Jurisprudence Commons^™

Putting A Gag On Farm Whistleblowers: The Right To Lie And The Right To Reamin Silent Confront State Agricultural Protectionism, Rita-Marie Cain Reid, Amber L. Kingery

Journal of Food Law & Policy

Whistleblowers play an important role in filling gaps in government food safety systems. Unfortunately, several dominant food-producing states have pursued legislative initiatives that punish farm whistleblowers and silence investigative tactics. First, this research describes various state legislative initiatives that curb criticism of agriculture. The work analyzes the federal food safety system and how these protections limiting agricultural criticism contravene that food safety net. Further, the research analyzes the free speech concerns in the newest protectionist laws. The analysis recommends strategies and future research to improve agricluture safety and protect free speech in an evolving food safety landscape.

Local And State Governments Are Taking The Stage When It Is Fda's Curtain Call - Are Local And State Governments' Safety Warnings Preempted By Federal Law?, Melissa M. Card

Journal of Food Law & Policy

Eliminated from fad diets, sworn off by celebrities, and frantically reformulated out of processed foods, added sugars have been deemed the new nutritional scoundrel. Recent studies from the American Heart Association, the World Health Organization, and the American Cancer Association demonstrate that the consumption of added sugar leads to increased risks of obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and gout. While all foods containing added sugar are deemed unhealthy, Sugary-Sweetened Beverages ("SSBs") are said to be especially toxic by the American health community, by virtue of these beverages' being excessively high in added sugar content, low in satiety, and incomplete in compensation …

Ending Judgment Arbitrage: Jurisdictional Competition And The Enforcement Of Foreign Money Judgments In The United States, Gregory Shill

Gregory Shill

Recent multi-billion-dollar damage awards issued by foreign courts against large American companies have focused attention on the once-obscure, patchwork system of enforcing foreign-country judgments in the United States. That system’s structural problems are even more serious than its critics have charged. However, the leading proposals for reform overlook the positive potential embedded in its design.

In the United States, no treaty or federal law controls the domestication of foreign judgments; the process is instead governed by state law. Although they are often conflated in practice, the procedure consists of two formally and conceptually distinct stages: foreign judgments must first be …