Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Religion (2)
- Austria (1)
- Court (1)
- Criminal Code (1)
- Criminal Law (1)
-
- ECtHR (1)
- Environmental Law (1)
- Establishment Clause (1)
- European Court of Human Rights (1)
- First Amendment (1)
- Frank Zimring (1)
- Free Speech (1)
- Freedom of Speech (1)
- Fulton v. City of Philadelphia (1)
- Harm (1)
- Inadmissible Harms (1)
- Little Sisters of the Poor (1)
- Minorities (1)
- Probative Harms (1)
- Prohibited Harms (1)
- Religious Exemptions (1)
- Religious Exercise (1)
- Social Goods (1)
- Supreme Court (1)
- The Insidious Momentum of Mass Incarceration (1)
- Third Parties (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Criminal Law
When Freedom Of Speech Comes At A Cost: A Case Study Of E.S. V. Austria, Rachael Taylor
When Freedom Of Speech Comes At A Cost: A Case Study Of E.S. V. Austria, Rachael Taylor
Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies
In the fall of 2018, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) issued a decision upholding the criminal conviction of an Austrian national (E.S.) in violation of Austria's Criminal Code against the disparagement of religious doctrines. Her initial conviction in the Austrian court was based on statements she made about the Prophet Muhammad while teaching a series of seminars entitled "Basic Information on Islam." In upholding her conviction, the ECtHR found that there had been no violation of the Austrian's right to freedom of expression under Article 10 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights (Convention), and …
First Amendment “Harms”, Stephanie H. Barclay
First Amendment “Harms”, Stephanie H. Barclay
Indiana Law Journal
What role should harm to third parties play in the government’s ability to protect religious rights? The intuitively appealing “harm” principle has animated new theories advanced by scholars who argue that religious exemptions are indefensible whenever they result in cognizable harm to third parties. This third-party harm theory is gaining traction in some circles, particularly in light of the Supreme Court’s pending cases in Little Sisters of the Poor and Fulton v. City of Philadelphia. While focusing on harm appears at first to provide an appealing, simple, and neutral principle for avoiding other difficult moral questions, the definition of harm …
The Categorical Imperative As A Decarceral Agenda, Jessica M. Eaglin
The Categorical Imperative As A Decarceral Agenda, Jessica M. Eaglin
Articles by Maurer Faculty
In his forthcoming book, The Insidious Momentum of Mass Incarceration, Frank Zimring proposes two alternative methods to decarcerate: states can adopt a categorical imperative to reduce prison populations or states can reform the governance of sentencing. This symposium Essay focuses on the first of these options, as proposed in his tentative Chapter Six, wherein Zimring calls for categorically removing drug-addicted offenders from eligibility for prison sanctions and expanding use of jails for categories of offenses or offenders.
These methods, I suggest, exist in tension with numerous popular sentencing reforms being implemented in the states right now. Popular reforms, including the …