Law Commons^™

Against Legislation: Garcetti V. Ceballos And The Paradox Of Statutory Protection For Public Employees, Ruben J. Garcia

Scholarly Works

In Garcetti v. Ceballos, the Supreme Court denied constitutional protection to a deputy prosecutor named Richard Ceballos. In reaching its decision, the Court pointed to the plethora of statutory protections that were available to government whistleblowers. A closer examination of these statutory alternatives reveals that they will not protect Ceballos. This is the paradox of statutory protection in labor and employment law-more sometimes is less for vulnerable workers.

This Article places the Garcetti case in the historical trajectory of worker protection—from no protection to statutory protection. This Article argues for a move toward constitutional and international protection …

Symposium, Justice And Democracy Forum: The Law And Politics Of Tort Reform, Ann C. Mcginley

Scholarly Works

On April 25, 2003, the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (“UNLV”) Center for Democratic Culture (“CDC”) and the William S. Boyd School of Law sponsored a one-day symposium addressing issues of tort reform. In particular, the Forum addressed concerns regarding construction defect litigation and medical malpractice, two areas of current and substantial concern in Nevada. As reflected in the discussion at the Forum, both topics received considerable attention from the Nevada State Legislature during its 2003 Session. Ultimately, the legislature enacted amendments to state statutes governing claims for defective construction. Despite significant lobbying by physicians and insurers, the legislature did …

Book Note, Fatma E. Marouf

Scholarly Works

Tortured Confessions presents an innovative perspective on the relationship between torture and propaganda. Abrahamian’s persuasive account exposes the intrinsic limitations of arguments that try to explain torture as simply the result of a “traditional” regime, a desire for social discipline, or a search fro security information; he binds torture instead to ideological warfare and political mobilization, the fundamental goals of military propaganda.

Democratic Responses To International Terrorism, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

This volume provides a multidisciplinary study of terrorism. The editor notes at the outset the difficulty of definition: "Terrorism is not a one-dimensional problem; it transcends many frontiers: political, jurisdictional, institutional, disciplinary and methodological. So approaching the problem from only one perspective may lead to only partial understanding and an incomplete strategy for developing constructive responses” (p. 3). Note the tendency of even this careful statement to assume that terrorism is always committed by others, Also, although legal definition and consideration may be implied by the terms polical, jurisdictional, institutional and disciplinary, which are indicated as various dimensions of …

The Evisceration Of The Political Offense Exception To Extradition, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

The Supplementary Convention to the Extradition Treaty between the Government of the United States of American and the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, was signed on June 25, 1985, and transmitted to the U.S. Senate on July 17, 1985. This article will focus on the portion of the supplementary treaty which effectively eliminates the political offense exception, and on the statement made by the Legal Adviser to the Department of State, the honorable Judge Abraham D. Sofaer, made in favor of the Supplementary Treaty, on August 1, 1985. This article suggests that approval of …

Note, A Dialogue On The Political Question Doctrine, Thomas B. Mcaffee, Christopher A. Johnson

Scholarly Works

Legal scholars have generally discussed the political question doctrine as part of the larger debate over the legitimacy of judicial review. Points of discordance aside, scholars have agreed that the doctrine is “a classic technique of judicial avoidance, a way of allowing a governmental decision to stand without involving the Court in supporting its legitimacy.” Thus, debate over the objectives, legitimacy and scope of the doctrine has traditionally proceeded from the unquestioned assumption that there exists a body of law which justifies judicial abstention from deciding some types of issues.

In recent years, however, some scholars have challenged the assumption …