Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Inside The Box - When Exercising Peremptory Challenges, Attorneys Should Keep In Mind The Three-Step Framework Of Batson/Wheeler, Angela J. Davis
Inside The Box - When Exercising Peremptory Challenges, Attorneys Should Keep In Mind The Three-Step Framework Of Batson/Wheeler, Angela J. Davis
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
No abstract provided.
The Assumptions Behind The Assumptions In The War On Terror: Risk Assessment As An Example Of Foundational Disagreement In Counterterrorism Policy, Kenneth Anderson
The Assumptions Behind The Assumptions In The War On Terror: Risk Assessment As An Example Of Foundational Disagreement In Counterterrorism Policy, Kenneth Anderson
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
This 2007 article (based around an invited conference talk at Wayne State in early 2007) addresses risk assessment and cost benefit analysis as mechanisms in counterterrorism policy. It argues that although policy is often best pursued by agreeing to set aside deep foundational differences, in order to obtain a strategic plan for an activity such as counterterrorism, foundational differences must be addressed in order that policy not merely devolve into a policy minimalism that is always and damagingly tactical, never strategic, in order to avoid domestic democratic political conflict. The article takes risk assessment in counterterrorism, using cost benefit analysis, …
Guilty Pleas Or Trials: Which Does The Barrister Prefer?, Peter W. Tague
Guilty Pleas Or Trials: Which Does The Barrister Prefer?, Peter W. Tague
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
Barristers in England and attorneys in the United States have been upbraided for pursuing their interests to their clients' detriment in recommending guilty pleas over trials. While this accusation against American attorneys could be true since their incentives are sometimes skewed to favor guilty pleas, it is not accurate with respect to barristers in England. This is because the latter’s selfish incentives--to maximize income and avoid sanction--incline them to prefer trials over guilty pleas. In Melbourne and Sydney, barristers have never been similarly accused. Indeed, the topic has not been studied. Based on interviews with legal professionals in those cities, …
Lower Courts And Constitutional Comparativism, Roger P. Alford
Lower Courts And Constitutional Comparativism, Roger P. Alford
Journal Articles
The issue of constitutional comparativism has been a topic of significant commentary in recent years. However, there is one aspect of this subject that has been almost completely ignored by scholars: the reception, or lack thereof, of constitutional comparativism by state and lower federal courts. While the Supreme Court's enthusiasm for constitutional comparativism has waxed and now waned, lower state and federal courts have remained resolutely agnostic about this new movement. This is of tremendous practical significance because over ninety-nine percent of all cases are resolved by lower state and federal courts. Accordingly, if the lower courts eschew constitutional comparativism, …