9150 research outputs found
Sort by
The Indecency of the Communications Decency Act § 230: Unjust Immunity for Monstrous Social Media Platforms
No full textThe line between First Amendment protection and the innovation of social media platforms is hazy at best. Not only do these platforms increasingly encompass the lives of many individuals, but they provide incredible new opportunities to interact from near and far, through sharing photographs, videos, and memories. The Internet provides countless outlets that are available at the tip of users’ fingers: thriving forums to communicate nearly whenever and wherever desired. Users effortlessly interact on these platforms and are consistently exposed to numerous forms of speech, including messages through posts, chat room discussions, videos, polls, and shared statements. From 2010 to 2017, the number of social media users worldwide has increased from 0.97 billion to 2.46 billion, respectively.1 These numbers are expected to grow as high as 3.02 billion in the year 2021.2 Undoubtedly, an unbelievably large number of individuals are exposed daily to these leading-edge speech forums—many of whom are unaware of the inadequacy of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (“Section 230”).3 This Article will address its history of creation and past case law, and provide a thorough analysis of its need to be revised. Moreover, this Article will specifically speak to the manner in which it should be revised in order to ensure protection to users of social media platforms who encounter situations in which they seek legal remedies for the need to remove unlawful material
International Law of Nuclear Weapons Nonproliferation: Application to Non-State Actors
Get PDFInternational legal responses to the threat of nuclear terrorism by non-state actors have been many but often inconsistent, inadequate, and legally unsound. This Article argues in favor of resorting to successfully-implemented methods of dealing with similar crimes. International law has already expanded from its original statist conceptions and scope to include individuals, such as in international human rights norms and international humanitarian laws. In the latter, in particular, the law has expanded in the context of both international and non-international armed conflict. This Article argues that the advancement of law in these areas can lend much to efforts to bring nuclear terrorism within the scope of International Criminal Court, from whose jurisdiction this crime is currently excluded. This Article also recommends purposefully elevating the prohibition against possession and use of nuclear weapons by non-state actors to jus cogens, making such acts international crimes of the type that do not necessarily require state consent for prosecution by an international tribunal
Do You Trust Me(dia)?: How Students Perceive and Identify Fake News
Get PDFSocial media has become an increasingly popular source of news among young adults. However, with the rise of “fake news,” credibility comes into question and young adults are left on their own to determine which news is real and which is false. Two focus groups were employed in this study to gain a greater understanding of how college students aged 18-24 determine what news to trust on social media and the factors that impacted those decisions. Young adults in that age group trust news found on social media based on a variety of factors including the person that is sharing the news, the particular social media site it comes from, and the ability to verify the news with other alternative sources
Rudolph Giuliani and the Ethics of Bullshit
Get PDFLawyers are communicators. They communicate with clients, courts, adversaries, juries, witnesses, and the public. Lawyers have a special responsibility for the quality of justice. Their communications, therefore, are hedged by various ethical rules to ensure that their statements are knowledgeable, truthful, respectful, and not prejudicial to the administration of justice. But lawyers are not always knowledgeable of the facts. In fact, they sometimes behave disrespectfully, and stray from the truth. False statements by lawyers may be made unwittingly, sometimes intentionally, and sometimes with an indifference, even a contempt for the truth. Discourse of the latter kind may be characterized as bullshit.
Bullshit is more prevalent in our culture than ever. Expanded forms of electronic communication and the ability of everybody to be an expert on almost everything probably accounts for so much more bullshit. The proliferation of bullshit in our culture generally is also reflected in an increase in bullshit by lawyers. Indeed, the investigation of President Donald Trump by Special Counsel Robert Mueller produced a dizzying array of unusual public statements by his personal lawyer Rudolph Giuliani that may be regarded as bullshit. Giuliani\u27s statements invite consideration of the following questions: Do the rules of professional ethics cover attorney bullshit? If so, how much bullshit may a lawyer utter before crossing an ethical line? Assuming the ethics rules apply, are professional disciplinary bodies capable of exposing lawyer bullshit
Healing The Healer: Understanding and Promoting Resilience Among Mental Health Clinicians
No full textIn recent years, the notion of resilience has become a very popular area of study within the mental health field. The resilient individual is one who is able to effectively deal with challenges and crises, which makes resilience an important concept among mental health practitioners. Yet there is no single, agreed upon definition of resilience, which can hinder the impact of such research. The present study explores the various definitions of research through the lens of the mental health clinician by asking questions related to the concept of resilience. Results indicate that mental health practitioners have varied definitions of resilience, but tend to practice building up their own resilience and that of their patients in similar ways. These strategies are explored in detail throughout the study
Humanizing Work Requirements for Safety Net Programs
Get PDFThis Article explores the political and policy appeal of work requirements for public benefit programs and concludes that inclusion of such requirements can be a reasonable design choice, but not in their current form. This Article’s proposals attempt to humanize these highly controversial work requirements while acknowledging the equity concerns they are designed to address. Drawing on expansive definitions of “work” found in guidance published by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (“CMS”) and in various state waiver applications, this Article proposes that work requirements be approved for Medicaid (as well as other benefit programs) only if they encompass various forms of unpaid but intrinsically valuable activities. This Article also proposes that the requirements be converted from a punitive eligibility precondition that can result in the termination of Medicaid coverage into an incentive program. To incentivize people to engage in “work” activity, this Article proposes that any activity engaged in for purposes of Medicaid (or any other benefit program that utilizes similar work requirements) count as earned income for purposes of the Earned Income Tax Credit (“EITC”) and also count toward quarters of coverage for purposes of the Social Security and Medicare programs. This design would incentivize lower income individuals to work or engage in socially-valuable activities, could strengthen popular support for Medicaid by incorporating social insurance features, and would help address the longstanding problem of valuing socially important unpaid work such as caregiving
