Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- 4th amendment (1)
- 5th amendment (1)
- California Senate Bill 1476 (1)
- California Senate Bill 274 (1)
- Conscience (1)
-
- Criminal law (1)
- Deterrence (1)
- EO 12333 (1)
- Executive Order 12333 (1)
- False speech (1)
- Federalism (1)
- Fifth amendment (1)
- First amendment (1)
- Fourth amendment (1)
- Free speech (1)
- LPR (1)
- Lawful Permanent Resident (1)
- Parent status (1)
- Parentage law (1)
- Prior conviction (1)
- Recidivism (1)
- SB 1476 (1)
- SB 274 (1)
- Sentencing (1)
- Terrorists (1)
- Tort law (1)
- Tort liability (1)
- UPA (1)
- Uniform Parentage Act (1)
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Social and Behavioral Sciences
The Punishment Should Fit The Crime—Not The Prior Convictions Of The Person That Committed The Crime: An Argument For Less Impact Being Accorded To Previous Convictions, Mirko Bagaric
San Diego Law Review
The seriousness of the offense is the main consideration that should determine the severity of criminal punishment. This cardinal sentencing principle is undermined by the reality that often the criminal history of the offender is the most decisive sentencing consideration. Recidivists are frequently sent to imprisonment for long periods for crimes, which, when committed by first-time offenders, are dealt with by a bond, probation, or a fine. This makes sentencing more about an individual’s profile than the harm caused by the offender and has contributed to a large increase in prison numbers. Intuitively, it feels right to punish repeat offenders …
National Geographics: Toward A “Federalism Function” Of American Tort Law, Riaz Tejani
National Geographics: Toward A “Federalism Function” Of American Tort Law, Riaz Tejani
San Diego Law Review
This Article will situate the federalism function among existing scholarly frameworks and assess the “contoured” approach to federal and state power balancing across the existing subject matter of torts. Part II will assess conflicting characterizations of tort law as on one hand “private” and on the other “public” law. Part III will define and explain competing functions of tort law with an eye to whether federalism fits the common criteria of these coexisting objectives, goals, purposes, and methods for adjudication. In Part IV, the Article will explore historical and contemporary roles of federalism to understand why this process becomes so …
Should Public Law Accommodate The Claims Of Conscience?, William A. Galston
Should Public Law Accommodate The Claims Of Conscience?, William A. Galston
San Diego Law Review
In the end, it seems to me, the matter boils down to a single issue. Many individuals consider themselves bound by two sources of authority, public law and conscience, whose demands do not always coincide. Is the state prepared to take cognizance of this fact, and if so, how should it respond? Unlike other regimes, liberal democracies should not find these questions unduly challenging. To be a liberal state is to recognize limits on the legitimate scope of public authority; to be a liberal democracy is to recognize limits on the authority of the people and on the writ of …
False Speech: Quagmire?, Christopher P. Guzelian
False Speech: Quagmire?, Christopher P. Guzelian
San Diego Law Review
Recently decided cases in several Federal Courts of Appeals and the United States Supreme Court show that First Amendment false speech case law is contradictory and unpredictable. This Article gives examples and concludes that legal liability for false speech will continue to be arbitrary and even susceptible to intentionally unjust decisionmaking if judges and juries individually and collectively disregard or downplay the necessity of an honest search for truth under the guise of tolerance and evenhandedness. If Americans wish to avoid an anything-goes “quagmire” about truth, they must—despite inevitable resistance in a civilization increasingly rife with skeptics—undergo transformations of their …
Overseas Lawful Permanent Resident Terrorists: The Novel Approach For Revoking Their Lpr Status, Daniel Pines
Overseas Lawful Permanent Resident Terrorists: The Novel Approach For Revoking Their Lpr Status, Daniel Pines
San Diego Law Review
This Article seeks to break the silence by examining the issue of overseas LPRs and offering a mechanism by which the U.S. government could take affirmative action to file cases in immigration courts to strip out-of-status LPR terrorists of their LPR status. As the United States legally can, and routinely does, revoke the LPR status of out-of-status LPRs who appear at U.S. borders, the United States could also take away such status for those who have resorted to terror, without having to wait—perhaps in vain—for them to appear on the United States’ doorstep. The purpose of granting an individual LPR …
A Modern King Solomon’S Dilemma: Why State Legislatures Should Give Courts The Discretion To Find That A Child Has More Than Two Legal Parents, Ann E. Kinsey
San Diego Law Review
This Comment reviews the current state of parental rights and proposes statutory clarifications that would provide courts with the power to find that a child has more than two legal parents. Part II provides background information on the decline of the traditional family. The Part reviews how the law of parentage has progressed over time and provides an overview of the laws of several states and Canada that provide rights to, and impose duties on, a third parent. Part III discusses California Senate Bill 1476, which, had Governor Jerry Brown signed it into law in 2012, would have given California …