Geological Observatory of Coldigioco
PennState, The Dickinson School of Law: Penn State Law eLibraryNot a member yet
7581 research outputs found
Sort by
EB-5 VISAS: SELLING CITIZENSHIP?
No full textThis article analyzes the EB-5 Investor Visa Program, specifically discussing whether this program could be considered a means of selling of United States citizenship and, conversely, how it may be beneficial to the U.S. economy. This will be done by examining the EB-5 Program requirements and the contributions it has made to the United States. On one hand, the EB-5 Program provides a direct path to citizenship if an immigrant can invest enough money in a U.S. company. On the other hand, the economic benefits that result from the EB-5 program are vast, stimulating the U.S. economy. Conversely, President Trump’s “gold card” proposal is an example of an overt selling of citizenship that only requires a monetary contribution with no job creation requirement, deepening the discourse on the “selling” of U.S. citizenship
Access, Welfare, and Lawsuits: Restoring Reproductive and Economic Autonomy Post-\u3ci\u3eDobbs\u3c/i\u3e
No full textAccess to abortion and increased poverty for women and children are inversely correlated: as access to abortion decreases, feminine and child poverty increase. Women who try to access abortions are more likely to already be mothers, and more likely to be living below the poverty line. In post-Dobbs America, abortion is illegal or severely restricted in approximately half of the states. In states where abortion access is most restricted, women and children experience poverty at the highest rates in the nation. The Supreme Court majority that decided Dobbs chose to ignore the connection between abortion and poverty. In doing so, they also ignored their own legal precedent. Specifically, in 1992’s Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the Court based its decision on the connection between abortion access and women’s economic agency. The Casey Court recognized that reproductive autonomy is critical to women’s overall life planning, most importantly their financial stability. The Dobbs dissenters called out this cognitive dissonance demonstrated by the Dobbs majority, which essentially rejected as irrelevant the overwhelming empirical data on reproductive rights and economic stability for women.This article is the first to document the law and policy strategies that collectively increase abortion access and reduce feminine and child poverty. Innovative approaches like the 2023 Texas lawsuit by women who almost died because they were denied abortions are yielding results that directly support women’s economic autonomy. State legislatures and governors are legally enshrining women’s rights to access abortion and doctors’ and nurses’ rights to provide abortions. And voters are going to the polls in droves to protect abortion access, with victories in every state where it was on the ballot in the two years since Dobbs. This article chronicles those abortion access strategies and more, including the increasing importance of medication abortion, which remains vulnerable to legal challenges despite the Supreme Court’s 2024 dismissal of the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine’s lawsuit for lack of standing.Grappling with the reality that Dobbs removed the constitution-al right to abortion recognized by Roe and Casey, this article traces the history of the abortion rights battle from the Supreme Court’s decisions in Roe in 1973 through Casey in 1992 to Dobbs in 2022. In this recounting, the article contextualizes reproductive autonomy within women’s economic rights, which developed significantly during that same time. This article concludes with optimism. Women’s and children’s financial health are compromised generally by Dobbs, but negative outcomes are not inevitable. Strategies abound to protect and even increase abortion access, and the article describes those in detail. The article also highlights social welfare policies that mitigate feminine and child poverty. The law and policy landscape for women and children economically is changing for the better despite the Dobbs decision, and the momentum must continue. Focusing on these supportive approaches offers pathways to protect the financial futures of women and children in the wake of Dobbs
Artificial Intelligence & FINRA Arbitration Awards: Utilizing AI and Arbitral Analytics to Uncover FINRA Arbitration Award Patterns
No full text
The Wrongly Read Right: Insurrection and the Second Amendment Right to Bear Arms
No full textSeveral judges and scholars have interpreted the Second Amendment as creating a right to bear arms to facilitate armed resistance against the government whenever it threatens to impose tyranny. These arguments have been made in books, scholarly articles, and court decisions. Many of the proponents of the pro-armed insurrection interpretation of the Second Amendment root this point of view in the history of the right to bear arms in the Anglo-American legal tradition. This Article argues that the Second Amendment does not create a right to bear arms to resist government authority because such a right is inconsistent with several provisions of the Constitution. Interpreting the Amendment to create such a right ignores 18th-century conceptions of natural rights and the relationship between the citizen and the state held by many in the Founding Generation. The Article advocates for a more coherent view of the Second Amendment: that the Amendment represents an attempt to commit the United States to a model of defense with broad citizen participation, not the creation of a constitutional right to armed resistance to federal and state governments
