Law Commons^™

Mcdonald V. Chicago, Self-Defense, The Right To Bear Arms, And The Future, Richard L. Aynes

ConLawNOW

In this article, Professor Richard L. Aynes, who was cited for his research by the majority in McDonald, delivers his critique on the opinion, the concurrence, and the dissent. Professor Aynes provides an in-depth analysis of Justice Thomas’ concurrence, which asserts the proper vehicle for incorporation to be the Fourteenth Amendment’s Privileges and Immunities Clause, as opposed to the traditional method employed by the court – the Due Process Clause. With contemporary legal scholarship in agreement with Justice Thomas, Professor Aynes asserts that just as the Privileges and Immunities Clause commanded the support of a ratifying nation, “it will …

Shifting The Burden Of Proving Self-Defense - With Analysis Of Related Ohio Law, Randy R. Koenders

Akron Law Review

Senate Bill Number 42 was introduced into the Ohio General Assembly on February 1, 1977. The bill provides that while the burden of proof for all elements of the criminal offense with which an individual is charged rests upon the prosecution, the burden of proof for affirmative defenses rests upon the defendant, and he must prove his affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence. Because the bill raises serious questions concerning placing the burden of persuasion with respect to affirmative defenses generally, and self-defense in particular, on the defendant, a study of the law and policy involved in shifting …

Analyzing Second Amendment Challenges: Getting Strict With Judges, Lauren Dwarika

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Relevance Of Culpability To The Punishment And Prevention Of Crime, R. J. Spjut

Akron Law Review

It follows that if a legal system may fairly punish only a person who culpably violated the law, a preventive restraint like self-defense is also fair only when it is used against a person whose offense or imminent offense is culpable. Such measures as punishment and prevention are justified because "a person who violates the order of fairness, which can be described as a system of rights,forfeits certain of his own rights." The forfeiture theory implicitly associates A's loss of rights with his deserts and suggests some analogy with punishment. Finnis' argument both makes explicit the analogy and shifts attention …

State V. Stewart: Self-Defense And Battered Women: Reasonable Perception Of Danger Or License To Kill, Barbara A. Venesy

Akron Law Review

First, this Note explores the criminal justice system's ineffective response to wife abuse, the law of self-defense, and the impact of battered woman syndrome on the doctrine of self-defense. Then, the Note evaluates the Kansas court's denial of self-defense instructions in view of its previous holdings on quantity of evidence and imminent danger. The remainder of the Note analyzes the unfounded fear that the battered woman syndrome could become an independent form of self-defense and sanction unnecessary self-help. The Note concludes that successful use of battered woman syndrome testimony ensures the woman's right to act in self-defense and restricts only …

State V. Nemeth: Equal Protection For The Battered Child, Joseph A. Shoaff

Akron Law Review

This Note analyzes the Court's decision in Nemeth. Part II presents a background of the battered child syndrome followed by a discussion of the admissibility of battered woman and battered child syndrome testimony in Ohio. In addition, it contains a brief overview of Ohio's ambiguous self-defense standard. Part III presents the facts, procedural history, and holding of Nemeth. Part IV analyzes the Court's holding.

This Note establishes why the Ohio Supreme Court should recognize the psychological equivalency of the battered woman and battered child syndromes and affirm the Nemeth holding on equal protection grounds. In doing so, the Court will …

Mirandizing Terrorism Suspects? The Public Safety Exception, The Rescue Doctrine, And Implicit Analogies To Self-Defense, Defense Of Others, And Battered Woman Syndrome, Bruce Ching

Catholic University Law Review

In its 1984 decision New York v. Quarles, the Supreme Court announced the public safety exception, under which statements made by un-Mirandized suspects can be admissible when made in response to questions reasonably asked to protect the safety of the arresting officers or the general public. During the investigation of terrorism cases, law enforcement agencies have begun to extend the time of un-Mirandized questioning of suspects, with the hope that courts will find that the public safety exception makes the suspects’ statements admissible in the ensuing prosecutions.

This Article argues that in announcing the public safety exception, …

The Exculpatory Effect Of Self-Defense In State Responsibility, Gamal Moursi Badr

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Taking A Stand?: An Initial Assessment Of The Social And Racial Effects Of Recent Innovation In Self-Defense Laws, Mario L. Barnes

Fordham Law Review

Perhaps, not surprisingly, the controversy over the rise of self-defense reforms in the United States that have come to be known as ―Stand Your Ground‖ (SYG) laws, began with a story about colors. This Article principally applies an empirical method and critical race theory (eCRT) lens to explore whether these reformed statutes, which generally have authorized greater use of force within the context of self-defense, deter crime and differentially affect Whites, Blacks, and other racial groups.

Internal Colonialism And Humanitarian Intervention, M. Sornarajah

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

The Cowboy Code Meets The Smash Mouth Truth: Mediations On Worker Incivility, Michael C. Duff

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Doctrine Of Legitimate Defense, Jens Ohlin

International Law Studies

The following article reorients mainstream conceptions of self-defense by defending a broader doctrine of legitimate defense that, in limited circumstances, justifies unilateral intervention. The source of the doctrine is natural law, which was explicitly incorporated into the text of UN Charter Article 51. The effect of this incorporation was to preserve, as a carve-out from the prohibition against force in Article 2, the natural law rights of defensive force. Specifically, the Article concludes that defensive force under natural law included, in extreme situations, a right of intervention in rogue States that refused to comply with natural law.

Carrying The Second Amendment Outside Of The Home: A Critique Of The Third Circuit's Decision In Drake V. Filko, Ryan Notarangelo

Catholic University Law Review

In D.C. v. Heller, the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s inherent right to keep and bear arms for self-defense-most notably, inside the home. Post-Heller, the lower courts are split on the Second Amendment’s protections outside of the home. This Note addresses the Third Circuit’s opinion on that split. In Drake v. Filko, the Third Circuit addressed whether New Jersey’s concealed carry permit law, which requires an individual to demonstrate a “justifiable need” to carry a handgun outside of the home, violated the Second Amendment. The plaintiffs were …

Defensive Force Against Non-State Actors: The State Of Play, Monica Hakimi

International Law Studies

This article assesses the implications of the current Syria situation for the international law on the use of defensive force against non-State actors. The law in this area is highly unsettled, with multiple legal positions in play. After mapping the legal terrain, the article shows that the Syria situation accentuates three preexisting trends. First, the claim that international law absolutely prohibits the use of defensive force against non-State actors is increasingly difficult to sustain. States, on the whole, have supported the operation against the so-called Islamic State in Syria. Second, States still have not coalesced around a legal standard on …