Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Immigration (2)
- Accountability (1)
- Adult felonies and misdemeanors (1)
- Arbitration (1)
- Assigned counsel systems (1)
-
- Children's DNA (1)
- Collateral Consequences (1)
- Corporate law (1)
- Corporate litigants (1)
- Criminal Law (1)
- DNA collection from children (1)
- DNA ownership (1)
- Democratic decline (1)
- Fictional Pleas (1)
- Flat-fee contract lawyer (1)
- Genetic infomration (1)
- Genetic property rights (1)
- Gideon v. Wainwright (1)
- Indigent criminal defendant (1)
- Indigent defense (1)
- Law and social mobilization literature (1)
- Low-income clients (1)
- Oligarchic courthouse (1)
- Parental control (1)
- Parental rights (1)
- Plea Bargaining (1)
- Policymaking (1)
- Primary jurisdiction (1)
- Property rights of children (1)
- Prosecutorial Ethics (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Who Owns Children’S Dna?, Nila Bala
Who Owns Children’S Dna?, Nila Bala
Michigan Law Review
In recent years, DNA has become increasingly easy to collect, test, and sequence, making it far more accessible to law enforcement. While legal scholars have examined this phenomenon generally, this Article examines the control and use of children’s DNA, asking who ultimately owns children’s DNA. I explore two common ways parents—currently considered “owners” of children’s DNA— might turn over children’s DNA to law enforcement: (1) “consensual” searches and (2) direct-to-consumer testing. My fundamental thesis is that parental consent is an insufficient safeguard to protect a child’s DNA from law enforcement. At present, the law leaves parents in complete control of …
The Oligarchic Courthouse: Jurisdiction, Corporate Power, And Democratic Decline, Helen Hershkoff, Luke Norris
The Oligarchic Courthouse: Jurisdiction, Corporate Power, And Democratic Decline, Helen Hershkoff, Luke Norris
Michigan Law Review
Jurisdiction is foundational to the exercise of judicial power. It is precisely for this reason that subject matter jurisdiction, the species of judicial power that gives a court authority to resolve a dispute, has today come to the center of a struggle between corporate litigants and the regulatory state. In a pronounced trend, corporations are using jurisdictional maneuvers to manipulate forum choice. Along the way, they are wearing out less-resourced parties, circumventing hearings on the merits, and insulating themselves from laws that seek to govern their behavior. Corporations have done so by making creative arguments to lock plaintiffs out of …
Collusive Prosecution, Ben A. Mcjunkin, J.J. Prescott
Collusive Prosecution, Ben A. Mcjunkin, J.J. Prescott
Law & Economics Working Papers
In this Article, we argue that increasingly harsh collateral consequences have surfaced an underappreciated and undertheorized dynamic of criminal plea bargaining. Collateral consequences that mostly or entirely benefit third parties (such as other communities or other states) create an interest asymmetry that prosecutors and defendants can exploit in plea negotiations. In particular, if a prosecutor and a defendant can control the offense of conviction (often through what some term a “fictional plea”), they can work together to evade otherwise applicable collateral consequences, such as deportation or sex-offender registration and notification. Both parties arguably benefit: Prosecutors can leverage collateral consequences to …
Assessing Visions Of Democracy In Regulatory Policymaking, Shoba Sivaprasad Wadhia, Christopher J. Walker
Assessing Visions Of Democracy In Regulatory Policymaking, Shoba Sivaprasad Wadhia, Christopher J. Walker
Articles
Motivated in part by Congress’s failure to legislate, presidents in recent years seem to have turned even more to the regulatory process to make major policy. It is perhaps no coincidence that the feld of administrative law has similarly seen a resurgence of scholarship extolling the virtues of democratic accountability in the modern administrative state. Some scholars have even argued that bureaucracy is as much as if not more democratically legitimate than Congress, either in the aggregative or deliberative sense, or both.
The Problematic Structure Of Indigent Defense Delivery, Eve Brensike Primus
The Problematic Structure Of Indigent Defense Delivery, Eve Brensike Primus
Michigan Law Review
The national conversation about criminal justice reform largely ignores the critical need for structural reforms in the provision of indigent defense. In most parts of the country, decisions about how to structure the provision of indigent defense are made at the local level, resulting in a fragmented patchwork of different indigent defense delivery systems. In most counties, if an indigent criminal defendant gets representation at all, it comes from assigned counsel or flat-fee contract lawyers rather than public defenders. In those assigned-counsel and flat-fee contract systems, the lawyers representing indigent defendants have financial incentives to get rid of assigned criminal …