Search

The article focuses on the nonviolent nature of human rights adjudication, arguing that courts can succeed without coercion by inspiring voluntary compliance through moral conviction. It examines the limitations of human rights courts in enforcing their judgments, explores different scholarly perspectives on international law's effectiveness, and proposes the concept of adjudication as world building.

The article discusses the straightforward rule regarding the judicial enforcement of treaties, which was established by the Constitution of the U.S. It notes that by declaring treaties to have the force of law, the Supremacy Clause makes them enforceable in the courts as a matter of domestic constitutional law. It states that the treaties were contracts between nations which had depended on interest and honor for their efficacy. It also provides information on the subsequent decision of the court in several trials including "United States v. Percheman" and "Medellin v. Texas." It also says that the Percheman rule seeks to control the domestic legal consequences of the treaties they negotiate.

The article offers information on the court case Bancoult v. McNamara. In this case, the individual rights consideration in dismissing on political question grounds claims arising out of the alleged depopulation by the United States of islands in the British Indian Ocean Territory, was discussed by the Washington, D.C. Circuit court. The displacement of inhabitants of the Chagos Archipelago was caused by the construction of a U.S. military base.

Looks at the rulings issued by U.S. Supreme Court justices on several cases related to freedom of speech and expression. Analysis of the Virginia Supreme Court on the case of R.A.V. versus City of Saint Paul; Facts of the case of Virginia versus Black; Reason that the statute targeted cross burning.

Analyzes the application of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on the case Fisher v. United States for cases concerning the use of subpoena duces tecum and the rights of criminal defendants in the U.S. Background on the ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court; Discussion on the concept of implicit authentication; Examination of the first amendment protection for personal paper.

Discusses a court case between Evans and Jeff D. regarding waivers of attorney's fees in individual civil rights actions. Opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court on the case; Circuit court decisions that have relied upon the Evans case to approve fee waiver settlements; Details of an approach to fee waivers that restores a mechanism for judicial oversight of the negotiating process.

Examines the ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court on several cases in 1964. Information on a federal law forbidding communists to hold union office; Details on the constitutionality of the public accommodations provision of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; Discussion on the decision of the court on the bootstrap transfer of business to charitable organization.

In a recent article Professor Henry M. Hart, Jr. criticized the current performance of the Supreme Court, suggesting that the quality of the Court's opinions would be improved were the Justices to spend more time in collective deliberation. The author disputes Professor Hart's thesis, and, pointing to recent civil-liberties cases, concludes that the incumbent members of the Court have been successful in fulfilling the Court's function and maintaining its stature as an institution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article informs that exercise of judgment is apt to be painful where each alternative has some merit; and men find it natural to seek some clear and impersonal rule to eliminate the harsh necessity of self-reliance in choice. The phrase "due process of law," when applied as a criterion of the validity of a substantive enactment, is essentially a convenient verbal cloak hiding that unwelcome truth. The decision is an embarrassing one to make, because some governmental recognition of and backing for religion has been customary for many years and continues with surprising vigor.

Presents the court ruling in the U.S. on the case Heim versus McCall dealing with the constitutionality of a statute restricting employment of aliens. Facts of the case; Basis of the ruling.