Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons^™

The Backyard Effect How The Experience Of Impacts Of Climate Change Affects Opinion And Discourse, Kevin Eggleston

Renée Crown University Honors Thesis Projects - All

“The Backyard Effect” hypothesizes that for an issue as potentially abstract, complex, and vast-in-scope as climate change, it will take experiential evidence of impacts in order for people to change and view the problem as urgent – and take action. In order to test this hypothesis, this project set out to interview citizens in climate change-impacted regions around the world in order to explore any connections between personal experience and personal opinion and action. The methodology involved personal interviews with residents, analysis of poll numbers, and use of media reports in locations currently experiencing the impacts of climate change.

Based …

Changing Constituencies And International Trade: The Role Of Organized Labor On The Trade Platform Of The Democratic Party, Chad Ivan Brooker

Renée Crown University Honors Thesis Projects - All

Abstract

Problem:

There has been much talk over the past 50 years of the role of American labor in a changing American industrial market. As the world has become increasingly connected, American workers who tout high levels of labor rights, high wages, and safe working conditions have been hard pressed to compete with emerging economies that often share little of these same principles or legal decrees.

The debate over American competitiveness in the world has been fought on the picket lines, on the streets, in back rooms and most importantly in the stolid, white, columned halls of Congress. While liberalized …

The Supreme Court That Stole…Christmas? Measuring The Fallout From Lynch And Allegheny: A Critique Of The Establishment Clause And Religious Displays, Deidre E. Kalenderian

Renée Crown University Honors Thesis Projects - All

Lynch v. Donnelly in 1984 and County of Allegheny v. ACLU in 1989, the only holiday themed religious display cases decided by the Court on the grounds on Establishment Clause violations, demonstrate the inadequacies of the Court’s Establishment Clause jurisprudence. The precedent set out by the Supreme Court in Lynch v. Donnelly and Allegheny v. ACLU compromise lower courts’ decision making process. Discrepancy in methods, results, and opinions threatens the credibility of the Court. This not only confuses the idea of religious freedom, but it also threatens its very core.

Lynch and Allegheny were intended to clarify Establishment Clause jurisprudence …

Dual Citizenship In Asia, Mindy Eiko Tadai

Renée Crown University Honors Thesis Projects - All

Among all regions, Asia lags behind in terms of the number of countries that recognize dual citizenship, but why have some Asian countries permitted dual citizenship while others have not? As of 2009, only seven countries in Asia recognize dual citizenship: Sri Lanka, Cambodia, the Philippines, India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Vietnam. This study analyzes data for twenty-two Asian countries and conducts four case studies. The first two cases, India and the Philippines, recognize dual citizenship, while the second two cases, Nepal and Mongolia, do not. I examine three hypothesized factors that contribute to state recognition of dual citizenship in Asia: …

Reflections Of A Young Journalist Working Within The Parliament Of The United Kingdom, Joe Frandino

Renée Crown University Honors Thesis Projects - All

The purpose of my Capstone project is to present a personalized insight into the British political and journalistic systems, and how they contrast with their respective American counterparts. As an intern in the British Houses of Parliament, and with the news department of the Liberal Democratic Party of the United Kingdom, I will present my significant experiences and understandings, as well as the changes I underwent during my study-abroad semester in London, England during the spring of 2009.

The Televised Presidential Debate: Decreasing Effectiveness And The Impact Of The New Media Spin In The Fourth Age, Marcus Stevens

Renée Crown University Honors Thesis Projects - All

This Capstone Project focuses on the entire history of televised presidential debates in America. Beginning with the Kennedy-Nixon debates of 1960 and ending with the Obama-McCain debates of 2008, I examine and analyze academic books, articles and data in order to answer several questions: Did the American public continue to tune in to televised debate for information throughout the years? Have the debates lost their ability to maintain interest, change or affect electoral outcomes, or help inform the masses of the actual policies and promises of the candidates? Have the advances in technology and media had any effect on these …

Vol. 4 No. 1, Moynihan European Research Centers, Spring 2010, Moynihan European Research Centers

Newsletters from Moynihan European Research Centers

Kazakhstan and the OSCE -- EU Graduate Simulation -- Berlin Wall panel -- MERC outreach project -- Global Europe -- 2010-11 FLAS announcement

Will The Real Elena Kagan Please Stand Up? Conflicting Public Images In The Supreme Court Confirmation Process, Keith J. Bybee

Institute for the Study of the Judiciary, Politics, and the Media at Syracuse University

What images of judging did the Kagan confirmation process project?

My response to this question begins with a brief overview of existing public perceptions of the Supreme Court. I argue that a large portion of the public sees the justices as impartial arbiters who can be trusted to rule fairly. At the same time, a large portion of the public also sees the justices as political actors who are wrapped up in partisan disputes. Given these prevailing public views, we should expect the Kagan confirmation process to transmit contradictory images of judicial decisionmaking, with a portrait of judging as a …

All Judges Are Political—Except When They Are Not: Acceptable Hypocrisies And The Rule Of Law, Keith J. Bybee

College of Law - Faculty Scholarship

This paper contains the introduction to the new book, All Judges Are Political—Except When They Are Not: Acceptable Hypocrisies and the Rule of Law (Stanford University Press, 2010).

The book begins with the observation that Americans are divided in their beliefs about whether courts operate on the basis of unbiased legal principle or of political interest. This division in public opinion in turn breeds suspicion that judges do not actually mean what they say, that judicial professions of impartiality are just fig leaves used to hide the pursuit of partisan purposes.

Comparing law to the practice of common courtesy, the …