Geological Observatory of Coldigioco
PennState, The Dickinson School of Law: Penn State Law eLibraryNot a member yet
7581 research outputs found
Sort by
Human Trafficking in the Digital Era: Freedom of Speech Versus Freedom from Exploitation
No full text
The Reedy Creek Improvement District: A Comparative Analysis Underscoring the Problems in Hampering Special Districts
No full textIn 2022, the Florida legislature passed a bill that removed the administration of the Reedy Creek Improvement District, the special district governing the Walt Disney World Resort. The bill replaced it with the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District. Governor Ron DeSantis hailed this legislation as a success in reigning in a corporation operating with unchecked and unprecedented levels of governmental authority. Since its inception, however, the replacement administration has contended with claims of ethical violations, inefficiency, and unconstitutional enactment. Before the repeal of the Walt Disney World special district, special districts themselves were not often present in the Nation’s everyday thinking. But now that these recent events have shed more light on their existence and operation, many are asking questions about what they are and what they do. This Comment will explore the creation and subsequent repeal of the Reedy Creek Improvement District. It will also examine special districts in other states across the Nation to showcase a comparative analysis relating to the Walt Disney World special district. Finally, this Comment will ultimately argue that the Walt Disney World special district is rooted in national precedent and should be reinstated. Doing so will not only correct a legislative error but also strengthen the legitimacy of special districts in the United States
When Rights Require Permission: The Discriminatory History of Licensing Laws for Firearm Possession
No full textJust to Be Safe, Let’s Keep Ignoring What “Arms” Meant in 1791
No full textThe Supreme Court held in District of Columbia v. Heller and reaffirmed in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen that “arms,” referred to in the Second Amendment, are common weapons useful for lawful purposes. The majority argued that militiamen fought with whatever common weapons they had on hand for civilian purposes, such as self-defense and hunting. Therefore, under Heller, only those weapons are covered by the Second Amendment. However, Heller did little to ground the “self-defense” theory of “arms” in original public meaning or even actual history. Commonality and lawful purpose have proved difficult for lower courts to define, as evidenced by conflicting rulings on whether AR-15s are “arms” under the Second Amendment.
This Essay contends that Heller’s definition of “arms” is incorrect as a matter of history, which helps explain the struggle of lower courts to employ that definition. The philosophy, politics, and technology of the era suggest that the militia served a military function and therefore required military weapons. The militia were to be citizen-soldiers, protecting their communities, not simply engaging in self-defense. Consistent with that mission, the militia generally used military weaponry, often provided by their communities, states, or private groups. Early American policy relating to the militia focused on how to improve and regularize its weaponry for military ends. Civilian weapons used for self-defense or hunting were understood to be militarily useless and were only employed out of desperate necessity
Benefits Washing
No full textEmployee benefits often comprise between 24% and 26% of an employee’s total compensation. As such, it is important that people know what benefits companies actually offer. Unfortunately, instead of being transparent, numerous companies engage in what this author calls “benefits washing.” Benefits washing occurs when companies provide vague or misleading information about their employee benefits in an effort to make their benefits appear better than they are. The practice occurs in three primary ways: detail omission, attention deflection, and deceptive manipulation.
This Essay elaborates on what constitutes benefits washing. It presents numerous examples of America’s largest employers engaging in benefits washing, focusing on 401(k) plan benefits (due to the numerous variances allowed in such plans), paid parental leave, abortion related travel benefits, “free” training, and remote work. Next, it analyzes why benefits washing occurs. It then discusses the impact and harmful effects of benefits washing. This Essay concludes by describing the limitations of legal claims available to victims of benefits washing
