Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Digital Commons Network

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 6 of 6

Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network

Leveraging Social Science Expertise In Immigration Policymaking, Ming H. Chen May 2018

Leveraging Social Science Expertise In Immigration Policymaking, Ming H. Chen

NULR Online

The longstanding uncertainty about how policymakers should grapple with social science demonstrating racism persists in the modern administrative state. This Essay examines the uses and misuses of social science and expertise in immigration policymaking. More specifically, it highlights three immigration policies that dismiss social scientific findings and expertise as part of presidential and agency decision-making: border control, crime control, and extreme vetting of refugees to prevent terrorism. The Essay claims that these rejections of expertise undermine both substantive and procedural protections for immigrants and undermine important functions of the administrative state as a curb on irrationality in policymaking. It concludes …


Evolutionary Due Process, Louis J. Virelli Iii Jan 2010

Evolutionary Due Process, Louis J. Virelli Iii

NULR Online

The issue of evolution instruction in American public schools is becoming increasingly complex, both legally and politically. Until recently, the controversy over whether and how to teach evolution in public school science classes has been singularly focused on the constitutional limits of government support for religion under the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause. Current measures in Louisiana and Texas, however, represent a shift toward a new “adjudicative model” for addressing questions of evolution instruction. This adjudicative model permits individual educators to treat evolution issues on a case-by-case basis, which, in turn, implicates a new constitutional issue in the evolution education debate: …


Can The Law Track Scientific Risk And Technological Innovation?: The Problem Of Regulatory Definitions And Nanotechnology, David A. Dana Jan 2010

Can The Law Track Scientific Risk And Technological Innovation?: The Problem Of Regulatory Definitions And Nanotechnology, David A. Dana

Faculty Working Papers

The functioning of a regulatory regime often turns on what is defined to be included in the scope of regulation and what is defined to be outside. In constructing the definitions of what is regulated, two key challenges are to align the defintions with the risks that motivated the establishment of the regulatory regime and to build in dynamism into the defintions so that they adapt to changes in scientific understanding and technology. This Chapter of a forthcoming book from Cambridge University Press (David Dana, ed., The Nanotechnology Challenge), explores these challnegs in the context of nanotechnology.


Keeping The Label Out Of The Case, Pearson Bownas, Mark Herrmann Apr 2009

Keeping The Label Out Of The Case, Pearson Bownas, Mark Herrmann

NULR Online

No abstract provided.


The Contextual Rationality Of The Precautionary Principle, David A. Dana Jan 2009

The Contextual Rationality Of The Precautionary Principle, David A. Dana

Faculty Working Papers

This article defines the precautionary principle (PP) primarily based on what it is not: it is not quantitative cost-benefit analysis (CBA) or cost-cost analysis of the sort we associate with the Office of Management and Budget in the United States and U.S. policymaking and policy discourse generally. In this definition, the PP is a form of analysis in which the costs of a possible environmental or health risk are not quantified, or if they are, any quantification is likely to be inadequate to capture the full extent of the costs of not taking regulatory measures to mitigate or avoid the …


The Mismatch Between Public Nuisance Law And Global Warming, David A. Dana Jan 2008

The Mismatch Between Public Nuisance Law And Global Warming, David A. Dana

Faculty Working Papers

The federal courts using the common law method of case-by-case adjudication may have institutional advantages over the more political branches, such as perhaps more freedom from interest group capture and more flexibility to tailor decisions to local conditions. Any such advantages, however, are more than offset by the disadvantages of relying on the courts in common resource management in general and in the management of the global atmospheric commons in particular. The courts are best able to serve a useful function resolving climate-related disputes once the political branches have acted by establishing a policy framework and working through the daunting …