Law Commons^™

The Constitutionality Of Prison Privatization: An Analysis Of Prison Privatization In The United States And Israel, Stacey Jacovetti

Global Business Law Review

This note analyzes the constitutionality of the current state of prison privatization in the United States under the non-delegation doctrine and the due process clause. Furthermore, this note analyzes the Israeli Supreme Court's ruling holding prison privatization as unconstitutional under the Basic Law of the Right to Human Dignity and Liberty. Subsequently, an argument is made that the current authority for the utilization of private prisons in the United States is insufficient to establish the use of private prisons as constitutional. As such, this note argues that the overall scheme of privatization should provide for more detailed contracts--similar to those …

Constitutional Law—Fourth Amendment And Seizures— Accidental Seizures By Deadly Force: Who Is Seized During A Police Shootout? Plumhoff V. Rickard, 134 S. Ct. 2012 (2014)., Adam D. Franks

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

City Court, Watertown New York, People V. Rogers, Lisa Bartolomeo

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Court Of Appeals Of New York, People V. David, Courtney Blakeslee

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Martin Luther King, Jr. Celebration Keynote Address: The Honorable Carlton W. Reeves, United States District Court For The Southern District Of Mississippi, Roger Williams University School Of Law

School of Law Conferences, Lectures & Events

No abstract provided.

Shock Incarceration And Parole: A Process Without Process, Adam Yefet

Brooklyn Law Review

The idea that an inmate could possess a liberty interest in parole is a relatively recent development in Fourteenth Amendment law. It was not until 1979, in Greenholtz v. Inmates of the Nebraska Penal and Correctional Complex, that the Supreme Court examined Nebraska’s parole scheme and found that inmates could have a liberty interest in parole. The primary implication of Greenholtz was that parole statutes that contained certain mandatory language could confer upon inmates a liberty interest in parole. Applying the Greenholtz analysis, numerous parole schemes across the country were held to create a liberty interest and to require …

Missed Opportunities: The Unrealized Equal Protection Framework In Maher V. Roe And Harris V. Mcrae, Amelia Bailey

Michigan Journal of Gender & Law

This Note focuses on two cases, Maher v. Roe and Harris v. McRae, and argues that they represent watershed moments in the reproductive rights movement because they positioned abortion as a fundamental right in name only. In both cases, the Supreme Court sanctioned severe funding restrictions and refused to grant poor women the right to state and federal assistance for elective and “nontherapeutic” abortions. “Non-therapeutic abortion” refers to those abortions performed or induced when the life of the mother is not endangered if the fetus is carried to term or when the pregnancy of the mother is not the …

What Gideon Did, Sara Mayeux

All Faculty Scholarship

Many accounts of Gideon v. Wainwright’s legacy focus on what Gideon did not do—its doctrinal and practical limits. For constitutional theorists, Gideon imposed a preexisting national consensus upon a few “outlier” states, and therefore did not represent a dramatic doctrinal shift. For criminal procedure scholars, advocates, and journalists, Gideon has failed, in practice, to guarantee meaningful legal help for poor people charged with crimes.

Drawing on original historical research, this Article instead chronicles what Gideon did—the doctrinal and institutional changes it inspired between 1963 and the early 1970s. Gideon shifted the legal profession’s policy consensus on indigent defense away from …