9747 research outputs found
Sort by
Legislative Design and the Controllable Costs of Special Legislation
Get PDFLegislation that singles out an identifiable individual for benefits or harms that do not apply to the rest of the population is called “special legislation.” In previous work, I have argued that special legislation is constitutionally suspect. In this Article, I explore the normative consequences of special legislation, assessing both the costs it imposes and the benefits that it can provide. Drawing on constitutional theory, public choice theory, and the history of special legislation, I argue that the enactment of special legislation is costly when it reflects the corruption of the legislative process and leads to low-quality legislation, unjustifiably unequal treatment, and legislative encroachment on the judicial and executive functions. By contrast, special legislation is normatively attractive when it addresses a problem unique to a particular location, when it addresses a matter of public concern, when it reduces rather than exacerbates disuniformity in the law, and when it provides relief for underrepresented political minorities. After considering these costs and benefits, I suggest modifications to the legislative process to diminish the costs associated with special legislation while still preserving its benefits
Under Armour v. Uncle Martian: A Case Study in Protecting American Trademarks in China Against Homegrown Squatters
Get PDF
Automated License Plate Readers: The Difficult Balance of Solving Crime and Protecting Individual Privacy
Get PDFHouston, We Have a Problem and It\u27s Your \u27Anti Hoarding\u27 Ordinance: The Legal Ramifications and Shortcomings of Houston\u27s Controversial Statute
No full textHoarding behavior and hoarding disorder affect between 2-5% of the population and present various legal dilemmas for communities. Unlike many areas that have opted for more supportive solutions, Houston, Texas, in a case of therapeutic jurisprudence gone awry, has created an ordinance, with criminal penalties, that many have described as “anti-hoarding”. The threat of criminal punishment is not necessarily an ethical, or legal, problem and may encourage those who hoard to seek help. But because hoarding behavior is a sign of mental illness, it is necessary to ensure that the law is properly addressing the needs of both the city and those who hoard within it.
The scant legal research on hoarding and housing law has undoubtedly influenced the decision-making that led to the ordinance’s creation. To be sure, the existing scholarship provides a thorough overview of how hoarding fits into the legal landscape. However, these articles fall short in demonstrating the ramifications on one’s housing that can result when hoarding is criminalized.
This essay provides a legal analysis and critique to Houston’s ordinance by exploring how the ordinance fits within therapeutic jurisprudence, Texas’ eviction procedures, and the reasonable accommodation provision within the Fair Housing Act. Pervading the essay is a reminder of the delicate psychology of hoarding and its impact on the individual. At its conclusion, the essay suggests that Houston form a hoarding task force to oversee the ordinance’s implementation. By illuminating this shadowy intersection of the law and psychology, Houston and other communities can learn how to more adequately address the many social and legal problems posed by hoarding
