Secession And Federalism In The United States: Tools For Managing Regional Conflict In A Pluralist Society, 2017 Florida State University College of Law
Secession And Federalism In The United States: Tools For Managing Regional Conflict In A Pluralist Society, Erin Ryan
Revolutionary Disobedience, 2017 Barry University School of Law
Revolutionary Disobedience, Philip K. Y. Lau
Barry Law Review
Over the past few decades, civil disobedience has become one of the most widely studied subjects in jurisprudence. Scholars such as Rawls and Dworkin have offered their unique reflections on the subject. Whilst many have made great contributions to clarify its purposes and justifications, they have neglected one of the most important and fundamental forms of political disobedience, namely revolutionary disobedience. Unlike an act of civil disobedience, which recognizes governmental authority and legitimacy, revolutionary disobedience explicitly denies and challenges those two principles. Manifested as a rupture between the constituent power (ruled/governed) and constituted power (ruler/governor) in a given ...
Democracy In Brazil: The Evolving Role Of The Country’S Supreme Court, 2017 Brazilian Supreme Court
Democracy In Brazil: The Evolving Role Of The Country’S Supreme Court, Dias Toffoli
Boston College International and Comparative Law Review
The objective of this paper is to analyze the functions of the Brazilian Supreme Court and the need to attribute to a single specific entity the roles of guardian of the constitution, court of the federation, and moderator of political and social conflicts. It is also important to stress the relevance of the Brazilian Supreme Court as a criminal court, overseeing inquiries and criminal suits involving federal authorities entitled to the prerogative of privileged jurisdiction.
The Trump Presidency And The Press, 2017 University of New Hampshire School of Law
The Trump Presidency And The Press, John M. Greabe
[Excerpt] "It is not difficult to understand why presidents frequently voice frustration with the press. Imagine being subjected to critical analysis 24/7 by reporters, bloggers and pundits who often lack complete and accurate information but face competitive pressure to publish quickly."
Damned Lies & Criminal Sentencing Using Evidence-Based Tools, 2017 Duke Law
Damned Lies & Criminal Sentencing Using Evidence-Based Tools, John Lightbourne
Duke Law & Technology Review
The boom of big data and predictive analytics has revolutionized business. eHarmony matches customers based on shared likes and expectations for romance, and Target uses similar methods to strategically push its products on shoppers. Courts and Departments of Corrections have also sought to employ similar tools. However, the use of data analytics in sentencing raises a host of constitutional concerns. In State v. Loomis, the Wisconsin Supreme Court was faced with whether the use of an actuarial risk assessment tool based on a proprietary formula violates a defendant’s right to due process where the defendant could not review how ...
Proportionality Skepticism In A Red State, 2017 Georgia State University College of Law
Proportionality Skepticism In A Red State, Lauren Sudeall Lucas
Faculty Publications By Year
Commentary on Carol S. Steiker & Jordan M. Steiker, Courting Death: The Supreme Court and Capital Punishment (2016).
A Comparative Approach To Counter-Terrorism Legislation And Legal Policy, 2017 Liberty University
A Comparative Approach To Counter-Terrorism Legislation And Legal Policy, Paul David Hill Jr
Senior Honors Theses
Since the 9/11 attacks, American legislation and legal policy in regards to classifying and processing captured terrorists has fallen short of being fully effective and lawful. Trial and error by the Bush and Obama administrations has uncovered two key lessons: (1) captured terrorists are not typical prisoners of war and thus their detainment must involve more legal scrutiny than the latter; and (2) captured terrorists are not ordinary criminals and thus the civilian criminal court system, due to constitutional constraints, is not capable of adequately trying every count of terrorism. Other nations, including France and Israel, approach this problem ...
Rwu First Amendment Blog: David A. Logan's Blog: Donald Trump Vs. Roger Williams 05-08-2017, 2017 Roger Williams University School of Law
Rwu First Amendment Blog: David A. Logan's Blog: Donald Trump Vs. Roger Williams 05-08-2017, David A. Logan
Law School Blogs
No abstract provided.
Can President Trump 'Open Up' The Libel Laws?, 2017 University of New Hampshire School of Law
Can President Trump 'Open Up' The Libel Laws?, John M. Greabe
[Excerpt] "Libel and slander are branches of the law of defamation. Defamation law authorizes remedies for reputational harm caused by some false statements of fact. A libel is a defamatory statement that is printed or written; a slander is a defamatory statement that is spoken.
During the 2016 presidential campaign, candidate Donald Trump suggested that, if elected, he would "open up our libel laws" to facilitate lawsuits by public officials against news organizations."
Stewart V. State, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 20 (May 4, 2017), 2017 Nevada Law Journal
Stewart V. State, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 20 (May 4, 2017), Margarita Elias
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
Before his interrogation, Tommy Laquade Stewart (“Stewart”) was given LVMPD’s Miranda warning pursuant to Miranda v. Arizona. Stewart then agreed to speak with detectives without an attorney. He was subsequently charged and convicted of kidnapping and robbery. On appeal, Stewart argued that there was insufficient evidence to support the convictions and that the Miranda warning was legally insufficient. The Court disagreed and affirmed the district court’s judgment of conviction.
 384 U.S. 436 (1966).
Duties Of Capital Trial Counsel Under The California “Death Penalty Reform And Savings Act Of 2016”, 2017 Santa Barbara College of Law
Duties Of Capital Trial Counsel Under The California “Death Penalty Reform And Savings Act Of 2016”, Robert M. Sanger
Robert M. Sanger
Adrift At Sea: How The United States Government Is Forgoing The Fourth Amendment In The Prosecution Of Captured Terrorists, Frank Sullivan
Penn State Journal of Law & International Affairs
No abstract provided.
Jury Deliberation, 2017 firstname.lastname@example.org
Jury Deliberation, Giuliana Pietrantoni
The Review: A Journal of Undergraduate Student Research
Juries are tasked with the duty of deliberating and applying the law to the case at hand. But it is unclear whether juries deliberate or deliberate well enough. Factors which may affect jury deliberation are the motivation of jurors, characteristics of jurors, emotions during and after trial, bargaining, charges, and dissenters. This paper argues that jurors do engage in rigorous dialogue which eventually results in compromises, although whether this creates an unjust verdict is unclear.
Federalism And The End Of Obamacare, 2017 University of Michigan Law School
Federalism And The End Of Obamacare, Nicholas Bagley
Federalism has become a watchword in the acrimonious debate over a possible replacement for the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Missing from that debate, however, is a theoretically grounded and empirically informed understanding of how best to allocate power between the federal government and the states. For health reform, the conventional arguments in favor of a national solution have little resonance: federal intervention will not avoid a race to the bottom, prevent externalities, or protect minority groups from state discrimination. Instead, federal action is necessary to overcome the states’ fiscal limitations: their inability to deficit-spend and the constraints that federal law ...
Finding A Duty To Consult Aboriginal Peoples During The Negotiation Of Free Trade Agreements (Ftas) And Foreign Investment Promotion And Protection Agreements (Fipas), Katya Lena Richardson
Western Journal of Legal Studies
This article explores whether there is a legal duty to consult with Indigenous groups prior to the ratification of international trade and investment agreements. It considers both the content of the duty to consult and the circumstances under which such a duty is triggered. In doing so, this paper analyzes the arguments of Hupacasth First Nation v Canada, the only case that has been brought to the courts on this issue. Although the Federal Court of Appeal dismissed the Hupacasath First Nation’s claim that the duty to consult extends to negotiations that the federal government enters into with other ...
Pub. Employees’ Ret. Sys. Of Nev. V. Gitter, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 18 (Apr. 27, 2017)., 2017 Nevada Law Journal
Pub. Employees’ Ret. Sys. Of Nev. V. Gitter, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 18 (Apr. 27, 2017)., Scott Cardenas
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that: 1) Nevada’s general slayer statutes apply to the Public Employees’ Retirement Act (“PERS Act”) for purposes of determining a survivor’s benefits, 2) the Public Retirement System (“PERS”) is not exempt from paying prejudgment and post-judgment interest, 3) the district court had discretion to award up to $1,500 in reasonable costs under NRS 18.005(5) for a nontestifying expert consultant, and 4) the district court’s award of attorney fees under NRS 7.085 and 18.010 was inappropriate and warranted reversal.
Nlrb Jurisdiction Over Religious Schools And The Religion Clause Of The First Amendment, 2017 St. John's University School of Law
Nlrb Jurisdiction Over Religious Schools And The Religion Clause Of The First Amendment, Richard J. Curiale
The Catholic Lawyer
No abstract provided.
Byrn And Roe: The Threshold Question And Juridical Review, 2017 St. John's University School of Law
Byrn And Roe: The Threshold Question And Juridical Review, Peter J. Riga
The Catholic Lawyer
No abstract provided.
A Modern Look At The Right To A Civil Jury Trial Under The Maine Constitution, 2017 University of Maine School of Law
A Modern Look At The Right To A Civil Jury Trial Under The Maine Constitution, Carolyn A. Liegner
Maine Law Review
The right to a civil jury trial is a cornerstone of the American legal system. The Maine Constitution promises an even broader right to a civil jury trial than is offered by the federal Constitution and many other states. Article I, Section 20 states: “In all civil suits, and in all controversies concerning property, the parties shall have a right to a trial by jury, except in cases where it has heretofore been otherwise practiced.” The exception in the provision has been the subject of multiple interpretations by the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, since the ...
As A Matter Of Fact: Factual Methodology In Obergefell V. Hodges And Its Implications For Public Policy, Clint Hamilton
What are the implications of the confusing decision the Supreme Court reached in Obergefell v. Hodges that challenged the definition of marriage as legal bond between a man and a woman. Much of this confusion has arisen because instead of following the usual factual methodology to reach this groundbreaking (and very controversial) decision, the Supreme Court used an abnormal pattern of fact-finding. The use of abnormal methodology resulted in many complicated and tumultuous policy questions at both the State and National levels of government. This paper investigates both the methodology that resulted in the Supreme Court’s decision and its ...