Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Pond Betwixt: Differences In The U.S.-Eu Data Protection/Safe Harbor Negotiation, Richard J. Peltz-Steele
The Pond Betwixt: Differences In The U.S.-Eu Data Protection/Safe Harbor Negotiation, Richard J. Peltz-Steele
Faculty Publications
This article analyzes the differing perspectives that animate US and EU conceptions of privacy in the context of data protection. It begins by briefly reviewing the two continental approaches to data protection and then explains how the two approaches arise in a context of disparate cultural traditions with respect to the role of law in society. In light of those disparities, Underpinning contemporary data protection regulation is the normative value that both US and EU societies place on personal privacy. Both cultures attribute modern privacy to the famous Warren-Brandeis article in 1890, outlining a "right to be let alone." But …
A Jurisprudential Divide In U.S. V. Wong & U.S. V. June, Richard J. Peltz-Steele
A Jurisprudential Divide In U.S. V. Wong & U.S. V. June, Richard J. Peltz-Steele
Faculty Publications
In spring 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court decided two consolidated cases construing the Federal Tort Claims Act, U.S. v. Kwai Fun Wong and U.S. v June, Conservator. The Court majority, 5-4, per Justice Kagan, ruled in favor of the claimants and against the Government in both cases. On the face of the majority opinions, Wong and June come off as straightforward matters of statutory construction. But under the surface, the cases gave the Court a chance to wrestle with fundamental questions of statutory interpretation. The divide in Wong and June concerns the role of the courts vis-à-vis Congress — one …
The Cy Pres Doctrine In The United States: From Extreme Reluctance To Affirmative Action, Frances Howell Rudko
The Cy Pres Doctrine In The United States: From Extreme Reluctance To Affirmative Action, Frances Howell Rudko
Faculty Publications
In Part I, the author illustrates how the United States jurisdictions differ from England in the requirement for charitable intent. Earlier cases reveal the United States, unlike England, has resisted relaxation of the requirement. In Part II, the author uses the Restatement of Trusts to demonstrate further how jurisdictions had developed differently at the mid-twentieth century point. In Part III, the author reports on the significant reforms in England and the corresponding, though halting, movement toward reform in the United States jurisdictions. In Part IV, the author describes the specific reform proposals in the United States proliferating since 1943. Finally, …