Digital Collections @ Suffolk
Not a member yet
8574 research outputs found
Sort by
Biden’s Options: Policy Recommendations on the US-China Trade War
Full text linkAs talks of unprecedented inflation and the long-term impact of the pandemic are on the rise in the United States, it is critical to understand how the foreign policy choices of the US Government ultimately impact its economy. This paper aims to evaluate the impact of the economic tensions between the US and China as a result of the ongoing US-China Trade War. To examine the viability of proposed options, a cost-benefit analysis of Biden’s policy options is implemented based on a framework of escalation, de-escalation, or modification of the current US-China economic policy initiative. The analysis of these proposals is rooted in overarching foreign policy objectives of the United States such as: the encouragement of economic prosperity in the domestic sphere, improvements in quality of life for the American people, and the maintenance of US leadership and credibility on a global scale. Ultimately, the best choice for the Biden administration is to move towards eventual, but not imminent de-escalation through the strategy of policy modification. The most optimal policy recommendation that adequately takes into account US priorities and responsibilities is the modification of trade strategies and adherence to the tariff status quo. While this strategy would be at the expense of the opportunity to enhance economic growth, it is more critical at the present to maintain the current balance of power between the US and China
Oral History Interview with Richard Torrisi (SOH-079 video recording and transcript)
Full text linkRichard Torrisi, Professor Emeritus of Finance and International Business, discusses his background, early academic career, and then his teaching and administrative roles at Suffolk University. He discusses his scholarship in economics and international business, including his Fulbright appointments in Poland and Slovakia. Professor Torrisi talks about the programs he helped develop in the Sawyer Business School, including travel seminars and creating partnerships locally and globally to contribute to the student experience. He concludes the interview discussing Suffolk’s role, reputation, and the direction in which he hopes it the university will continue.https://dc.suffolk.edu/soh/1051/thumbnail.jp
Criminal Procedure—Night at the Museum: The Balance Between Learning from History and Maintaining the Secrecy Surrounding Grand Jury Proceedings—Lepore v. United States (In Re Order Directing Release of Recs.), 27 F.4th 94 (1st Cir. 2022)
Full text linkEducation Law—A Child Left Behind: Exploring Failures in Effective IEP Implementation—Lamar Consol. Indep. Sch. Dist. v. J.T., 577 F. Supp. 3d 599 (S.D. Tex. 2021)
Full text linkEvidence - For the Sake of the Marriage: First Circuit\u27s Rejection of the Joint Participants Exception Complicates Criminal Prosecution of Married Co-Conspirators - United States v. Pineda-Matteo, 905 F.3d 13 (1st Cir. 2018)
Full text linkThe Case for Race: An Exploration of Whether the United States Olympic and Paralympic Committee Can Require Athletes to Sign Away Their Right to Protest
Full text linkEducation Law—IDEA Eligibility: Hindsight is 20/20—Lisa M. ex rel. J.M. v. Leander Indep. Sch. Dist., 924 F.3d 205 (5th Cir. 2019)
Full text linkAmerica’s Extraordinary and Compelling Problem: An Assessment of the Sentence Modification Process in the Federal District Courts and the Need to Remove the Bureau of Prison’s Gatekeeper Role
Full text linkThe Middle Ground of Products Liability Analysis
Full text linkThe area of products liability has been the subject of intense debate for the past half-century, perhaps never more strongly than the decades comprising the second half of the twentieth century. Specifically, the 1970s was the decade that introduced the judicial community to this debate. In the 1970s and a few decades prior, consumerism skyrocketed to levels never seen before in the United States and in the world. Logically, this drastic increase in consumerism came with a drastic increase in products liability lawsuits. Manufacturing companies and corporations were forced to pay damages to injured parties at levels they never came close to prior. As a result, they used their wealth and power to influence legislatures to change the law in their favor. Courts, unbeholden to special interests, took the opposite approach to counteract this imbalance. The result was a decades-long back and forth of extremism. Depending on the time period and depending on the jurisdiction in question, there were two extremes: one that regularly ruled against corporations with drastic variations in punitive damage amounts that accomplished little to deter wrongful conduct, one of the purposes of tort law, and one that regularly ruled against plaintiffs with unreasonable, unconstitutional reform statutes and evidentiary standards. Throughout the past half-century, there has been what amounts to a “tug-of-war” process in which the judicial and legislative branches of government, both at the federal and state level, have caused a back and forth paradigm from a pro-plaintiff mindset to a pro-corporation one. The ideal way for products liability analysis to operate lies on a “middle ground” which society has failed to come close to reaching. In Part One of this paper, the facets of the corporate interest of limiting the scope of products liability as well as the plaintiff interest of holding manufacturers accountable for the harm that their products cause will be analyzed and evaluated for their effects on society as a whole. A specific focus will be paid to the economic consequences of these factions’ policies. In Part Two, a “middle ground” solution will be proposed that limits the harms that both have inflicted throughout the years and maximizes the benefits that both have contributed. These solutions, if enacted, will lead to a greater understanding of the roles and expectations of manufacturers and consumers in the future, thereby eliminating the possibility of the contrivation of gray areas for exploitative purposes
