Touro College: Digital Commons @ Touro Law Center
Not a member yet
3484 research outputs found
Sort by
Deplatformed: Social Network Censorship, The First Amendment, and the Argument to Amend Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act
Get PDF
The Harmful Addiction to the War on Drugs
Get PDFMost modern societies prohibit the use of addictive drugs such as cocaine and heroin. We contend this is a mistake. They should all be legalized, forthwith, since their usage constitutes a victimless crime. But more, we also maintain that these jurisdictions are actually addicted to these unjust and harmful laws since, no matter what the logic or the evidence about the perniciousness of this legislation, it still remains on the book
The Billion Dollar Industry That Has Never Paid Its Money-Makers: The NCAA’s Attempt at Compensation through Names, Images and Likeness
Get PDFThe National Collegiate Athletic Association (“NCAA”) has regulated collegiate sports for over one hundred years. The NCAA has long relied upon the principle of amateurism to prohibit college athletes from profiting from their name, image and likeness (“NILs”). However, recently this principle has drawn a lot of attention and has all but crumbled. States across the nation have passed legislation that will soon come into effect to bypass the NCAA bylaws and allow student athletes to profit from their NILs, even the United States Supreme Court has called the NCAA’s business model into question. This has left the NCAA with no choice but to pivot and allow athletes to profit from their NILs for the first time. This Note will explore the NCAA’s history of exploiting student-athletes for profit, and how their attitude towards the concept of NILs has changed overtime. This Note begins by looking at the NCAA’s business model and how they have turned themselves into a billion-dollar business that does not pay their money-makers, the athletes. Prior to addressing the various state legislations and federal proposals, this Note will also recount prior Supreme Court cases. Ultimately, this Note will propose standardized federal legislation to govern NIL laws
National Animal Abuse Registry Reform: To Be Effective and Provide Prospective, a National Animal Abuse Registry Must Be the Next Directive
Get PDFThe Limits of Equity
Get PDFEquity is a common buzzword in urban planning circles. However, nearly any land use decision can be justified as more equitable than the alternatives
Challenging Gender Discrimination in Closely Held Firms: The Hope and Hazards of Corporate Oppression Doctrine
Get PDFThe #MeToo Movement has ushered sexual harassment out of the shadows and thrown a spotlight on the gender pay gap in the workplace. Harassment and unfair treatment have, however, been difficult to extinguish. This has been true for all workers, including partners – those women who are owners in their firms and claim that they have suffered harassment or unfair treatment based on gender. That is because a partner’s lawsuit for discrimination often will suffer an insurmountable hurdle: plaintiff’s status as a partner in the firm means that they may not be considered an “employee” under the relevant employment discrimination statutes. This article discusses an underexplored and underutilized potential alternative in seeking a remedy for discrimination: oppression (or “freeze out”) doctrine in the closely held business.The article begins with a discussion of the current jurisprudence addressing when an owner is an employee for purposes of employment discrimination statutes. It also explores the doctrine of minority shareholder oppression, both as an instrument of enforcing fiduciary obligations and as a statutory mechanism to petition for dissolution or seek other equitable relief. The article then brings these subjects together by discussing how a female owner’s claim of discrimination or harassment fits into existing minority oppression doctrine, and by comparing the substantive requirements of discrimination claims and corporate oppression claims.Ultimately, this article concludes that one of the advantages of oppression doctrine is that it need not be framed in gender-based terms to succeed. Indeed, in discrimination cases it is often very difficult to prove that the employment decisions were based upon sex, and oppression doctrine bypasses this requirement. However, this advantage in any individual case may also prove to be a greater overall disadvantage because, without framing the claim in gender-based terms, the broader goals of workplace equality are not advanced