Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Constitutional Law (3)
- Criminal Law (3)
- Jurisprudence (2)
- Law Enforcement and Corrections (2)
- Supreme Court of the United States (2)
-
- Computer Law (1)
- Criminal Procedure (1)
- Environmental Law (1)
- Health Law and Policy (1)
- Human Rights Law (1)
- Immigration Law (1)
- International Law (1)
- Internet Law (1)
- Law and Society (1)
- Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility (1)
- Military, War, and Peace (1)
- Oil, Gas, and Mineral Law (1)
- State and Local Government Law (1)
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Constitutional Law Of Incarceration, Reconfigured, Margo Schlanger
The Constitutional Law Of Incarceration, Reconfigured, Margo Schlanger
Articles
On any given day, about 2.2 million people are confined in U.S. jails and prisons—nearly 0.9% of American men are in prison, and another 0.4% are in jail. This year, 9 or 10 million people will spend time in our prisons and jails; about 5000 of them will die there. A decade into a frustratingly gradual decline in incarceration numbers, the statistics have grown familiar: We have 4.4% of the world’s population but over 20% of its prisoners. Our incarceration rate is 57% higher than Russia’s (our closest major country rival in imprisonment), nearly four times the rate in England, …
Evaluating Punishment In Purgatory: The Need To Separate Pretrial Detainees' Conditions-Of-Confinement Claims From Inadequate Eighth Amendment Analysis, David C. Gorlin
Evaluating Punishment In Purgatory: The Need To Separate Pretrial Detainees' Conditions-Of-Confinement Claims From Inadequate Eighth Amendment Analysis, David C. Gorlin
Michigan Law Review
The Due Process Clause prohibits all "punishment" of pretrial detainees- individuals that are held by the Government, but not adjudged guilty of any crime. The Eighth Amendment only prohibits the infliction of "cruel and unusual punishments" upon convicted individuals. Despite the Supreme Court's insistence that the Due Process Clause, and not the Eighth Amendment, protects pretrial detainees from deplorable and harmful conditions of confinement, most federal circuits now assess pretrial detainees' claims under Eighth Amendment standards. Under the Eighth Amendment framework, pretrial detainees must establish that conditions subjected them to a substantial risk of serious harm, and that jailers were …
Virtually Free From Punishment Until Proven Guilty: The Internet, Web-Cameras And The Compelling Necessity Standard, Michael Clements
Virtually Free From Punishment Until Proven Guilty: The Internet, Web-Cameras And The Compelling Necessity Standard, Michael Clements
Richmond Journal of Law & Technology
Few legal maxims have had greater resonance than the tenet that one is innocent until proven guilty. It is a principle that has been traced back to Roman times, and it entered the American legal lexicon through the United States Supreme Court decision Coffin v. United States. It has even been incorporated in the United Nations’1948 Declaration of Human Rights under article eleven, section one.4
The Majority Opinion As The Social Constuction Of Reality: The Supreme Court And Prison Rules, James E. Robertson
The Majority Opinion As The Social Constuction Of Reality: The Supreme Court And Prison Rules, James E. Robertson
Oklahoma Law Review
No abstract provided.
Defender Or Offender: America's Role In The Protection Of International Human Rights?, Kimberly Satterwhite
Defender Or Offender: America's Role In The Protection Of International Human Rights?, Kimberly Satterwhite
University of Richmond Law Review
The recent caning of an eighteen year old American student by officials in Singapore sparked much debate over the appropriateness of corporal punishment in criminal cases. Many Americans question the humaneness of criminal penalties imposed in foreign lands. While quick to identify human rights violations around the world, the United States government has been reluctant to concede that abuses occur within the American-criminaljustice system.
Consent Decrees Resulting From Institutional-Reform Litigation May Be Modified Upon Showing A Significant Change In Law Or Fact And A Modification Appropriately Tailored To That Change., Christy J. Lindsay
St. Mary's Law Journal
In Rufo v. Inmates of Suffolk County Jail, the Court held that courts may modify consent decrees resulting from institutional reform litigation upon showing a significant change in law or fact and a modification appropriately tailored to that change. The case of Swift v. United States set a strict standard for modification of consent decrees, requiring movants to demonstrate extreme, unexpected hardship and oppression. However, there is a modem trend toward adopting a more flexible standard. The Court deems the “flexible test” as particularly appropriate in the case of the institutional reform consent decree because of its speculative, long-term nature. …
Warrantless Searches And Seizures In Virginia, Ronald J. Bacigal
Warrantless Searches And Seizures In Virginia, Ronald J. Bacigal
University of Richmond Law Review
There is a well-recognized lack of consistency and clarity in fourth amendment decisions. At times, each search and seizure case seenis unique and the decisions appear to rest on factual determinations rather than on legal principles. Nonetheless, it is desirable to have some understanding of the basic principles of the fourth amendment, and the way in which these principles affect individual cases.