Search

Copyright of Social Sciences in China is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article discusses the Kansas state's concealed carry law in Pittsburg State University (PSU) in Pittsburg, Kansas, including PSU faculty's attitudes towards this law. An overview of the concealed carry law's impact on KSU's culture, campus safety, values, college students and academic freedom is provided.

As more states proceed with marijuana legalization laws, questions have arisen about how to accommodate those states that wish to retain prohibition. For instance, in 2014, Oklahoma and Nebraska unsuccessfully sued Colorado based on the spillover effects that Colorado's marijuana legalization law had on its neighboring states. This article asserts that there are several reasons why state marijuana legalization laws are unlikely to have a large effect on neighboring states. First, marijuana is not a previously unobtainable good being introduced into the stream of commerce, as it is already available through the black market inexpensively. Second, legalization laws have a number of restrictions that make it very difficult for sellers to profit from exporting legally produced marijuana across state lines. Prohibition states may have reason to worry, however, that illegal marijuana growers will be better able to hide their operations in legalization states that allow residents to grow small amounts of marijuana for personal use, which in turn may increase illegal marijuana exports to neighboring prohibition states. Prohibition states can minimize this risk of increased marijuana flow by lobbying the federal government to establish rules that protect their interests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the wake of a December 2014 decision by the Department of Justice to deprioritize enforcement of federal marijuana laws against tribes as well as states, many tribes have reevaluated their policies toward marijuana. Tribal attitudes toward marijuana are diverse; some tribes regard marijuana as a public health menace, whereas others see it as a source of economic opportunity. Where tribal policies are significantly more or less restrictive than those of the surrounding state, tribal-state relations have often suffered friction. The problem is particularly acute given the jurisdictional uncertainty that characterizes Indian country and the absence of any equivalent to the conflict-mediating doctrines that help to smooth interstate relations. As a result, federal intervention may be needed to protect tribal sovereignty and resolve tribal-state conflict; any such action should be guided by recognizing the successes and failures of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In contemporary America, legislators send messages about values through symbolic legislation and lawsuits. One conflict is between states where marijuana is legal and others that continue to ban it. This Article evaluates what might happen if anti-marijuana states made it illegal for their citizens to purchase or use marijuana, borrowing a page from the playbook of activists opposed to reproductive choice who propose that if Roe v. Wade is overturned, individuals could be prohibited from traveling to another state for the purpose of obtaining an abortion. Although such laws would be hard to enforce, they still present important questions of state authority. The Supreme Court has recognized state jurisdiction over citizens and over state territory. if, say, Alabama prohibited gambling in its territory, or by its citizens anywhere in the world, while Nevada's public policy was to allow gambling in its territory, a difficult conflict would be presented. However, the marijuana controversy does not present the same problem. Federal law categorically prohibits possession, use, and distribution of marijuana. in order to hold that state marijuana laws are not preempted by the federal ban, courts have found that the states do not have a public policy in favor of marijuana, they merely decline to prohibit it. As a result, the policies of the anti-marijuana states do not conflict with the interests of other states in the way that states opposed to abortion or gambling might conflict with states affirmatively allowing those activities. Although the law in this area is not particularly developed, making reliable prediction difficult, a state's national ban on marijuana seems much more likely to pass muster than would a ban on activities affirmatively promoted by another state. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recreational marijuana is now legal in several states as a result of ballot initiative campaigns, a number of campaigns have framed marijuana legalization using what this Note calls "white individualism. " They have put forth messages and images to implicitly suggest that white, hardworking, middle-class marijuana consumers are deserving beneficiaries of legalized marijuana. This Note examines the appearance of white individualism in the Colorado, Washington, Oregon, and Alaska campaigns. It also explores the appearance of racial justice appeals in the California, Ohio, Washington, D.C., and Massachusetts campaigns. A whitewashed framing of legal marijuana omits and implicitly reinforces marijuana prohibition's troubled legacy. Marijuana prohibition first came about through the proliferation of racist stereotypes. Its expansion during the "war on drugs" rested on coded racial appeals, and its enforcement has disproportionately affected black and brown people. This Note explores the varying degrees to which successful and failed marijuana legalization campaigns have addressed these issues. White individualist framing has tended to correlate with postlegalization policies that favor white marijuana entrepreneurs, such as those prohibiting people with marijuana convictions from receiving business licenses, rather than policies that redress harms from prohibition, such as the expungement of criminal records. As many people continue to experience criminalization and racial myths go relatively unchallenged, largely white marijuana entrepreneurs reap legal marijuana's profits. Marijuana policy should address past harms, this Note argues, because marijuana prohibition was founded and implemented on an unjust basis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives. To determine the association of medical marijuana laws (MMLs) with traffic fatality rates. Methods. Using data from the 1985-2014 Fatality Analysis Reporting System, we examined the association between MMLs and traffic fatalities in multilevel regression models while controlling for contemporaneous secular trends. We examined this association separately for each state enacting MMLs. We also evaluated the association between marijuana dispensaries and traffic fatalities. Results. On average, MML states had lower traffic fatality rates than non-MML states. Medical marijuana laws were associated with immediate reductions in traffic fatalities in those aged 15 to 24 and 25 to 44 years, and with additional yearly gradual reductions in those aged 25 to 44 years. However, state-specific results showed that only 7 states experienced post-MML reductions. Dispensaries were also associated with traffic fatality reductions in those aged 25 to 44 years. Conclusions. Both MMLs and dispensaries were associated with reductions in traffic fatalities, especially among those aged 25 to 44 years. State-specific analysis showed heterogeneity of the MML-traffic fatalities association, suggesting moderation by other local factors. These findings could influence policy decisions on the enactment or repealing of MMLs and how they are implemented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses a symposium on the use of general policy orders in place of regulations for utilities providing service in the Commonwealth such as natural gas, and water by the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PUC). Topics discussed include state laws regarding substantive powers and the procedures of for the use of the powers; use of Regulatory Review Act for reviewing regulations by the Independent Regulatory Review Commission; and retail electricity competition on PUC.

The article focuses on various issues of state gaming laws amid the exponential growth of daily fantasy sports (DFS) in the U.S. Topics discussed include introduction of uniform regulation at the federal level for combating quasi-gambling; history of fantasy sports for exemplifying its underlying purpose and evolution; and enactment of state rules for dangers and harms given its resemblance to gambling.

For-profit social entrepreneurship is a steadily growing movement. As part of this movement, numerous states have enacted legislation authorizing the incorporation of benefit corporations, a new for-profit corporate form. In addition to generating profit for shareholders, benefit corporations must "create" a "public benefit." The mandate that a for-profit corporation pursue a humanitarian cause in addition to generating profit is a significant departure from shareholder primacy: the maxim that the sole purpose of a corporation is to generate return on investment for its shareholders. Although this legislation is a necessary and progressive evolution in corporate law, the current benefit corporation form lacks meaningful accountability and oversight mechanisms. It does little to deter bad actors from taking advantage of socially conscious consumers willing to pay a premium for ethically sourced goods and services by incorporating and operating sham benefit corporations. This Note argues for amending benefit corporation legislation to allow state attorneys general to oversee the creation of public benefits. An oversight and enforcement mechanism would root out and deter bad actors from perverting the purpose of the benefit corporation form, and it would hold benefit corporations accountable to their intended beneficiaries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Robert Cover argues that nomoi (normative universes) exist and operate in law-like fashion, serving as a competitor with the state’s law. The state’s response is jurispathic – it attempts to kill off competing nomoi. The HBO series The Wire portrays both the existence of nomoi and the state’s effort to kill it off. It also reveals that the jurispathic effort fails to destroy the community’s commitment to their nomos. Rather than destroy competing nomoi, The Wire portrays how a dialogue can emerge out of law-nomos conflict with the power to alter both law and nomos while promoting certain democratic goods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors argue that the American police practice of arresting protesters and other residents for municipal ordinance and state civil law violations, which is also known as civil arrest, is unconstitutional and unlawful under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Police shooting-related protests in places such as St. Louis County, Missouri in the twenty-first century are examined, along with peaceful assembly-related civil infractions and America's search and seizure laws.

The article discusses collateral sanctions in America in relation to the author's claim that the inadequacy of child endangerment statutes in the U.S. is negatively impacting the employment goals of ex-criminal offenders in the country. Social harm and punishment in America are examined, along with criminal liability, state laws, and religion-related legal exemptions in the U.S. Legal barriers to criminal records access are examined, along with child neglect and abuse laws in the country.

We documented childhood obesity legislative activity in all 50 US states that occurred in parallel to the first year of Voices for Healthy Kids (Voices), a campaign to mobilize evidence-based legislation addressing childhood obesity. We identified 217 bills in the year before Voices (November 2012 to October 2013) and 304 bills at follow-up (November 2013 to October 2014). In states with active Voices grantees, the bill enactment rate was 50% higher (increasing from 10% at baseline to 15% at follow-up) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This Article provides a comprehensive analysis of state constitutional limits on legislative incorporation of dynamic federal law, as occurs when a state legislature incorporates future federal tax, environmental, or health regulations. Many state judicial decisions draw on the nondelegation doctrine to endorse an ex ante prohibition on state legislative incorporation of dynamic federal law. However, the analysis in this Article shows how bedrock principles related to separation of powers under state constitutions, such as protecting transparency, reinforcing accountability, and protecting against arbitrariness in lawmaking, are not consistent with this approach. Instead, this Article evaluates two practices that can make dynamic incorporation of federal law more compatible with state separation of powers: (a) accountable intermediaries, such as administrative agencies, as a way of preserving political accountability with incorporation of dynamic federal sources of law; and (b) ex post judicial review, as a mechanism to provide standards and safeguards to protect against arbitrariness in lawmaking. The analysis highlights serious flaws with judicial interpretations of state constitutions that impose an ex ante barrier to the adoption of dynamic federal law. It also advances "hard look federalism " as a novel approach to judicial review by state appellate courts that can allow states to both protect their own separation of powers concerns and improve the operation of federalism, particular by enhancing state participation in adoption, interpretation, and implementation of federal standards. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Lawyers concerned with local government insist ubiquitously that their field is not administrative law. State administrative law, similarly, defines its subject to exclude local governments. Nevertheless, state agencies and local jurisdictions are functionally similar. Both are organized to afford state governments, which have broad scope and general jurisdiction, the benefits of specialization. This similarity is under-recognized. Recovering the deep similarities between local governments and stale agencies is not only true to state constitutional design but can advance more productive and sensible approaches to various problems in local government and state administrative law. I support this final claim with a brief sketch of four exemplary problems: judicial review of claims that government has acted ultra vires, the extraterritorial reach of local government, the use of political information by agencies, and the design of specialized or hybrid institutions of state government. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers information on the work of the Supreme Court Justice William J. Brennan. Particular focus is given to how his work relates to state constitutions in the U.S.. Additional topics discussed include how the topic was examined at the Ohio State Law Journal's 2014-2015 Symposium on State Constitutions in the United States Federal System, the history of human rights in the U.S., and the court case Michigan v. Long, which examined state rights and the allowing of searches of car compartments during a stop.

The article discusses various items from the Ohio State Law Journal's 2014-2015 Symposium on State Constitutions in the United States Federal System. Particular focus is given to the author's observations on what Americans think about constitutional reform. Additional topics discussed include the timing of constitutional referendums, formatting ballot language and analyzing data from voters.

Even after a criminal case is disposed of and a period of incarceration or probation is completed, individuals who have become involved in the criminal justice system often face a myriad of collateral consequences based on their criminal records. In order to promote reintegration and combat recidivism, many states have taken legislative actions to ease the burden associated with having a criminal record. In recent years, these efforts have led several states to reform or enact statutes for criminal record sealing or expungement, a controversial, yet highly efficacious tool to provide greater employment and housing opportunities for ex-offenders. In 2010 and in 2014 respectively, the Massachusetts legislature and judiciary made considerable changes to the way that criminal records are managed, disseminated, and sealed in the Commonwealth's Criminal Offender Record Information ("CORI") system. This Note argues that Massachusetts has established a thorough and balanced approach to criminal record sealing that, with certain modifications, can serve as a model for reform for other states and the federal government. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An outbreak of measles in California in early 2015 triggered a nationwide discussion about childhood vaccination requirements and the growing " anti-vaccination" movement that has gained traction in certain parts of the country. Proponents of vaccination point to the real danger vaccine-preventable diseases pose and the need to bolster "herd immunity" through aggressive vaccination practices. Meanwhile, opponents decry vaccination predominantly for purported medical reasons, or otherwise object on religious or philosophical grounds. Courts in the United States, including the Supreme Court, have consistently upheld states' rights to compel mandatory vaccination for schoolchildren to ensure the public health and prevent diseases like measles from plaguing the population. Although all states have mandatory vaccination requirements, most states provide for religious and some, philosophical, exemptions that allow parents to send their children to school vaccine-free. This Note argues that states should strengthen their vaccination requirements by limiting religious exemptions to only "genuine and sincere" religious beliefs that oppose vaccination, and do away with philosophical exemptions entirely. State legislatures can do this by either independently redrafting their vaccination statutes using New York's statute as a model, or, alternatively, adopting a proposed uniform vaccination law, which would also use the New York framework. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

On January 1, 2014, Colorado became the first state in the nation to sell legal recreational marijuana for adult use. As a result, Colorado has had to carefully examine potential population health and safety impacts as well as the role of public health in response to legalization. We have discussed an emerging public health framework for legalized recreational marijuana. We have outlined this framework according to the core public health functions of assessment, policy development, and assurance. In addition, we have discussed challenges to implementing this framework that other states considering legalization may face. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) drug approval process in relation to the legality and effectiveness of Right to Try laws in American states, and it mentions how the state laws allow individuals with terminal illnesses to use experimental drug treatments in order to try and save their lives. A preemption legal doctrine is examined, along with legislative reform, procedural issues, and the FDA New Drug Application (NDA) and compassionate use programs.

Different jurisdictions disagree on whether a person facing an illegitimate threat is ever required to retreat in the face of it or to submit to it, rather than using force in defence. Those that have attempted to identify the principled position on this issue also disagree about (i) the philosophical source (if any) of the duty to retreat; (ii) the interests that may privately be defended; and (iii) the point of time at which private force becomes available to a defender. I address these disputes by suggesting that rules requiring retreat or submission must be limitations on private force that flow from the state's monopoly of legitimate force within its jurisdiction. I argue that these limitations on private force operate at two stages. The first stage limitations restrict 'in-principle' access to private force to cases in which the threat cannot be avoided non-forcefully, and the second stage limitations ensure that the force privately deployed does not exceed the force that the state could itself have legitimately deployed. Next, I examine whether certain interests often taken to be privately defensible ought to be treated as such. Finally, I describe the model of retreat and submission that follows from the ideas canvassed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Law forms one of the major structural contexts within which family lives play out, yet the precise dynamics connecting these two foundational institutions are still poorly understood. This article attempts to help bridge this gap by applying sociolegal concepts to empirical findings about state law's role in family, and especially in marriage, drawn from across several decades and disciplines of South Africanist scholarly research. I sketch the broad outlines of a nuanced theoretical approach for analysing the law-family relationship, which insists that the relationship entails a contingent and dynamic interplay between relatively powerful regulating institutions and relatively powerless regulated populations. Accordingly, while my argument broadly distinguishes the more repressive regimes of colonialism and apartheid from the more expansive post-apartheid legal regime, it also partially undoes that periodisation by highlighting limits and evasions of repressive law and obstacles impeding access to post-apartheid law's expansive promises. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The article discusses gender bias in the client selection process in America as of 2015, and it mentions sexual discrimination in the country, as well as the ethical issues associated with U.S. law firms that exclude women from being able to receive domestic relations services. Women-only law firms are addressed, along with moral principles, professional conduct requirements for U.S. attorneys, and freedom of speech considerations. State anti-discrimination laws in America are assessed.

As the marijuana legalization movement advances, states face a jurisprudential dilemma in addressing the burgeoning public health issue of "drugged driving." Zero-tolerance laws targeting drivers with any illegal drugs in their systems, currently justified under a "jurisprudence of prohibition" based on the blameworthiness of the drug itself, are no longer a good fit due to legalization. Instead, states have attempted to treat marijuana like alcohol by importing drunk driving's "jurisprudence of dangerousness" through enactment of per se driving under the influence of (DUI) marijuana laws redefining DUI as driving with a certain quantifiable amount of THC, marijuana's main psychoactive compound, in one's blood. These laws are legitimate, legislators claim, because they are analogous to per se .08 percent blood-alcohol concentration (BAC) impairment laws. What lawmakers have forgotten, and what legal scholars have largely neglected, is the buried and colorful history of drunk driving's jurisprudence of dangerousness and the scientific framework for proving the link between specific BACs and crash risk established by the country's first "traffic czar," William Haddon Jr. Under this framework—which focuses first and foremost on fatal single-car crashes and case-control studies with a randomly selected control group—the illegitimacy of the new wave of DUI marijuana laws is painfully obvious. In fact, the few single-car crash and case-control studies that have been conducted have found no relationship between THC blood levels and an increased relative crash risk. Properly understood, the history of drunk driving jurisprudence offers what is still the only valid scientific framework for criminalizing chemical impairment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the role that the U.S. legal system can play in increasing childhood immunization rates, and it mentions the legal aspects of a vaccination crisis in the country involving children and parental vaccine refusals. The scientific aspects of childhood vaccinations are examined, along with vaccine-related risks and American state legal policies regarding immunization requirements prior to school entry. Legal exemptions and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are assessed.

The article discusses landlord-tenant laws and changes involving rent regulation in New York, and it mentions rent control and stabilization in the state, as well as the impacts of rent law changes on amenities. Access restrictions involving apartment building-related amenities such as physical fitness centers (gyms) in New York, New York are examined, along with legal compliance, mixed-income building construction, and affordable housing in places such as New York, New York.

A rising tide of Islamophobia in the United States has led, in recent years, to state-level efforts to prohibit the application of Sharia law in American courts. While these bans have been largely unsuccessful as legislation--the U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals has even declared one such ban unconstitutional--the growing uneasiness among Americans regarding the application of Sharia law persists. Similar tensions have been addressed in Canada and the United Kingdom through reform of the application of Sharia law in alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms. By taking a critical look at the American ADR system through the lens of Canadian and British reforms, a mode of reconciling religious arbitration with egalitarian values, and concerns, can emerge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the concept of civil death in relation to the reconsideration of Minnesota's disenfranchisement law as of 2015, and it mentions criminal law reform initiatives and the legal rights of individuals who have been convicted of felony offenses. Minnesota's criminal justice system is examined, as well as public safety laws and cost-benefit analyses. The Minnesota Constitution is assessed in relation to voting rights, civil rights, and issues involving probation and parole.

English Language Learners (ELLs) are the fastest growing group in America's schools. The debate over how to best serve them is largely dominated by fights over English-only versus bilingual instruction. This controversy is once again taking center stage, as states like California and Massachusetts reassess their language programs after a decade of English-only laws on the books. But once again, lost in the battle over language pedagogy is the fact that ELLs face educational challenges beyond language. Like any other student population, the ELL cohort includes students with disabilities who need special education services. In theory, two different statutes protect the rights of ELLs with disabilities: the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), and the Equal Educational Opportunities Act (EEOA), which guarantees assistance in overcoming language barriers. In reality, however, neither law adequately safeguards ELLs' equal access to education. Rather, when students have both language and disability challenges, they fall through a gap that exists between the implementation of these two statutes. To date, schools and courts have largely ignored the intersection of language and disability, operating as though the IDEA addresses one set of students and the EEOA an entirely different set. Many schools select and implement their English language acquisition programs without giving any thought to the unintended consequences on special education. This approach, sanctioned by courts, is both flawed and dangerous because a school's chosen language program can either impede or enhance the accurate identification of students with disabilities. Even more worrisome, some schools use language acquisition as a justification to delay identification of ELLs with disabilities. While this is inconsistent with the intent of the IDEA, provisions of the IDEA, as interpreted by courts, do not adequately prevent it. Even worse, EEOA precedent may actually encourage such delays. As a result, students with dual challenges of language and disability do not receive the necessary educational services these two statutes are designed to provide. The mixed messages from statutes and courts can be resolved, but such cohesion requires reading the IDEA and EEOA together, not separately. This Article provides the specific analysis by which to do so. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses American criminal law in relation to a shift towards the decriminalization of the personal possession of small amounts of marijuana, and it mentions issues related to police authority and arrests for marijuana possession in America. The institutional incentives for police to continues to make arrests are mentioned, along with democracy, public opinion, and automobile search laws in the U.S. Criminal justice, state laws, and political support are also examined.

Sacred sites and traditional cultural properties are crucial to the preservation of indigenous peoples' culture and society, and are increasingly recognised by international and state law and non-governmental entities. This article explores the various legal and non-legal documents addressing sacred sites and traditional cultural properties, and the duties and responsibilities imposed on businesses involved in the resource extraction industries: conducting consultation with affected indigenous peoples and obtaining, at times, their free, prior and informed consent for the project. While by no means exhaustive this broad survey encompasses laws and court decisions from international bodies, the United States and examples from other countries, international guidelines, industry standards and laws of indigenous peoples. It concludes that conducting good faith, socially appropriate and respectful consultation with indigenous peoples prior to conducting extraction activities that will or may affect sacred sites and traditional cultural properties is required not only by the law, but by good business practice. Consultation, obtaining free, prior and informed consent, and reaching formalised agreements result in the avoidance of protracted public litigation, and an improved business reputation when commencing future development projects on indigenous lands. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

State and local officials are increasingly using their own computers, smart phones and personal email accounts to do their jobs. State public records laws do not necessarily prohibit the practice, but a number of these officials have contended that the emails, text messages and other records conducting public business are not subject to state sunshine laws when communicated on these private accounts and devices. They argue that ownership of the device or account determines if the records are open. This article found that in states where authorities have decided the issue, the majority has rejected the notion that ownership trumps content. The article examines the reasoning put forth and determines which arguments have found the most support among state courts and attorneys general asked to decide the issue. The article also suggests solutions to separate those communications that should be public from those that are properly considered private. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The article discusses the reasons why Florida's third-grade retention policy has apparently worked as of July 2014, focusing on why the policy is a good role model for other states that are considering reading laws. According to the article, Florida's third-grade reading law requires students who do not meet a certain reading level on their standardized tests to be held-back (retained) and prevented from entering the fourth grade. The U.S. No Child Left Behind Act is also examined.

The article discusses the reasons why Kentucky should reportedly enact a "Tebow Bill" which allows homeschoolers to participate in public school sports as of July 2014. According to the article, the "Tewbow Bill" is named after former National Football League quarterback Tim Tebow who was able to play on a public high school football team as a homeschooled student due to Florida's Craig Dickinson Act of 1996. Several state sports laws in places such as Louisiana and Tennessee are examined.

A number of states have proposed initiatives or implemented laws that prohibit state courts from applying, considering, or interpreting foreign law, and in particular, Islamic law. The constitutionality of anti-Sharia legislation is in question. Its proponents claim that the Sharia ban protects state and federal constitutional rights, whereas its opponents claim that the ban infringes on the religious freedom of Muslims. The all-or-nothing approach to anti-Sharia legislation misses the distinction between cases where Islamic law should be given consideration from the cases where it should have no influence on judicial decision. This Essay provides a principled distinction between the different uses of Islamic law and shows how the courts can preserve a balance among religious liberty and other constitutional rights. By applying three principles-neutrality, reciprocity, and protection--derived from the core commitments of a liberal democratic society, this Essay explains the distinction between good, bad, and unsustainable uses of Islamic law in American courts: (1) good use where the judge's application, consideration or interpretation of Islamic law should be sustained; (2) bad use where the grounds that render the use unsustainable may be overridden by other considerations; and (3) unsustainable use that lacks overriding considerations. This Essay offers a way to avoid the undesirable consequences of a strict ban or an unrestricted permission on Sharia use by applying the three principles to a number of cases involving Islamic law reviewed by American courts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses several proposed limitations in regards to the use of expunged offenses in bar exam and law school admission process in America as of July 2014, focusing on various conflict of law issues and the process of analyzing an applicant's character and fitness. Legal defenses to perjury statutes and a court's authority to expunge an individual's criminal record are examined. Candor and honesty are mentioned, along with state laws and allegedly minor drug and alcohol offenses.

The article discusses hydraulic fracturing and shale gas development in New York as of 2014, focusing on America's reportedly dormant Commerce Clause in relation to legal challenges to natural gas drilling moratoria. The U.S. Constitution's Takings Clause and alleged state law burdens on interstate commerce are mentioned, along with the Marcellus Shale and the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in the 1970 case Pike v. Bruce Church Inc. which deals with in-state preferences and local bans.

This article examines legal and political developments in California in the 1970s and early 1980s that led to extreme changes in the state's use of imprisonment. It uses historical research methods to illustrate how institutional and political processes interacted in dynamic ways that continuously unsettled and reshaped the crime policy field. It examines crime policy developments before and after the passage of the state's determinate sentencing law to highlight the law's long-term political implications and to illustrate how it benefited interest groups pushing for harsher punishment. It emphasizes the role executives played in shaping these changes, and how the law's significance was as much political as legal because it transformed the institutional logics that structured criminal lawmaking. These changes, long sought by the law enforcement lobby, facilitated crime's politicization and ushered in a new era of frenetic and punitive changes in criminal law and punishment. This new context benefited politicians who supported extreme responses to crime and exposed the crime policy process to heightened degrees of popular scrutiny. The result was a political obsession with crime that eschewed moderation and prioritized prison expansion above all else. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses a reported paradox involving race-conscious labels in America as of June 2014, focusing on the U.S. Supreme Court's (USSC's) ruling in the case Fisher v. Univ. of Texas at Austin which deals with Texas' Top Ten Percent Law and a race-neutral means of achieving viewpoint diversity in relation to university admissions. USSC Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's views about diversity in education are mentioned, along with equal protection and the legal rights of minority students.

This Article introduces the concept of "shadow immigration enforcement"--that is, the increasingly common and troubling phenomenon of improper involvement in federal immigration enforcement by state and local law enforcement officers. Shadow immigration enforcement occurs when state or local police officers with no immigration enforcement authority exercise their regular police powers in a distorted way for the purpose of increasing federal immigration enforcement. Shadow enforcement typically involves the disproportionate targeting of vulnerable "foreign-seeming" populations for hyper-enforcement for reasons wholly independent of suspected involvement in criminal activity as defined by state or local law. At best, the state officers use the enforcement of laws within their mandate (criminal or traffic laws) as a pretext for targeting those suspected of having unlawful immigration status, often based on observable ethnic or racial characteristics. This shadow enforcement raises qualitatively different civil rights and constitutional concerns from those that arise in immigration enforcement carried out by Department of Homeland Security officers. On the one hand, the overlap of the targeted population with identifiable racial minorities (most notably Latinos) raises special constitutional concerns. On the other, the "under the table" nature of the enforcement incentives, confusion over enforcement authority, and the utter lack of accountability are also extremely troubling. Moreover, the usual constitutional safeguards that seek to protect the public from biased and distorted policing--specific regulations, training and discipline of officers, and using the exclusionary rule in court proceedings--do not serve as effective protection against, or deterrents to, shadow enforcement, because existing accountability structures do not adequately account for this type of enforcement. This Article explores the specific constitutional dangers created by shadow immigration enforcement by state and local officers and proposes strategies for responding to those dangers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This Note gives the legal background of the doctrine of dormant foreign affairs preemption, examines the laws governing the recognition of foreign judgments under the lens of dormant foreign affairs preemption, and argues that courts should adopt an objective standard for future dormant foreign affairs preemption cases. Dormant foreign affairs preemption is premised on the idea that the federal government should have exclusive control over foreign affairs. The doctrine allows courts to preempt state laws in some cases where there is no conflicting federal policy or statute. The U.S. Supreme Court has only once held a state statute unconstitutional under the doctrine. In addition, not all scholars agree that courts should apply dormant foreign affairs preemption, and many argue the federal government merely has supreme, rather than exclusive, authority in foreign affairs. However, lower courts continue to apply a wide variety of tests to preserve the federal government's exclusive role in foreign affairs. Dormant foreign affairs preemption is best understood by exploring an area of law that captures the competing interests in current dormant foreign affairs preemption analyses. This Note considers the laws governing the recognition of foreign judgments, an area of traditional state competence that also has a substantial and growing impact on modern conceptions of foreign affairs. Finally, this Note argues that courts would benefit from applying an objective standard that looks at whether other countries would reasonably expect the federal government to have exclusive jurisdiction over an area of law. Unlike current standards, this analysis accounts for changing notions of foreign affairs and protects against encroachments on state sovereignty. Under the objective standard, the federal government would have exclusive jurisdiction over regulation of the recognition of foreign judgments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the reported efforts to disincentivize elder abuse through disinheritance as of 2014, focusing on the Uniform Probate Code, states' powers under the U.S. Constitution, and Section 259 of the California Probate Code which deals with elder-related fraud and undue influence. The potential deterrent effects of elder abuse disinheritance statutes are mentioned, along with model laws and various American state criminal and probate laws. Mandated reporter laws are also examined.

The article provides analyses of various state laws in America which reportedly have the potential to influence the public health workforce's participation in emergency responses as of 2014. The roles that American state public health laws play in public health emergency planning, response, and recovery are assessed. An H1N1 influenza pandemic and natural disasters such as Hurricanes Katrina and Sandy are also mentioned. Liability protections for first responders are also examined.

The article discusses contemporary bioethics, state laws in America, and an analysis of whether a mental health professional has a duty to protect threatened victims in the wake of the shooting deaths of 20 students at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut in 2012 and the 1973 case Tarasoff v. Regents of Univ. of Cal. which deals with the murder of Tatiana "Tanya" Tarasoff by mental counseling patient Prosenjit Poddar. Wrongful death lawsuits and codes of ethics are examined.

An increasing number of states have passed laws aimed at preventing the costs of litigation from burdening legitimate petitioning activity. These laws frequently include procedural protections, such as a special motion to dismiss. When state law claims are instead brought in federal court, these laws and their procedural protections implicate the Erie doctrine and the Rules of Decision Act, which has led some federal courts not to apply these laws, or to apply them only in part. This Note concludes that federal courts, interpreting the Rules Enabling Act consistent with principles of federalism and the First Amendment, should apply in full state laws protecting the right to petition the government. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One hundred years ago, two states had criminal laws addressing collegiate hazing. Today, hazing is a crime in thirty-nine states. However, this flood of legislation has failed to stem the tide of hazing injuries and deaths. The current criminal law approach to hazing has failed because the claimed benefits of specialized hazing laws are illusory. Moreover, the rare cases in which hazing laws provide a benefit over general criminal statutes are the very cases in which the hazing laws are most vulnerable to legal challenge. The current approach also fails on policy grounds. A pure enforcement approach that does not engage with students' values and beliefs about hazing may have the unintended effect of entrenching pro-hazing norms. The creation of sweeping criminal liability also increases the danger of hazing by driving it further underground. This Comment argues for jettisoning the current, failed approach to hazing and instead imposing a duty of mutual aid on members of collegiate student groups. Under this Comment's proposal, if a student becomes helpless as a result of a group activity and is unable to protect himself other group members must protect him from injury until he is once again able to take care of himself Criminal liability attaches when a member who knows of the other student's helplessness breaches the duty and an injury results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This Note joins a growing chorus of scholarship criticizing the lack of proportionality analysis in the Supreme Court's Fourth Amendment jurisprudence. Rather than simply bemoan the current state of legal doctrine, we offer a practical test that state and federal courts could use to determine the permissible scope of pedestrian stop-and-frisks. Specifically, we propose that courts adopt an offense-severity model that distinguishes minor offenses (like jaywalking, public alcohol consumption, and simple trespass) from more serious misdemeanors and felonies. Two state supreme courts-Massachusetts's and Washington's-have already adopted part of our approach, distinguishing noncriminal from criminal activity for the purposes of stop-and-frisks. That is, police in those states may not engage in stop-and-frisks based on mere suspicion of noncriminal offenses. Our Note further advocates for a rebuttable presumption against stop-and-frisks for petty misdemeanors. To overcome this presumption, prosecutors would bear the burden of demonstrating that an officer reasonably believed the suspected offense posed an immediate threat to public safety. In advocating such a model, our Note contributes to a broader debate about crime-severity's usefulness as a rubric for assessing police conduct under the Fourth Amendment and its state law equivalents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]