SelectedWorks @ Chapman University Dale E. Fowler School of Law
Not a member yet
    1539 research outputs found

    Culture Change

    No full text

    Suing the President

    No full text

    Changes in the Legal Profession and the Progress of Female Lawyers

    No full text

    Amending the First Amendment

    No full text

    Introduction to Dodge v. Ford Motor Co.: Primary Source and Commentary Material

    No full text
    Original documents in historic cases provide a uniquely valuable perspective on the cases themselves and the surrounding circumstances and history that contribute to the development of legal principles. Understanding that access to historical materials can be difficult, the Chapman Law Review has endeavored to collect source documents regarding the case of Dodge v. Ford Motor Co. After a short introduction to this compilation, including a discussion of research methodologies, several key historical documents are reproduced and transcribed that we hope will aid future researchers

    Binary Searches and the Central Meaning of the Fourth Amendment

    No full text
    Fourth Amendment jurisprudence is frequently accused of doctrinal incoherence. A primary reason is the persistence of two competing conceptions of “unreasonable” search and seizure. The first is libertarian in character; it understands the Fourth Amendment’s command of reasonableness as establishing a constitutional boundary on investigative powers. On this view, the prohibition on unreasonable search and seizure keeps society free by limiting the government’s investigative reach. The second conception understands the Fourth Amendment\u27s prohibition as freedom against unjustified government intrusion. This conception of reasonableness is essentially pragmatic in character, balancing liberty and law-enforcement interests. This article interrogates these competing conceptions by focusing whether a “binary search” should be regarded as unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment. Binary search techniques reveal no more than whether there is probable cause to believe that an otherwise concealed area contains contraband or other evidence of criminality. In a binary search, the competing conceptions of the Fourth Amendment point toward different outcomes. On the libertarian conception, the Fourth Amendment would regard as unreasonable an effectively unlimited power to scrutinize otherwise private space through binary techniques. A libertarian Fourth Amendment demands limitations on binary searches. On the pragmatic conception, a binary search that discloses nothing more than the probable presence of contraband is supported by powerful law-enforcement interests, and is unlikely to threaten any legitimate liberty interest of the innocent. Therefore, it could readily be regarded as constitutionally reasonable even if unsupported by individualized suspicion of wrongdoing. As technology advances, the binary search will become increasingly important, as increasingly sophisticated and focused technologies are developed that can precisely target the presence of contraband or other evidence of criminality in both real and cyberspace. In last Term\u27s decision in Florida v. Jardines, the Court considered a type of binary search – the use of a trained narcotics-detection dog. In Jardines, a bare majority embraced the libertarian conception. Writing that “[a]t the Amendment’s very core stands the right of a man to retreat into his own home and there be free from unreasonable governmental intrusion,” the Court held that “[t]he government’s use of trained police dogs to investigate the home and its immediate surroundings is a search within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment.” Jardines’s libertarianism, however, is stunted and incomplete. The Court’s holding can be readily circumvented by investigative techniques that stop short of a physical intrusion, and might even leave binary searches unrestricted if they are ultimately deemed constitutionally reasonable, even if considered a “search.” Indeed, given our current understanding of the scope of governmental regulatory power, the binary search demonstrates the absence of a coherent Fourth Amendment libertarianism. Searches with no potential to compromise the interests of the innocent – such as a binary search – are constitutionally unobjectionable in a regime that recognizes no legitimate interest in even the entirely “private” possession of items that the government may deem unlawful to possess. Thus, the persistence of the libertarian conception comes with the inevitable cost of a loss of conceptual coherence. Moving beyond the particulars of the binary-search debate, this article concludes that although the pragmatic conception leaves plenty of room for debate over the proper scope of investigative authority, only the pragmatic conception has any real power to rationalize Fourth Amendment jurisprudence, especially as it faces unparalleled challenges as a consequence of technological advance

    Law and Economic Development: A New Beginning?

    No full text

    The Transnational and Sub-National in Global Crimes

    No full text

    Lessons from the NBA Lockout: Union Democracy, Public Support, and the Folly of the National Basketball Players Association

    No full text
    By most accounts, the National Basketball Players Association (NBPA) — the union representing the players in the NBA — conceded a significant amount of money and other contractual terms in the new ten-year collective bargaining agreement (2011 Agreement) that ended the 2011 NBA lockout. Player concessions were predictable because the NBA’s economic structure desperately needed an overhaul. The magnitude of such concessions, however, was startling. The substantial changes in the division of basketball-related income, contract lengths and amounts, salary cap provisions, and revenue sharing rendered the NBA lockout — and the resulting 2011 Agreement — a near-complete victory for the owners. Several interpretations have been offered to explain the lopsided deal, including the financial strain on players during the lockout and the players’ emotional reactions to the negotiations. These justifications are intriguing, particularly in light of the racial overtones that marked the entire process. These explanations have significant merit, but they fail to completely account for why the NBA players agreed to such drastically unfavorable terms. This article provides a fuller analysis of how this surprising result came about. In doing so, it takes an interdisciplinary approach using communications and industrial relations scholarship that highlights the critical importance of intra-union communications, public relations campaigns, and union democracy. Through this analysis, this article not only assesses the missteps of the NBPA during the NBA lockout, but also provides guidance to professional sports unions for future collective bargaining negotiations during periods of labor unrest

    The Diaspora of Ethnic Economies: Beyond the Pale?

    No full text

    0

    full texts

    1,539

    metadata records
    Updated in last 30 days.
    SelectedWorks @ Chapman University Dale E. Fowler School of Law
    Access Repository Dashboard
    Do you manage Open Research Online? Become a CORE Member to access insider analytics, issue reports and manage access to outputs from your repository in the CORE Repository Dashboard! 👇