Search

Most employment discrimination research has focused on race and gender. The relatively fewer papers dealing with religion suggests that discrimination exists. We extend the literature by examining the effects of job type (public safety/non-public safety), religion (Muslim/non-Muslim) and Muslim gender on selection decisions. Participants ranked applicants and made judgments on trust and whether to interview applicants after evaluating seven resumes for either a shipping clerk or a security guard position. Participants rated Muslim applicants lower than non-Muslim applicants for the security guard position. We found no evidence of discrimination in the shipping clerk position. Perceived trust may be a possible explanation for some of the decisions people made. We also found that the Muslim female candidate was rated higher than the Muslim male candidate for the security guard position; no gender differences existed for the shipping clerk position. Our findings are consistent with the gender discrimination literature in that job type affected the extent to which religious-based discrimination occurred and the intersectionality literature/models specifying that combinations of demographics can impact judgments. One implication is the need to incorporate religion in discrimination interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Australia, imprisonment remains a popular form of crime control amidst rising costs in prison expenditure and high rates of prison return. While changes to crime rates and to policing policy have impacted the growing prisoner population in recent years, less is known about the language underpinning the courts' decision to imprison. This article presents the results of a critical discourse analysis on 124 sentencing remarks on imprisonment from the District Court of New South Wales in 2017. Three discourses were identified in the texts as facilitating the justification of a prison sentence: the discourse of control, the discourse of safety and the discourse of duty. These findings highlight the ways in which the prison is constructed and legitimated in the courts, which has implications not only for sentencing policy and practice but also for conceptions and applications of justice more broadly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives : Judgments about police procedural fairness consistently have a stronger influence on how the public ascribes legitimacy to the police than evaluations of police effectiveness. What remains largely underexplored, however, is the potential moderating effect of procedural justice on the relationship between effectiveness and legitimacy and whether this moderation varies by citizen race. Method: We administered two separate surveys to determine whether procedural justice's moderating effect on the relationship between police ineffectiveness and legitimacy varies by citizen race. The first was a mail survey of a random sample of citizens in a southern US city (N = 1,681) conducted in 2013; the second, a national survey of adults (N = 972) administered via Qualtrics in 2022. Results: We found that procedural justice could help protect against the harmful influence of perceived ineffectiveness on police legitimacy in Study 2. However, contrary to expectations, this moderation effect held only for White Americans. Conclusions: The effect of perceived ineffectiveness on legitimacy evaluations does not vary depending on citizens' perceptions of procedural justice. Yet, police still do have control over how they treat people with whom they interact, which is one mechanism that can improve citizens' views on police legitimacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Quantitative research into the effectiveness of the UN human rights treaty bodies (UNTBs) in eliciting remedial responses from states is impeded by a lack of usable data on how states respond to their decisions. The new Treaty Body Views Dataset (TBVD) aims to fill this gap. It comprises details on all published decisions in individual complaints cases issued by the UNTBs between 1979 and 2019 and matches these with information on their state of compliance. The TBVD can be used for research on the activities of the treaty bodies, the nature of the decisions themselves, or state behavior following a decision. An empirical application illustrates how the TBVD can advance knowledge about the factors that correlate with compliance with adverse UNTB decisions. Results show that the likelihood of implementation hinges critically on decision-level characteristics, and reveal differences and similarities between compliance with UNTB decisions and regional human rights court judgments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Criminal defendants can face significant pressures to plead guilty, but wrongful conviction scholarship has largely overlooked the study of guilty pleas. This study content analyzed 139 Australian appellate court judgments in which a guilty plea conviction was overturned, investigating the types of errors involved in these convictions, and the stage of the criminal justice process at which the errors occurred. The findings revealed that errors occurred during the police investigation, pretrial preparations, and formal court procedures, with the most frequent errors involving incorrect or inappropriate charges, inadequate legal representation, and the courts erroneously accepting a guilty plea. The findings raise important implications regarding the adequacy of safeguards to ensure guilty pleas are appropriate or factually and legally accurate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines Russia's practice of the ban introduced by the so-called 'fake news laws' during the war against Ukraine. It blends doctrinal legal with discourse analysis to study how and why Russian courts have applied the laws, which epistemology of knowledge they have constructed while limiting fake news about the war and what implications this has for freedom of expression and public debate of the war within Russia. The dataset covers 446 Russian court decisions from 2022 to 2023. A historical approach is utilised to discuss the results in connection to the Soviet Communist ideology. The article argues that Russian courts have used the laws to make truth in Russia conditional and loyalty unconditional, actualising the Soviet principles of 'partyness', 'objectivity' and 'scientificalness'. It demonstrates how courts construct a mythologised reality about the 'imaginary' 'military operation' to help the government monopolise the public debate and misrepresent the war against Ukraine within Russia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In what ways do amicus curiae or friend of the court briefs shape the decisions of constitutional courts outside of the United States? Using a unique data set of more than nine hundred briefs from the Bulgarian Constitutional Court, hearing cases of constitutional review and legal interpretation, we analyze the Court's propensities to both borrow language from briefs and cite the identity of interested parties. We find that the Court is more inclined to incorporate language from briefs by powerful government actors rather than non-governmental groups. Furthermore, the Court's alignment with the governing coalition and the type of constitutional review also influence the propensity to borrow language from briefs. However, the Bulgarian Constitutional Court does not appear to favor citing any particular interested party. These results question whether the briefing process in Bulgaria lives up to democratic expectations for including less powerful civil society viewpoints into decision-making. The study is one of the few of its kind to explore how the reasoning found within the brief influences an important national high court outside of the United States. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This document is an editorial note from the Newspaper Research Journal. It discusses the gap between technology and the law, with recent Supreme Court cases and legislation suggesting that the gap may be closing. The article highlights the implications of these cases for communication and news media, such as the ruling that public officials may be sued for blocking critics on social media. It also mentions upcoming Supreme Court cases related to government interactions with social media companies and the question of whether social media companies have editorial control over content. Additionally, the document mentions legislation calling for the sale or banning of TikTok due to concerns about privacy and national security. The editorial note concludes by acknowledging the interest in media literacy, misinformation, and the role of social media in modern society. [Extracted from the article]

Initial impressions of others based on facial appearances are often inaccurate yet can lead to dire outcomes. Across four studies, adult participants underwent a counterstereotype training to reduce their reliance on facial appearance in consequential social judgments of White male faces. In Studies 1 and 2, trustworthiness and sentencing judgments among control participants predicted whether real-world inmates were sentenced to death versus life in prison, but these relationships were diminished among trained participants. In Study 3, a sequential priming paradigm demonstrated that the training was able to abolish the relationship between even automatically and implicitly perceived trustworthiness and the inmates' life-or-death sentences. Study 4 extended these results to realistic decision-making, showing that training reduced the impact of facial trustworthiness on sentencing decisions even in the presence of decision-relevant information. Overall, our findings suggest that a counterstereotype intervention can mitigate the potentially harmful effects of relying on facial appearance in consequential social judgments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The central obligation under the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act is to provide each eligible student with a free appropriate public education (FAPE). In Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District RE-1 (2017), the U.S. Supreme Court revised the prior substantive standard for determining FAPE that the court had developed in Board of Education v. Rowley (1982). The Endrew F. court modified the Rowley standard of requiring the individualized education program (IEP) to be reasonably calculated to enable the student to receive educational benefit to requiring a student's IEP to be reasonably calculated to enable the student to "make progress appropriate in light of the student's circumstances." The purpose of this article is to compare what the post– Endrew F. courts use with what the professional literature recommends as measures of appropriate progress. The results inform special education practitioners about the significant discrepancy between the courts' focus on the "must" of legal requirements and the "should" of professional recommendations. The discussion suggests ways that special education professionals can use their expertise to inform courts and legislatures to narrow this gap for the benefit of more effective progress for students with disabilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]