Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Toward A More Expansive Welfare Devolution Debate, 9 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. 311 (2005), Steven D. Schwinn
Toward A More Expansive Welfare Devolution Debate, 9 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. 311 (2005), Steven D. Schwinn
Steven D. Schwinn
Leading up to and in the wake of national welfare reform, commentators, scholars, and advocates debated one of the key ingredients in the 1996 legislation: devolution of responsibility for the design and administration of welfare from the federal government to the states. Pro-devolutionists argued that devolution would create 50 state welfare experiments, would result in welfare programs tailored to the unique needs of individual states, and would lead to a race to the top in the quality of welfare programs. Anti-devolutionists argued that devolution would encourage states to compete to repel welfare recipients, to avoid becoming welfare magnets, and, ultimately, …
Sidestepping Lassiter On The Path To Civil Gideon: Civil Douglas, Steven D. Schwinn
Sidestepping Lassiter On The Path To Civil Gideon: Civil Douglas, Steven D. Schwinn
Steven D. Schwinn
Civil Gideon advocates have at each turn faced the scourge of Lassiter v. Department of Social Services, which established (apparently out of whole cloth) a presumption that indigent litigants are entitled to appointed counsel only when physical liberty is at stake. This article proposes side-stepping that presumption by seeking a right to counsel on appeal via Douglas v. California, not a right to counsel at trial via Gideon v. Wainwright. Once established, a civil right to counsel on appeal would presage the inevitable downfall of Lassiter and the establishment of Civil Gideon. This article poses the argument in federal constitutional …
Welfare Reform In A Global Economy, 11 J. Gender Race & Just. 209 (2008), Steven D. Schwinn
Welfare Reform In A Global Economy, 11 J. Gender Race & Just. 209 (2008), Steven D. Schwinn
Steven D. Schwinn
No abstract provided.
Toward A More Expansive Welfare Devolution Debate, Steven Schwinn
Toward A More Expansive Welfare Devolution Debate, Steven Schwinn
Steven D. Schwinn
Leading up to and in the wake of national welfare reform, commentators, scholars, and advocates debated one of the key ingredients in the 1996 legislation: devolution of responsibility for the design and administration of welfare from the federal government to the states. Pro-devolutionists argued that devolution would create 50 state welfare experiments, would result in welfare programs tailored to the unique needs of individual states, and would lead to a race to the top in the quality of welfare programs. Anti-devolutionists argued that devolution would encourage states to compete to repel welfare recipients, to avoid becoming welfare magnets, and, ultimately, …