Digital Collections @ Suffolk
Not a member yet
8574 research outputs found
Sort by
2015 Suffolk University commencement program, Law School
Get PDFSuffolk University commencement programs detail the location, date, order of exercises, academic honors, speakers, administration, graduates, and other related information. Unless otherwise indicated, programs cover graduate and undergraduate ceremonies for all schoolshttps://dc.suffolk.edu/comm/1183/thumbnail.jp
Suffolk University Undergraduate Academic Catalog, College of Arts and Sciences and Sawyer Business School, 2015-2016
Get PDFThis catalog contains information for the undergraduate programs in the College of Arts and Sciences and the Sawyer Business School. The catalog is a PDF version of the Suffolk website, so many pages have repeated information and links in the document will not work.
The catalog is keyword searchable by clicking ctrl+f. A-Z course descriptions are also included here as separate PDF files with lists of CAS and SBS courses. Please contact the Archives if you need assistance navigating this catalog or finding information on degree requirements or course descriptions.https://dc.suffolk.edu/cassbs-catalogs/1170/thumbnail.jp
The Victims\u27 Court? A Study of 622 Victim Participants at the International Criminal Court
Get PDFWhen the International Criminal Court (ICC) was created in 1998, its founders hailed it as a “victims’ court,” one that would give survivors of mass atrocity an influential voice in the administration of justice. In the nearly two decades since its establishment, thousands of victims have been registered as “victim participants,” and thousands more have applied to the court for acceptance. However, there is now widespread agreement, both inside and outside of the court, that the ICC victim participation programs need reform. Court staff and outside observers have argued that current levels of outreach, care, and support are inadequate and incorporation of the views of so many victims is unworkable. Both defense and prosecution teams have also questioned whether victims’ representations, filings, and testimony have sometimes had an adverse effect on the fairness of ICC trials.
But what of the victim participants themselves? What motivated these men and women to become victim participants? Was it to tell their story and to have it acknowledged by the court? Did they wish to see the accused punished? Or was it more important to receive reparations for the harms they suffered? What did they think of the process of becoming a victim participant? What were their perceptions of the court and how it operated? How were their interactions with court staff? And did they have security or safety concerns?
To explore these and other questions, we interviewed ICC victim participants in four countries where the ICC had initiated investigations and prosecutions of serious international crimes — Uganda, Democratic Republic of Congo, Kenya, and Côte d’Ivoire. Our interviews with 622 victim participants and dozens of key informants strongly suggest that the ICC has reached a critical juncture in its victim participation program. It is our view that the court must either invest more resources and think more creatively about how it can meet the pragmatic and psychosocial needs of victim participants in its present form or revamp the program entirely. Despite admirable efforts by ICC staff, both in The Hague and in victims’ home countries, most victim participants, our findings indicate, have only a rudimentary knowledge of the ICC and its mandate. They want more contact with the court, are deeply frustrated by the slow pace of the proceedings, and expect to receive individual reparations. What remains to be seen is if the ICC (and the states that support it) can make the necessary reforms to meet these expectations
Competitive Orders, the Final Monopoly, and the Second Most Important Invention in History
No full textMonopolies matter. Competition is now being introduced at a brisk pace by federal government orders and rules in the country’s last major monopoly industry, electric power. The federal government promotes greater competition in power markets When that competition is contrary to state policy that preserves utility monopolies, the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution can be used to preempt any state law contrary to federal law. However, federal courts have recently stricken some of these federal initiatives as extending beyond federal legal jurisdiction.Independently, some states are using their separate authority over retail aspects of their monopoly utilities to forcefully resist the federal government’s move for more competition. Some states promote in-state commerce in power favoring their in-state power and industries, discriminating against out-of-state power. Whether and how the law is used to maintain monopoly or foster greater competition in power forms the analytic narrative of this article, parsing significant legal friction between state and federal regulatory law. In a bifurcated state-federal system of U.S. governance, introducing competition is not a straightforward regulatory exercise or a seemless regulatory fit. This article navigates the nature of monoply, interstate commerce, and the friction in transition to 21st century competition in power in America
Towards the Law of Legal Services
No full textImagine that someone asks you how legal services are regulated in the United States. You might answer that lawyers need a license in the jurisdictions where they intend to practice, typically after graduating from an ABA-accredited law school and passing the bar examination. You could explain that lawyers are governed by rules of professional conduct and subject to discipline, including disbarment, for failing to comply. You also might mention the growing patchwork of state and federal regulations that govern lawyer behavior. Each of these answers offers a slightly different perspective on the regulation of legal services, but they share one common feature: they are all about lawyers. This Article contends that the current lawyer-based regulatory framework should be reimagined if we hope to spur more innovation and expand access to justice. Rather than focusing on the so-called “law of lawyering” – the body of rules and law regulating lawyers – this Article suggests that we need to develop a broader “law of legal services” that authorizes, but appropriately regulates, the delivery of more legal and law-related assistance by people who do not have a J.D. degree and do not work alongside lawyers. For example, the Washington Supreme Court recently adopted a framework for allowing specially educated and separately regulated professionals – Limited License Legal Technicians (LLLTs) – to deliver a narrow range of family law services without a traditional law license. Some observers predict that LLLTs will be able to offer assistance at a lower cost than lawyers and improve access to legal services. This type of regulatory reform, which falls outside the law of lawyering, illustrates the growing importance and potential utility of the law of legal services. The idea of looking beyond the law of lawyering for ways to encourage innovation is conceptually different from many recent calls for regulatory reform, which tend to focus on expanding opportunities for lawyers and nonlawyers to work together through alternative business structures (ABSs). To be sure, ABSs are a potentially important development, but they are necessarily a creature of the law of lawyering. Consider, for example, the authorization of ABSs under the United Kingdom’s Legal Services Act (LSA). Passed in 2007, the LSA requires ABSs to have a lawyer manager, provides detailed regulations about a lawyer’s role in the ABS, and explains the role nonlawyers can play relative to lawyers. The LSA does not purport to regulate nonlawyers who want to deliver legal services completely apart from the legal profession. In other words, reforms focused on ABSs overlook regulatory innovations outside the law of lawyering – like the LLLT program – that hold the promise of an even greater impact on legal services. For too long, regulatory reforms have focused primarily on the limited options available within the law of lawyering. By looking beyond that body of law, we can unlock the innovative potential of new providers who are capable of delivering legal services to those who need them. In this way, the law of legal services can safely expand the public’s options for addressing many legal needs, and it can do so in ways overlooked by conventional regulatory reform efforts
Trust v. Law (In a Box): Do Organizational Forms Really Make a Difference?
Get PDFIn this contribution to the University of Illinois College of Law’s 2013 Larry Ribstein Memorial Symposium, I assess Professor Ribstein’s approach to both to trust and the “uncorporation.” My thesis is that his disciplinary commitment to a transaction cost economics model resulted in an overstatement of the extent to which business association forms matter in the real world. In contrast to Professor Ribstein’s view that mandatory law (which includes corporate law) “crowds out” trust (implicitly making uncorporations more amenable to trust), I see the orderliness of modern and abstract business structures (of any kind) as distinct from, yet operating at the same time and in the same space as, the usual gamut, for better or worse, of human emotions. Even if, as a matter of economic theory, uncorporations do a better job of corporations in permitting owners to control manager agency costs, the theory leaves out (for otherwise good reasons inherent in doing any kind of rigorous science) virtues like trust and vices like greed, fear, panic, all of which seem just as likely to operate in the uncorporate as the corporate setting
Suffolk University Undergraduate Academic Catalog, College of Arts and Sciences and Sawyer Business School, 2014-2015
Get PDFThis catalog contains information for the undergraduate programs in the College of Arts and Sciences and the Sawyer Business School. The catalog is a pdf version of the Suffolk website, so many pages have repeated information and links in the document will not work.
The catalog is keyword searchable by clicking ctrl+f. A-Z course descriptions are also included here as separate pdf files with lists of CAS and SBS courses. Please contact the Archives if you need assistance navigating this catalog or finding information on degree requirements or course descriptions.https://dc.suffolk.edu/cassbs-catalogs/1168/thumbnail.jp
Pentagon Preemption: The 5-Sided Loss of Energy and Power
No full textStates have attempted recently to regulate the unique form of electric energy as to its:· Place – forcing power generation to locate in the state or leave the state· Price – Providing a higher price for certain power generated in the state or requiring utilities and their ratepayers to pay above market prices for certain power· Regulatory credit value -- Providing greater credits for in-state power or fuelSome federal courts have struck state regulation of energy and climate change-related renewable technologies as constituting a violation preempted under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution in five dimensions. State regulation has been found by some courts to cross illegally a “bright line” established by the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution. This article dissects and analyzes what could be characterized as a pentagon of preemption through recent federal court decisions. The article analyzes in detail both it “inside” dimensions where in-state power is favored compared to out-of-state power, and its exterior dimensions where states attempt to keep certain power outside the state. The article analyzes the impacts of preempted power sector decisions how the sector will evolve under law
Carbonite Legal Conflict in California
No full textThis Article thaws several legal layers of California carbonite, tranche- by-tranche, and examines the legal fabric. First, in Section II we examine federal Constitutional challenges to California’s A.B. 32 and sustainable energy statutes under the Supremacy Clause. Section III analyzes litigation against California carbon control pursuant to the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. Section IV analyzes challenges to the California regulation pursuant to state law violations, distinguishing those which proceed from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and those which utilize other state administrative laws to challenge California’s carbon choices and implementation. Section V examines the trilogy of litigation set forth in Sections II –IV as to next steps and implications for state policy
Suffolk University Law School Alumni Magazine, winter 2014
Get PDFhttps://dc.suffolk.edu/slam/1022/thumbnail.jp