8227 research outputs found
Sort by
Police as Community Caretakers: Caniglia v. Strom
Get PDFWhat is the proper role of the police? That question has been at the forefront of debates about policing for quite some time, but especially in the past year. One answer, spurred by countless news stories about black people killed by law enforcement officers, is that the power of the police should be reduced to the bare minimum, with some in the Defund the Police movement calling for outright abolition of local police departments. Toward the other end of the spectrum is the notion that the role of the police in modern society is and must be capacious. Police should function as “community caretakers,” because “a police officer—over and above his weighty responsibilities for enforcing the criminal law—must act as a master of all emergencies, who is ‘expected to aid those in distress, combat actual hazards, prevent potential hazards from materializing, and provide an infinite variety of services to preserve and protect community safety.’”
That commodious language comes from the First Circuit Court of Appeals in the case of Caniglia v. Strom. The court relied on the “special role of the police in our society” to hold that police may enter the home of a suicidal individual to seize his guns, when he is not present, in the absence of consent, and without a warrant. As a matter of formal legal doctrine, the First Circuit purported to be applying what courts have long called the “community caretaker exception” to the Fourth Amendment rule that warrants are usually required to carry out a search of a home and the seizure of items in it.
The First Circuit’s holding did not stand for long, however. In an opinion written by Justice Clarence Thomas, a unanimous Supreme Court (not a common phenomenon these days) reversed the First Circuit, taking only four pages to do so (also unusual in recent years)
The Image of European Union Law in Bilateral Relations
Get PDFThe impact of foreign law on the development of national laws has been analyzed and vindicated in numerous studies in comparative legal literature. These studies typically focus on the two most prominent legal systems--common law (the Anglo-American system) and civil law (the Continental system). The historical reasons for this are clear, emanating from the fact that the world\u27s legal systems are based on these legal regimes and are amended in the spirit of changes made to them. Over the years, however, with the many effects of legal and economic globalization, legal systems have become a diverse mosaic which has appropriated doctrines and interpretations on legal issues drawn from various other legal traditions. One of the most prominent legal systems to emerge in recent years is that of the European Union (EU), currently the largest democratic bloc of countries in the world. Despite its relative novelty, EU law has great influence on the development of legal interpretation in many legal systems. This Study, which is laid out in two complementary Articles, is the first to empirically examine the influence that EU law had on the development of a non-EU country. These Articles take Israel as a case study on which normative conclusions can be drawn for other non-EU countries with whom the EU has established close bilateral legal, economic, cultural, and social relations. The importance and significance of comparative sources to the development of Israeli jurisprudence is expressed in local legislation and rulings
Chancery Court Dismisses Revlon Claims without Considering Directors\u27 Potential Corwin Defense
Get PDF
Pleading-Stage Dismissal via Corwin Denied to 34.8% Stockholder Alleged to Control Both Sides of Challenged Transaction
Get PDF
