for Journals by Title or ISSN
for Articles by Keywords
help
  Subjects -> LAW (Total: 1380 journals)
    - CIVIL LAW (36 journals)
    - CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (48 journals)
    - CORPORATE LAW (87 journals)
    - CRIMINAL LAW (23 journals)
    - CRIMINOLOGY AND LAW ENFORCEMENT (145 journals)
    - FAMILY AND MATRIMONIAL LAW (22 journals)
    - INTERNATIONAL LAW (184 journals)
    - JUDICIAL SYSTEMS (22 journals)
    - LAW (804 journals)
    - LAW: GENERAL (9 journals)

LAW (804 journals)                  1 2 3 4 5 | Last

Showing 1 - 200 of 354 Journals sorted alphabetically
ABA Journal Magazine     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 24)
Acta Juridica     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 7)
Acta Politica     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 15)
Acta Universitatis Danubius. Juridica     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Actualidad Jurídica Ambiental     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Adam Mickiewicz University Law Review     Open Access  
Adelaide Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 23)
Administrative Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 44)
Aegean Review of the Law of the Sea and Maritime Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 6)
African Journal of Legal Studies     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 8)
African Journal on Conflict Resolution     Open Access   (Followers: 19)
Afrilex     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Ahkam : Jurnal Hukum Islam     Open Access  
Ahkam : Jurnal Ilmu Syariah     Open Access  
Air and Space Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 20)
Akron Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Al 'Adalah : Jurnal Hukum Islam     Open Access  
Al-Ahkam     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Alaska Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 8)
Albany Law Review     Free   (Followers: 5)
Alberta Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 14)
Alternative Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 8)
Alternatives : Global, Local, Political     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 12)
Amazon's Research and Environmental Law     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
American Journal of Comparative Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 56)
American Journal of Jurisprudence     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 18)
American Journal of Law & Medicine     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 11)
American Journal of Legal History     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 8)
American Journal of Trial Advocacy     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 7)
American University Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 10)
American University National Security Law Brief     Open Access   (Followers: 8)
Amicus Curiae     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
Amsterdam Law Forum     Open Access   (Followers: 8)
Anales de la Cátedra Francisco Suárez     Open Access  
Annales Canonici     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Annales de droit     Open Access  
Annals of the Faculty of Law in Belgrade - Belgrade Law Review     Open Access  
Anuario da Facultade de Dereito da Universidade da Coruña     Open Access  
Anuario de Psicología Jurídica     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
ANZSLA Commentator, The     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 4)
Appeal : Review of Current Law and Law Reform     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Arbitration Law Monthly     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 3)
Arbitration Law Reports and Review     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 14)
Arctic Review on Law and Politics     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Arena Hukum     Open Access  
Argumenta Journal Law     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Arizona Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Arizona State Law Journal     Free   (Followers: 3)
Arkansas Law Review     Free   (Followers: 6)
Ars Aequi Maandblad     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 3)
Art + Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 12)
Article 40     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Artificial Intelligence and Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 11)
ASAS : Jurnal Hukum dan Ekonomi Islam     Open Access  
Asia-Pacific Journal of Ocean Law and Policy     Hybrid Journal  
Asian American Law Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Asian Journal of Law and Society     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 7)
Asian Journal of Legal Education     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 4)
Asian Pacific American Law Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
AStA Wirtschafts- und Sozialstatistisches Archiv     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
Asy-Syir'ah : Jurnal Ilmu Syari'ah dan Hukum     Open Access  
Australasian Law Management Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 7)
Australian and New Zealand Sports Law Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 9)
Australian Feminist Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 11)
Australian Indigenous Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 22)
Australian Journal of Legal History     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 14)
Ave Maria Law Review     Free   (Followers: 3)
Badamai Law Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Ballot     Open Access  
Baltic Journal of Law & Politics     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
Bar News: The Journal of the NSW Bar Association     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 6)
Behavioral Sciences & the Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 27)
Beijing Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Berkeley Journal of Entertainment and Sports Law     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
Berkeley Technology Law Journal     Free   (Followers: 13)
Bioethics Research Notes     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 14)
Boletín de la Asociación Internacional de Derecho Cooperativo     Open Access  
Bond Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 18)
Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 7)
Boston College Journal of Law & Social Justice     Open Access   (Followers: 11)
Boston College Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 16)
Boston University Law Review     Free   (Followers: 11)
BRICS Law Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law     Open Access   (Followers: 8)
Brigham Young University Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 7)
British Journal of American Legal Studies     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Brooklyn Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Bulletin of Legal Medicine     Open Access  
Bulletin of Medieval Canon Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 3)
Business and Human Rights Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 3)
C@hiers du CRHIDI     Open Access  
Cadernos de Dereito Actual     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Cadernos de Informação Jurídica     Open Access  
Cadernos do Programa de Pós-Graduação em Direito - PPGDir./UFRGS     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Cadernos Ibero-Americanos de Direito Sanitário     Open Access  
Cahiers Droit, Sciences & Technologies     Open Access  
California Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 20)
California Lawyer     Free  
California Western Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Cambridge Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 170)
Campbell Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Campus Legal Advisor     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 2)
Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 10)
Canadian Journal of Law and Society     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 20)
Case Western Reserve Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Časopis pro právní vědu a praxi     Open Access  
Catalyst : A Social Justice Forum     Open Access   (Followers: 9)
Catholic University Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Chicago-Kent Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 4)
Chicana/o-Latina/o Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
China : An International Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 18)
China-EU Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 6)
Chinese Journal of Comparative Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 4)
Chinese Law & Government     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 9)
Cleveland State Law Review     Free   (Followers: 2)
College Athletics and The Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1)
Colombia Forense     Open Access  
Columbia Journal of Environmental Law     Free   (Followers: 10)
Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 15)
Columbia Law Review (Sidebar)     Open Access   (Followers: 18)
Commercial Law Quarterly: The Journal of the Commercial Law Association of Australia     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 5)
Comparative Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 38)
Comparative Legal History     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 7)
Comparative Legilinguistics     Open Access  
Con-texto     Open Access  
Conflict Resolution Quarterly     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 41)
Conflict Trends     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 12)
Cornell Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 12)
Criterio Jurídico     Open Access  
Critical Analysis of Law : An International & Interdisciplinary Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Cuadernos de Historia del Derecho     Open Access   (Followers: 7)
Cuestiones Juridicas     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Current Legal Problems     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 29)
Danube     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
De Jure     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
De Rebus     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 1)
Deakin Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 15)
Debater a Europa     Open Access  
Defense Counsel Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 1)
Democrazia e diritto     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 2)
Denning Law Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 6)
DePaul Journal of Women, Gender and the Law     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
DePaul Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Der Staat     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 14)
Derecho Animal. Forum of Animal Law Studies     Open Access  
Derecho PUCP     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Derecho y Ciencias Sociales     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Derechos en Acción     Open Access  
Dicle Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi     Open Access  
Die Verwaltung     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 10)
Dikaion     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Dike     Open Access  
Diké : Revista Jurídica     Open Access  
Direito e Desenvolvimento     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Direito e Liberdade     Open Access  
Diritto penale contemporaneo     Free   (Followers: 2)
Diritto, immigrazione e cittadinanza     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Dixi     Open Access  
Doxa : Cuadernos de Filosofía del Derecho     Open Access  
Droit et Cultures     Open Access   (Followers: 7)
Droit et Médecine Bucco-Dentaire     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 1)
Droit, Déontologie & Soin     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 2)
Drug Science, Policy and Law     Full-text available via subscription  
Duke Environmental Law & Policy Forum     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Duke Forum for Law & Social Change     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Duke Journal of Gender Law & Policy     Open Access   (Followers: 15)
Duke Law & Technology Review     Open Access   (Followers: 10)
Duke Law Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 26)
DULR Online     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
East Asia Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
ECI Interdisciplinary Journal for Legal and Social Policy     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Ecology Law Quarterly     Free   (Followers: 4)
Economics and Law     Open Access  
Edinburgh Law Review     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 19)
Education and the Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 13)
El Cotidiano     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Election Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 24)
Energy Law Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 5)
Environmental Justice     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 9)
Environmental Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 22)
Environmental Policy and Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 13)
ERA-Forum     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
Erasmus Law Review     Open Access  
Erciyes Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi     Open Access  
Espaço Jurídico : Journal of Law     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
ESR Review : Economic and Social Rights in South Africa     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Ethnopolitics     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 3)
Ethos: Official Publication of the Law Society of the Australian Capital Territory     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 5)
EU Agrarian Law     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Europaisches Journal fur Minderheitenfragen     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 2)
European Energy and Environmental Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 13)
European Journal for Education Law and Policy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 9)
European Journal of Comparative Law and Governance     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 9)
European Journal of Law and Technology     Open Access   (Followers: 18)
European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
European Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 164)
European Public Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 37)
European Review of Contract Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 25)
European Review of Private Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 33)
European Yearbook of Minority Issues Online     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)

        1 2 3 4 5 | Last

Journal Cover
California Law Review
Journal Prestige (SJR): 1.725
Citation Impact (citeScore): 1
Number of Followers: 20  

  This is an Open Access Journal Open Access journal
ISSN (Print) 0008-1221
Published by U of California, Berkeley Homepage  [4 journals]
  • Consumer Protection for Criminal Defendants: Regulating Commercial Bail in
           California

    • Authors: Mel Gonzales
      Abstract: ail bond companies act as gatekeepers to freedom for thousands of people in California every day. Yet despite their ubiquitous role in our criminal justice system, the current framework regulating the commercial bail industry almost exclusively monitors the relationship between bail companies and the state; it fails to mitigate the wide variety of harms that bail agents can and often do inflict on their customers. Existing policies frame defendants simply as criminals, erasing their simultaneous position as consumers soliciting a commercial service. As a consequence, defendant-consumers, often poor individuals of color, and their families, remain vulnerable to an often-predatory commercial bail bond system.This Note proposes a novel way to frame the interaction between a bail bond company and a criminal defendant or arrestee: as that between a merchant and a consumer. As a consequence, this relationship can and should be governed by a framework of consumer protection laws. This framework, properly crafted and enforced, would protect consumers of commercial bail bonds from abuse and generally encourage a well-functioning commercial bail industry.In an effort to encourage a less predatory and more beneficial commercial bail industry, the Note describes an avenue for pursuing claims against abusive bail bond companies and policy changes that could lay the groundwork for systemic improvement. In doing so, the Note argues (1) that commercial bail companies should be regulated by existing consumer protection law; (2) that consumers of these bail services can and should bring suit against bail companies for violations of state and federal consumer protection laws; and (3) that new legislation tailored to the industry is urgently needed to ensure a properly functioning industry free of exploitation and abuse.Part I of the Note summarizes the process of pretrial detention and bail in California, illuminating the context in which consumers of bail services find themselves. Part I also summarizes qualitative research in order to help describe the variety of harms consumers of bail services often endure. Part II surveys existing consumer protection legislation available to consumers seeking relief, focusing primarily on the California Unfair Competition Law, the California Legal Remedies Act, and the California Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Part II then analyzes their applicability to the commercial bail context. In Part III, the Note addresses the broader legal framework regulating the commercial bail industry, focusing on the areas that existing protections may not be able to reach and describing the possibility of enacting new legislation tailored to these deficiencies.
      PubDate: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 08:16:20 PDT
       
  • The Changemaker Lawyer: Innovating the Legal Profession for Social Change

    • Authors: David Nahmias
      Abstract: As lawyers today confront existential challenges to their profession, from globalization to technological change, they face demands to innovate. In a world of rapid change, individuals must have certain skills to succeed; they must be “changemakers.” Changemakers are individuals who harness innovation to solve social challenges, a notion arising from the global movement of social entrepreneurship that has captured the attention of sectors spanning international development and the business world. This Note argues that through their innovative work, “changemaker lawyers” present a new set of skills and concepts to support a struggling legal profession. They can serve as exemplars and guides for lawyers in an evolving profession, and the principles that undergird their work can provide significant advantages to the profession as a whole. Starting from the proposition that these changemaker lawyers exist, I conducted interviews with ten attorneys whose unconventional work or expertise embodies changemaker lawyering. Drawing on my interviews, I identify three key themes that changemaker lawyers appear to have in common: (1) they seek to overcome long-standing norms in the legal profession; (2) they design novel organizational structures that reflect their values, and (3) they create trans-disciplinary practices that bridge legal fields and sectors. I then suggest challenges that handicap changemaker lawyers. By proposing the idea of changemaker lawyers, this Note seeks to help create a new identity, unite a diverse community of advocates, and trigger a new movement in the legal profession.
      PubDate: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 08:16:14 PDT
       
  • Presidential Obstruction of Justice

    • Authors: Daniel J. Hemel et al.
      Abstract: Federal obstruction of justice statutes bar anyone from interfering with official legal proceedings based on a “corrupt” motive. But what about the president of the United States' The president is vested with “executive power,” which includes the power to control federal law enforcement. A possible view is that the statutes do not apply to the president because if they did they would violate the president’s constitutional power. However, we argue that the obstruction of justice statutes are best interpreted to apply to the president, and that the president obstructs justice when his motive for intervening in an investigation is to further personal, pecuniary, or narrowly partisan interests, rather than to advance the public good. A brief tour of presidential scandals indicates that, without anyone noticing it, the law of obstruction of justice has evolved into a major check on presidential power.
      PubDate: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 08:16:08 PDT
       
  • Trademark’s Judicial De-Evolution: Why Courts Get Trademark Cases
           Wrong Repeatedly

    • Authors: Glynn S. Lunney; Jr.
      Abstract: In the last fifteen years, individuals have brought hundreds of cases challenging government national security practices for violating human rights or civil liberties. Courts have reviewed relatively few of these cases on the merits, often deferring broadly to the executive branch on the grounds that they lack expertise, political accountability, or the ability to protect national security secrets. Yet in cases where courts have permitted civil suits to proceed far enough to decide legal questions, influence policy, or afford litigants relief, they have often experimented with new methods for managing the secret information implicated in many national security cases. These procedures include centralizing cases through Multidistrict Litigation, conducting in camera review of sensitive documents, pressing the government to provide opposing counsel access to secret evidence, appointing special experts of their own, facilitating interlocutory review, and deciding cases in an incremental and dynamic fashion. Illuminating this procedural experimentation, this Article contends that courts can address secrecy in national security adjudication in a tailored, pragmatic fashion, rather than deferring to the executive at the threshold. But this account also shows the limits of such strategies: where misapplied, some procedures may fall short of due process, undermine norms of public access and transparency in the courts, reduce pluralism in the adjudication of disputes, or import bias into judicial decision-making. Together, this suggests that courts should adopt these procedures cautiously and with case-specific assessment of their costs and benefits. Panning out from national security litigation, the Article also offers a set of secondary insights for civil procedure more generally: it highlights the role of the executive branch in making procedural law, the costs of certain transsubstantive procedures, and distorted perceptions across the civil–criminal procedure divide.
      PubDate: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 08:16:02 PDT
       
  • Patriotic Philanthropy' Financing the State with Gifts to Government

    • Authors: Margaret H. Lemos et al.
      Abstract: This Article offers a positive and normative account of an important and growing trend: wealthy individuals are increasingly giving their money to the government to encourage the government to fund particular projects that these individuals want the government to pursue. Such gifts—dubbed “patriotic philanthropy” by one prominent donor—raise fundamental questions about the role that private money plays and ought to play in public policy-making. Legal academics have addressed these types of questions in other contexts, such as campaign financing, privatization of government, and private philanthropy. However, patriotic philanthropy, which presents a new and perhaps more effective way for wealthy individuals to influence the government, has generally escaped the attention of the legal literature. We aim to remedy that lacuna with this Article. Although we do not question the enormous good that patriotic philanthropy can do, this Article argues that gifts to government raise significant concerns about democratic process, equality, and state capacity.
      PubDate: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 08:15:56 PDT
       
  • Debunking Pre-Arrest Incident Searches

    • Authors: Joshua Deahl
      Abstract: The “search incident to arrest” exception to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement permits officers to search a suspect upon making an arrest. It is the most commonly invoked justification for unconsented-to searches; indeed, incident searches far exceed searches conducted with a warrant. This seemingly straightforward exception has wilted in recent years as courts have done away with the prerequisite of an arrest, permitting incident searches so long as there is pre-search probable cause to arrest. The result has been to grant authority to search any person engaged in the most minor of offenses—e.g., speeding, littering, jaywalking—even absent an arrest, injecting routine warrantless searches into this most common form of police-citizen encounter.This Article takes aim at pre-arrest incident searches and diagnoses two doctrinal missteps courts make in permitting them. The first is ignoring that Fourth Amendment intrusions must be judged “at their inception,” a maxim that dictates any post-search arrest is irrelevant to the constitutional calculus (except as evidence of some pre-search fact). The second is that they interpret Whren v. United States—in which the Supreme Court held that a seizure supported by probable cause was valid without regard to whether it was pretextual—as an evidentiary bar to considering officer intentions in Fourth Amendment inquiries. That is wrong too: Whren is not an evidentiary bar at all. While officer intentions are irrelevant to certain objective questions (like probable cause), they matter when discerning whether a custodial arrest is under way. Once these two mistakes are corrected, a straightforward rule emerges: incident searches are permitted only if there is a custodial arrest (be it completed or in-progress) at a search’s inception.Correcting the two missteps above has broad implications. Reinvigorating the principle that intrusions must be judged at their inception has reverberations in all manner of Fourth Amendment analyses. Likewise, treating Whren as a broad evidentiary bar to considering officer intentions is a pervasive yet ultimately mistaken approach. This Article offers a course correction on an issue that has deeply divided appellate courts and is likely to soon receive Supreme Court consideration.
      PubDate: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 08:15:50 PDT
       
  • Procedural Experimentation and National Security in the Courts

    • Authors: Shirin Sinnar
      Abstract: In the last fifteen years, individuals have brought hundreds of cases challenging government national security practices for violating human rights or civil liberties. Courts have reviewed relatively few of these cases on the merits, often deferring broadly to the executive branch on the grounds that they lack expertise, political accountability, or the ability to protect national security secrets. Yet in cases where courts have permitted civil suits to proceed far enough to decide legal questions, influence policy, or afford litigants relief, they have often experimented with new methods for managing the secret information implicated in many national security cases. These procedures include centralizing cases through Multidistrict Litigation, conducting in camera review of sensitive documents, pressing the government to provide opposing counsel access to secret evidence, appointing special experts of their own, facilitating interlocutory review, and deciding cases in an incremental and dynamic fashion. Illuminating this procedural experimentation, this Article contends that courts can address secrecy in national security adjudication in a tailored, pragmatic fashion, rather than deferring to the executive at the threshold. But this account also shows the limits of such strategies: where misapplied, some procedures may fall short of due process, undermine norms of public access and transparency in the courts, reduce pluralism in the adjudication of disputes, or import bias into judicial decision-making. Together, this suggests that courts should adopt these procedures cautiously and with case-specific assessment of their costs and benefits. Panning out from national security litigation, the Article also offers a set of secondary insights for civil procedure more generally: it highlights the role of the executive branch in making procedural law, the costs of certain transsubstantive procedures, and distorted perceptions across the civil–criminal procedure divide.
      PubDate: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 08:15:44 PDT
       
  • An Analysis of the Lack of Protection for Intangible Tribal Cultural
           Property in the Digital Age

    • Authors: Chante Westmoreland
      Abstract: This Note analyzes how the current push for digitization of library and museum collections exacerbates the infringement and appropriation of intangible tribal cultural property and how current statutory schemes fail to adequately protect such property. Cultural property includes any sacred traditional knowledge essential to tribal ways of life and is often privileged information. Intangible cultural property is easily likened to intellectual property in import but does not share the same policy rationale. Because intellectual property laws are justified using “incentive-creation” and other utilitarian theories, these laws inadequately protect tribal images, sacred songs, and other types of traditional knowledge. Meanwhile, statutory schemes specific to cultural property focus solely on tangible sacred objects, such as ceremonial and funerary regalia. This leaves items such as photographs, notes, and recordings, which contain culturally sensitive information, exposed to outsiders and ripe for infringement. In order to remedy this harm, Congress should fulfill its fiduciary obligation to tribes by enacting laws that incentivize libraries, museums, and other educational entities to negotiate with tribes to license or repatriate intangible cultural property prior to digitization.
      PubDate: Fri, 13 Jul 2018 06:25:05 PDT
       
  • Global South Empowerment or Business as Usual: The Challenges Presented by
           the New Development Bank’s and the Asian Infrastructure Investment
           Bank’s Accountability Mechanisms

    • Authors: Sarah I. Mirza
      Abstract: This Note discusses two new multilateral development banks (MDBs), the New Development Bank (NDB) and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), which are rising to challenge the hegemony of the World Bank and other Western-led development finance institutions. Supporters have argued that these new banks will be sources of empowerment and reclamation, allowing the Global South to have a more powerful voice in the development projects that affect it most. I argue that this is only possible if the NDB and AIIB install strong accountability mechanisms and safeguard frameworks to relieve vulnerable Global South communities of further burdens and to ensure these communities have adequate systems of redress for their grievances and human rights concerns. I analyze the current landscape of MDB accountability mechanisms and the ongoing race to the bottom in multilateral financial institutions, looking particularly at the World Bank and its Inspection Panel. I also provide recommendations for both banks’ accountability offices based on implementing best practices and increasing community involvement in project consultation and in grievance mechanisms.
      PubDate: Fri, 13 Jul 2018 06:24:59 PDT
       
  • Stays

    • Authors: Portia Pedro
      Abstract: After judges issue final orders and judgments, losing defendants often ask courts to make a determination that may seem to be a mere procedural technicality, but is, instead, a new battleground for injunctive litigation. These judges are deciding whether to grant a stay pending appeal—whether to prevent the enforcement of a court order or judgment until a court has decided the appeal. Because litigating and deciding an appeal can take years and because the issues at the heart of much of civil injunctive litigation are extremely time-sensitive, determining whether to grant or deny a stay is a momentous decision. By deciding requests for stays pending appeal, federal judges have decided if Texas could enforce health and safety regulations, or if clinics could provide abortions in the state; if 300,000 registered voters in Wisconsin would be able to vote, or if the state could enforce its duly-enacted provisions to regulate elections and prevent voter fraud; if states could determine requirements for marriage, or if samesex couples could marry; if the President could enforce an Executive Order regarding national security, or if Muslims could enter the country regardless of religion; and, arguably, if the forty-third US President would be Al Gore or George W. Bush.The standard for stay determinations ostensibly includes four factors: (1) the likelihood of success on appeal; (2) the likelihood of irreparable harm pending appeal; (3) the balance of the hardships; and (4) the public interest. However, there is more idiosyncrasy than standard because courts vary so widely regarding what constitutes each prong and the manner in which courts should weigh each prong, if at all. Compounding the absence of a uniform stays standard, courts frequently give no reasoning or opinion for stay determinations. With life changing (and potentially world-changing) issues on the line pending appeal, stays are a nearly law-free zone. The immense consequences of stay determinations, due to lengthy appeals and the time-bound nature of the underlying injunctions or orders, mean that courts need to make an effort to get stay decisions right.The author argues that the purpose of a stay pending appeal is to protect a meaningful opportunity to appeal where guaranteed. The Article suggests different standards for stays, turning on whether review is guaranteed or discretionary. The author also asserts that courts should write reasoned opinions for stay decisions.
      PubDate: Fri, 13 Jul 2018 06:24:52 PDT
       
  • Detaining Families: A Study of Asylum Adjudication in Family Detention

    • Authors: Ingrid Eagly et al.
      Abstract: The United States currently detains more families seeking asylum than any nation in the world, but little is known about how these families fare in the immigration court process. In this Article, we analyze government data from all immigration court cases initiated between 2001 and 2016 to provide the first empirical analysis of asylum adjudication in family detention. We find that families have been detained in remote locations, have faced language barriers in accessing the courts, and, despite valiant pro bono efforts to assist them, have routinely gone to court without legal representation. Only half of the family members who remained detained found counsel, fewer than 2% spoke English, and 93% had their hearings in detention adjudicated remotely over video conference, rather than in a traditional face-to-face courtroom setting.In addition, the evidence we uncover documents the important, and underappreciated, role that immigration courts have played in limiting the overdetention of migrant families by immigration authorities at the border. During the period studied, immigration judges reversed half of the negative credible fear decisions of asylum officers and systematically lowered the bond amount set by detention officers. We also find high compliance rates among family members who were released from detention: family members seeking asylum attended their immigration court hearings in 96% of cases since 2001. Finally, we document significant regional variation in case outcomes among family members who were released from detention, including whether family members obtained attorneys and won their asylum cases. These and other findings are meaningful to current policy debates regarding the role of immigration courts in maintaining due process in asylum proceedings and the appropriate use of detention to manage the migration of families fleeing violence in their home countries.
      PubDate: Fri, 13 Jul 2018 06:24:47 PDT
       
  • Saving Governance-By-Design

    • Authors: Deirdre K. Mulligan et al.
      Abstract: Governing through technology has proven irresistibly seductive. Everything from the Internet backbone to consumer devices employs technological design to regulate behavior purposefully by promoting values such as privacy, security, intellectual property protection, innovation, and freedom of expression. Legal and policy scholarship has discussed individual skirmishes over the political impact of technical choices—from whether intelligence and police agencies can gain access to privately encrypted data to debates over digital rights management. But it has failed to come to terms with the reality that “governance-by-design”—the purposeful effort to use technology to embed values—is becoming a central mode of policymaking, and that our existing regulatory system is fundamentally ill-equipped to prevent that phenomenon from subverting public governance.
      PubDate: Fri, 13 Jul 2018 06:24:42 PDT
       
  • The Rise of Federal Title

    • Authors: Gregory Ablavsky
      Abstract: Why did, and does, the federal government own most of the public domain within the United States' The standard historical answers—that states ceded their lands to the federal government and that the Property Clause confirmed this authority—turn out to be incomplete, masking a neglected process in the 1780s and ‘90s in which legitimate ownership came to derive primarily from the federal government.This transformation, which I call the rise of federal title, involved two intertwined controversies. The first was a federalist struggle over whether the federal government could retain land in former territories admitted as states notwithstanding the promise of equal footing. The second concerned the nature of ownership: as states’ unregulated land grants created endless litigation, claimants turned to the federal government to resolve conflicting rights and to create a land system that offered certain title. Both processes vindicated federal ownership, with the consequence that the federal government enjoyed a monopoly on one of the nation’s most important sources of wealth.This history proves highly relevant. The rise of federal title is under threat, as many western states, and the Republican Party platform, have spun a theory based on erroneous history that argues federal landholding is unconstitutional. Simultaneously, in constructing a principle of equal state sovereignty, the Supreme Court’s recent Shelby County decision relied on equal footing cases that ignored this early history. But the implications transcend immediate doctrinal concerns. For property scholars, this Article posits a greater role for the state and its regulation of property than current accounts emphasize. For those focused on public law, this history suggests a more expansive early federal government and a more modest court role in policing federalism—than most scholarship on the early United States acknowledges.
      PubDate: Fri, 13 Jul 2018 06:24:36 PDT
       
  • Wrong Turn on the Ex Post Facto Clause

    • Authors: Paul D. Reingold et al.
      Abstract: The Ex Post Facto Clause bars any increase in punishment after the commission of a crime. But deciding what constitutes an increase in punishment can be tricky. At the front end of a criminal case, where new or amended criminal laws might lengthen prisoners’ sentences if applied retroactively, courts have routinely struck down such changes under the Ex Post Facto Clause. At the back end, however, where new or amended parole laws or policies might lengthen prisoners’ sentences in exactly the same way if applied retroactively, courts have used a different standard and upheld the changes under the Ex Post Facto Clause. Because the harm is identical and lies at the core of what the Ex Post Facto Clause is supposed to protect against, we think the asymmetry is mistaken.Parole is an integral part of punishment: it determines how much time people will serve on their sentences. Until the twenty-first century, black-letter law forbade even modest parole changes that were adverse to prisoners. If a change in the parole regime might lead to longer sentences, then courts insisted that the change be applied prospectively only. Over the last two decades, relying on language in two US Supreme Court parole cases decided in 1995 and 2000, the lower courts have shifted parole ex post facto doctrine by 180 degrees. Prisoners can no longer prevail, even when the change in the state parole regime is almost certain to lead to significantly longer sentences.In the context of parole, the courts have repudiated past doctrine and strayed far from the purposes of the Ex Post Facto Clause. In this article, we review the history, show how the current case law is misguided and illogical, and put forward a new framework that would restore the Ex Post Facto Clause to its rightful place.
      PubDate: Fri, 13 Jul 2018 06:24:29 PDT
       
  • Discover Our Model: The Critical Need for School-Based Immigration Legal
           Services

    • Authors: Prerna Lal et al.
      Abstract: This piece seeks to chronicle the development of school-based immigration legal services at the East Bay Community Law Center, evaluate the successes and challenges of our model, and provide guidance to other organizations across the country that may wish to emulate the model.
      PubDate: Wed, 11 Jul 2018 13:15:16 PDT
       
  • The Housing Clinic

    • Authors: Ubaldo Fernandez
      Abstract: Even before Javier Mabrey first set foot in the East Bay Community Law Center’s Housing Clinic (the “Clinic”), he was no stranger to housing law. Javier was raised by a single mother who, due to her mental disabilities and low income, struggled to keep Javier and his brother housed. By the time Javier was sixteen, his family had been evicted on several occasions. For months at a time, they lived in cars, on friends’ couches, or in budget motels. Only ten years after his family had struggled with homelessness, Javier was using civil litigation to defend families very much like his own from eviction.The Clinic’s eviction defense practice is an excellent experiential course in civil litigation. Court-certified students write and argue motions, prepare and take depositions, and second-chair trials in court, all in the context of one of the most competitive rental markets in the country. Their work at the Clinic equips them with valuable lawyering and personal skills, while significantly expanding the Clinic’s ability to serve distressed tenants.
      PubDate: Wed, 11 Jul 2018 13:15:09 PDT
       
  • A Voice of Their Own: Youth-Centered Representation at EBCLC

    • Authors: Rosa Bay et al.
      Abstract: At the East Bay Community Law Center (EBCLC), the young clients we represent teach us every day about resilience and resistance. Even when the stakes are high, and the meetings and hearings are anxiety producing, our clients never hide who they are—they bring their authentic selves. In the Education, Defense and Justice for Youth program (known—fittingly—as “EDJY”) at EBCLC, we represent young people pushed out of school and into the juvenile justice system. This means advocating for our young clients in special education, school discipline, and delinquency proceedings throughout Alameda County, California.
      PubDate: Wed, 11 Jul 2018 13:15:02 PDT
       
  • A Clean Slate Case Study of Community Lawyering

    • Authors: Theresa Zhen et al.
      Abstract: The United States has a long history of appropriation, forced movement, and penalization of indigenous people, minorities, and anyone perceived as “other.” From the colonization of the Americas, slavery, and forced movement of Africans to the “post-slavery” era that deprives civil rights and incarcerates people of color and indigent communities, this repression continues. Indeed, the most recent systemic iteration of controlling and policing these communities is through the legal “justice” systems that Michelle Alexander has aptly coined the “New Jim Crow.” As advocates in the Clean Slate Practice (Clean Slate) at the East Bay Community Law Center (EBCLC) in Berkeley, California, we witness firsthand the cascading consequences of criminalization that result from a simple traffic stop: that “simple” stop turns into an arrest, which then results in a criminal or traffic conviction—and with the flick of a wrist, a person’s life, economic stability, housing, and personal value are summarily ravaged. Many generations of Clean Slate attorneys, staff, and law students have worked tirelessly to fight against the last twelve years of expansion (and redesign) of mass incarceration. In the process, we have successfully improved the lives of those who exit the system and kept individuals outside of its grasp in the first place.
      PubDate: Wed, 11 Jul 2018 13:14:55 PDT
       
  • The Not-Quite-Accidental Genius of EBCLC’s Consumer Justice Clinic:
           Lessons for Legal Services Providers

    • Authors: Ted Mermin
      Abstract: In the fall of 2008, I was approached after an Ultimate Frisbee game by a player who asked if she remembered correctly that I practice consumer law. I confessed that yes, that was precisely what I had been doing at the California Attorney General’s office until earlier that year. That inquisitive player and skilled advocate, Elisa Della-Piana, then asked apologetically if I knew anything about debt-collection law and, if so, whether I might be willing to sit in the back of the old EBCLC office on Shattuck Avenue during clinic hours. I did, and I was, and I went in that Thursday and have never left.
      PubDate: Wed, 11 Jul 2018 13:14:48 PDT
       
  • On Love and Lawyering: A Celebration of the East Bay Community Law Center

    • Authors: Seema N. Patel
      Abstract: As we sift—no, shovel—through one of the most tumultuous times in our country’s history, I invite you to join me in taking some solace in the tremendous and important work that the staff and attorneys of the East Bay Community Law Center (EBCLC or Law Center) do daily. Our conscientious and dedicated advocates not only shepherd clients through a range of legal issues, but work more universally—with love, compassion, and skill—to improve the basic human condition. Indeed, a day in the Law Center bears witness to a wide range of people, circumstances, and emotions. To celebrate EBCLC, then, is to pay homage to the uniqueness and humility of some of the country’s best and brightest legal aid lawyers.The stories and reflections that comprise this Festschrift are a testament to the lifelong impact that EBCLC has had not only on our immediate community, but on the staff and attorneys themselves that do the hard, relentless, and loving work of community lawyering and advocacy. Indeed, the Law Center is the place where the head, the hands, and the heart of legal education come together.
      PubDate: Wed, 11 Jul 2018 13:14:41 PDT
       
 
 
JournalTOCs
School of Mathematical and Computer Sciences
Heriot-Watt University
Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, UK
Email: journaltocs@hw.ac.uk
Tel: +00 44 (0)131 4513762
Fax: +00 44 (0)131 4513327
 
Home (Search)
Subjects A-Z
Publishers A-Z
Customise
APIs
Your IP address: 54.158.208.189
 
About JournalTOCs
API
Help
News (blog, publications)
JournalTOCs on Twitter   JournalTOCs on Facebook

JournalTOCs © 2009-