballot Question 2 Doesn’T Do, Mary Lafrance
Defining Marriage: What Ballot Question 2 Doesn’T Do, Mary Lafrance
Scholarly Works
This article examines he oddly-worded initiative, which constituted Question 2 on Nevada’s 2002 ballot and explains how it was a bit of a puzzle, even two years after it was first sprung upon the electorate. Touted during its previous appearance in the 2000 election as a “definition of marriage,” this article shows how it is all too clear that the initiative was anything but that. Neither the initiative, nor any existing provision of Nevada law, made the slightest attempt to define marriage.