for Journals by Title or ISSN
for Articles by Keywords
help
  Subjects -> LAW (Total: 1346 journals)
    - CIVIL LAW (36 journals)
    - CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (47 journals)
    - CORPORATE LAW (88 journals)
    - CRIMINAL LAW (22 journals)
    - CRIMINOLOGY AND LAW ENFORCEMENT (144 journals)
    - FAMILY AND MATRIMONIAL LAW (22 journals)
    - INTERNATIONAL LAW (183 journals)
    - JUDICIAL SYSTEMS (22 journals)
    - LAW (774 journals)
    - LAW: GENERAL (8 journals)

LAW (774 journals)                  1 2 3 4 | Last

Showing 1 - 200 of 354 Journals sorted alphabetically
ABA Journal Magazine     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 23)
Acta Juridica     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 7)
Acta Politica     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 14)
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: 42)
Aegean Review of the Law of the Sea and Maritime Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 6)
African Journal of Legal Studies     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 8)
African Journal on Conflict Resolution     Open Access   (Followers: 19)
Afrilex     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Air and Space Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 20)
Akron Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Al 'Adalah : Jurnal Hukum Islam     Open Access  
Al-Ahkam     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Alaska Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 8)
Albany Law Review     Free   (Followers: 5)
Alberta Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 13)
Alternative Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 8)
Alternatives : Global, Local, Political     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 12)
Amazon's Research and Environmental Law     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
American Journal of Comparative Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 56)
American Journal of Jurisprudence     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 18)
American Journal of Law & Medicine     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 11)
American Journal of Legal History     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 8)
American Journal of Trial Advocacy     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 7)
American University Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 10)
American University National Security Law Brief     Open Access   (Followers: 8)
Amicus Curiae     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
Amsterdam Law Forum     Open Access   (Followers: 8)
Anales de la Cátedra Francisco Suárez     Open Access  
Annales Canonici     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
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: 3)
Appeal : Review of Current Law and Law Reform     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Arbitration Law Monthly     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 3)
Arbitration Law Reports and Review     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 14)
Arctic Review on Law and Politics     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Arena Hukum     Open Access  
Argumenta Journal Law     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Arizona Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Arizona State Law Journal     Free   (Followers: 3)
Arkansas Law Review     Free   (Followers: 6)
Ars Aequi Maandblad     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 3)
Art + Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 12)
Article 40     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Artificial Intelligence and Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 11)
ASAS : Jurnal Hukum dan Ekonomi Islam     Open Access  
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: 5)
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: 11)
Australian Indigenous Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 20)
Australian Journal of Legal History     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 14)
Ave Maria Law Review     Free   (Followers: 3)
Badamai Law Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Ballot     Open Access  
Baltic Journal of Law & Politics     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
Bar News: The Journal of the NSW Bar Association     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 6)
Behavioral Sciences & the Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 24)
Beijing Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Berkeley Journal of Entertainment and Sports Law     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Berkeley Technology Law Journal     Free   (Followers: 12)
Bioethics Research Notes     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 13)
Boletín de la Asociación Internacional de Derecho Cooperativo     Open Access  
Bond Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 18)
Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 7)
Boston College Journal of Law & Social Justice     Open Access   (Followers: 11)
Boston College Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 16)
Boston University Law Review     Free   (Followers: 11)
BRICS Law Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law     Open Access   (Followers: 8)
Brigham Young University Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 7)
British Journal of American Legal Studies     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Brooklyn Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Bulletin of Legal Medicine     Open Access  
Bulletin of Medieval Canon Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 3)
Business and Human Rights Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 3)
C@hiers du CRHIDI     Open Access  
Cadernos de Dereito Actual     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Cadernos de Informação Jurídica     Open Access  
Cadernos do Programa de Pós-Graduação em Direito - PPGDir./UFRGS     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Cadernos Ibero-Americanos de Direito Sanitário     Open Access  
Cahiers, Droit, Sciences et Technologies     Open Access  
California Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 19)
California Lawyer     Free  
California Western Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Cambridge Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 161)
Campbell Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Campus Legal Advisor     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 2)
Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 10)
Canadian Journal of Law and Society     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 20)
Case Western Reserve Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Časopis pro právní vědu a praxi     Open Access  
Catalyst : A Social Justice Forum     Open Access   (Followers: 9)
Catholic University Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Chicago-Kent Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 4)
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: 4)
Chinese Law & Government     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 7)
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: 17)
Commercial Law Quarterly: The Journal of the Commercial Law Association of Australia     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 5)
Comparative Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 38)
Comparative Legal History     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 7)
Con-texto     Open Access  
Conflict Resolution Quarterly     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 29)
Conflict Trends     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 12)
Cornell Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 11)
Criterio Jurídico     Open Access  
Critical Analysis of Law : An International & Interdisciplinary Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Cuadernos de Historia del Derecho     Open Access   (Followers: 7)
Cuestiones Juridicas     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Current Legal Problems     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 27)
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   (Followers: 1)
Deakin Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 15)
Debater a Europa     Open Access  
Defense Counsel Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 1)
Democrazia e diritto     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 2)
Denning Law Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 6)
DePaul Journal of Women, Gender and the Law     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
DePaul Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Der Staat     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 14)
Derecho Animal. Forum of Animal Law Studies     Open Access  
Derecho PUCP     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Derecho y Ciencias Sociales     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Derechos en Acción     Open Access  
Dicle Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi     Open Access  
Die Verwaltung     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 10)
Dikaion     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Dike     Open Access  
Diké : Revista Jurídica     Open Access  
Direito e Desenvolvimento     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Direito e Liberdade     Open Access  
Diritto penale contemporaneo     Free   (Followers: 2)
Diritto, immigrazione e cittadinanza     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Dixi     Open Access  
Droit et Cultures     Open Access   (Followers: 7)
Droit et Médecine Bucco-Dentaire     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 1)
Droit, Déontologie & Soin     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 2)
Drug Science, Policy and Law     Full-text available via subscription  
Duke Environmental Law & Policy Forum     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Duke Forum for Law & Social Change     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Duke Journal of Gender Law & Policy     Open Access   (Followers: 15)
Duke Law & Technology Review     Open Access   (Followers: 10)
Duke Law Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 25)
DULR Online     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
East Asia Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
ECI Interdisciplinary Journal for Legal and Social Policy     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Ecology Law Quarterly     Free   (Followers: 3)
Edinburgh Law Review     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 19)
Education and the Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 12)
El Cotidiano     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Election Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 25)
Energy Law Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 5)
Environmental Justice     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 10)
Environmental Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 22)
Environmental Policy and Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 13)
ERA-Forum     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
Erasmus Law Review     Open Access  
Erciyes Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi     Open Access  
Espaço Jurídico : Journal of Law     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
ESR Review : Economic and Social Rights in South Africa     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Ethnopolitics     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 3)
Ethos: Official Publication of the Law Society of the Australian Capital Territory     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 5)
EU agrarian Law     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Europaisches Journal fur Minderheitenfragen     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 2)
European Energy and Environmental Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 13)
European Journal for Education Law and Policy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 9)
European Journal of Comparative Law and Governance     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 7)
European Journal of Law and Technology     Open Access   (Followers: 16)
European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
European Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 161)
European Public Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 36)
European Review of Contract Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 24)
European Review of Private Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 32)
European Yearbook of Minority Issues Online     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
Evaluation Review     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 12)
Evidence & Policy : A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 12)
Faulkner Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 1)
Federal Communication Law Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 2)
Federal Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 21)
Federal Probation     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 2)
Feminist Legal Studies     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 14)
feminists@law     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Fiat Justisia     Open Access  
First Amendment Studies     Hybrid Journal  

        1 2 3 4 | Last

Journal Cover
Brooklyn Law Review
Number of Followers: 4  

  This is an Open Access Journal Open Access journal
ISSN (Print) 0007-2362
Published by Brooklyn Law School Homepage  [4 journals]
  • The “Deeming Rule”: The FDA’s Destruction of the Vaping
           Industry

    • Authors: Lauren H. Greenberg
      Abstract: The FDA has recently passed sweeping regulations, which classifies and then regulates electronic cigarettes as “tobacco products” in the same manner as traditional cigarettes. Though the agency reasons that unknowing adults and children may easily turn to e-cigarettes without fully understanding the potential health effects, there is a lack of conclusive evidence in this field to justify such a comprehensive regulatory scheme. Through the far-reaching “Deeming Rule,” e-cigarette manufacturers are forced to comply with financially burdensome and time-consuming requirements before taking most of their products to market. The channels by which the FDA proposes manufacturers and retailers gain permission from the agency to sell their products on the market in the first place threaten to put them out of business completely. Courts read a cost-benefit analysis into their interpretation of the Administrative Procedure Act, and the FDA has failed to conduct a fair and full cost-benefit analysis before the passage of the new Deeming Rule. By violating the Administrative Procedure Act, consumers are unable to turn to a safe alternative to traditional cigarettes, and manufacturers are unfairly put out of business. Instead of heavily regulating an entire industry with such limited research to support it, the FDA should step out and cease regulation until adequate research has been conducted. If the agency is unwilling to completely delay the regulation, weakening the burdensome approval process and stringent requirements until more research is completed would allow companies to still supply the market while protecting consumers.
      PubDate: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 09:48:00 PDT
       
  • Every English Learner Succeeds: The Need for Uniform Entry and Exit
           Requirements

    • Authors: Ana A. Núñez Cárdenas
      Abstract: While the number of English Learners (ELs) continues to significantly grow in the United States, the focus on their education is still severely lacking. During the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) era, the federal role in education greatly expanded, holding states accountable for their practices and ensuring academic proficiency. Even with the federal government’s expanded role ELs’ academic achievements did not improve and were further frustrated under the NCLB. In 2005, the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) was introduced to ameliorate the harmful stain the NCLB left on education. Under the ESSA, the states regained both their autonomy and flexibility to address the specific educational needs of their students. Even so, ELs’ education may be harmed if federal involvement is lacking. This note proposes that the federal government should collaborate with the states and create uniform entry and exit requirements for ELs. Uniformity in this area is paramount, because it would permit states to effectively assess student skills, therefore promoting their integration into the educational settings.
      PubDate: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 09:47:57 PDT
       
  • Fleeing the Rat’s Nest: Title VII Jurisprudence After Ortiz v.
           Werner Enterprises, Inc.

    • Authors: Zachary J. Strongin
      Abstract: In 2016, the Seventh Circuit issued an opinion that may be a harbinger for an important shift in the federal judiciary’s long-standing employment discrimination jurisprudence. In Ortiz v. Werner Enterprises, Judge Easterbrook reiterated the frustration with the existing “rat’s nest” of tests and standards used in Title VII discrimination and retaliation claims. The note contains two overarching arguments. First, the Supreme Court’s employment discrimination and “rat’s nest” of tests and standards has led to an untenable situation in which federal district courts apply different standards at different stages of litigations. This in turn has caused confusion amongst the various federal courts and has resulted in employee-plaintiffs to unfairly face different burdens across the country. Second, the Ortiz decision evinces that at least some judges and courts are tiring of this “rat’s nest” when it comes to evidentiary standards in employment discrimination cases. To solve this quandary, the federal judiciary should simplify the evidentiary standard at summary judgment so that an employee may present his or her evidence as a whole. With such a holistic standard, an employee need not be concerned with whether the evidence is direct, indirect, merely suggestive, or iron clad. Rather, a common sense evaluation of the evidence as a whole by the judge would suffice.
      PubDate: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 09:47:54 PDT
       
  • When the Fourth Estate’s Well Runs Dry

    • Authors: Megan L. Shaw
      Abstract: The press is under fire. Members of the press often face subpoenas or similar court orders, compelling the disclosure of a source’s identity. By issuing media subpoenas, the government has effectively censored the press—the exact type of censorship that the Supreme Court held presumptively unconstitutional over eight decades ago in Near v. Minnesota. Yet the least protected—and most complicated—aspect of the newsgathering process is a reporter’s relationship with her source. For decades, journalists have tried to assert defenses to government compulsions on First Amendment grounds as well as by invoking a “reporter’s privilege,” a testimonial privilege similar to that of a physician or an attorney. But the reporter’s privilege is far from well-settled law. The ambiguities at the federal level as to the bounds of the press’ First Amendment protections have significantly burdened the newsgathering process. Today’s chaotic political climate demands that the Supreme Court address the fragmented framework currently used to analyze the existence of a reporter privilege. The federal judiciary must begin analyzing media subpoenas as prior restraints. If courts apply the prior restraint balancing test—a test which permits censorship only under extremely compelling circumstances—the federal judiciary can accommodate the interests of the government without chilling the press. Absent a framework in which members of the press can consistently protect confidential information, sources will stop disclosing valuable information for fear of retribution, leaving journalists with less accurate and less timely facts from which to report to the public.
      PubDate: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 09:47:52 PDT
       
  • Section 230’s Liability Shield in the Age of Online Terrorist

    • Authors: Jaime M. Freilich
      Abstract: In recent years, “home grown” terrorists—individuals inspired to violence after watching terrorist videos online—have been responsible for devastating attacks in the United States and across Europe. Such terrorist propaganda falls outside the realm of the First Amendment’s protection because it has been proven to indoctrinate attackers, thus inciting imminent lawless action. Seizing on this, victims’ families have brought suits alleging that social media platforms, including Twitter, Facebook, and Google, provided material support to terrorists in violation of the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA). The Communications Decency Act (CDA), however, has served as an impenetrable shield against these claims, protecting social media companies from any liability when they are acting as mere “hosts” of third-party content. Congress should amend the CDA to prevent its immunity shield from applying in cases arising under the ATA because failure to do so frustrates the ATA’s intention of providing terror victims’ families with an avenue of legal redress against parties whose have provided material support to terrorists. Social media companies are aware that terrorist propaganda is being disseminated over their platforms, they are aware that people are being indoctrinated through their platforms, and they are profiting by running targeted advertising alongside the propaganda. Safely behind the CDA’s shield, however, they have no incentive to develop tools to mitigate the dire impact of online terrorist recruiting. The proposed amendment to the CDA would encourage companies to combat online terrorist propaganda while also ensuring that suits brought under the ATA will move past the motion to dismiss stage.
      PubDate: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 09:47:49 PDT
       
  • Opacity, Fragility, & Power: Lessons from the Law Enforcement Response
           to the Financial Crisis

    • Authors: Gregory M. Gilchrist
      Abstract: Review of Mary Kreiner Ramirez and Steven A. Ramirez, THE CARE FOR THE CORPORATE DEATH PENALTY: RESTORING LAW AND ORDER ON WALL STREET (New York 2017) The Case for the Corporate Death Penalty, by Mary Kreiner Ramirez and Steven A. Ramirez, argues that the limited law enforcement response to the 2008 financial crisis represented an unprecedented failure of the rule of law. It further maintains that the weak response by law enforcement was caused by the economic and political power of the largest financial institutions and those who run them. It concludes that the failure to vigorously prosecute the people for the crisis risks continued and even heightened crime in the financial industry. This book review suggests that the concentration on prosecutions is misguided. There are good reasons for the limited prosecutorial response to the crisis. Better regulation, not more prosecutions, would best address the problems that led to the 2008 crisis. Whether one favors a prosecutorial or regulatory response, however, The Case for the Corporate Death Penalty serves as a valuable contribution to understanding the financial crisis and the factors that contributed to it. The book introduces the reader to the history of white collar prosecutions in America, before providing a clear, well-written, and carefully-sourced tour of greed, recklessness, and fraud. For those who want to better understand how our financial system so nearly failed, or how it might happen again, this book is the place to start.
      PubDate: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 09:47:46 PDT
       
  • Accommodating Bias in the Sharing Economy

    • Authors: Norrinda Brown Hayat
      Abstract: The “sharing economy” is not equally accessible to all. The sharing economy’s travel accommodations giant, Airbnb, illustrates this problem. At least one study has found that requests on Airbnb from guests with distinctively African-American names are approximately 16 percent less likely to be accepted than identical guests with distinctively white names. Some Airbnb “hosts,” including hosts that list multiple units, insist that they are not subject to civil rights laws relying on First Amendment jurisprudence, property law and business justifications for support. These arguments are identical to arguments raised and ultimately dismissed in opposition to blacks’ right to travel prior to the Civil War, at the outset of the Jim Crow era and at dawn of the passage of Title II. Further, an evaluation of Title II’s enforcement in the over fifty years since its passage offers compelling evidence that this question of balancing hosts’ freedom of association against patrons’ dual freedom to associate is resolved by the nuances within the statute itself. It is the main premise of this article that hosts in the sharing economy’s travel sector are, generally, prohibited under Title II and similarly worded state laws from discriminating and that those laws can be employed now to democratize public accommodations in the sharing economy in the short term. Moreover, the dual nature of units offered as public accommodations in the sharing economy–both hotel and home–also suggests that the Fair Housing Act of 1964 may also apply in some contexts. A failure to enforce civil rights laws against discriminating hosts in the sharing economy now poses a serious threat to blacks’ and others’ access to travel presently and in the future, but also to the “multiplicity of spheres” that underpin citizenship for these groups writ large.
      PubDate: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 09:47:43 PDT
       
  • Pickering, Garcetti, & Academic Freedom

    • Authors: Mark Strasser
      Abstract: While the U. S. Supreme Court long ago recognized that individuals do not lose their free speech rights simply by virtue of being state employees, the contours of their First Amendment protections have been evolving over the past several decades. The proper way to apply these protections in the academic context is confusing, especially after Garcetti v. Ceballos in which the Court suggested that First Amendment protections do not attach insofar as individuals are speaking as employees rather than as citizens. The circuit courts have adopted a dizzying set of rules to determine when First Amendment protections are triggered in the academic context, some distinguishing between the protections afforded to college professors and the protections afforded to primary and secondary school teachers and others distinguishing based on whether the expression is appropriately characterized as teaching, scholarship or, instead, something else. Still others offer a different approach. Even when the Garcetti exception is not triggered, the circuits offer very different interpretations of how to apply the prevailing jurisprudence. Until the Court offers greater guidance, we can only expect the circuits to continue to treat relevantly similar cases differently, to diverge with respect to what academic freedom includes, and to put the benefits accrued from the recognition of academic freedom at risk.
      PubDate: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 09:47:40 PDT
       
  • Regulating the “Too Big to Jail” Financial Institutions

    • Authors: Jerry W. Markham
      Abstract: This article addresses the “too big to jail” regulatory model in which large banks pay hundreds of billions of dollars to settle multiple and duplicative regulatory charges brought by a horde of state, federal, and even foreign regulators. The banks pay those massive settlements in order to keep their banking charters and to obtain immunity from prosecution for senior executives. In turn, regulators benefit from the headlines these fines generate. Much criticism has been directed at these settlements because the banks are allowed to continue business as usual and no senior executives are jailed. Other critics contend that these settlements are simply a form of official larceny that the banks must accede to in order to retain their regulatory licenses, that the settlements are hurting shareholders, and that employees are laid off in order to cover their costs. This article traces historical concerns that white-collar criminals enjoy immunity from criminal prosecution. It describes criminal prosecutions arising from financial scandals prior to the Financial Crisis in 2008 (Financial Crisis). The article then addresses the too big to jail settlement pattern in cases arising from the Financial Crisis. It concludes that the regulatory model applied in those cases is neither effective nor appropriate. The article proposes that the regulation of financial services be consolidated into a single federal regulator and that state regulation be preempted. This would stop the multiple, duplicative regulatory actions that are now common in the industry. The article also proposes that the single regulator be restricted in its ability to levy large fines, even in a settlement, in the absence of demonstrated culpability at the executive level.
      PubDate: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 09:47:37 PDT
       
  • Interminable Parade Rest: The Impossibility of Establishing Service
           Connection in Veterans Disability Compensation Claims When Records Are
           Lost or Destroyed

    • Authors: Jessica Lynn Wherry
      Abstract: By statute, veterans are eligible for disability compensation benefits for illness or injury connected to the veteran’s service in the armed forces. The process of seeking benefits is intended to be non-adversarial and requires VA to assist veterans in developing their claims. Unfortunately, VA’s nagging problems including poor management and a lack of accountability produce well-documented and devastatingly negative effects on veterans. These effects are not limited to veterans receiving disability benefits but extends to veterans who never make it past the claim stage because their claims are denied. Typically, service medical records are used to establish service-connection. When those records are unobtainable, there are alternative sources of medical or lay evidence that can be used to establish service-connection. But when service medical records are lost or destroyed and there is no other contemporaneous medical evidence, the veteran likely suffers an absolute bar to receiving a favorable decision about service-connection. Any decision made without service medical records is necessarily based on a lack of evidence rather than an evaluation of the evidence. This article proposes administrative and statutory remedies to give the veteran a presumption of service-connection. Such presumption would require the veteran to provide two forms of alternative evidence, including the veteran’s own statements, to support service-connection. The government would then have the opportunity to rebut the presumption by proving impossibility of the existence of the event, injury, or disease.
      PubDate: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 09:47:35 PDT
       
  • Strictly Speaking: Courts Should Not Adopt Strict Scrutiny for Firearm
           Regulations

    • Authors: Andrew Kimball
      Abstract: A militia right or an individual right' In District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court of the United States declared that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to a firearm outside the context of a militia. While pronouncing the individual right to a gun as fundamental, the Court declined to define an appropriate standard of review to assess firearm regulations. Thus, the Heller decision opened the floodgates for legal challenges to firearm regulations across the nation. Absent direction from the Supreme Court, many lower courts reacted by applying intermediate scrutiny, but in Kolbe v. Hogan the Fourth Circuit became the first court to apply strict scrutiny to a Maryland law regulating semi-automatic assault rifles. This proved to be contentious and short-lived however, as just one year after its initial ruling and in a significant turn of events, the Fourth Circuit released an en banc decision, vacated the appellate court panel opinion, applied intermediate scrutiny, and declared semi-automatic assault weapons beyond Second Amendment protection. If Heller marked a dramatic development in Second Amendment jurisprudence, Kolbe revealed courts’ difficulties in addressing firearm regulations absent a defined standard of review. This note examines the relationship between the right to bear arms as an individual right, the ongoing debate over firearm regulations in society, and the appropriate standard of review courts should utilize in evaluating legislation that implicates Second Amendment rights. Until the Supreme Court clarifies the scope of the Second Amendment and the appropriate standard of review, courts should view Kolbe v. Hogan as a warning against strict scrutiny, not an invitation for its application to firearm regulations. The maintenance of a militia, the individual right to a handgun for self-defense, and reasonable regulation can all be reconciled under intermediate scrutiny.
      PubDate: Mon, 05 Mar 2018 07:45:01 PST
       
  • Circuit Rift Sends Sound Waves: An Interpretation of the Copyright
           Act's Scope of Protection for Digital Sampling of Sound Recordings

    • Authors: Elyssa E. Abuhoff
      Abstract: Digital sampling of sound recordings itself has become an art—an art that has given rise to hit songs that have out-charted the songs they sampled. Yet there is a debate within the music industry and legal field over whether there is a de minimis exception for the unauthorized use of sound recordings. In the summer of 2016, in VMG Salsoul, LLC v. Ciccone, the Ninth Circuit departed from the Sixth Circuit’s unpopular 2006 decision in Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Dimension Films by holding that the Copyright Act allows for a de minimis exception for the unauthorized use of sound recordings. This note details the impact of the circuit split, by exploring the background of the Copyright Act, the de minimis exception, and providing each circuit’s stance on the de minims exception. Until the circuit split is resolved, many in the music industry are faced with the decision of licensing or litigating. This chills creativity. Rather than wait for Congress—which is subject to capture and control by powerful groups in the music industry—to act, the Supreme Court should resolve the circuit split. This note provides a statutory interpretation that the Supreme Court should use to demonstrate that the Copyright Act does indeed allow for a de minimis exception—after all, the law does not concern itself with trifles.
      PubDate: Mon, 05 Mar 2018 07:44:55 PST
       
  • Secrecy for the Sake of It: The Defend Trade Secrets Act

    • Authors: Lauren Rayner Davis
      Abstract: With foreign economic espionage and national security concerns thrust to the forefront of the discussion, Congress nearly unanimously passed the Defend Trade Secrets Act after a concerted effort by the executive branch, federal law enforcement, and intellectual property scholars. While this landmark legislation provides the long sought-after grounds of original federal jurisdiction for trade secret misappropriation claims, the statute also offers litigants a powerful remedy—the ex parte seizure provision. This unprecedented provision in trade secrets law allows a plaintiff, with no notice to the defendant, to file an application with the court requesting that U.S. Marshals seize and hold the defendant’s property containing the allegedly wrongfully acquired or disclosed trade secrets until a hearing is set on the matter. Although subject to numerous procedural safeguards and with an order in favor of ex parte seizure only to be granted in “extraordinary circumstances,” this potent provision all but assures that litigants with deep pockets (and in businesses wholly unrelated to national security) will be able to silence a less financially robust competitor—more often than not, a former employee—who may be especially vulnerable to unexpected seizures at precarious moments for a newly launched start-up such as on the eve of an initial public offering or product release. Trade secrets should be considered as a viable property interest, yet are materially distinct from established forms of federally registerable intellectual property (e.g., copyrights, trademarks, patents) and as a result, the vast majority of ex parte proceedings in the trade secrets context will needlessly violate the defendant’s due process rights. This note proposes that the “extraordinary circumstances” language of the ex parte seizure provision should be narrowed to comport with basic constitutional tenets, and further suggests that as a matter of policy, employers should be fostering launchpad and knowledge-sharing environments, rather than punishing top talent and restricting innovation.
      PubDate: Mon, 05 Mar 2018 07:44:52 PST
       
  • "Waiting on the (Music) World to Change": Licensing in the
           Digital Age of Music

    • Authors: Gabriella A. Conte
      Abstract: The music industry appears to be thriving with constant record breaking sales and more ways to listen to music than ever before. But behind the scenes, government regulation has struggled to adapt to changes in the industry, leaving industry players uncertain of the bounds of copyright. Decades ago, the two most prevalent Performing Rights Organizations—entities that collect royalties for songwriters and publishers based on public performances of their musical compositions—in the United States, ASCAP and BMI, entered into consent decrees to assuage antitrust concerns. Last amended over fifteen years ago, these decrees govern the music licensing practices of a vast majority of the nation’s songwriters and those who purchase the rights to publicly broadcast their music. Due to the changing nature of how consumers listen to music, these decrees have lost much of their practical significance today. In the age of digital music, how can something written before iTunes existed really account for the way music is listened to and licensed today' Due to the antiquated nature of these consent decrees, paired with ongoing digital music advancements, this note suggests that a decision on a standard music licensing practice cannot be made without first amending the consent decrees, and ultimately advocates for the installation of a dedicated committee to oversee public performance licensing.
      PubDate: Mon, 05 Mar 2018 07:44:49 PST
       
  • The "Blurred Lines" of Copyright Law: Setting a New Standard for Copyright
           Infringement in Music

    • Authors: Joseph M. Santiago
      Abstract: In 2014, rock legends Led Zeppelin were sued by a relatively obscure band, named Spirit, for copyright infringement over the use of their iconic 1971 song “Stairway to Heaven.” Just a year before, musicians Robin Thicke and Pharrell Williams found themselves in the same position over their hit song “Blurred Lines.” Both cases, tried in the Ninth Circuit through the same signature “extrinsic/intrinsic” infringement analysis, had different outcomes—Led Zeppelin was victorious, while Thicke and Williams lost. These differing outcomes help to accentuate the problem with applying the typical copyright infringement tests—ones used for any type of artistic medium—to music. Music is unique, and a varying set of circumstances hinders musicians. Western music, as a whole, is limited by a twelve-note octave, putting a hard cap on chord structures, progressions, and possible arrangements. Furthermore, and given these restrictions, musicians typically draw from those that came before them as influence. This is unlike authors; while they may be influenced and inspired by previous authors, they know no limits to what story they could tell. This note argues that courts ought to use a higher standard—the “Unique Quality” test—to determine whether infringement occurred in a music-based case. The test would work to protect artists’ musical expression while shielding them from futile suits involving elements of musical pieces that are clearly just ideas that should be protected under copyright law. The notion that ideas cannot be protected, but that only the expression of them can, serves as a foundation in copyright law, and this note works to allow for a better understanding of what constitutes a musical “idea” versus an artist’s “expression,” which typically consists of common musical elements paired with a unique melody or addition that makes a song uniquely its own.
      PubDate: Mon, 05 Mar 2018 07:44:47 PST
       
  • How New York Drinks: If and How Third-Party Providers can Integrate with
           the Three-Tier System

    • Authors: Alexa Bordner
      Abstract: Thanks to a surge of new companies that facilitate home delivery, it has become increasingly common for consumers to make purchases online. In the case of alcohol sales, however, convenience cannot be the only consideration. New York (and a majority of other states) regulates the distribution of alcoholic beverages through a three-tier licensing system of producers, wholesalers, and retailers. The question that then arises is whether the non-licensed, third-party entities that work with licensees in a variety of ways, including by providing retail licensees with a platform for making Internet sales, fit into the regulatory scheme. While consumer demand has evolved to insist on this kind of buying experience, the law remains a frozen reflection of the Prohibition-era glorification of temperance. Adding to the mix of interests at stake, the established brick-and-mortar retailer community has long had to comply with strict regulation and has put pressure on regulators to level the playing field. In adjudicating the legality of some of these third-party entities through declaratory judgments, the New York State Liquor Authority has both asserted guidelines for compliance and applied them inconsistently. It is incumbent upon the state to respond to the fundamental shift in consumer behavior and create regulatory predictability. This note proposes the creation of a minimally burdensome permit for third-party providers as a way forward that best addresses the concerns of all affected parties.
      PubDate: Mon, 05 Mar 2018 07:44:44 PST
       
  • ESSAY: Reconsidering Contractual Consent: Why We Shouldn't Worry Too
           Much About Boilerplate and Other Puzzles

    • Authors: Nathan B. Oman
      Abstract: Our theoretical approaches to contract law dramatically over-estimated the importance of voluntary consent. Voluntary consent plays, at best, a secondary role in the normative justification of contract law. Rather, contract law should be seen as part of an evolutionary process of finding solutions to problems of social organization in markets. Like natural evolution, this process depends on variation and feedback. Unlike natural evolution, both the variation and the feedback mechanisms are products of human invention. On this theory, consent serves two roles in contract law. First, consent makes freedom of contract possible and freedom of contract generates variation in transactional structures. In effect, it creates a store of possible solutions to problems of social organization. Second, consent is one method among several by which “bad” solutions are weeded out and “good” solutions are selected. But consent is not the only—or in many cases even the primary—feedback mechanism for transactional structures. Because there are other mechanisms that mitigate against pathological transactional forms, we are comfortable enforcing contracts in many situations where consent is formal at best and the voluntariness of contracting parties is open to serious doubt. Ultimately “meaningful consent” is not a necessary condition for the normative justification of contractual enforcement. Applying this model to boilerplate contracts explains why we are justified in enforcing agreements where consent may be attenuated and very imperfectly informed. The voluminous criticism of these agreements shares the common assumption that robust voluntary consent is a necessary condition for the normative justification of contract law. This basic assumption, however, is mistaken.
      PubDate: Mon, 05 Mar 2018 07:44:41 PST
       
  • The Duke Model: A Performance-Based Solution for Compensating College
           Athletes

    • Authors: David A. Grenardo
      Abstract: The recent $8.8 billion extension of the NCAA men’s basketball tournament with TV networks CBS Sports and Turner Broadcasting System Inc. illustrates how in recent years the business of college athletics—specifically, of Division I football and men’s basketball programs—has evolved considerably, exploding into a multibillion dollar annual enterprise. There has been no commensurate change, however, in the compensation structure for the college athletes driving these colossal profits; they are still prohibited from being paid under NCAA rules and are compensated solely through the award of athletic scholarships, as has been the case for decades. This article argues that the jurisprudence on the issue of compensating college athletes relies on shaky antitrust arguments, exposing the flaws of each in turn. In light of the increasing likelihood that a court may in the future side with college athletes on the issue of compensation, the NCAA should be proactive and establish compensation structure guidelines for Division I football and men’s basketball programs, which drive the vast majority of college athletic program profits. The author presents a novel model to achieve this goal, the Duke Model, and demonstrates how this performance-based model would be applied in practice, and further elaborates on how the NCAA could utilize its existing infrastructure to take concrete steps towards reversing its ban on the payment of college athletes.
      PubDate: Mon, 05 Mar 2018 07:44:38 PST
       
  • Improving Access to Justice by Enforcing the Free Speech Clause

    • Authors: Michele Cotton
      Abstract: State laws often make it a crime for a nonlawyer to give a person “legal advice,” even though it is speech of a sort that is usually protected by the First Amendment. As this article demonstrates, appellate courts have been unanimous in their conclusion that such speech is not protected, seemingly settling the issue. However, this article shows that these decisions are scattershot in their approaches, unconvincing in their reasoning, and inept at applying existing First Amendment precedents. In fact, Supreme Court jurisprudence indicates that unauthorized practice of law restrictions against nonlawyers giving legal advice violate the Free Speech Clause. The appellate decisions finding otherwise represent not only a judicial failure to police an important constitutional right, but also impede access to justice. They mean that even trained nonlawyers cannot provide legal advice to the many persons who cannot afford or otherwise obtain a lawyer. Enforcing the Free Speech Clause would empower nonlawyers to provide the unrepresented with legal advice, but it does present real risks to consumers. However, as this article demonstrates, it is possible to address such risks while obtaining the benefits provided by the increase in access to legal advice and assistance that such enforcement of the First Amendment would afford.
      PubDate: Mon, 05 Mar 2018 07:44:35 PST
       
  • Whither the Functional Parent' Revisiting Equitable Parenthood
           Doctrines in Light of Same-Sex Parents’ Increased Access to Obtaining
           Formal Legal Parent Status

    • Authors: Jessica Feinberg
      Abstract: Equitable parenthood doctrines generally provide rights relating to visitation or custody to an individual who has functioned as a child’s parent, but who is not recognized as a formal parent under existing law. These doctrines have played an essential role in protecting non-biological parents raising children within same-sex relationships, a group which historically has been excluded from the traditional avenues to establishing formal legal parent status based upon biology, marriage, and adoption. Over the past thirty years, a number of jurisdictions have adopted equitable parenthood doctrines to avoid the significant harm to children and unfairness that result from treating non-biological parents raising children within same-sex relationships as legal strangers to their children. In recent years, however, formal avenues to establishing legal parent status based upon marriage and adoption increasingly have been extended to non-biological parents raising children within same-sex relationships. While these developments are laudable steps in protecting LGBT families, they leave the future of equitable parenthood doctrines in question. Courts and legislatures may conclude that the increasing expansion to non-biological parents in same-sex relationships of formal avenues to establishing legal parent status means that equity no longer requires application or adoption of equitable parenthood doctrines. In fact, in cases involving same-sex parents, several courts have already cited as a justification for declining to adopt or apply equitable parenthood doctrines the availability of a formal avenue through which the individual seeking parental rights could have established legal parent status. This article argues that it would be a serious mistake for courts and legislatures to abandon equitable parenthood doctrines. Regardless of the increased availability to same-sex parents of formal avenues to establishing legal parent status, equitable parenthood doctrines will remain essential in promoting one of family law’s most important goals: protecting the best interests of children.
      PubDate: Mon, 05 Mar 2018 07:44:33 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
Fax: +00 44 (0)131 4513327
 
Home (Search)
Subjects A-Z
Publishers A-Z
Customise
APIs
Your IP address: 54.166.141.12
 
About JournalTOCs
API
Help
News (blog, publications)
JournalTOCs on Twitter   JournalTOCs on Facebook

JournalTOCs © 2009-