Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 10 of 10
Full-Text Articles in Health Law and Policy
What We Owe The World Are Thoughtful War-Crimes Trials That Do Justice Without Unduly Jeopardizing Innocent Lives By Compromising Vital Intelligence Comment., Sherry M. Barnash
What We Owe The World Are Thoughtful War-Crimes Trials That Do Justice Without Unduly Jeopardizing Innocent Lives By Compromising Vital Intelligence Comment., Sherry M. Barnash
St. Mary's Law Journal
In Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, the United States Supreme Court held the military commission convened to try accused terrorist Salim Ahmen Hamdan was unlawful. The Court concluded the Government could not lawfully proceed using established commission rules because the commission differed from courts-martial and did not follow certain aspects of the Geneva Convention. One procedure the Court found troubling was a provision in the Military Commission Order No. 1 which allowed the exclusion of the defendant and his civilian counsel from certain proceedings. Yet, denial of access was nothing new, as three decades prior Congress enacted the Classified Information Procedures Act …
Restricting Kelo: Will Redefining Blight In Senate Bill 7 Be The Light At The End Of The Tunnel., Adrianne Archer
Restricting Kelo: Will Redefining Blight In Senate Bill 7 Be The Light At The End Of The Tunnel., Adrianne Archer
St. Mary's Law Journal
In Kelo v. City of New London, the United States Supreme Court extended the public use limitation to its most expansive definition yet. The Kelo decision enhanced the Fifth Amendment takings power by allowing the city of New London, Connecticut, to exercise eminent domain power in furtherance of an economic development plan. Notably, the city’s revitalization plan did not include a claim that the area subject to eminent domain was “blighted.” The Fifth Amendment provides that governments may wield the power of eminent domain and take private property for public use but only with just compensation. Generally, private property can …
The Unable To Agree Requirement And Texas Condemnation Law: A Critical Analysis Of Hubenak V. San Jacinto Gas Transmission Co.., B. Tyler Milton
The Unable To Agree Requirement And Texas Condemnation Law: A Critical Analysis Of Hubenak V. San Jacinto Gas Transmission Co.., B. Tyler Milton
St. Mary's Law Journal
In Texas, the state constitution requires adequate compensation as a predicate to a taking of private property for a public use. Though an eminent domain cause of action has both a constitutional and statutory basis, the requirement of adequate or just compensation is premised on principles of natural equity and justice. Texas statutorily mandates that a condemner of land must, prior to the institution of a condemnation proceeding, plead and prove the two parties were “unable to agree” on the corresponding compensation due to the landowner. Texas courts interpreted this requirement in the condemnation statute to compel “good faith negotiations” …
Texas Private Real Property Rights Preservation Act: A Political Solution To The Regulatory Takings Problem Comment., George E. Grimes Jr.
Texas Private Real Property Rights Preservation Act: A Political Solution To The Regulatory Takings Problem Comment., George E. Grimes Jr.
St. Mary's Law Journal
Increasing environmental regulation has resulted in an antiregulation backlash and the growth of a property rights movement. Unable to successfully use the courts to protect private property from diminution in value due to government regulations, property rights advocates have looked to the federal and state legislatures for assistance. This has led to some states and the United States Congress to introduce private property rights protection. This protection generally takes one of two forms. The first requires the government to assess the possible effect on property rights before enacting regulations. The second requires the government to compensate property owners for the …
The Presumption Of Innocence: Patching The Tattered Cloak After Maryland V. Craig., Ralph H. Kohlmann
The Presumption Of Innocence: Patching The Tattered Cloak After Maryland V. Craig., Ralph H. Kohlmann
St. Mary's Law Journal
Over one hundred years ago, the United States Supreme Court recognized the importance of the presumption of innocence in a criminal justice system which is based on due process. The Court declared the presumption of innocence is “the undoubted law, axiomatic, and elementary, and its enforcements lies at the foundation … of our criminal law.” The Court’s changing view of the Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause is the most recent contribution to the reduction in the practical value of the presumption of innocence. In Maryland v. Craig, the Court decided that while face-to-face confrontation forms the core of values furthered in …
Principles Of Governmental Immunity In Texas: The Texas Government Waives Sovereign Immunity When It Contracts - Or Does It Comment., Renna Rhodes
St. Mary's Law Journal
When the government causes injury through negligence or by breaching a contract, the injured party must face the obstacle of governmental immunity. The doctrine of governmental immunity can act as a total bar to recovery, especially in Texas. Over the years, governmental immunity increasingly has faced attack from courts and commentators. Some states, including Texas, have revised the common-law doctrine, allowing the government to be sued in certain situations. In Texas, principles of governmental immunity are often misconstrued. Which principles of governmental immunity apply to a particular situation in Texas depends on whether the defendant is a state entity or …
Scientific Evidence Under Daubert., John H. Mansfield
Scientific Evidence Under Daubert., John H. Mansfield
St. Mary's Law Journal
The controversy over the proper standard for the admissibility of scientific evidence is an argument over the value of a jury trial compared with a bench trial or decisions by scientists. The argument has both a constitutional dimension in the provisions relating to a jury trial, compulsory process and due process, and a nonconstitutional dimension in the ordinary law of evidence. In the recent case of Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the United States Supreme Court took a different approach, basing its decision almost entirely on an interpretation of the particular words used in Rule 702 of the Federal …
Foreigners On Texas's Death Row And The Right Of Access To A Consul Symposium - Human Rights In The Americas., S. Adele Shank, John Quigley
Foreigners On Texas's Death Row And The Right Of Access To A Consul Symposium - Human Rights In The Americas., S. Adele Shank, John Quigley
St. Mary's Law Journal
Foreign nationals arrested in the United States confront the disadvantage of mounting a criminal defense in several ways. In most cases, they are unfamiliar with U.S. customs, police policies, and criminal proceedings. Although U.S. courts strive to prevent bias against accused based on alienage, discrimination does occur. To minimize the disadvantages experienced by accused foreigners, international law guarantees the right of consular access. Under internationally accepted norms applicable in the United States, an accused foreigner is entitled to contact his home-state consult office for assistance. Furthermore, mere involvement of a consul may encourage local government to follow procedural norms and …
The Natural Law Tradition On The Modern Supreme Court: Not Burke, But The Enlightenment Tradition Represented By Locke, Madison, And Marshall., R. Randall Kelso
The Natural Law Tradition On The Modern Supreme Court: Not Burke, But The Enlightenment Tradition Represented By Locke, Madison, And Marshall., R. Randall Kelso
St. Mary's Law Journal
A traditional common-law style of judicial decisionmaking exists which was present at this nation’s founding. This common law style is derived from natural law tradition. And this tradition stands as an alternative to the formalism of Justice Scalia or the Holmesian style of Chief Justice Rehnquist. This natural law style, with its focus on the religious and communitarian ethical tradition, was the dominant view of judicial interpretation for the framing and ratifying generation of the original Constitution and the Civil War Amendments. The decisionmaking style of Justices O’Connor, Kennedy, and Souter appears to have great affinity with this traditional common-law …
Peremptory Jury Strike In Texas After Batson And Edmondson., Alan B. Rich
Peremptory Jury Strike In Texas After Batson And Edmondson., Alan B. Rich
St. Mary's Law Journal
In Batson v. Kentucky, the United States Supreme Court overruled that portion of Swain v. Alabama, which had imposed a “crippling burden of proof” upon a person who wished to vindicate his right of equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment in the face of a racially motivated peremptory challenge. Under Batson, a defendant can raise an inference of discrimination and prove it using only evidence adduced at his own trial. Two fundamental questions needing resolution prior to involving the Batson procedures are: (A) who has standing to bring a Batson challenge; and (B) who must be challenged before the Batson …