Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Under Color Of Law: Siliadin V. France And The Dynamics Of Enslavement In Historical Perspective, Rebecca J. Scott
Under Color Of Law: Siliadin V. France And The Dynamics Of Enslavement In Historical Perspective, Rebecca J. Scott
Book Chapters
When is it appropriate to apply the term ‘slavery’—a concept that appears to rest on a property right—to patterns of exploitation in contemporary society, when no state extends formal recognition to the possibility of the ownership of property in a human being? Historians, who generally position themselves as enemies of anachronism, may be particularly resistant to the use of an ancient term to describe a twenty-first century reality. And jurists have often been understandably reluctant to employ a word whose historical meaning was so closely tied to a specific property relationship that has long since been abolished in Europe and …
Freedom Of Expression And Its Competitors, George C. Christie
Freedom Of Expression And Its Competitors, George C. Christie
Faculty Scholarship
The recognition of an increasing number of basic human rights, such as in the European Convention on Human Rights, has had the paradoxical effect of requiring courts in the common-law world to consider whether the extensive protection given by the common law to expression that was not false or misleading must be modified to accommodate these newly recognized basic rights. The most important of these newly recognized rights is the right of privacy, although expression has other competitors as well, such as what might be called a right to be spared the emotional trauma caused by abusive language. This article …
Crosses And Culture: State-Sponsored Religious Displays In The Us And Europe, Mark L. Movsesian
Crosses And Culture: State-Sponsored Religious Displays In The Us And Europe, Mark L. Movsesian
Faculty Publications
This article compares the recent jurisprudence of the US Supreme Court and the European Court of Human Rights on the question of state-sponsored religious displays. Both tribunals insist that states have a duty of religious “neutrality,” but each defines that term differently. For the Supreme Court, neutrality means that government may not proselytize, even indirectly, or appear to favor a particular church; neutrality may even mean that government must not endorse religion generally. For the ECtHR, by contrast, neutrality means only that government must avoid active religious indoctrination; the ECtHR allows government to give “preponderant visibility” to the symbols of …