9747 research outputs found
Sort by
Under What Circumstances is “Caste” Likely to Be Useful as an Analytic Concept (and Should We Care)?
No full text
Crossing State Lines for Contested Health Care: The Case Against Extraterritoriality Within the United States
Full text linkInterference with the Democratic Process as Public Nuisance
Full text linkThis Article argues that the tort of public nuisance provides a vehicle for holding accountable those engaged in antidemocratic conduct. Recent history suggests that neither the criminal justice system nor Constitutional checks and balances are always up to the task. Following the 2020 election, some supporters of President Trump stormed the Capitol to prevent the counting of the electoral votes, tampered with election machines, and intimidated election workers and voters. Depending on the results of the 2024 election, criminal charges against Trump and some of his followers may be dismissed. The Senate failed to convict the President on articles of impeachment for instigating the January 6th insurrection, and the Supreme Court delayed Trump\u27s criminal trial, depriving voters of knowing the outcome, and then granted the former President expansive new immunity from prosecution. If Trump is not elected, it is nevertheless likely that our nation will again face similar attacks on democratic governance at some point in the future.
Courts and scholars agree that the tort of public nuisance protects against violations of rights held in common by members of the public. The rights of democratic participation comprise such rights. To mitigate concerns that the boundaries of the tort are vague, we suggest that courts initially protect only those rights clearly delineated by the Constitution, federal statutes, and well-defined common law. Our primary objective is not to expand the conduct deemed unlawful, but rather to assure that accountability remains when other remedies prove inadequate, or charges are declined, dismissed, or pardoned for illegitimate political reasons. State common law torts, including public nuisance, are largely immune from the immediate effects of extreme political movements. Either state attorneys general or private citizens who suffer a special injury have standing to file the action, and remedies include both damages and injunctive relief
Lethal Injection Secrecy Laws: A Cruel and Unusual Solution for the Preservation of Capital Punishment
Full text linkWho Teaches Consumer Law?
Full text linkThis paper reports on a survey of 31 law professors teaching consumer protection law conducted in connection with the Center for Consumer Law & Economic Justice at the UC Berkeley School of Law and the Center for Consumer Law at the University of Houston Law Center’s 2024 Teaching Consumer Law Conference. Surveys posed at previous editions of the Teaching Consumer Law Conference focused largely on what topics are covered in consumer law courses. The 2024 iteration of the survey instead explored responding professors’ goals in consumer law courses and experiences with and views on consumer law matters. Among the findings: nearly every respondent saw it as important that students hear arguments the professor disagreed with. While professors generally saw it as important that students learn the legal doctrines, professors as a group saw it as even more important that students learn problem-solving skills, how to work with statutes and regulations, and the policy justifications underlying the rules—suggesting that consumer law professors share the traditional view that a key purpose of law school is to teach students to think like lawyers. Two-thirds of the consumer law professors have represented a consumer in a dispute with a business while nearly half have represented a business in a consumer matter. Not one professor—not even those who had represented businesses--thought the country has too much consumer regulation while 70% thought it had too little