Subjects -> LAW (Total: 1528 journals)
    - CIVIL LAW (36 journals)
    - CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (51 journals)
    - CORPORATE LAW (89 journals)
    - CRIMINAL LAW (27 journals)
    - CRIMINOLOGY AND LAW ENFORCEMENT (153 journals)
    - FAMILY AND MATRIMONIAL LAW (23 journals)
    - INTERNATIONAL LAW (189 journals)
    - JUDICIAL SYSTEMS (22 journals)
    - LAW (929 journals)
    - LAW: GENERAL (9 journals)

LAW (929 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: 8)
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: 24)
Administrative Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 47)
Aegean Review of the Law of the Sea and Maritime Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 9)
AfP : Zeitschrift für das gesamte Medienrecht / Archiv für Presserecht     Hybrid Journal  
African Journal on Conflict Resolution     Open Access   (Followers: 27)
Afrilex     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
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: 6)
Al 'Adalah : Jurnal Hukum Islam     Open Access  
Al Ihkam : Jurnal Hukum & Pranata Sosial     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
AL Rafidain law journal     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Al-Ahkam     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Al-Istinbath : Jurnal Hukum Islam     Open Access  
Al-Risalah     Free   (Followers: 1)
Alaska Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 8)
Albany Law Review     Free   (Followers: 6)
Alberta Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 16)
Alternative Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 11)
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: 60)
American Journal of Jurisprudence     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 19)
American Journal of Law & Medicine     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 12)
American Journal of Legal History     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 11)
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 : Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales de la Universidad Nacional de La Plata     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
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   (Followers: 1)
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: 4)
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   (Followers: 1)
Asia Pacific Law Review     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: 10)
Australian Feminist Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 13)
Australian Indigenous Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 20)
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: 8)
Behavioral Sciences & the Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 28)
Beijing Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Berkeley Journal of Entertainment and Sports Law     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
Berkeley Technology Law Journal     Free   (Followers: 14)
BestuuR     Open Access  
Bioderecho.es     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
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: 15)
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: 217)
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: 9)
Canadian Journal of Law and Society     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 21)
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)
Católica Law Review     Open Access  
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: 19)
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     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 8)
Comparative Legilinguistics     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Con-texto     Open Access  
Conflict Resolution Quarterly     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 41)
Conflict Trends     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 13)
Cornell Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 13)
Criterio Jurídico     Open Access  
Critical Analysis of Law : An International & Interdisciplinary Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 7)
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: 3)
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: 4)
DePaul Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Derecho Animal. Forum of Animal Law Studies     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Derecho PUCP     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Derecho y Ciencias Sociales     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Derechos en Acción     Open Access  
Dereito : Revista Xurídica da Universidade de Santiago de Compostela     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 1)
Deusto Journal of Human Rights     Open Access  
Dicle Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi     Open Access  
DiH : Jurnal Ilmu Hukum     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)
Direito.UnB : Revista de Direito da Universidade de Brasília     Open Access  
Diritto penale contemporaneo     Free   (Followers: 4)
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: 22)
Duke Law & Technology Review     Open Access   (Followers: 11)
Duke Law Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 26)
DULR Online     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
e-Pública : Revista Eletrónica de Direito Público     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: 15)
El Cotidiano     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Election Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 18)
Energy Law Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 6)

        1 2 3 4 5 | Last

Similar Journals
Journal Cover
Duke Law Journal
Journal Prestige (SJR): 1.116
Citation Impact (citeScore): 1
Number of Followers: 26  

  This is an Open Access Journal Open Access journal
ISSN (Print) 0012-7086
Published by Duke University Press Homepage  [23 journals]
  • Journal Staff

    • PubDate: Wed, 01 Apr 2020 14:09:53 PDT
       
  • Detention by Any Other Name

    • Authors: Sandra G. Mayson
      Abstract: An unaffordable bail requirement has precisely the same effect as an order of pretrial detention: the accused person is jailed pending trial. It follows as a logical matter that an order requiring an unaffordable bail bond as a condition of release should be subject to the same substantive and procedural protections as an order denying bail altogether. Yet this has not been the practice.This Article lays out the logical and legal case for the proposition that an order that functionally imposes detention must be treated as an order of detention. It addresses counterarguments and complexities, including both empirical and normative ambiguity in the concept of “unaffordable” bail. It explains in practical terms what it would entail for a court system to treat unaffordable bail as a detention order. One hurdle is that both legal and policy standards for pretrial detention are currently in flux. Recognizing unaffordable bail as a detention order foregrounds the question of when pretrial detention is justified. This is the key question the bail reform movement must now confront.
      PubDate: Wed, 01 Apr 2020 14:09:50 PDT
       
  • Driven to Failure: An Empirical Analysis of Driver’s License
           Suspension in North Carolina

    • Authors: William E. Crozier et al.
      Abstract: A person’s interest in a driver’s license is “substantial,” and as the U.S. Supreme Court has observed, the suspension of a license by the state can result in “inconvenience and economic hardship suffered,” including because a license may be “essential in the pursuit of a livelihood.” However, forty-four U.S. states currently require indefinite suspension of driver’s licenses for non-driving-related reasons, such as failure to appear in court or pay fines for traffic infractions. There are no systematic, peer-reviewed analyses of individual-level or county-level data regarding such suspensions. This study describes North Carolina’s population of suspended drivers and assesses how driver’s license suspension statutes operate relative to geography, race, and poverty level. First, it analyzes four decades of active-suspension data in North Carolina and finds over 1,225,000 active suspensions for failures to appear or pay traffic fines, amounting to one in seven adult drivers in the state. Second, it compares these data to county-population data; county-level traffic-stop data, collected as required by statute in North Carolina; and county-level data on the volume and composition of traffic court dockets. This study reveals that driver’s license suspensions are not associated with either the volume of traffic stops or the size of the traffic court docket. In contrast, we find that black and Latinx people are overrepresented relative to the population. Linear mixed-level modeling regression analyses demonstrate that the population of white people below the poverty line and black people above the poverty line are most strongly associated with more suspensions. Finally, this Article explores implications of these results for efforts to reconsider the imposition of driver’s license suspensions for non-driving-related reasons. These patterns raise constitutional concerns and practical challenges for policy efforts to undo such large-scale suspension of driving privileges.
      PubDate: Wed, 01 Apr 2020 14:09:47 PDT
       
  • Beyond Graduation: Economic Sanctions and Structural Reform

    • Abstract: In recent years, increased attention is being paid to the dangers of imposing economic sanctions in felony, misdemeanor, juvenile, municipal, and traffic courts because the imposition of unmanageable fines, fees, surcharges, restitution, and forfeitures can be financially devastating for people and their families. One reform that has gained traction is the graduation of economic sanctions to account for their financial effect. To date, considerations of the efficacy of graduated sanctions focus on the individual benefits that would accrue from a properly designed graduation mechanism. In other words, the value of graduation is measured by comparing it to the serious negative consequences for individuals that may result from the imposition of ungraduated sanctions. This Article uses abolitionism as a heuristic because it changes the baseline, measuring graduation against a fundamentally different set of goals: the dismantling of the carceral state and its replacement with systems of “transformative justice.” Doing so indicates that graduation is in some ways consistent with and in other ways in opposition to structural reforms of criminal legal systems writ large. This Article uses those insights to identify potential complementary reforms designed to bring graduation in better alignment with structural reform efforts.
      PubDate: Wed, 01 Apr 2020 14:09:44 PDT
       
  • Toward a Demosprudence of Poverty

    • Authors: Monica Bell et al.
      Abstract: This Article describes the rift between a due-process-focused jurisprudence on legal–financial obligations—the centerpiece of the current fight against criminalization of poverty—and the substantive and structural problems of poverty criminalization. It argues that judges can help address this disconnect while still operating within the scope of their authority by engaging in a demosprudence of poverty—“a democracy-enhancing jurisprudence” that actively seeks to learn from poor people themselves and movements for economic justice. This Article builds from demosprudential theory to offer guidance for judges in their reason-giving, rulemaking, and courtroom management practices.
      PubDate: Wed, 01 Apr 2020 14:09:41 PDT
       
  • Fees, Fines, Bail, and the Destitution Pipeline..

    • Authors: Brandon L. Garrett et al.
      PubDate: Wed, 01 Apr 2020 14:09:37 PDT
       
  • Journal Staff

    • PubDate: Mon, 24 Feb 2020 06:09:57 PST
       
  • Retroactive Diplomatic Immunity

    • Authors: Anna Raphael
      Abstract: When German tennis star Boris Becker attempted to become a diplomat of the Central African Republic in 2018 to avoid bankruptcy proceedings in the United Kingdom, much of the world ridiculed his efforts. But his actions begged a genuine question: Can an individual become a diplomat so that his or her past actions are immunized from prosecution or suit, even after the actions have occurred or court proceedings have been instituted' In the United States, the answer appears to be yes. On at least two occasions, federal courts have allowed such retroactive applications of diplomatic immunity in cases involving allegations ranging from false imprisonment to mistreatment of domestic workers. Presumably under the political question doctrine, these courts reasoned that they must defer to the executive branch on issues of foreign affairs and on State Department certifications of diplomatic immunity, in particular. These courts did not review the factual contexts of the cases, which would have illuminated that the individuals in question were not actually diplomats, would be unlikely to ever act as diplomats, and seemingly had obtained diplomatic status solely for the purpose of evading suit or prosecution.This Note argues that the purposes of diplomatic immunity, analogies to other forms of immunity like presidential immunity, and the potential for unfettered abuse all cut against the retroactive application of diplomatic immunity. Courts need not dismiss cases as nonjusticiable under the political question doctrine solely because a case involves a question of diplomatic status. Rather, courts should narrowly tailor the judicially developed political question doctrine when legitimate issues as to the factual and legal validity of a defendant’s diplomatic position arise.
      PubDate: Mon, 24 Feb 2020 06:09:55 PST
       
  • Constructing a Legal Framework for the Expansion Proposals of Collection
           Museums

    • Authors: Colleen O’Leary
      Abstract: In 2018, The Frick Collection, a museum featuring the private art collection of Henry Clay Frick and housed in the Frick family’s private residence, finally received approval from the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission to expand its physical footprint to accommodate its growing number of visitors. Official sanctioning of the plan came after years of consternation, however, demonstrating the competing legal principles and conflicting interests that emerge when collection museums seek to expand their physical structures.Collection museums, like the Frick, are institutions created from individuals’ private art collections that were themselves amassed to found and open the museum. Because collection museums possess a defining characteristic—a physical arrangement that integrates artwork, interior design, physical building, and landscape—proposals to alter or expand collection museums threaten to upset their unique aesthetic and experiential natures.To effectively balance the public’s right to express its interests with the collection museum’s autonomy to determine its institutional needs, this Note assesses legal frameworks for understanding the complex intersection of interests that are raised by collection museums’ proposals to expand. Critical analysis of the trust framework, even when supplemented by nonlegal constraints, reveals its shortcomings. Ultimately, a property-based framework emerges as the preferable framework, capable of enfranchising the public while also maintaining a collection museum’s authority to make necessary alterations.
      PubDate: Mon, 24 Feb 2020 06:09:52 PST
       
  • “Souls Aren’t Saved Just in Church Buildings”: Defining “Religious
           Exercise” Under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act
           

    • Authors: Taylor Luckey Brennan
      Abstract: Throughout its First Amendment jurisprudence, the Supreme Court has acknowledged the difficulty inherent in determining the scope of the multivalent term “religion.” The Court has repeatedly struggled to articulate workable definitions of religion, religious belief, and religious exercise. And the struggle is ongoing. The Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (“RLUIPA”) protects “religious exercise” in the land-use context. If a claimant can prove that its religious exercise is substantially burdened by a land ordinance or zoning regulation, it may receive an exemption.Although RLUIPA offers a definition of “religious exercise,” it remains unclear just what types of land uses and activities are protected by the statute’s broad scope. Surely RLUIPA protects formal worship uses, such as hosting a mass or offering Sunday School classes, but does it protect a homeless shelter on church grounds' Residential housing for synagogue staff' A Christian radio show'This Note examines the current framework used to assess religious land-use claims under RLUIPA, arguing that this analysis not only leads to inconsistent outcomes but also impermissibly requires judges to involve themselves too deeply in questions of religious belief. Recognizing the danger in having judges act as the arbiters of religious belief, this Note proposes an alternative criterion for what uses ought to count as religious exercise: sincerity alone. If a land use is considered to be a sincere extension of a religious person or entity’s religious belief it should qualify as religious exercise. This principle is supported by the Court’s own First Amendment jurisprudence and the text and legislative history of RLUIPA.
      PubDate: Mon, 24 Feb 2020 06:09:49 PST
       
  • Backdoor Purposivism

    • Authors: Anita S. Krishnakumar
      Abstract: It has become standard among statutory interpretation commentators to declare that, “We are all textualists now.” The comment stems from the observation that in the modern, post-Scalia era, all of the Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court pay significant attention to statutory text when construing statutes and, relatedly, that legislative history use by the Court as a whole has declined since its heyday in the 1970s. The account of textualism’s triumph is so prevalent that some scholars have declared purposivism—or at least traditional purposivism—essentially defunct. Two prominent textualist scholars in particular have suggested that there is a “new purposivism” at work on the modern Court and that this purposivism is textually constrained, limiting its focus to the means identified in the text of the statute rather than the underlying policy objectives motivating the statute—or, alternately, using purpose as a threshold consideration in determining whether a statute’s text is ambiguous in the first place.This Article challenges the conventional “purposivism is dead or dying” narrative in two important ways. First, relying on data from an empirical analysis of 499 Roberts Court statutory interpretation cases decided between 2006 and 2017, it argues that traditional purposivism is alive and well on the modern Supreme Court. That is, while purposivist Justices in the modern era do pay attention to text and invoke textual canons in a way that their 1970s purposivist counterparts did not, modern purposivists have not abandoned the traditional purposive approach of identifying a statute’s policy objective and adopting the construction that best fits that objective. On the contrary, modern purposivists regularly invoke statutory purpose, intent, and legislative history—even if the Court as a whole does not. Second, and perhaps more importantly, the Court’s textualist Justices have been quietly engaging in a form of purposive analysis that comes closer to traditional purposivism than scholars and jurists have recognized. That is, the textualist Justices regularly have been using pragmatic reasoning, as well as traditional textual canons such as noscitur a sociis and the whole act rule, to impute a specific intent or policy goal to Congress. This practice, which I call “backdoor purposivism,” goes beyond using text as the best evidence of statutory purpose and entails significant judicial guesswork and construction of legislative purpose and intent.The Article suggests that, in the end, there may be less distance between textualists and purposivists than the old debates suggest—but because textualists have embraced purpose and intent in unexpected ways, rather than because, or merely because, purposivists have become more text focused. It concludes by advocating that both textualists and purposivists employ interpretive resources outside their preferred toolkit to check the accuracy of their initial statutory readings and to curb the influence of their inherent personal biases.
      PubDate: Mon, 24 Feb 2020 06:09:46 PST
       
  • Transferable Sovereignty: Lessons from the History of the Congo Free State

    • Authors: Joseph Blocher et al.
      Abstract: In November 1908, the international community tried to buy its way out of the century’s first recognized humanitarian crisis: King Leopold II’s exploitation and abuse of the Congo Free State. And although the oppression of Leopold’s reign is by now well recognized, little attention has been paid to the mechanism that ended it—a purchased transfer of sovereign control. Scholars have explored Leopold’s exploitative acquisition and ownership of the Congo and their implications for international law and practice. But it was also an economic transaction that brought the abuse to an end.The forced sale of the Congo Free State is our starting point for asking whether there is, or should be, an exception to the absolutist conception of territorial integrity that dominates traditional international law. In particular, we ask whether oppressed regions should have a right to exit—albeit perhaps at a price—before the relationship between the sovereign and the region deteriorates to the level of genocide.
      PubDate: Mon, 24 Feb 2020 06:09:43 PST
       
  • Barricading the Immigration Courts

    • Authors: Jennifer Lee Koh
      PubDate: Fri, 21 Feb 2020 12:25:39 PST
       
  • The Justices’ Forgotten Debuts

    • Authors: Andrew R. Gould
      PubDate: Thu, 20 Feb 2020 08:25:49 PST
       
  • Forensics, Statistics, and Law: Ten Years After “A Path
           Forward”

    • Authors: Brandon Garrett
      PubDate: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 06:21:01 PST
       
  • Journal Staff

    • PubDate: Fri, 31 Jan 2020 08:42:50 PST
       
  • What’s in the “Black Box”' Balancing Financial Inclusion and
           Privacy in Digital Consumer Lending

    • Authors: Aaron Chou
      Abstract: The availability of credit is a foundation of the American economy, but not everyone has an avenue to credit. Financial Technology (“FinTech”) lending plays a sizable role in providing these avenues for Americans who would not otherwise have access to loans and are forced to turn to high-cost loan instruments like payday lending. Most scholars who have contributed to the topic of FinTech lending have focused on the risk of discrimination by Artificial Intelligence within FinTech lending platforms. This Note argues that given the recent history of data breaches in the credit industry, privacy issues should be a part of the larger discussion. Furthermore, balancing privacy with FinTech lending’s goal of financial inclusion will be a task required by regulation such as the Fair Credit Reporting Act.This Note argues that the number of issues that might arise—the inherent invasiveness of FinTech and the unfairness of the contracts; the biased nature of their algorithms; the lack of transparency; and the danger of data breaches—should ultimately play second fiddle to the goal of financial inclusion. The reason is that although the two priorities of privacy and access to credit seem to offset one another, they actually balance in counterintuitive ways. Even though there are legitimate privacy concerns with the FinTech model, they can be softened by greater transparency. Toward this end, this Note discusses the solutions that have been offered to help eliminate the opacity of FinTech lending’s Artificial Intelligence and ultimately proposes the use of counterfactual explanations to develop accountability in FinTech lending while expanding financial inclusion.
      PubDate: Fri, 31 Jan 2020 08:42:48 PST
       
  • A Border Deferred: Structural Safeguards Against Judicial Deference in
           Immigration National Security Cases

    • Authors: Ali Shan Ali Bhai
      Abstract: When confronted with cases lying at the intersection of immigration and national security, the judiciary has abided by a consistent principle: the president knows best. Since the late nineteenth century, rather than deciding these cases on the merits, courts have instead deferred to the executive branch. Courts’ reluctance to engage in judicial review of these policies is based on the traditions of special national security deference and the plenary power doctrine. Deference of this kind is not without its proponents, who cite the executive branch’s vast institutional advantages in the realms of immigration and national security. Detractors, on the other hand, contend that this deference renders the president beyond judicial review, creating a blank check for the executive branch to take questionable acts in immigration matters with little to no scrutiny by the legislative or judicial branches. After the Supreme Court granted certiorari to hear a challenge to President Trump’s controversial travel ban case in Trump v. Hawaii, both sides saw it as an opportunity to either preserve or jettison deference to the executive branch in this area.But with a narrow 5–4 holding, neither side could claim victory. Instead, the future of plenary power remains an open question. To fill the gap, this Note proposes practical safeguards for the judiciary to act as a counterweight to unchecked executive authority in the realm of immigration law.
      PubDate: Fri, 31 Jan 2020 08:42:45 PST
       
  • “Foreign Agents” in an Interconnected World: FARA and the
           Weaponization of Transparency

    • Authors: Nick Robinson
      Abstract: The Foreign Agents Registration Act (“FARA”) is a sweeping and generally underenforced public-disclosure statute. Enacted in 1938, FARA was used during World War II to target fascist propaganda, but by the 1960s its enforcement had shifted to lobbyists and public-relations firms for foreign governments. After the 2016 presidential election, FARA has gained favor among policymakers and prosecutors as a central tool to respond to a range of foreign influence in U.S. politics, including foreign lobbying, electioneering, and disinformation.This Article argues that FARA’s breadth creates substantial risk that it will be used in a politicized manner. In the past decade, analogous transparency laws in other countries—often justified by reference to FARA—have been weaponized to target dissenting voices with the stigma and burden of registering as a “foreign agent.” This Article undertakes an analysis of FARA to show how its broad and unclear provisions make FARA susceptible to being similarly used in the United States, especially against nonprofits, the media, and public officials. It examines three cases in which FARA was arguably enforced in a politicized manner, explains why strengthening the Act’s enforcement would likely exacerbate this problem, and discusses the Act’s potential constitutional deficiencies under the Supreme Court’s recent First Amendment jurisprudence.The Article ends by weighing the merits of using FARA to address different types of foreign influence. It posits that transparency provisions like those in FARA are most appropriate, and on strongest ground, when applied to (1) those who clearly are acting at the direction or control of a foreign government or political party; and (2) when the covered activity involves core democratic processes, such as lobbying or electioneering. It warns that using FARA to target disinformation is unlikely to be effective and presents a high risk of politicized abuse. Based on these insights, it suggests three potential strategies for FARA reform.
      PubDate: Fri, 31 Jan 2020 08:42:43 PST
       
  • State Attorneys General as Agents of Police Reform

    • Authors: Jason Mazzone et al.
      Abstract: State attorneys general can and should play an important role in remedying police violations of constitutional rights. In 1994, Congress enacted 34 U.S.C. § 12601 to authorize the U.S. attorney general to seek equitable relief against state and local police departments engaged in patterns or practices of misconduct. The Department of Justice (“DOJ”) has used this statute to reform some of the nation’s most troubled police departments. However, the DOJ has lacked the resources to pursue more than a few cases each year, and in 2017 the Trump administration announced it would no longer enforce § 12601.In response, some state attorneys general have sought to fill the regulatory gap. These attorneys general claim legal standing under the common law doctrine of parens patriae to seek equitable relief in federal court against police departments within their states for violations of constitutional rights—even without any statutory authority for their lawsuits. Allowing these cases to proceed would give state attorneys general expansive and untapped potential as agents of police reform, with significant implications for police practices and accountability.This Article provides a cautionary tale about uses of parens patriae by state attorneys general and presents an alternative. It urges that the common law doctrine of parens patriae should not allow state attorneys general to seek equitable relief in federal district court against local police departments engaged in patterns of misconduct. The Article shows that such uses of parens patriae raise numerous doctrinal and policy concerns. Nevertheless, the Article concludes that state attorneys general are uniquely situated to provide a check on abuses by local law enforcement and that they should be given the tools to do so. As an alternative to using common law parens patriae, both Congress and state legislatures should grant state attorneys general explicit statutory authority to seek equitable relief against local police departments. Empowering state attorneys general in this manner has the potential to curb seemingly intractable problems of police violations of constitutional rights.
      PubDate: Fri, 31 Jan 2020 08:42:40 PST
       
 
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
 


Your IP address: 3.233.215.196
 
Home (Search)
API
About JournalTOCs
News (blog, publications)
JournalTOCs on Twitter   JournalTOCs on Facebook

JournalTOCs © 2009-