Legal Remedies Commons^™

The Restitution Of Nazi-Looted Art In The United States: A Legal And Policy Analysis, Katharine J. Namon

Senior Theses and Projects

Restitution of Nazi-looted art in the United States is a complicated legal and policy issue. Victims and their heirs seeking restitution of their stolen art frequently encounter inconsistent legal standards at the state, federal, and international levels. Moreover, there are many different parties involved in these cases, including countries, museums, private collections, auction houses, heirs, and individuals who may have an interest in the particular work of art. Ethics must also be considered, and in the past, international principles for nations have been established to guide the process of delivering victims of wartime looting justice. Unfortunately, the current legal framework …

The Civil Redress And Historical Memory Act Of 2029: A Legislative Proposal, William J. Aceves

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

During the extant “War on Terror,” U.S. and foreign nationals who did not engage in hostilities were detained and mistreated abroad by the United States or by other countries with the acquiescence of the United States. These individuals were accused of being terrorists or were suspected of associating with terror groups, but they were, in fact, innocent. They were eventually released and were never charged by the United States with any crime. Despite their innocence, the United States has failed to provide them with any form of redress for their mistreatment. The Bush, Obama, and Trump administrations refused to apologize …

Continuous Contamination: How Traditional Criminal Restitution Principles And Section 2259 Undermine Cleaning Up The Toxic Waste Of Child Pornography, Mary Margaret Giannini

Mary Margaret Giannini

Progress In The Victim Reform Movement: No Longer The "Forgotten Victim", David L. Roland

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Section 2259 Restitution Claims And Child Pornography Possession, Dina Mcleod

Michigan Law Review

In 2009, a child pornography victim brought a criminal restitution claim against a defendant who possessed images of her abuse. The statutory provision authorizing restitution, 18 U.S.C. § 2259, had never before been used to bring a claim against a defendant who had only possessed, rather than produced or distributed, child pornography ("child pornography possession defendants"). The federal courts have not developed a consistent approach to resolving Section 2259 claims involving such defendants. This Note argues that two conceptions of traditional proximate cause doctrine can provide a framework for analyzing such claims. It examines Section 2259 claims using both a …