Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Administrative Office of the Courts (1)
- COVID-19 (1)
- Communications decency act (1)
- Content creators (1)
- Court facilities (1)
-
- Court operations (1)
- Emergency preparedness (1)
- Federal courts (1)
- Federal preemption (1)
- H1N1 (1)
- Judicial guidance (1)
- Limiting the scope (1)
- Mainstream media (1)
- Pandemic (1)
- Preparedness planning (1)
- Remote justice (1)
- Safe harbor (1)
- Social media (1)
- St. Mary's Law Journal (1)
- Willy E. Rice (1)
- Zoe Niesel (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Courts
The Aoc In The Age Of Covid - Pandemic Preparedness Planning In The Federal Courts, Zoe Niesel
The Aoc In The Age Of Covid - Pandemic Preparedness Planning In The Federal Courts, Zoe Niesel
Faculty Articles
The 2020 COVID-19 pandemic created a crisis for American society—and the federal courts were not exempt. Court facilities came to a grinding halt, cases were postponed, and judiciary employees adopted work-from-home practices. Having court operations impacted by a pandemic was not a new phenomenon, but the size, scope, and technological lift of the COVID-19 pandemic was certainly unique.
Against this background, this Article examines the history and future of pandemic preparedness planning in the federal court system and seeks to capture some of the lessons learned from initial federal court transitions to pandemic operations in 2020. The Article begins by …
Abolishing The Communications Decency Act Might Sanitize "Political Biased," "Digitally Polluted," And "Dangerously Toxic" Social Media? - Judicial And Statistical Guidance From Federal-Preemption, Safe-Harbor And Rights-Preservation Decisions, Willy E. Rice
Faculty Articles
Sitting and former U.S. Presidents, as well as members of the general public, financial, political and educational institutions, use social media. Yet, an overwhelming majority of users, content creators, parents, "conservatives," "progressives," Democrats, and Republicans distrust social media owners. Some critics allege that owners "digitally pollute" platforms by encouraging users to post "corrosive, dangerous, toxic, and illegal content." Other critics assert that service providers' purportedly objective content moderation algorithms are biased-discriminating irrationally on the basis of users' political association, ideology, socioeconomic status, gender, and ethnicity. Republicans and Democrats have crafted roughly twenty bills on this matter. In theory, the enacted …