Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
Retribution's Role, John Bronsteen
Retribution's Role, John Bronsteen
John Bronsteen
For many decades, criminal law scholars have directed their efforts at finding a philosophical justification of criminal punishment. This endeavor has created a split between retributivists (who deem punishment justified by the wrongdoing of the offender) and utilitarians (who deem it justified by its good consequences such as deterring future crime). This Article suggests that the dialogue between retributivists and utilitarians would profit from a change in the way they frame the central question of what justifies punishment. Specifically, the question could be divided as follows. First, why does the state have a right to punish? And second, why does …
Aedpa's (Imaginary) Purposes, Lee B. Kovarsky
Aedpa's (Imaginary) Purposes, Lee B. Kovarsky
Lee Kovarsky
Bearing the scars of a ferocious half-century battle over habeas reform, the 1996 Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (“AEDPA”) has become less a legal text than a force of nature. Ignoring that statutory language limits perceived legislative purposes as much as it embodies them, federal courts have transformed what should be text-bound interests into unconstrained judicial fetishes. In (Michael) Williams v. Taylor, the Supreme Court announced that Congress intended for AEDPA to vindicate “principles of comity, finality, and federalism,” and that proposition has become a sacred cow of modern habeas jurisprudence. While habeas scholarship has been critical of the …
Aedpa's (Imaginery) Purposes, Lee B. Kovarsky
Aedpa's (Imaginery) Purposes, Lee B. Kovarsky
Lee Kovarsky
Bearing the scars of a ferocious half-century battle over habeas reform, the 1996 Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (“AEDPA”) has become less a legal text than a force of nature. Ignoring that statutory language limits perceived legislative purposes as much as it embodies them, federal courts have transformed what should be text-bound interests into unconstrained judicial fetishes. In (Michael) Williams v. Taylor, the Supreme Court announced that Congress intended for AEDPA to vindicate “principles of comity, finality, and federalism,” and that proposition has become a sacred cow of modern habeas jurisprudence. While habeas scholarship has been critical of the …
Aedpa's (Imaginary) Purposes, Lee B. Kovarsky
Aedpa's (Imaginary) Purposes, Lee B. Kovarsky
Lee Kovarsky
Bearing the scars of a ferocious half-century battle over habeas reform, the 1996 Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (“AEDPA”) has become less a legal text than a force of nature. Ignoring that statutory language limits perceived legislative purposes as much as it embodies them, federal courts have transformed what should be text-bound interests into unconstrained judicial fetishes. In (Michael) Williams v. Taylor, the Supreme Court announced that Congress intended for AEDPA to vindicate “principles of comity, finality, and federalism,” and that proposition has become a sacred cow of modern habeas jurisprudence. While habeas scholarship has been critical of the …
Coporate America Fights Back: The Battle Over Waiver Of The Attorney-Client Privilege, Michael L. Seigel
Coporate America Fights Back: The Battle Over Waiver Of The Attorney-Client Privilege, Michael L. Seigel
Michael L Seigel
This article address a topic that is the subject of an on-going and heated contest between the business lobby and its lawyers, represented primarily by the American Bar Association, the Association of Corporate Counsel, and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, on the one side, and the United States Department of Justice, on the other. The fight is over federal prosecutors’ escalating practice of requesting that corporations accused of criminal wrongdoing waive their attorney-client privilege as part of their cooperation with the government. The Department views privilege waiver as a legitimate and very important tool in its post-Enron battle …
Neuroimaging And The "Complexity" Of Capital Punishment, Orlando Carter Snead
Neuroimaging And The "Complexity" Of Capital Punishment, Orlando Carter Snead
O. Carter Snead
The growing use of brain imaging technology to explore the causes of morally, socially, and legally relevant behavior is the subject of much discussion and controversy in both scholarly and popular circles. From the efforts of cognitive neuroscientists in the courtroom and in the public square, the contours of a project to transform capital sentencing both in principle and practice have emerged. In the short term, such scientists seek to intervene in the process of capital sentencing by serving as mitigation experts for defendants, where they invoke neuroimaging research on the roots of criminal violence to support their arguments. Over …