for Journals by Title or ISSN
for Articles by Keywords
help
  Subjects -> LAW (Total: 1235 journals)
    - CIVIL LAW (37 journals)
    - CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (43 journals)
    - CORPORATE LAW (82 journals)
    - CRIMINAL LAW (20 journals)
    - CRIMINOLOGY AND LAW ENFORCEMENT (138 journals)
    - FAMILY AND MATRIMONIAL LAW (21 journals)
    - INTERNATIONAL LAW (162 journals)
    - JUDICIAL SYSTEMS (22 journals)
    - LAW (703 journals)
    - LAW: GENERAL (7 journals)

LAW (703 journals)                  1 2 3 4 | Last

Showing 1 - 200 of 354 Journals sorted alphabetically
ABA Journal Magazine     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 20)
Acta Juridica     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 9)
Acta Politica     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 13)
Acta Universitatis Danubius. Juridica     Open Access  
Actualidad Jurídica Ambiental     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Adelaide Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 20)
Administrative Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 39)
Aegean Review of the Law of the Sea and Maritime Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 7)
African Journal of Legal Studies     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 6)
African Journal on Conflict Resolution     Open Access   (Followers: 15)
Afrilex     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Air and Space Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 19)
Akron Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Alaska Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 10)
Albany Law Review     Free   (Followers: 6)
Alberta Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 15)
Alternative Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 3)
Alternatives : Global, Local, Political     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 16)
Amazon's Research and Environmental Law     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
American Journal of Comparative Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 55)
American Journal of Jurisprudence     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 16)
American Journal of Law & Medicine     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 12)
American Journal of Legal History     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 5)
American Journal of Trial Advocacy     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 8)
American University Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 16)
American University National Security Law Brief     Open Access   (Followers: 9)
Amicus Curiae     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Amsterdam Law Forum     Open Access   (Followers: 9)
Annales Canonici     Open Access  
Annual Survey of South African Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 5)
Anuario de Psicología Jurídica     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
ANZSLA Commentator, The     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 4)
Appeal : Review of Current Law and Law Reform     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Arbitration Law Monthly     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 2)
Arbitration Law Reports and Review     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 13)
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: 4)
Arizona State Law Journal     Free   (Followers: 2)
Arkansas Law Review     Free   (Followers: 6)
Ars Aequi Maandblad     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 2)
Art + Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 11)
Article 40     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Artificial Intelligence and Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 10)
Asian American Law Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Asian Journal of Legal Education     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 5)
Asian Pacific American Law Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
AStA Wirtschafts- und Sozialstatistisches Archiv     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
Asy-Syir'ah : Jurnal Ilmu Syari'ah dan Hukum     Open Access  
Australasian Law Management Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 7)
Australian and New Zealand Sports Law Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 8)
Australian Feminist Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 10)
Australian Indigenous Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 17)
Australian Journal of Legal History     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 18)
Ave Maria Law Review     Free   (Followers: 3)
Badamai Law Journal     Open Access  
Ballot     Open Access  
Baltic Journal of Law & Politics     Open Access   (Followers: 7)
Bar News: The Journal of the NSW Bar Association     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 5)
Behavioral Sciences & the Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 23)
Beijing Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 7)
Berkeley Journal of Entertainment and Sports Law     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
Berkeley Technology Law Journal     Free   (Followers: 11)
Bioethics Research Notes     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 14)
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: 10)
Boston College Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 18)
Boston University Law Review     Free   (Followers: 11)
BRICS Law Journal     Open Access  
Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law     Open Access   (Followers: 8)
Brigham Young University Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 8)
British Journal of American Legal Studies     Open Access  
Brooklyn Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Bulletin of Legal Medicine     Open Access  
Bulletin of Medieval Canon Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 3)
C@hiers du CRHIDI     Open Access  
Cadernos de Dereito Actual     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Cadernos do Programa de Pós-Graduação em Direito - PPGDir./UFRGS     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Cadernos Ibero-Americanos de Direito Sanitário     Open Access  
Cahiers, Droit, Sciences et 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: 142)
Campbell Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Campus Legal Advisor     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 2)
Case Western Reserve Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Časopis pro právní vědu a praxi     Open Access  
Časopis zdravotnického práva a bioetiky     Open Access  
Catalyst : A Social Justice Forum     Open Access   (Followers: 10)
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: 16)
China-EU Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 4)
Chinese Journal of Comparative Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 3)
Chinese Law & Government     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 6)
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: 9)
Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 15)
Columbia Law Review (Sidebar)     Open Access   (Followers: 15)
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: 5)
Con-texto     Open Access  
Conflict Resolution Quarterly     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 22)
Conflict Trends     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 8)
Cornell Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 7)
Criterio Jurídico     Open Access  
Critical Analysis of Law : An International & Interdisciplinary Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Cuadernos de Historia del Derecho     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
Cuestiones Juridicas     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Current Legal Problems     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 26)
Danube : The Journal of European Association Comenius - EACO     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
De Jure     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
De Rebus     Full-text available via subscription  
Deakin Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 14)
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: 8)
DePaul Journal of Women, Gender and the Law     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
DePaul Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Der Staat     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 13)
Derecho PUCP     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Derecho y Ciencias Sociales     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Die Verwaltung     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 10)
Dikaion     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Dike     Open Access  
Direito e Desenvolvimento     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Direito e Liberdade     Open Access  
Diritto penale contemporaneo     Free   (Followers: 2)
Diritto, immigrazione e cittadinanza     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Dixi     Open Access  
Droit et Cultures     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
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: 6)
Duke Forum for Law & Social Change     Open Access   (Followers: 8)
Duke Journal of Gender Law & Policy     Open Access   (Followers: 15)
Duke Law & Technology Review     Open Access   (Followers: 10)
Duke Law Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 26)
DULR Online     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
East Asia Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
ECI Interdisciplinary Journal for Legal and Social Policy     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Ecology Law Quarterly     Free   (Followers: 3)
Edinburgh Law Review     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 21)
Education and the Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 11)
El Cotidiano     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Election Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 23)
Energy Law Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 4)
Environmental Justice     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 10)
Environmental Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 23)
Environmental Policy and Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 16)
ERA-Forum     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
Espaço Jurídico : Journal of Law     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
ESR Review : Economic and Social Rights in South Africa     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Ethnopolitics     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 4)
Ethos: Official Publication of the Law Society of the Australian Capital Territory     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 4)
EU agrarian Law     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Europaisches Journal fur Minderheitenfragen     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 2)
European Energy and Environmental Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 16)
European Journal for Education Law and Policy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 8)
European Journal of Comparative Law and Governance     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 4)
European Journal of Law and Technology     Open Access   (Followers: 15)
European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
European Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 135)
European Public Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 33)
European Review of Contract Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 21)
European Review of Private Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 29)
European Yearbook of Minority Issues Online     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 3)
Evaluation Review     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 12)
Evidence & Policy : A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 9)
Faulkner Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 1)
Federal Communication Law Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 1)
Federal Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 22)
Federal Probation     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 2)
Feminist Legal Studies     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 16)
feminists@law     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Fiat Justisia     Open Access  
First Amendment Studies     Hybrid Journal  
Florida Bar News     Free  
Florida Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Florida State University Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Fordham Environmental Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 18)
Fordham Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 13)
FORO. Revista de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales, Nueva Época     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Fundamina : A Journal of Legal History     Open Access   (Followers: 7)
Geoforum     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 23)
George Washington Law Review     Free   (Followers: 8)
Georgia Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Georgia State University Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Global Journal of Comparative Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 2)
Global Labour Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 7)
Golden Gate University Environmental Law Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 3)

        1 2 3 4 | Last

Journal Cover Brooklyn Law Review
  [2 followers]  Follow
    
  This is an Open Access Journal Open Access journal
   ISSN (Print) 0007-2362
   Published by Brooklyn Law School Homepage  [4 journals]
  • Back Matter

    • Authors: Journal Staff
      PubDate: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 14:04:18 PDT
       
  • “Big Brother” in the Private Sector: Privacy Threats Under the FAA’s
           New Civilian Drone Regulations

    • Authors: Sean M. Nolan
      Abstract: The Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) recent promulgation of civilian drone regulations triggered the growth of a new consumer industry. As this industry grows, so do the privacy threats it presents. Drones with advanced technological capabilities can record and store a wide range of data, without the consent of the data’s source. Privileged information captured by drones—whether for innocent purposes or not—is in turn vulnerable to misappropriation, as civilian drones are far from hack-proof. Despite the likely privacy implications of large-scale drone legalization, the FAA’s new regulations do not include any privacy protections. This note provides a criticism of the FAA’s new drone regulations, with a focus on their disregard for the privacy threats presented by civilian drone legalization. As an illustration, this note more specifically analyzes the privacy concerns presented by civilian drones’ vulnerability to hackers. It concludes that new federal legislation is necessary, and suggests some potential contents of drone privacy regulations that would help combat the privacy problems associated with civilian drones’ mass entry into United States’ skies.
      PubDate: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 14:04:15 PDT
       
  • An Exception to the Derivative Rule: Allowing Mutual Fund Investors to
           Bring Suits Directly

    • Authors: Jamie D. Kurtz
      Abstract: Mutual funds differ greatly from traditional corporations in the way they are formed and operated. Despite these differences, courts apply the same rules for derivative shareholder litigation to both types of entities. While these rules make sense and were mostly created with corporations in mind, courts have generally been unwilling to consider mutual funds’ unique characteristics in determining whether to allow direct litigation from shareholders. This note explores those unique characteristics and the usual policy reasons for requiring derivative litigation. It concludes that in most cases these unique characteristics make a derivative suit nearly impossible to sustain. Further, the normal reasons for requiring a derivative suit are not as prevalent in mutual funds. As a result, it proposes a new way of evaluating direct shareholder suits in the context of mutual funds.
      PubDate: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 14:04:10 PDT
       
  • Who Let the Dogs Out—and While We’re at It, Who Said They Could Sniff
           Me': How the Unregulated Street Sniff Threatens Pedestrians’ Privacy
           Rights

    • Authors: Jacey Lara Gottlieb
      Abstract: The Fourth Amendment affords United States citizens the right “to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.” Throughout the last two centuries, the Supreme Court has developed extensive case law that has created a somewhat formulaic approach to determining whether one’s Fourth Amendment rights have been violated—namely, the “reasonable expectation of privacy” test. The Court has applied this test to afford the home, vehicle, airport, and the pedestrian all varying levels of privacy rights, and has upheld most of these respective levels of privacy in the context of the police canine sniff. The Supreme Court has failed, however, to craft case law that protects a pedestrian’s expectation of privacy when faced with a police dog. Police canines are trained to detect particular illegal substances and to alert their human handlers to contraband. These alerts, in turn, create the probable cause that a human officer needs before she may legally conduct a search. However, these alerts are often inaccurate, partially due to human suggestions to the dogs (“handler cues”) and poor training methods utilized by trainers throughout the country. Inaccurate dog alerts, in turn, permit human officers to conduct full searches without probable cause. Notably, the Supreme Court has overlooked and ignored these pressing issues, and has permitted dog sniffs to occur in various settings, without finding that they violate the Fourth Amendment. In most situations however, the Court has implemented safeguards which assure that an individual’s reasonable expectation of privacy is not violated by a sniff and a potentially inaccurate alert. Because the Court has afforded the pedestrian no such safeguards or protections, he is left wholly vulnerable to dogs approaching him and alerting inaccurately, either by accident or as a result of their handlers’ suggestions. This note suggests four steps that the government must take to maintain the privacy protections that pedestrians deserve. First, it must acknowledge that a pedestrian is entitled to a heightened reasonable expectation of privacy. Second, it must implement a temporary presumption against street sniffs that are not supported by human reasonable suspicion, until it can assure that dog alerts are accurate. Third, it must standardize training requirements for all handler-canine pairs, which will target the problems that cause false alerts. Fourth, it must implement a threshold accuracy requirement for all handler-canine pairs. This four-step solution will guarantee that pedestrians’ Fourth Amendment rights are being protected against the potential dangers of the canine sniff.
      PubDate: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 14:04:06 PDT
       
  • Delaware’s Ban on Fee-Shifting: A Failed Attempt to Protect Shareholders
           at the Expense of Officers and Directors of Public Corporations

    • Authors: Ryan S. Starstrom
      Abstract: In 2014, the Delaware Supreme Court issued its opinion in ATP Tour, Inc. v. Deutscher Tennis Bund, which held that non-stock Delaware corporations may validly enact fee-shifting provisions in their bylaws and certificate of incorporation. Subsequently, the Delaware Legislature, fearing that the ATP Tour decision would extend to stock corporations, amended Title 8 of the Delaware Code (DGCL) Sections 102(f) and 109(b). These amendments provide for a blanket prohibition of fee-shifting provisions in a Delaware corporation’s certificate of incorporation or bylaws, respectively, in regard to “internal corporate claims.” Such a prohibition eliminates the possibility for a Delaware corporation to enact a fee-shifting provision in its bylaws or certificate of incorporation to combat the excessive levels of shareholder derivative suits. This note analyzes the new amendments to the DGCL and argues that they are problematic for several reasons, one of which is that the new amendments incentivize frivolous shareholder litigation. Furthermore, this note predicts that the new amendments will lead to an increase in shareholder derivative suits, especially with respect to mergers and acquisitions litigation. Ultimately, the Delaware Legislature should give autonomy back to Delaware corporations and re-amend the DGCL to allow corporations to enact fee-shifting provisions, provided that such provisions (1) require two-way fee-shifting, and (2) place a cap on the amount of attorneys’ fees, costs, and expenses that may be shifted.
      PubDate: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 14:04:02 PDT
       
  • Clicks and Tricks: How Computer Hackers Avoid 10b-5 Liability

    • Authors: Ryan H. Gilinson
      Abstract: This note argues that computer hackers who sell inside information instead of trading on it themselves, referred to in the note as hacker-sellers, avoid liability under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act and SEC Rule 10b-5. Rule 10b-5 criminalizes the use of a manipulative or deceptive device “in connection with the purchase or sale of any security.” Hacker-sellers fall outside the scope of this rule for two reasons. First, the type of hacking employed by hacker-sellers is not always “deceptive,” and only the forms of hacking which deceive the computer into thinking an authorized user is seeking access are “deceptive” under the statute. Second, hacker-sellers’ conduct is not “in connection with” a securities transaction because they do not subsequently trade on the information they acquire. This note proposes that the aiding and abetting provision of the Securities Exchange Act—codified in Section 20(e)—is a more effective provision of the Act under which to charge hacker-sellers because the hacker-seller effectively facilitates the trader’s insider trading violation instead of violating 10b-5 himself.
      PubDate: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 14:03:58 PDT
       
  • Finally, a True Elements Test: Mathis v. United States and the Categorical
           Approach

    • Authors: Rebecca Sharpless
      Abstract: The fate of defendants facing lengthy federal sentence enhancements often turns on what the U.S. Supreme Court calls the categorical approach. The approach controls whether a federal defendant might face an additional decade or longer in prison based solely on having prior convictions of a certain type. At a time when many question the wisdom of mass incarceration, the Court has taken great care to delimit the circumstances in which a federal sentencing judge can lengthen sentences based on recidivism. The categorical approach also governs most immigration cases involving deportation for a crime. As Congress has cut back deportation defenses for lawful permanent residents with criminal records, the Court has demanded that convictions used for deportation strictly correspond to a federal removal ground. In both Descamps v. United States and Mathis v. United States, recent Armed Career Criminal Act opinions authored by Justice Kagan, the Supreme Court interpreted the categorical approach as requiring a true elements test, declaring that at least two decades of the Court’s precedent required this result. Yet, Justice Breyer and Justice Ginsburg, two justices who had been in the majority in Descamps, dissented in Mathis. This article analyzes the trajectory of the Court’s categorical approach decisions, using the Mathis dissent authored by Justice Breyer and joined by Justice Ginsburg, to explain an ambiguity in the Court’s jurisprudence that Descamps and Mathis have now settled. Justice Kagan’s penchant for oversimplification has led her not only to overstate the relationship between the Court’s early and late categorical approach decisions but to include a discussion in Mathis that leaves room for confusion about how to apply the categorical approach in practice. This dictum suggests that adjudicators can take a “peek” at the record of conviction to help determine whether state law has defined a fact as a means or element. This article argues that Descamps and Mathis require the categorical approach to operate like a true elements test and that the take a “peek” suggestion in Mathis is inconsistent with the case’s holding.
      PubDate: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 14:03:54 PDT
       
  • Property as a Management Institution

    • Authors: Lynda L. Butler
      Abstract: The institution of property serves an important management function for society, guiding the use of resources among its members by delegating to the owner the power to decde how and when to use a resource. Under the dominant American approach, this delegation involves recognizing broad decision-making powers in the individual property owner. Grounded in an exclusion-based view of property, the dominant approach recognizes each property owner as a gatekeeper, with important in rem rights that bind all others—even those not in a direct relationship with the owner. Over time, courts and other lawmakers have developed doctrines and rules of law to guide and sometimes constrain the exercise of gatekeeping powers. Developed through democratic institutions, these principles and rules provide an important counterweight to the self-interests driving the decisions of individual right holders. The exclusion-based approach to the management function works well much of the time. It is a low-cost approach that relies on the incentives of the marketplace to reward the productive gatekeeper or replace the wasteful one. With a simple delegation, ownership rights and powers are placed in the gatekeeper and protected from encroachment or interference through the power to exclude. In certain more complex settings, however, property’s owner-centric exclusion strategy poses serious problems by ignoring the true scales and relational dimensions of property use. These problems include resource hoarding, excessive fragmentation, overcapitalization, and serious, sometimes irreversible degradation of the environment. It is time to rethink the management function of property to recognize that management occurs both through individual and collective action. In a democratic society, neither is sufficient by itself. Both are necessary to promote individual freedoms, social cohesion, and the integrity of political, economic, and natural systems.
      PubDate: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 14:03:49 PDT
       
  • The Political Process Argument for Overruling Quill

    • Authors: Edward A. Zelinsky
      Abstract: Should the U.S. Supreme Court overrule Quill Corporation v. North Dakota' A careful assessment of the federal political process suggests that the Supreme Court itself should overturn Quill in the Court’s role as guardian of the states against federal commandeering. A combination of factors underlay this conclusion: the tactical advantage that Quill bestows in the political process upon the internet and mail order industries, the importance of the states in the structure of federalism, the centrality of sales taxes to the financing of state government, the severe impediment which Quill and its physical presence test impose upon the collection of these taxes, and the unique disadvantages of the states in the federal legislative process. In our system of federalism as it exists today, the states are structurally important but politically disadvantaged. Federal legislators receive no political benefits from helping the states. This contrasts with the political support—votes and campaign contributions—private groups bestow for legislative backing. The Court itself should, despite the force of stare decisis, overturn Quill rather than rely on Congress to abolish the physical presence test which severely hampers the states’ collection of their sales taxes in the face of the growth of internet commerce.
      PubDate: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 14:03:45 PDT
       
  • Fueling the Terrorist Fires with the First Amendment: Religious Freedom,
           the Anti-LGBT Right, and Interest Convergence Theory

    • Authors: Kyle C. Velte
      Abstract: This article argues that there is a connection between formal equality for LGBT Americans and the United States’ foreign policy and national security interests. It makes that connection utilizing Professor Derek Bell’s interest convergence paradigm. It argues that the new agenda of the American Religious Right is one that seeks to assert quasi-theocratic and anti-Establishment positions in litigation as well as in its promulgation of anti-LGBT laws. This agenda is cloaked in the garb of “religious freedom,” but the Religious Right’s definition of “religious freedom” is one that runs counter to our long-standing understanding of that principle as one that rests on religious pluralism. The interests of the national security and foreign policy communities converge with those of the LGBT community because of the commonalities between the Religious Right and the extremist Islamic terror groups that United States has been fighting against since the 9/11 attacks. Both groups share similar theocratic and quasi-theocratic sensibilities; both share a common religiously based disdain or hatred for LGBT people that fuels their efforts to deny LGBT people civil rights. These similarities mean that the United States must take similar positions vis-à-vis both groups; failure to do so will render the United States hypocritical on the world stage. To maintain its own moral and diplomatic authority when spreading messages of equality, democracy, and freedom, the United States must live those values within its own borders by rejecting the Religious Right’s new efforts to carve out quasi-theocratic zones of exemptions from antidiscrimination laws and to enact explicitly anti-Establishment, anti-LGBT laws. Failing to condemn the anti-Establishment agenda of the Religious Right also threatens national security. Inconsistency between what the United States says regarding freedom and democracy abroad, and what it actually does at home, provides fodder for terrorist groups to rally their followers and harm the United States and its citizens. Interest convergence between the U.S. foreign policy and national security communities (securing U.S. foreign policy and national security interests) and the LGBT civil rights movement (formal equality) provides an opportunity for a unique coalition to coalesce for LGBT civil rights protections.
      PubDate: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 14:03:41 PDT
       
  • The Conundrum of Voluntary Intoxication and Sex

    • Authors: Michal Buchhandler-Raphael
      Abstract: Research shows that a significant number of sexual assaults occur after victims have consumed an excessive amount of intoxicants, rendering them substantially impaired and incapable of opposing nonconsensual sexual acts. Existing sexual assault statutes mostly criminalize sexual acts with involuntarily intoxicated people, namely when the defendant administered the intoxicants to the victim. Most of these statutes, however, do not directly prohibit sexual intercourse with voluntarily intoxicated victims whose intoxication was self-inflicted. While general prohibitions against sexual intercourse with physically and mentally incapacitated individuals may be used to prosecute sexual assaults of intoxicated victims, they offer only an incomplete solution to the problem and are ill suited to capture the distinct features of these cases. This article aims to draw the legal boundary between sex crimes and consensual, albeit drunken and regrettable, sexual encounters. It makes several contributions to the contentious societal and legal debate over the circumstances that may justify holding a perpetrator criminally responsible for sexually assaulting a voluntarily intoxicated victim. First, it argues that the criminal law’s treatment of sexual assault of intoxicated victims should not depend on how the victim’s impairment came about, and should equally protect victims of both voluntary and involuntary intoxication. Second, the article demonstrates that since the existing incapacity to express consent standard is vague and ambiguous, its application may result in inequitable resolutions for both victims and defendants. Third, the article proposes a statute that directly prohibits sexual acts with victims who were unable to refuse nonconsensual sexual acts due to their intoxication, whether voluntary or involuntary. The statute replaces the victim-oriented capacity to consent standard with a perpetrator-oriented inquiry that aims at identifying sexual predators by focusing on the circumstances that demonstrate a defendant’s culpable conduct and morally blameworthy state of mind. By targeting only cases that warrant criminal sanction, the proposed framework strikes a balance between defendants’ right not to be subject to criminal sanctions for conduct that does not demonstrate culpability and victims’ right to remain free from sexual violation by imposition of nonconsensual sex.
      PubDate: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 14:03:37 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: 54.225.20.19
 
About JournalTOCs
API
Help
News (blog, publications)
JournalTOCs on Twitter   JournalTOCs on Facebook

JournalTOCs © 2009-2016