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: 143)
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: 134)
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 Arizona State Law Journal
  [2 followers]  Follow
    
  Free journal Free journal
   ISSN (Print) 0164-4297
   Published by Arizona State University Homepage  [3 journals]
  • Free to Do No Harm: Conscience Protections for Healthcare Professionals
    • Authors: asuljadmin
      Abstract: Kevin H. Theriot & Ken ConnellyThe right to conscience of medical practitioners and related healthcare professionals has come under increasing attack in recent years. Examples abound of individuals and institutions being compelled to act against their will and their beliefs. Yet despite this unfortunate reality, it is difficult to conceive of a scenario in which the right to conscience for medical practitioners should not prevail in a conflict with some other claimed imperative, especially given its historical and philosophical pedigree.
      PubDate: Sat, 29 Jul 2017 17:32:38 +000
       
  • No One Knew What to Expect: Breaking the Phoenix Gender Barrier in 1969
    • Authors: asuljadmin
      Abstract: The Honorable Mary M. Schroeder1968 was not a good year for the world, for the United States, or for my husband, Milt, and me. The Vietnam War and public reactions to it were going so badly that in March, President Lyndon Johnson announced he would not stand for re-election in the fall. In April, Martin Luther King was gunned down in Memphis, sparking nation-wide riots including unrest in our Capitol Hill neighborhood in Washington, D.C. The ruckus drove Milt and me out of our little house at 8½ E Street Southeast and into the Virginia countryside while military units descended on Washington to keep order. Things became even worse when, in June, our great hope for the future, Bobby Kennedy, was shot in Los Angeles in a hotel kitchen, and died a few days later. That summer, the Democrats held a fiasco rather than a convention in Chicago, and in November, Richard Nixon was elected President of the United States.By Christmas of 1968, Milt and I had tentatively decided to move so that he could go into law school teaching. Our decision became firm in January 1969, when a number of what appeared to be highly unqualified men took over the top slots in the Department of Justice, where I was a trial attorney in the Civil Division. They tried to reform the Department by making it more like the private sector. One “innovation” was to have all Justice Department attorneys keep time records like lawyers in private practice. Rumor had it that the antitrust division threatened to strike because nothing on the forms matched what they did. Little did we dream in the winter of 1969 that a number of those top Justice Department appointees would eventually wind up in prison after the Watergate scandal. But we did know that it was time to leave Washington.
      PubDate: Sat, 29 Jul 2017 17:29:53 +000
       
  • Safeguarding the Right to Try
    • Authors: asuljadmin
      Abstract: Christina SandefurWhen Jenn McNary’s son Austin was three and her son Max was just a newborn, both boys were diagnosed with Duchenne’s Muscular Dystrophy— an incurable, fatal, degenerative muscle disorder. By the time Jenn learned of a promising treatment undergoing testing in clinical trials, Austin had declined so badly that he was restricted to a wheelchair. Jenn immediately tried to enroll both boys in the trial—only to learn that the trial was limited to ambulatory patients. That meant Max was eligible, but Austin’s disease had progressed too far to qualify. Jenn was forced to watch while one son’s condition improved significantly under treatment, and her other son’s condition worsened until he could no longer dress or use the restroom without help. Thirteen-year-old Max became sixteen-year-old Austin’s caregiver.The United States’ drug approval system is broken. It blocks Americans from potentially lifesaving medicines and treatments until those treatments receive final approval from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). And it takes an average of fourteen years and $1.4 billion for a drug to make its way through the clinical trial process and obtain FDA approval. But this is time that dying patients do not have. Patients like Austin and Max—and people like Jenn, who love them—are forced to suffer in limbo, with no say in their own destinies. All of this occurs despite the fact that one of the bedrock principles of medical ethics is patient autonomy: decisions about health care are ultimately for the patient to make.A new project, called Right to Try, aims to change this. Now law in thirty-seven states, Right to Try statutes protect the right of terminally ill patients to access medicine that has received basic safety approval from the FDA— and that is being given to patients in ongoing clinical trials—but that has not yet received final approval for sale. This Article looks at some of the legal and ethical implications of these laws, and of the cumbersome, “consistently overconservative,” and sometimes life-destroying bureaucratic process by which the FDA restricts access to treatments patients need.
      PubDate: Sat, 29 Jul 2017 17:24:53 +000
       
  • An End to Preemptively Limiting the Scope of a Manufacturer’s Duty: Why
           the Arizona Court of Appeals Was Right in Striking Down the Learned
           Intermediary Doctrine
    • Authors: asuljadmin
      Abstract: Matt O'ConnorOn January 29, 2015, the Arizona Court of Appeals rejected one of the most contentious tort doctrines in modern U.S. history. Amanda Watts began taking the drug Solodyn for acne treatment when she was a minor, as prescribed by her physician. After long-term use of Solodyn, she developed drug-induced hepatitis and drug-induced lupus, and now “she may suffer from lupus for the rest of her life.” She brought suit against the drug manufacturer, Medicis, for consumer fraud, product liability, and punitive damages. Although Amanda suffered obvious side effects as a result of taking Solodyn, the trial court granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss based on the learned intermediary doctrine (“the doctrine”).This tort liability doctrine can be traced back to 1925. It provides that “a manufacturer is not liable for failing to warn consumers of a product’s potential risk so long as it provides a proper warning to the specialized class of people who are authorized to sell, install, or provide the product.” Thus, the trial court held that under the doctrine, Watts’s physician was an intervening party in prescribing the medication, and thus her claims failed.The Arizona Court of Appeals vacated the judgment and remanded for further proceedings. The court of appeals’ decision held that Arizona’s Uniform Contribution Among Tortfeasors Act (“the UCATA”) superseded the doctrine because the doctrine “preemptively limit[ed] the scope of a manufacturer’s duty.” The Arizona Supreme Court vacated the decision by the court of appeals, holding that the doctrine generally applied to drug manufacturers and was not displaced by the UCATA. This Note will argue that the decision by the Arizona Court of Appeals was correct and that this view should be adopted throughout the country. Pharmaceutical manufacturers should not be able to escape liability by way of an outdated doctrine.
      PubDate: Sat, 29 Jul 2017 17:19:01 +000
       
  • Unclouding Arizona’s Water Future
    • Authors: asuljadmin
      Abstract: Rhett Larson and Brian PayneA cloud hangs over the future of Arizona’s water. The cloud has hung low and heavy for over forty years. The cloud is the ongoing adjudication of water rights in Arizona’s courts, where the priority, amount, and use of virtually all non-Colorado River water in Arizona remain in dispute. Arizona’s general stream adjudications cost the state, cities, towns, farms, mines, businesses, and citizens millions of dollars each year in legal costs. Those costs pale in comparison to the uncertainty that obscures Arizona’s water future because the cases remain undecided. The last time such a cloud hung over Arizona’s water future, the state enacted one of the most influential and innovative pieces of water law seen in world in last century—the Arizona Groundwater Management Act (GMA). Controversial legislation was recently proposed in the Arizona State Senate that would exempt certain communities from parts of the GMA, facilitating growth and increased groundwater withdrawals in these areas. This Article uses this recent controversy to explore the relationship between the GMA and the general stream adjudications, to explain why it is critical to invest in the efficient and equitable resolution of the adjudications, and propose reforms to Arizona’s water law that have the promise of being Arizona’s next great innovative contribution to water law and policy. These reforms include the creation of a state water escrow and regional water augmentation authorities to facilitate the resolution of Arizona’s water rights disputes and disperse the cloud obscuring an otherwise bright water future.
      PubDate: Sat, 29 Jul 2017 17:12:17 +000
       
  • Pushing for Change: The State of Arizona Should Allow Women Greater Access
           to Midwifery Care
    • Authors: asuljadmin
      Abstract: Leia DingottThe evidence in support of homebirths continues to pile up, and yet many states, including Arizona, continue to be influenced by the powerful lobby rather than by the facts and interests of the primary stakeholders, mothers, and babies. Maternal health in the United States is in a state of crisis with 437 woman dying annually (13 deaths per 100,000 births) from childbirth or complications from childbirth. The Center for Disease Control (CDC) estimates that half of these deaths are preventable. Recently, there has been a grassroots movement among woman to find direct entry midwives and birth at home. But there has been push-back from the medical community and state legislatures. The medical community claims that hospitals are the safest place to give birth, yet these numbers come from hospital births since most births in the United States occur in hospitals under the care of doctors. The American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ACOG) has repeatedly spoken out against the safety of homebirths and only recently has acknowledged the safety of birthing at a freestanding birth center assisted by a midwife. Other countries have more integrated systems that allow low-risk women to see and give birth at home with a midwife. These countries also have better maternal and infant mortality rates.
      PubDate: Sat, 29 Jul 2017 17:09:16 +000
       
  • Economic Liberty and the Arizona Constitution: A Survey of Forgotten
           History
    • Authors: asuljadmin
      Abstract: Paul Avelar and Keith DiggsJustice Brennan’s exhortation—now forty years old—for lawyers and judges to rediscover protections for individual rights in state constitutions was a timely reminder of the importance of state constitutions in our system of federalism. Justice Brennan issued this call at a time when he believed the U.S. Supreme Court was retreating from the protection of individual rights under the U.S. Constitution. It is doubtful that Justice Brennan meant to include economic liberty—the right to earn a living free from oppressive government regulation—in his “new federalism.” But economic liberty is a nearly textbook example of an individual right that the U.S. Supreme Court had once vigorously protected but had retreated from by the late 1970s.The pattern of meaningful protection for economic liberty fading into nonprotection was repeated at the Arizona Supreme Court. The change in Arizona jurisprudence, however, happened at a different time than in the federal courts and has never been adequately explored or explained—either by the courts or commenters. Neither have the “early” Arizona economic liberty cases—which actually span the decades between the 1920s and 1970s—been given credit for their consistency and sophisticated understanding of the police power, individual rights, and the threat of government-created monopoly. A comprehensive survey of these early cases demonstrates a tradition under the Arizona Constitution of providing more meaningful judicial protection for economic liberty than under the U.S. Constitution. This tradition was seemingly abandoned as the Arizona Supreme Court embraced—without explanation—a “lockstep” approach to economic liberty by adopting federal jurisprudence to interpret the relevant provisions of the Arizona Constitution. But this lockstep approach cannot be squared with the original cases, ignores unique aspects of the Arizona Constitution, and leads to incorrect results. As other states have begun to explore the greater protections for economic liberty in their constitutions, Arizona courts need to rediscover the same in our Constitution.
      PubDate: Sat, 29 Jul 2017 17:00:42 +000
       
  • A Look Back: The Spring 1983 Issue of the Arizona State University Law
           Forum
    • Authors: asuljadmin
      Abstract: To celebrate the law school’s fiftieth anniversary, we want to look back and appreciate the people and events from the last half century that have contributed to the school’s development. It is particularly significant to look back at the individuals who created the law school from the ground up. These founders of Arizona State University Law first recognized and appreciated the contributions that a law school brings to the community, and then committed themselves to turn their ideas into what is now the Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law.
      PubDate: Sat, 29 Jul 2017 16:49:18 +000
       
  • Disciplining Death: Assessing and Ameliorating Arbitrarines in Capital
           Charging
    • Authors: asuljadmin
      Abstract: Sherod ThaxtonJustice Stephen Breyer recently made international headlines when he emphasized that reforms to the capital punishment process have apparently failed to ameliorate the rampant arbitrariness, capriciousness, and bias that led the U.S. Supreme Court to temporarily invalidate the death penalty over forty years ago. According to the Justice, the primary cause of this failure has been the Court’s backpedaling on the very substantive and procedural protections it initially articulated as necessary for the constitutional administration of the death penalty. The Court’s capital punishment jurisprudence initially underscored the importance of social scientific evidence in assessing the fairness of capital punishment systems, but now the Court routinely minimizes, or outright ignores, social science evidence on the operation of the death penalty. This has led to the growing disjunction between the Court’s rhetoric and the reality of capital punishment. Justice Breyer underscored the Court’s responsibility in holding death penalty systems accountable and called for full briefing on the basic question of the social realities of the administration of capital punishment.Meaningful death penalty reform, if possible, requires a more prominent role for social science in death penalty decision-making. In this Article, I develop a doctrinally anchored statistical model that carefully disentangles and evaluates questions of arbitrariness, bias, and disproportionality in capital charging. I begin by discussing the Court’s inconsistent efforts to rationalize and regulate capital punishment systems. I then adopt a framework of statistical inference in an effort to provide greater definitional and analytical clarity. Finally, I describe a set of analytical tools uniquely suited for diagnosing capital charging errors that closely aligns with the Court’s conceptualization of unacceptable arbitrariness. I illustrate the usefulness of the model on data involving actual death penalty-eligible defendants from Georgia.My analysis reveals that death penalty charging practices are highly inconsistent, irrational, and disproportionate, both within and across jurisdictions in Georgia. The Article concludes by explaining how the empirical model might be used to improve accuracy and consistency in capital charging systems through empirically informed front-end charging screening.
      PubDate: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 12:00:59 +000
       
  • A Politics-Reinforcing Political Question Doctrine
    • Authors: asuljadmin
      Abstract: Harlan Grant CohenThe modern political question doctrine has long been criticized for shielding the political branches from proper judicial scrutiny and allowing the courts to abdicate their responsibilities. Critics of the doctrine thus cheered when the Supreme Court, in Zivotofsky I, announced a narrowing of the doctrine. Their joy though may have been short-lived. Almost immediately, Zivotofsky II demonstrated the dark side of judicial review of the separation of powers between Congress and the President: deciding separations of powers cases may permanently cut one of the political branches out of certain debates. Judicial scrutiny in a particular case could eliminate political scrutiny in many future ones.A return to the old political question doctrine, with its obsequious deference to political branch decisions, is not the answer. Instead, what is needed is a politics-reinforcing political question doctrine that can balance the need for robust review with the desire for robust debate. The uncertain boundaries between the political branches' overlapping powers create space for political debate. Their overlapping powers allow different groups to access the political system and have a voice on policy. Deciding separation of powers questions once-and-for-all can shut off those access points, shutting down political debate. Whereas the pre-Zivotofsky political question suggested abstention when the branches were in agreement and scrutiny when they were opposed, a politics-reinforcing political question doctrine suggests the opposite, allowing live debates to continue while scrutinizing political settlements. In so doing, it brings pluralism and politics back into the political question analysis, encouraging democracy rather than deference.
      PubDate: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 12:00:47 +000
       
 
 
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: 54.81.42.111
 
About JournalTOCs
API
Help
News (blog, publications)
JournalTOCs on Twitter   JournalTOCs on Facebook

JournalTOCs © 2009-2016