Digital Commons Network^™

Dissent Into Confusion: The Supreme Court, Denialism, And The False “Scientific” Controversy Over Shaken Baby Syndrome, Joelle Moreno, Brian Homgren

Utah Law Review

In the United States Supreme Court's first opinion on the merits from its 2011-2012 term, three members of the Court contributed their authoritative voices to one of the most recent -- and one of the most deadly -- false scientific controversies, the purported scientific debate over the medical diagnosis of shaken baby syndrome (SBS), a prevalent form of abusive head trauma (AHT).

On October 31, 2011, in Cavazos v. Smith, the Supreme Court upheld Shirley Ree Smith's conviction for causing the death of her seven-week-old grandson, Etzel. This conviction was based on the jury finding that Etzel died from SBS. …

The Skeptic’S Guide To Information Sharing At Sentencing, Ryan W. Scott

Utah Law Review

The “information sharing model,” a leading method of structuring judicial discretion at the sentencing stage of criminal cases, has attracted broad support from scholars and judges. Under this approach, sentencing judges should have access to a robust body of information, including written opinions and statistics, about previous sentences in similar cases. According to proponents, judges armed with that information can conform their sentences to those of their colleagues or identify principled reasons for distinguishing them, reducing inter-judge disparity and promoting rationality in sentencing law.

This Article takes a skeptical view of the information sharing model, arguing that it suffers from …

Nfib V. Sebelius: Proportionality In The Exercise Of Congressional Power, David Orentlicher

Utah Law Review

With its opinion on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), the U.S. Supreme Court sparked much discussion regarding the implications of the case for other federal statutes. In particular, scholars have debated the significance of the Court’s recognition of an anticoercion limit to the Spending Clause power. When it recognized an anticoercion limit for the ACA’s Medicaid expansion, the Court left considerable uncertainty as to the parameters of that limit. This essay sketches out one valuable and very plausible interpretation of the Court’s new anticoercion principle. It also indicates how this new principle can address a long-standing problem …

Beyond Finality: How Making Criminal Judgments Less Final Can Further The “Interests Of Finality”, Andrew Chongseh Kim

Utah Law Review

Courts and scholars commonly assume that granting convicted defendants more liberal rights to challenge their judgments would harm society’s interests in “finality”. According to conventional wisdom, finality in criminal judgments is necessary to conserve resources, encourage efficient behavior by defense counsel, and deter crime. Thus, under the common analysis, the extent to which convicted defendants should be allowed to challenge their judgments depends on how much society is willing to sacrifice to validate defendants’ rights. This Article argues that expanding defendants’ rights on posttrial review does not always harm these interests. Rather, more liberal review can often conserve state resources, …

Once Born, Twice Orphaned: Children’S Constitutional Case Against Same-Sex Adoption Bans, Tanya M. Washinton

Utah Law Review

The gay adoption debate has been focused on how placement bans deprive qualified gay and lesbian prospective parents of the opportunity to adopt children who are not likely to be permanently placed. Litigants challenging placement bans have focused primarily on the rights of prospective parents. States have defended these bans in ways that obscure the fact that they violate children’s rights by depriving them of the placement option that best serves their interests. Supply and demand realities, the best-interests-of-the-child standard, and the documented harms associated with non-placement demand state action that facilitates rather than frustrates the possibility of adoption. Confining …

The Humanitarian Problem With Drones, Frédéric Mégret

Utah Law Review

One of the difficulties with the debate on drones is that it has become a sort of lightning rod for all kinds of anxieties about the use of force in today’s world. Drones are, often problematically, the emblematic weapon for a range of other phenomena, and unsurprisingly, attract much polemic. The challenge, therefore, is to find the specific problem with drones as a technology in armed conflict that could not be dealt with better by invoking a larger genus of problems. To do this, this Article outlines ways in which drones have been seen as problematic, which this Article argues …

Does Living By The Sword Mean Dying By The Sword, Charles Chernor Jalloh

Articles

This article examines the right to self-representation in international criminal law, and the common challenges posed for judges effectuating that right in international criminal courts. Using a comparative law approach, the paper demonstrates how the interpretation of that right initially borrowed heavily from U.S. common law and later European civil law to address the problems caused by self-representing, disruptive, and uncooperative defendants. Although the right to self-representation is a Sixth Amendment right in U.S. law, and an equally fundamental one in international law, the author contends that this right seems better in theory than in practice. Indeed, since no self-representing …

A Comment On "No Comment": The Sub Judice Rule And The Accountability Of Public Officials In The 21st Century, Lorne Sossin, Valerie Crystal

Articles & Book Chapters

The sub judice rule is a rule of court, a statutory rule, a Parliamentary convention and a practice that has developed in the interaction between media and public officials. At its most basic, the sub judice rule prohibits the publication of statements which may prejudice court proceedings. This study examines the nature, rationale and scope of the sub judice rule. The authors provide an account of the current state of the rule, and highlight areas where more clarity would be desirable. The authors propose a more coherent approach to the sub judice rule, more clearly rooted in the concern over …

Ethical Lawyering In A Global Community, Trevor C. W. Farrow

Articles & Book Chapters

No abstract provided.

Moving Beyond "Slaves, Sinners, And Saviors": An Intersectional Feminist Analysis Of Us Sex-Trafficking Discourses, Law And Policy, Carrie N. Baker

Journal of Feminist Scholarship

This article analyzes stories and images of sex trafficking in current mainstream US public discourses, including government publications, NGO materials, news media, and popular films. Noting the similarities and differences among these discourses, the first part demonstrates that they often frame sex trafficking using a rescue narrative that reiterates traditional beliefs and values regarding gender, sexuality, and nationality, relying heavily on patriarchal and orientalist tropes. Reflecting this rescue narrative, mainstream public policies focus on criminal justice solutions to trafficking. The second part suggests alternative frameworks that empower rather than rescue trafficked people. The article argues that the dominant criminal justice …

Proceedings Of The Seventh International Humanitarian Law Dialogs, Recent Developments In International Criminal Law: 2012–2013, Mark A. Drumbl

Scholarly Articles

This publication is based on Professor Drumbl’s keynote address on August 27, 2013 at the Seventh International Humanitarian Law Dialogs held in Chautauqua, New York.

Tender Is The Night: Should Your Expert Be?, Cynthia Ford

Faculty Journal Articles & Other Writings

This article discusses the practice of tendering an expert for acceptance or certification by the court at trial in the presence of the jury. The article considers Tennessee and Montana state and federal evidence law. The author suggests that Montana courts and lawyers should comply with the A.B.A. Updated Civil Trial Standard 14 and let juries assess the testimony of a Rule 702 witness without a special designation accorded by the judge certifying a witness as an "expert" in his or her field.

Uf Law Fall 2013, University Of Florida Levin College Of Law

UF Law Magazine

Charting What's Next for Legal Practice; The Maestro of UF Law; Special Tax Section: A Better Corporate Code; Bitcoin: The New Switzerland?; Grad Tax Tour de Force

Undergraduate Bulletin 2013-2014, John Jay College Of Criminal Justice

College Bulletins

Covers academic year 2013-2014

A Broken Shield: A Plea For Formality In The Juvenile Justice System, Robin Walker Sterling

University of Maryland Law Journal of Race, Religion, Gender and Class

No abstract provided.

The Marshall-Brennan Constitutional Literacy Project: American Legal Education's Ambitious Experiment In Democratic Constitutionalism, Jamin B. Raskin

Denver Law Review

No abstract provided.

Civic Education As An Instrument Of Social Mobility, Dawinder S. Sidhu

Denver Law Review

No abstract provided.

Vol. 90, No. 4: Full Issue, Denver University Law Review

Denver Law Review

No abstract provided.

On Surviving Legal De-Education: An Allegory For A Renaissance In Legal Education, Robin Walker Sterling

Denver Law Review

No abstract provided.

Keywords

Richmond Public Interest Law Review

Keywords for the bills

House Bills

Richmond Public Interest Law Review

Listing of House bills from the 2013 General Assembly

Senate Bills

Richmond Public Interest Law Review

Listing of Senate bills from the 2013 General Assembly

Defining Intellectual Disability And Establishing A Standard Of Proof: Suggestions For A National Model Standard, Natalie Cheung

Health Matrix: The Journal of Law-Medicine

No abstract provided.

Admissions Brochure 2013-2014, William & Mary Law School

Admissions Brochures

No abstract provided.

Military Commissions And The Paradigm Of Prevention, David Cole

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Why military commissions? Given the United States’s track record of success in trying terrorists in civilian criminal courts, and the availability of courts-martial to try war crimes, why has the United States government, under both the George W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations alike, insisted on proceeding through untested military commissions instead? In May 2009, President Obama defended military commissions with the following claims:

Military commissions have a history in the United States dating back to George Washington and the Revolutionary War. They are an appropriate venue for trying detainees for violations of the laws of war. They allow for …

Saga And Socialization In Jesuit Institutions, Charles Wilder Puls

Jesuit Higher Education: A Journal

The 28 institutions of the Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities share a strong heritage dating back to the founding of the first Jesuit institution in Messina, Sicily, in 1548, by Ignatius of Loyola and the newly founded Society of Jesus. Though formally independent of the Catholic Church, this Jesuit tradition is a core value of these institutions, and their presidents came together to articulate this value through The Jesuit, Catholic Mission of U.S. Jesuit Colleges and Universities. In this consensus statement, there is a rich sense of saga and socialization. The consensus statement is used to demonstrate elements of …

How Masculinities Distribute Power: The Influence Of Ann Scales, Ann C. Mcginley, Frank Rudy Cooper

Denver Law Review

No abstract provided.

Longwood University Catalog 2013-2014, Longwood University

Undergraduate Catalogs

No abstract provided.

Tennessee Law Enforcement Officers, A Study In Deadly Force And Shooting Incidents 2007-2011, Tennessee. Bureau Of Investigation.

Specialized Reports

No abstract provided.

Search, Seizure, And Immunity: Second-Order Normative Authority And Rights, Stephen E. Henderson, Kelly Sorensen

Faculty Articles

A paradigmatic aspect of a paradigmatic kind of right is that the rights holder is the only one who can alienate it. When individuals waive rights, the normative source of that waiving is normally taken to be the individual herself. This moral feature—immunity—is usually in the background of discussions about rights. We bring it into the foreground here, with specific attention to a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision, Kentucky v. King (2011), concerning search and seizure rights. An entailment of the Court’s decision is that, at least in some cases, a right can be removed by the intentional actions of …