Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Supreme Court of the United States Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- 4th amendment (1)
- Aliens (1)
- Amendments (1)
- Antithetical (1)
- Arizona (1)
-
- Arizona Senate Bill 1070 (1)
- Arizona v. united states (1)
- At home (1)
- Attrition (1)
- Bill of rights (1)
- Centralized immigration (1)
- Civil lawsuits (1)
- Civil rights (1)
- Compensatory awards (1)
- Consent (1)
- Constitution (1)
- Constitutional law (1)
- Constitutionality (1)
- Daimler ag v. bauman (1)
- Discrimination (1)
- Due Process Clause (1)
- Equal Protection Clause (1)
- Equal protection (1)
- Fourteenth amendment (1)
- Fourth amendment (1)
- General jurisdiction (1)
- Golden ratio (1)
- Hung jury (1)
- Illegal alien (1)
- Illegal immigrant (1)
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Supreme Court of the United States
Stuck In Ohio's Legal Limbo, How Many Mistrials Are Too Many Mistrials?: Exploring New Factors That Help A Trial Judge In Ohio Know Whether To Exercise Her Authority To Dismiss An Indictment With Prejudice, Especially Following Repeated Hung Juries, Samantha M. Cira
Cleveland State Law Review
Multiple mistrials following validly-prosecuted trials are becoming an increasingly harsh reality in today’s criminal justice system. Currently, the Ohio Supreme Court has not provided any guidelines to help its trial judges know when to make the crucial decision to dismiss an indictment with prejudice following a string of properly-declared mistrials, especially due to repeated hung juries. Despite multiple mistrials that continue to result in no conviction, criminal defendants often languish behind bars, suffering detrimental psychological harm and a loss of personal freedom as they remain in “legal limbo” waiting to retry their case. Furthermore, continuously retrying defendants cuts against fundamental …
Justice Blackmun And Individual Rights, Diane P. Wood
Justice Blackmun And Individual Rights, Diane P. Wood
Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)
Of the many contributions Justice Blackmun has made to American jurisprudence, surely his record in the area of individual rights stands out for its importance. Throughout his career on the Supreme Court, he has displayed concern for a wide variety of individual and civil rights. He has rendered decisions on matters ranging from the most personal interests in autonomy and freedom from interference from government in life’s private realms, to the increasingly complex problems posed by discrimination based upon race, sex, national origin, alienage, illegitimacy, sexual orientation, and other characteristics. As his views have become well known to the public, …
Of Carrots And Sticks: General Jurisdiction And Genuine Consent, Craig Sanders
Of Carrots And Sticks: General Jurisdiction And Genuine Consent, Craig Sanders
Northwestern University Law Review
The United States Supreme Court’s 2014 decision in Daimler AG v. Bauman changed how the courts will determine whether companies should be subject to general personal jurisdiction. In 1945, Pennoyer v. Neff’s geographical fixation gave way to International Shoe Co. v. Washington, which provided a test for courts to determine whether corporations had sufficient contact with a forum to meet the bar for personal jurisdiction there. Specific jurisdiction requires “minimum contacts,” provided the action is satisfactorily related to the forum. However, to be subject to general jurisdiction, a corporation must possess more than just “minimum contacts,” and claimants …
Punitive Damages Revisited: A Statistical Analysis Of How Federal Circuit Courts Decide The Constitutionality Of Such Awards, Hironari Momioka
Punitive Damages Revisited: A Statistical Analysis Of How Federal Circuit Courts Decide The Constitutionality Of Such Awards, Hironari Momioka
Cleveland State Law Review
Using data from punitive damages decisions of U.S. federal circuit courts from 2004 to 2012, this paper attempts to establish empirically the following: (1) there is no apparent statistical difference between the levels of jury and judge awards; (2) U.S. Supreme Court decisions such as Philip Morris (2007) or Exxon (2008) do not actually or substantially affect the level of punitive damage awards; (3) with regard to the cases involving remittitur, or reduction of awards, the Exxon decision did not radically affect the decreasing ratio of punitive to compensatory damage awards; (4) as the levels of compensatory awards go up, …
The Prevailing Culture Over Immigration: Centralized Immigration And Policies Between Attrition And Accommodation, Antonios Kouroutakis
The Prevailing Culture Over Immigration: Centralized Immigration And Policies Between Attrition And Accommodation, Antonios Kouroutakis
Seton Hall Circuit Review
No abstract provided.