Touro College: Digital Commons @ Touro Law Center
Not a member yet
3484 research outputs found
Sort by
Jewish Ethics
No full textEssays on Jewish Ethics in:
Chapter 2 Introduction to Ethical Approaches in Data Science
Chapter 4 Machine Models in Cour
New York Mental Hygiene Law Article 81 Proceedings: A Proposal to Better Protect the Best Interests of an Alleged Incapacitated Person
Get PDFGuardianship proceedings under New York Mental Hygiene Law Article 81 are intended to protect the personal needs and property management of an alleged incapacitated person. A guardian appointed for a person is responsible for making decisions in line with the best interests and wishes of his or her ward. While guardians serve a very important purpose, the current procedures of guardianship proceedings allow too much room for family members to bring a proceeding without the alleged incapacitated person’s best interests in mind. Often, people bring guardianship proceedings to fish for information on family members or to circumvent a future Surrogate’s Court proceeding. These reasons are not in accordance with the purpose of guardianship proceedings. New York Mental Hygiene Law Article 81, as it stands, allows too much room for people to bring guardianship proceedings for reasons outside the intent and purpose of the proceeding. Recognizing the sensitive nature of these proceedings, the legislature should amend the statute to protect alleged incapacitated persons from proceedings brought without their best interests in mind
Using Youtube to Explain Housing
Get PDFIn 2021, the author ran for Borough President of Manhattan, New York. The author tried to his scholarship into his campaign by producing over twenty Youtube videos, most of which addressed land use and housing policy. The article describes the videos, and evaluates their usefulness
Supreme Court Legitimacy Under Threat? The Role of Cues in How the Public Responds to Supreme Court Decisions
Get PDFUnderstanding how the public views the Court and its rulings is crucial to assessing its institutional stability. However, as scholars note, “People are broadly supportive of the court and believe in its ‘legitimacy’—that is, that Supreme Court rulings should be respected and followed. But we don’t know that much about whether people actually agree with the case outcomes themselves.” In this article, we highlight empirical research investigating the factors that affect public agreement with Court decisions, highlighting recent developments from our work. At the onset, it is to note that the public generally hears about the Court’s decisions from media sources, not from the Court itself. Legal rulings are jam-packed with jurisprudential jargon and technical language that can be difficult for a lay audience to understand, which is why the general public is especially likely to rely on heuristics— cognitive shortcuts—as cues to help them decipher the ruling and assess whether they agree or disagree. So, what do we know about the heuristic cues that affect how the public receives Supreme Court rulings? And how is the Court faring after the controversial 2022 ruling in Dobbs and other recent politically volatile case decisions?
Depoliticizing the Supreme Court: How to Rein in Those Answerable to No One?
Get PDFThis Note will discuss some of the Commission’s findings and other interesting suggestions to determine whether it is possible to rein in the modern-day Court. Part I will explain the inherently political nature of the Supreme Court. Part II will briefly present how the Supreme Court acquired its power. Part III will discuss several prominent proposals for Supreme Court reform. Finally, Part IV will examine whether any recommendations may depoliticize the Court
Reflections on the Creation of the Jewish Law Institute at Touro
Get PDFHaving interpreted the topic of our panel liberally, what I want to talk about today is why Sam Levine, director of Touro’s Jewish Law Institute, is here at the conference, or, to put it differently—why does Touro Law School have a Jewish law institute?
The Apparition Amendment: The Potential Effects of the Addition of a Federal Equal Rights Amendment to the United States Constitution in a Post-Dobbs United States
Get PDFThis Note will explore the feasibility of amending the federal Constitution to add an Equal Rights Amendment, and will outline previous attempts to pass such an amendment. It will also explore the potential ramifications of the additions of such an amendment. This Note will also inspect the language of Equal Rights Amendments within State constitutions and discuss what language ought to be included should a federal amendment be published in light of the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs. Part one will consider the legal viability of the Equal Rights Amendment of 1972 today. Part two will explore the levels of judicial scrutiny applied to laws which call for disparate treatment of Americans and how an ERA might be interpreted and explore the effects that an Equal Rights Amendment could have on Supreme Court decisions post-Dobbs. Finally, part three will consider the legitimacy an ERA might enjoy and explore the language which should be included within the amendment
