for Journals by Title or ISSN
for Articles by Keywords
help
  Subjects -> LAW (Total: 1456 journals)
    - CIVIL LAW (36 journals)
    - CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (49 journals)
    - CORPORATE LAW (89 journals)
    - CRIMINAL LAW (26 journals)
    - CRIMINOLOGY AND LAW ENFORCEMENT (146 journals)
    - FAMILY AND MATRIMONIAL LAW (23 journals)
    - INTERNATIONAL LAW (184 journals)
    - JUDICIAL SYSTEMS (22 journals)
    - LAW (872 journals)
    - LAW: GENERAL (9 journals)

LAW (872 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: 24)
Acta Juridica     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 7)
Acta Politica     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 19)
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   (Followers: 1)
Air and Space Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 22)
Akron Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
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: 15)
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: 10)
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: 6)
Arizona State Law Journal     Free   (Followers: 3)
Arkansas Law Review     Free   (Followers: 6)
Ars Aequi Maandblad     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 4)
Art + Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 12)
Article 40     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Artificial Intelligence and Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 12)
ASAS : Jurnal Hukum dan Ekonomi Islam     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
ASEAN Journal of Legal Studies     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: 3)
AStA Wirtschafts- und Sozialstatistisches Archiv     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
Asy-Syir'ah : Jurnal Ilmu Syari'ah dan Hukum     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Atti della Accademia Peloritana dei Pericolanti - Classe di Scienze Giuridiche, Economiche e Politiche     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: 13)
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)
Baltic Journal of Law & Politics     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
Bar News: The Journal of the NSW Bar Association     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 8)
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   (Followers: 1)
California Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 21)
California Western Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Cambridge Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 197)
Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies     Full-text available via subscription  
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: 18)
China-EU Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
Chinese Journal of Comparative Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
Chinese Journal of Environmental Law     Hybrid Journal  
Chinese Law & Government     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 9)
Chulalongkorn Law Journal     Open Access  
Cleveland State Law Review     Free   (Followers: 2)
Clínica Jurídica per la Justícia Social : Informes     Open Access  
CMU Journal of Law and Social Sciences     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
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: 41)
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: 5)
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   (Followers: 3)
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: 21)
Duke Law & Technology Review     Open Access   (Followers: 11)
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: 14)
El Cotidiano     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Election Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 21)
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: 14)
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)

        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]
  • An Irrevocably Tainted Opinion: Zen's Threat to Public
           Discourse

    • Authors: Andrew F. Popper
      Abstract: That agency decision-makers in enforcement actions must be objective, fair, and impartial is hardly debatable. It is equally obvious that a challenge to objectivity must be supported by actual evidence, not assumptions of prejudgment or bias. This essay criticizes Zen Magnets v. Consumer Product Safety Commission, a judicial review of an enforcement action that failed to follow the well-worn path that requires a presumption of honesty, integrity, and good faith when assessing the objectivity of administrative decisionmakers. The Zen court focused on one comment made by Consumer Product Safety Commission Chairman Robert Adler in a rulemaking, not even the enforcement action under review. That one comment, the court found, required a remand to the CPSC, nullified a product recall, and excluded Chairman Adler from further participation in that case. The decision may have put the public at risk by delaying any action by the CPSC on an allegedly dangerous product and denied Chairman Adler, a fair-minded and distinguished agency official, the right and responsibility to participate in an important case. Zen is predicated on an assumption of mistrust, the exact opposite assumption mandated by the Supreme Court. Were this approach to become the norm, it would chill the essential discourse between agency officials and the public, unnecessarily formalize agency process, and increase the likelihood of uninformed enforcement or regulation.
      PubDate: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 00:38:49 PDT
       
  • Bare Necessity: Simplifying the Standard for Admitting Showup
           Identifications

    • Authors: J.P. Christian Milde
      Abstract: In 1967, the Supreme Court held that admitting the results of an unnecessarily suggestive police identification procedure could violate a defendant’s right to due process. Over the next decade, several rulings narrowed and clarified the standard into the Brathwaite test, which remains in use today. This test allows the admission of identifications obtained through unnecessarily suggestive procedures if a court finds the identification to nonetheless be reliable. Applying the test requires courts to rule on a procedure’s necessity, its suggestiveness, and the resulting identification’s reliability. Making these determinations forces courts to grapple with intertwined questions of law and fact—questions whose answers have changed with advances in the scientific understanding of memory. The most commonly used type of suggestive procedure, known as a showup, involves a witness viewing a single suspect for identification. Although showup procedures can be useful when a lineup or photo array is not feasible, showups significantly increase misidentifications because the procedure implicitly tells a witness who the police believe is guilty, rendering the technique inherently suggestive. Further, because showups do not test a witness’s memory, they cannot safeguard against a mistaken witness, like a lineup can. To help courts avoid the difficult task of analyzing showup identifications for reliability, this Note proposes a simplified test for admitting them, arguing that courts may look to a showup’s necessity as the sole determining factor of admissibility. By considering the interplay of increased scientific understanding with existing law, this Note demonstrates that the proposed simplification is not only sound policy but is also permissible and advisable under current Supreme Court doctrine.
      PubDate: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 16:38:15 PDT
       
  • "Maybe Someone Dies": The Dilemma of Domestic Terrorism and Internet Edge
           Provider Liability

    • Authors: Emily B. Tate
      Abstract: In the aftermath of a string of highly publicized violent attacks motivated by far-right extremism, the public spotlight has swung its harsh light over tech companies—particularly social media platforms—for hosting extremism and allegedly facilitating radicalization online. With commentators across the political spectrum searching for solutions to a growing problem, the rumbling discourse has inevitably pivoted toward those platforms, with some suggesting that they should be liable for the content they host. Federal terrorism law and § 230 of the Communications Decency Act pose seemingly insurmountable hurdles to this end, but both recent congressional challenges to the CDA and increasingly creative legal arguments against it may eliminate it as a barrier. This Note argues that although radicalization on the Internet poses grave safety concerns, the law may find compromise without eroding the CDA. This Note first analyzes the massive ramifications of imposing liability on the Internet writ large, then proposes intermediate solutions via amending federal terrorism law that will do the least harm to the Internet ecosystem while attempting to solve a growing problem of violence.
      PubDate: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 16:38:07 PDT
       
  • The Need for Increased Possibility of Director Liability: Refusal to
           Dismiss In re Wells Fargo & Co. Shareholder Derivative Litigation, a Step
           in the Right Direction

    • Authors: Claudia A. Restrepo
      Abstract: The frequency and magnitude of corporate scandals call into question the effectiveness of the current mechanism to police director misconduct. Presently, directors are rarely held personally liable for failing to fulfill their fiduciary duties. The combination of multiple judicial and statutory protections and the courts’ hesitance to impose director liability shields directors and makes it difficult for shareholder plaintiffs to succeed on such claims. In fact, most claims are dismissed before courts have an opportunity to hear the merits of the case. This Note focuses on the oversight liability doctrine and argues that it is applied too narrowly, at least at the motion to dismiss stage, to deter director misconduct and encourage adequate oversight by directors. This Note uses the Wells Fargo corporate scandal and the directors’ failure of oversight as a case study. In In re Wells Fargo & Co. Shareholder Derivative Litigation, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California denied the director defendants’ motion to dismiss, allowing shareholder plaintiffs the opportunity to prove their claims against the directors. This Note argues that this rare decision is a positive step that sends a firm message to directors that they cannot disregard their duties and expect complete protection from liability.
      PubDate: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 16:37:55 PDT
       
  • Promise-Induced False Confessions: Lessons from Promises in Another
           Context

    • Authors: Margaux Joselow
      Abstract: People are generally skeptical that someone would falsely confess to a crime he or she did not commit. Nonetheless, a myriad of convicts exonerated by DNA and the rapidly emerging scientific literature on the subject calls into question this long-standing belief. Scholars in the field now recognize that personal and situational risk factors, including promises of leniency, heighten the risk of a false confession. Promises of leniency have been shown to be particularly coercive in interrogations and to produce unusually persuasive testimony in the courtroom. Due to a failure to recognize the power behind these promises, our justice system does not adequately safeguard criminal defendants who give promise-induced confessions. As such, federal appellate courts are in disarray over when a promise of leniency renders a confession inadmissible at trial. On the other hand, the power behind promises in the plea-bargaining context is better recognized by scholars and laypeople alike and our justice system consequently provides much greater safeguards to criminal defendants who plead guilty in response to a promise. This Note argues that jury instructions that help the jury better detect, understand, and weigh confession testimony can close the unwarranted gap between procedural safeguards governing promise-induced admissions of guilt during plea discussions and interrogations. This Note also proposes a model instruction, which conveys the relevant scientific and legal principles in a way that will impact jurors’ verdicts in false confession cases.
      PubDate: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 16:37:44 PDT
       
  • Problem with Your Bank Account' Tell It to the... Arbitrator'

    • Authors: Michael Koch
      Abstract: An increasing number of consumer financial products have begun to come pre-packaged with binding individual arbitration agreements. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s rule forbidding these agreements sought to ensure that consumers damaged by their banks’ actions could have their day in court. When Congress chose to repeal the so called “Arbitration Rule” in 2017, it dealt a serious blow to consumers’ rights. Consumers are nearly universally precluded from joining class action claims against large financial institutions due to the widespread and largely unfettered use of class-action waivers in arbitration agreements. This Note argues that class-action waivers should be regulated to ensure that individuals with inferior bargaining power and legal resources are not subjected to poor treatment at the hands of their
      PubDate: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 16:37:36 PDT
       
  • The Death Penalty and the Fundamental Right to Life

    • Authors: Kevin M. Barry
      Abstract: For over forty years, the Supreme Court has held that the death penalty is not invariably cruel and unusual in violation of the Eighth Amendment. But the Court has never addressed—let alone decided—whether the death penalty per se deprives the fundamental right to life in violation of substantive due process. The legal literature has followed suit, scarcely addressing the issue. This Article makes the case for why the death penalty violates the fundamental right to life. It first argues that the condemned have a fundamental right to life based on a history and tradition of diminished support for the death penalty nationally and worldwide, the dignity of the condemned, and the negative right not to be killed by one’s government. It next argues that the death penalty deprives this right in violation of substantive due process because the State cannot prove that the death penalty is narrowly tailored to achieve deterrence or retribution. Arbitrariness, delay, and unreliability deprive the death penalty of a compelling purpose, and execution belies narrow tailoring. Lastly, this Article argues that the right-to-life challenge is not inconsistent with the Fifth Amendment’s text or the elephant in the room: abortion rights. Although the Eighth Amendment has paved the road toward judicial abolition of the death penalty, there remains no end in sight, no welcome sign on the horizon. The road less traveled is substantive due process—the right to life of the condemned. On the long road toward abolition, this Article argues that two lanes are better than one.
      PubDate: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 16:37:28 PDT
       
  • Rethinking Feres: Granting Access to Justice for Service Members

    • Authors: Andrew F. Popper
      Abstract: In 1946, the ancient wall of sovereign immunity gave way with the passage of the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) opening the courthouse doors to persons harmed by those acting on behalf of the federal government. From the outset, FTCA liability was limited by the expansive discretionary function exception and other express limitations on civil actions. Unresolved in the FTCA was the fate of members of our armed forces injured by actions “incident to service” but outside of armed conflict. Four years later, in Feres v. United States, the Court addressed this question placing dramatic limits on civil tort claims of service members. The limitations were rationalized on the need to maintain order, discipline, and chain-of-command. From Feres forward, most of those injured incident to military service have been denied access to the very system of justice they pledge their lives to defend. That injustice has persisted for seven decades. This Article discusses Feres, the expansion of the “incident to service” prohibition, and recommends overturning Feres, amending the FTCA to allow access to justice in Article III courts for acts neither incident to nor essential for military service. It is time for victims of sexual assault, rape, and medical malpractice to have their day in court. Holding accountable the federal government and those engaged in misconduct will enhance, not undermine, respect for order, discipline, and chain-of-command. It is time for uniformly condemned acts to be subjected to the light of day in Article III courts.
      PubDate: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 16:37:19 PDT
       
  • 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
       
 
 
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: 34.236.216.93
 
About JournalTOCs
API
Help
News (blog, publications)
JournalTOCs on Twitter   JournalTOCs on Facebook

JournalTOCs © 2009-