for Journals by Title or ISSN
for Articles by Keywords
help
  Subjects -> LAW (Total: 1451 journals)
    - CIVIL LAW (36 journals)
    - CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (49 journals)
    - CORPORATE LAW (90 journals)
    - CRIMINAL LAW (24 journals)
    - CRIMINOLOGY AND LAW ENFORCEMENT (151 journals)
    - FAMILY AND MATRIMONIAL LAW (23 journals)
    - INTERNATIONAL LAW (187 journals)
    - JUDICIAL SYSTEMS (22 journals)
    - LAW (860 journals)
    - LAW: GENERAL (9 journals)

LAW (860 journals)                  1 2 3 4 5 | Last

Showing 1 - 200 of 354 Journals sorted alphabetically
(En)clave Comahue. Revista Patagónica de Estudios Sociales     Open Access  
ABA Journal Magazine     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 25)
Acta Juridica     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 7)
Acta Politica     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 18)
Acta Universitatis Danubius. Juridica     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Acta Universitatis Lodziensis : Folia Iuridica     Open Access  
Actualidad Jurídica Ambiental     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Adelaide Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 23)
Administrative Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 45)
Aegean Review of the Law of the Sea and Maritime Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 7)
African Journal on Conflict Resolution     Open Access   (Followers: 22)
Afrilex     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Ahkam : Jurnal Hukum Islam     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
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 Ihkam : Jurnal Hukum & Pranata Sosial     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Al-Ahkam     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Al-Istinbath : Jurnal Hukum Islam     Open Access  
Alaska Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 8)
Albany Law Review     Free   (Followers: 6)
Alberta Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 14)
Alternative Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 9)
Alternatives : Global, Local, Political     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 12)
Amazon's Research and Environmental Law     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
American Journal of Comparative Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 58)
American Journal of Jurisprudence     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 19)
American Journal of Law & Medicine     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 11)
American Journal of Legal History     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 9)
American Journal of Trial Advocacy     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 7)
American University Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 11)
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  
Annales de droit     Open Access  
Annales de la Faculté de Droit d’Istanbul     Open Access  
Annales Universitatis Mariae Curie-Skłodowska, sectio G (Ius)     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)
Arbeidsrett     Full-text available via subscription  
Arbitration Law Monthly     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 4)
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: 3)
Artificial Intelligence and Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 11)
ASAS : Jurnal Hukum dan Ekonomi Islam     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
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: 3)
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: 12)
Australian Indigenous Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 21)
Australian Journal of Legal History     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 15)
Ave Maria Law Review     Free   (Followers: 4)
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: 7)
Behavioral Sciences & the Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 28)
Beijing Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Berkeley Journal of Entertainment and Sports Law     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
Berkeley Technology Law Journal     Free   (Followers: 14)
Bioethics Research Notes     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 14)
Boletín de la Asociación Internacional de Derecho Cooperativo     Open Access  
Boletín Instituto de Derecho Ambiental y de los Recursos Naturales     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)
Bulletin of Yaroslav Mudryi NLU : Series : Philosophy, philosophy of law, political science, sociology     Open Access  
Business and Human Rights Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 4)
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)
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: 194)
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: 11)
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: 20)
China-EU Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
Chinese Journal of Comparative Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
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: 11)
Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 16)
Columbia Law Review (Sidebar)     Open Access   (Followers: 20)
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: 40)
Comparative Legal History     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 8)
Comparative Legilinguistics     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Con-texto     Open Access  
Conflict Resolution Quarterly     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 44)
Conflict Trends     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 13)
Cornell Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 12)
Criterio Jurídico     Open Access  
Critical Analysis of Law : An International & Interdisciplinary Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
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)
Derecho Animal. Forum of Animal Law Studies     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Derecho PUCP     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Derecho y Ciencias Sociales     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Derechos en Acción     Open Access  
Deusto Journal of Human Rights     Open Access  
Dicle Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi     Open Access  
Dikaion     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Dike     Open Access  
Dikê : Revista de Investigación en Derecho, Criminología y Consultoría Jurídica     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Diké : Revista Jurídica     Open Access  
Direito e Desenvolvimento     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
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: 18)
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)
Economics and Law     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
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: 25)
Energy Law Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 5)
Environmental Justice     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 10)
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: 10)
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: 178)

        1 2 3 4 5 | Last

Similar Journals
Journal Cover
Boston College Law Review
Number of Followers: 16  

  This is an Open Access Journal Open Access journal
ISSN (Print) 0161-6587
Published by Boston College Homepage  [8 journals]
  • What Then Must We Do': Why Rubin v. Islamic Republic of Iran Leaves
           Victims of State Sponsored Terror Attacks with Few Good Options

    • Authors: Sam Dougherty
      Abstract: The United States Supreme Court should have expanded § 1610(g) of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act to allow United States victims of foreign state sponsored terror attacks to file attachments against any kind of property owned by a foreign government. This would have provided victims with a viable opportunity to execute the judgments of United States courts against foreign state defendants. Without an expanded § 1610(g), victims will continue to be trapped without any realistic path to recover the full amount of damages they have sustained.
      PubDate: Thu, 30 May 2019 19:36:41 PDT
       
  • Mea Culpa: Why Corporate Waivers of Attorney-Client Privilege Have Not
           Increased the Prosecution of Corporate Executives

    • Authors: Leah Hengemuhle
      Abstract: Up until the most recent financial crisis, the Justice Department consistently prosecuted individuals responsible for corporate misconduct. In recent times, few executives are prosecuted for their vast corporate misconduct and most received a deferred prosecution agreement in exchange for waiving the corporation’s attorney-client privilege. This Note discusses how the waiver of attorney-client privilege has, in effect, reduced the prosecution of executives responsible for corporate crimes. It argues that the Justice Department must conduct its own investigations into corporate misconduct and should not rely on a corporation waiving its attorney-client privilege in exchange for a lenient deal. Successfully reducing corporate misconduct depends, in part, on the government’s ability to deter the individuals running the corporation, which cannot be met when leniency replaces investigative work.
      PubDate: Thu, 30 May 2019 19:36:33 PDT
       
  • The Assault on Campus Assault: The Conflicts Between Local Law
           Enforcement, FERPA, and Title IX

    • Authors: Emma B. Bolla
      Abstract: Controversies on college campuses nationwide have led to widespread calls to reform the investigative process of campus sexual assault cases. A total abandonment of the Title IX system would leave victims with few options for justice, but investigations by both universities and local law enforcement can lead to conflicts that are often not addressed in policy discussions about Title IX. This Note explores the Title IX and criminal systems for handling campus sexual assault. It then examines the conflicts created by federal law under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (“FERPA”) and Title IX for the effective policing of campus sexual assaults. Both the Title IX system and traditional criminal proceedings have pros and cons. Local law enforcement access to campus proceedings may help bring effective criminal justice by increasing the amount of evidence in sexual assault trials. Yet FERPA and Title IX can stymie local law enforcement efforts by blocking access to student records without subpoena. This exacerbates problems relating to the high evidentiary standards in criminal cases. Even if law enforcement could access student records, the accused’s due process rights may be at even greater risk, undermining the integrity of the Title IX system. Ultimately, this Note argues that Congress must revise FERPA to require release of limited information where there is a finding of guilt, to strike a balance between the interests of the accused, the victim, and the public.
      PubDate: Thu, 30 May 2019 19:36:26 PDT
       
  • Certifying Questions in First Amendment Cases: Free Speech, Statutory
           Ambiguity, and Definitive Interpretations

    • Authors: Clay Calvert
      Abstract: In the First Amendment-based speech cases of both Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky in 2018 and Expressions Hair Design v. Schneiderman in 2017, Justice Sonia Sotomayor forcefully contended that the United States Supreme Court should have certified questions about statutory meaning to the highest relevant state court. This Article examines certification—its purposes, its pros, and its cons—in cases pivoting on whether ambiguous state statutes violate the First Amendment. Mansky and Expressions Hair Design provide timely analytical springboards. The Article argues that certification carries heightened importance today. That is because the justices now frequently fracture along perceived political lines over when a case involving speech merits heightened First Amendment scrutiny and when it deserves only rational basis review. This rift was vividly exposed in 2018 in both National Institute of Family & Life Advocates v. Becerra and Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees. Although not a panacea, question certification might sometimes eliminate such splintering. The Article ultimately proposes four criteria for helping the Court to decide when certifying a question of state law in a First Amendment case is appropriate.
      PubDate: Thu, 30 May 2019 19:36:18 PDT
       
  • Nathan Roscoe Pound and the Nazis

    • Authors: Peter Rees
      Abstract: When Roscoe Pound, Dean of Harvard Law School, accepted an honorary degree from a leading German university in 1934, it was interpreted as a gesture of support for the Nazi Party. Was this a naïve misstep, or something more sinister' This Article addresses that question. It highlights previously unknown encounters between Pound and senior Nazi figures at the time, and an unusual relationship between Pound and a suspected Nazi agent that lasted throughout the Second World War, and beyond. These revelations necessarily bring into question Pound’s personal ethics and his professional responsibilities as a lawyer.
      PubDate: Thu, 30 May 2019 19:36:11 PDT
       
  • Fighting the Undead: Why States Should Use Forced Vesting to Kill Zombie
           Mortgages

    • Authors: Roman Ibragimov
      Abstract: Following the financial crisis, many home mortgage borrowers found themselves living in properties encumbered by debt that far exceeded their value. The result was an increase in mortgage default rates, followed by a wave of foreclosures as lenders scrambled to minimize the financial damage to their investments. From the wreckage, a new creature emerged that threatened to devastate borrowers who believed that foreclosure was their chance for a fresh start: the zombie mortgage. With a spike in lenders failing or declining to foreclose on properties, borrowers were unexpectedly facing an unwanted burden of homeownership that would cause them and their communities severe distress. As states and courts began to fight back, the number of zombie mortgages declined. Yet to this day, zombies can be found across the country and the risk that more will rise is quite real. This Note argues that a potential solution is for state legislatures to enact forced vesting provisions. Specifically, this Note evaluates the potential effect of such laws through a law and economics lens and concludes that such provisions would be beneficial.
      PubDate: Tue, 30 Apr 2019 05:28:58 PDT
       
  • Straight to Video: America’s Inmates Deprived of a Lifeline Through
           Video-Only Visits

    • Authors: Alexandre Bou-Rhodes
      Abstract: The ability of inmates in the United States to visit with loved ones is often severely limited by correctional officials, and the courts have been reluctant to intervene. Recently, those officials have begun to replace in-person visitation with video visitation. This Note argues that such a transition will be harmful for inmates, correctional institutions, and the communities many of them eventually return to. It also suggests possible jurisprudential, legislative, and regulatory interventions to curtail the replacement of in-person visitation.
      PubDate: Tue, 30 Apr 2019 05:28:44 PDT
       
  • Illegal Encouragement: The Federal Statute That Makes It Illegal to
           “Encourage” Immigrants to Come to the United States and Why It Is
           Unconstitutionally Overbroad

    • Authors: Lauren D. Allen
      Abstract: Section 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv) of Title 8 of the United States Code makes it illegal to “encourage” an alien to come to or reside in the United States. Since that section’s 1986 amendment, the circuits have struggled to adopt a consistent definition for “encourage.” Though some circuits have adopted a broad definition, the Third Circuit has explicitly taken a different route, applying a narrower construction. In addition to these different constructions, the two circuits that addressed the potential overbreadth issue of this subsection have reached contrary conclusions. This Note argues that this provision is facially unconstitutional under the overbreadth doctrine. Applying the analysis from Brandenburg v. Ohio, this Note first argues that the statute regulates protected speech, specifically advocacy speech. The statute’s application criminalizes a substantial number of defendants who are engaging in this protected speech, and thus the statute is overly broad. Finally, this Note suggests that the statute be redrafted by Congress to include stronger words, such as “urge” and “facilitate,” and carve out a special exception for immigrants with remediable claims. These solutions would bring the statute back within the realm of constitutionality.
      PubDate: Tue, 30 Apr 2019 05:28:25 PDT
       
  • Securities Disclosure As Soundbite: The Case of CEO Pay Ratios

    • Authors: Steven A. Bank et al.
      Abstract: This Article analyzes the history, design, and effectiveness of the highly controversial CEO pay ratio disclosure rule, which went into effect in 2018. Based on a regulatory mandate contained in the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010, the rule requires public companies to disclose the ratio between CEO pay and median worker pay as part of their annual filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The seven-year rulemaking process was politically contentious and generated a level of public engagement that was virtually unprecedented in the long history of the SEC disclosure regime. The SEC sought to minimize compliance costs by providing firms with maximum methodological flexibility, expressly foregoing any effort to ensure data comparability across firms. The sizable pay gaps highlighted by the newly reported pay ratios attracted extensive attention from the media and various non-corporate constituencies, fueling public outrage, motivating new proposed legislation, and reinforcing concerns over pay inequity and economic inequality. At the same time, the pay ratio’s role in investor decisionmaking remains uncertain. We suggest that the pay ratio disclosure rule represents a unique approach to disclosure, which we term disclosure-as-soundbite. This approach is characterized by (1) high public salience—the pay ratio is superficially intuitive and resonates with the public to an extent much greater than other disclosure, and (2) low informational integrity—the pay ratio is a relative outlier in terms of certain baseline characteristics of disclosure, meaning that the information is lacking in accuracy, difficult to interpret, and incomplete. We find that in its current formulation, the rule is ineffectual and potentially counterproductive when viewed as a means of generating useful and reliable information for investors, or influencing firm behavior on matters of worker and executive compensation. The pay ratio is more successful in fomenting or contributing to public discourse on broader societal matters relating to pay inequity and economic inequality, though the quality of the underlying information likely limits the quality of the discourse. Given the low probability of legislative action in this area in the near term, we propose that the SEC should seek to improve the rule’s informational integrity by mandating a narrative disclosure approach that provides information about median worker pay and the resulting pay ratio with more context, nuance, and explanation. This would be consistent with the format of existing disclosure requirements relating to executive compensation, and it would represent a positive move away from the disclosure-as-soundbite approach. A related and broader question about the need for disclosure of non-executive compensation and human capital management practices deserves further academic study.
      PubDate: Tue, 30 Apr 2019 05:28:09 PDT
       
  • Federal Guilty Pleas: Inequities, Indigence, and the Rule 11 Process

    • Authors: Julian A. Cook III
      Abstract: Although there has been substantial academic focus on the subject of plea bargaining, the guilty-plea hearing has received considerably less notice and criticism. It is this hearing where a defendant formally changes his plea from “not guilty” to “guilty,” and where judges are tasked with the responsibility of ensuring that defendants are making this decision voluntarily and with sufficient awareness of an array of critical attendant consequences. Yet, all too frequently, courts hastily perform this task, and accept a defendant’s change of plea decision without sufficient examination. These problems were on display in two recent Supreme Court cases, Lee v. United States and Class v. United States. In each case, the district courts accepted the defendant’s guilty plea without adequately ensuring the defendant’s comprehension of a key matter central to their decision-making. The Supreme Court in Brady v. United States stated that the decision to enter a guilty plea “is a grave and solemn act to be accepted only with care and discernment.” However, this “care and discernment” expectancy is commonly unfulfilled. This Article will analyze the federal guilty-plea-hearing process, explain why expediency and facial compliance with Rule 11 (as opposed to searching inquiries regarding a defendant’s knowledge and coercive influences) characterize federal-court procedure, discuss how these short-falls affect federal defendants generally, and the indigent and minorities in particular, and propose a pathway to reform.
      PubDate: Tue, 30 Apr 2019 05:27:54 PDT
       
  • A Meaningful Opportunity for Release: Graham and Miller Applied to De
           Facto Sentences of Life Without Parole for Juvenile Offenders

    • Authors: Anton Tikhomirov
      Abstract: Following the Supreme Court’s 2012 decision in Miller v. Alabama, that sentences of life without parole for non-incorrigible offenders who committed their crimes before the age of eighteen were unconstitutional, state and federal courts were left confused as to the decision’s parameters. In April 2018, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, in Grant v. United States, ruled that a term of years sentence that exceeded the life expectancy of an offender who committed a crime as a juvenile constituted de facto life without parole, and was unconstitutional under Miller. This decision was in accordance with decisions by the Seventh, Ninth and Tenth Circuit Courts of Appeals. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, however, held that Miller only applies to mandatory sentences of life without parole. This Comment argues that the Third Circuit better analyzed Supreme Court jurisprudence to find that de facto life without parole sentences for non-incorrigible juveniles were inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence. Meanwhile, the Eighth Circuit’s analysis fell short due to that court according insufficient weight to Montgomery v. Louisiana.
      PubDate: Fri, 26 Apr 2019 06:43:14 PDT
       
  • Digging Deep: The Clean Water Act's Applicability to Groundwater
           Discharges

    • Authors: Justin Rheingold
      Abstract: In its 2018 decision, Upstate Forever v. Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, L.P., the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit found liability under the Clear Water Act (“CWA”) for point source pollutant discharges that travel through hydrologically connected groundwater on their way to a navigable waterway. This decision aligned the court with precedent from the United States Courts of Appeals for the Second and Ninth Circuits, but later decisions from the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit resulted in a clear circuit split on the issue of CWA applicability to discharges that travel through groundwater. The Fourth Circuit also split from several other circuits in its subsidiary finding that liability could be found where there is a continued migration of pollution despite the point source itself ceasing to pollute. This Comment argues that the Fourth Circuit’s decision adhered to the CWA’s intentionally broad purpose and will improve the ability of citizen groups and government entities to hold polluters accountable.
      PubDate: Fri, 26 Apr 2019 06:43:04 PDT
       
  • The Ninth Circuit Enters the Class Certification Fray: Sali's
           Rejection of Evidentiary Formalism and Its Implications

    • Authors: Jessica Bachetti
      Abstract: In 2015, registered nurses brought a putative employment class action against the hospital that employed them, alleging that the hospital underpaid them by rounding their time in violation of California law. The United States District Court for the Central District of California denied class certification because the evidence that the plaintiffs submitted to demonstrate the “typicality requirement” for class certification under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 was inadmissible. On appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that inadmissibility alone is not a proper basis for denying class certification, adding to the circuit split over the issue of whether evidence submitted at class certification proceedings must be admissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence. This Comment analyzes the Ninth Circuit’s position in the circuit split and argues that, because of the nature of the evidentiary challenges in Sali v. Corona Regional Medical, the applicability of its holding remains unclear for cases where evidentiary objections go to the form rather than the substance of the evidence.
      PubDate: Wed, 17 Apr 2019 20:10:54 PDT
       
  • Public or Private' The Split Over First Amendment Protection of Union
           Speech by Public Employees

    • Authors: Meredith McCaffrey
      Abstract: On May 16, 2018, the Second Circuit held, in Montero v. City of Yonkers, that a police officer who criticized other officers at a union meeting and then sued for retaliation in the wake of his remarks spoke “as a private citizen” and was therefore protected by the First Amendment. However, the Second Circuit limited its ruling by refusing to adopt a per se rule that any person who speaks as a union member speaks “as a private citizen” and is therefore protected from retaliation by the First Amendment. By specifically refusing to adopt a per se rule on union speech, the Second Circuit split from the Sixth, Seventh, and Ninth Circuits, which have established categorical rules stating that union speech is distinct from employee speech. This Comment argues that the categorical rules regarding union speech adopted by the Sixth, Seventh, and Ninth Circuits are in accordance with the Supreme Court’s decision in Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, and that the Second Circuit was therefore incorrect in its decision not to adopt such a categorical rule.
      PubDate: Wed, 17 Apr 2019 20:10:45 PDT
       
  • Narrowing in on the Problem: A Component-Level Analysis of
           "Hybrid" Medical Devices

    • Authors: Jillian Friedmann
      Abstract: The Medical Device Amendments of 1976 (“MDA”) classify medical devices into three categories, each of which represents a different level of risk, and requires a different level of federal oversight. Class III devices, which pose the most risk, are subject to the highest level of oversight. Those devices are protected from any claims based on state laws that differ from or add to the requirements imposed by the MDA. On March 1, 2018, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, in Shuker v. Smith & Nephew, PLC, considered the application of preemption under the MDA to a “hybrid” device, which was made up of various Class II components and one Class III device. The Third Circuit held that these devices are to be considered at the component level, thus allowing hybrid devices with Class III components to be protected from state-law claims. This Comment argues that the Third Circuit’s level of analysis, which looked at the requirements imposed on the specific component at issue rather than the device itself, was the proper method of evaluation.
      PubDate: Wed, 17 Apr 2019 20:10:38 PDT
       
  • Hour Late on Your Bail, Spend the Weekend in Jail: Substantive Due Process
           and Pretrial Detention

    • Authors: Coleman Gay
      Abstract: On March 9, 2018, the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit held, in Dawson v. Board of County Commissioners of Jefferson County, that the right to be free from pretrial detention absent a determination of guilt is not a fundamental right. Rather, the court held, it is a non-fundamental liberty interest. In so doing, the Tenth Circuit split with the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which had held that the right is fundamental. The Tenth Circuit also diverged from the Ninth Circuit in its application of a test to determine whether the government’s detention policy constituted unconstitutional punishment. On January 7, 2019, the Supreme Court denied certiorari in Dawson, declining to address the circuit split. This Comment argues that the most accurate reading of the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence leads to the conclusion that the Court has recognized the right to be free from detention absent a determination of guilt as fundamental. This Comment further argues that the Supreme Court should have granted certiorari in Dawson to clarify the Tenth Circuit’s application of the law in two key areas. Such clarification is necessary to reduce confusion among the circuits in future pretrial detention cases. Lastly, it argues that the Supreme Court should have taken this opportunity to add additional factors to the test to help courts determine whether a government’s detention policy is excessive in relation to the government’s interest.
      PubDate: Wed, 17 Apr 2019 20:10:30 PDT
       
  • U.S. Citizens Detained and Deported' A Test of the Great Writ's
           Reach in Protecting Due Process Rights in Removal Proceedings

    • Authors: Caroline Holliday
      Abstract: Every year, the U.S. government unlawfully detains a significant number of U.S. citizens and places them in immigration removal proceedings. Before the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit’s 2018 decision in Gonzalez-Alarcon v. Macias, four circuits had held that an individual in removal proceedings with a valid claim to U.S. citizenship need not exhaust administrative remedies before the claim could be subject to judicial review. With its decision in Gonzalez-Alarcon, the Tenth Circuit joined the majority of circuits that have ruled on this issue and asserted the right of such an individual to bring a habeas corpus petition in federal court to resolve the citizenship question prior to exhausting administrative remedies. This Comment analyzes the situation that the plaintiff in Gonzalez-Alarcon presented when he discovered that he had a valid claim to U.S. citizenship after having been removed several times. Further, this Comment explores the ways in which the Tenth Circuit’s decision solidifies the importance of the writ of habeas corpus in challenging executive detention and affirms the power of judicial intervention to protect individual rights in an immigration system governed by plenary power.
      PubDate: Tue, 02 Apr 2019 00:02:46 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: 54.210.158.163
 
About JournalTOCs
API
Help
News (blog, publications)
JournalTOCs on Twitter   JournalTOCs on Facebook

JournalTOCs © 2009-