Geological Observatory of Coldigioco
PennState, The Dickinson School of Law: Penn State Law eLibraryNot a member yet
7581 research outputs found
Sort by
Omnibus Objection to Motion to Authorize Requests for Production of Documents
No full textOmnibus objection to motion pursuant to Rule 2004 seeking an order authorizing requests for production of documents directed to debtor and an adjournment of the disclosure statement hearing, filed February 17, 2021
Order Granting Century\u27s Motion for Production of Documents Directed to Debtor
No full textOrder granting Century\u27s motion pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 2004 seeking an order authorizing requests for production of documents directed to the debtor, filed March 3, 2021
Federalism, Democracy, and the 2020 Election
No full textIn the aftermath of the 2020 election, the United States has experienced an anti-democratic crisis, with a chief executive attempting to delegitimize the general election and declare victory in an election that all impartial observers stated he lost. In comparative terms, the U.S. election system has been much maligned – it is highly localized and partisan, and lacks the independent, apex institutions such as electoral tribunals that are characteristic of many modern democracies. This brief essay builds off our recent joint work on federalism to argue that state and local governments, which administer elections and have refuted claims of widespread voter fraud, are serving as important bulwarks against this threat. By separating and dispersing the functions of governance—the day to day work of governing—U.S. federalism provides protection against authoritarianism. The decentralization of authority over elections offers one particularly dramatic example of this dynamic in action. Indeed, the U.S. model of dispersing core functions, although messy and costly in other ways, may have important advantages in some contexts over the alternative model of centralized, apex institutions, especially by reducing vulnerability to capture
ARBITRABILITY OR DELEGATION: A COMMENT ON SEIU LOCAL 121RN V. LOS ROBLES REG\u27L MED. CTR.
No full textOn Assessing Trustworthy AI in Healthcare: Machine Learning as a Supportive Tool to Recognize Cardiac Arrest in Emergency Calls
No full textIncreasing Substantive Fairness and Mitigating Social Costs in Eviction Proceedings: Instituting a Civil Right to Counsel for Indigent Tenants in Pennsylvania
No full textThe U.S. Constitution provides criminal defendants the right to a court-appointed attorney but gives no similar protection to civil litigants. Although federal law does not supply any categorical rights to counsel for civil litigants, all 50 states have instituted the right in at least one category of civil law that substantially impacts individuals’ rights. Since 2017, several U.S. cities have enacted such a right for tenants facing eviction. In so doing, these cities responded to American families’ increasing rent burden, the recent publication of nationwide eviction data, the sociological research concerning the impact of eviction, and the lack of procedural and substantive fairness for tenants in court. The COVID-19 pandemic has only exacerbated the urgency for this right.
This Comment will recommend that the Pennsylvania legislature enact the nation’s first statewide civil right to counsel for tenants in eviction proceedings, given the support in case law and anticipated benefits to individuals and communities. This Comment explores the unique challenges and opportunities Pennsylvania faces in implementing tenants’ right to counsel, based on its demographics, its existing legal services infrastructure, and its largely rural geography. Additionally, this Comment overviews the implementation and results from similar programs in other jurisdictions. This Comment concludes by proposing concrete steps and raising abstract considerations for making aspirational justice a reality for tenants facing eviction in Pennsylvania