bepress Legal Repository
Not a member yet
645042 research outputs found
Sort by
NYLS Blood Drive
No full textFebruary 21, 2024https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/student_organizations/1012/thumbnail.jp
The Fourteenth Amendment and the \u3cem\u3eVénus Noire\u3c/em\u3e
No full textThis Essay makes two points. The first is that originalism is not a promising path for progressive causes. The second is that as the Constitution is amended, the meaning of the entire document is altered, and earlier text should be interpreted in light of what has changed. But instead of making these observations in the usual law review style, I’m calling on a figure out of nineteenth-century art, the Vénus Noire, to serve as our companion and guide.
This abstract has been taken from the author\u27s introductory paragraphs
Latchman v. Hardnett
No full textIn this nonpayment proceeding, the tenant moved to dismiss due to lack of an active lease. The court dismissed the case, agreeing that under Second Department precedent, a nonpayment proceeding requires a valid rental agreement at the commencement of the action. Since the rent-stabilized lease last renewed in 2015, no active agreement existed at filing, and the landlord’s claim of an implied agreement based on subsidy recertifications was insufficient. Other issues raised by the tenant were dismissed as moot
Indefinite Detention Under Part XX.1 of the Criminal Code and Winko V. British Columbia
No full text“Indefinite Detention Under Part XX.1 of the Criminal Code and Winko v. British Columbia” is chapter 27 in a textbook titled Canadian Anthology on Mental Health and the Law. It draws on the author’s ten years as a legal member and alternate chair on the Ontario Review Board, as well as on her participation in a research study on perceptions of fairness in ORB proceedings, to provide critical comment on the procedural fairness and constitutionality of forensic detention for mentally disordered criminal offenders (i.e. not criminally responsible (NCR); unfit to stand trial (UST); and dual status offenders (DSO). An initial section outlines Part XX.1 of the Code and Winko’s principles of interpretation, which include fair treatment and the utmost dignity of those in forensic detention. That is followed by a discussion that tests the procedural fairness, including qualitative fairness, of ORB proceedings against those Winko, and exposes gaps in the system that undermine the fairness and perceived fairness of ORB hearings. This chapter turns to substantive questions about indefinite forensic detention, expressing doubt about the constitutionality of Part XX.1 and calling for re-consideration of Winko. The advocates the introduction of capping provisions – along the lines of those enacted as part of Part XX.1 but not proclaimed and then repealed – an imperative response to the problem of indefinite detention
