16885 research outputs found
Sort by
Jury Bias Resulting in Indefinite Commitment: Expanding Procedural Protections in SVP Civil Commitment Proceedings Under the Mathews Test
Get PDFTwenty states, the District of Columbia, and the federal government have enacted Sexually Violent Predator (SVP) laws that permit the civil commitment of sex offenders. Under these laws, imprisoned sex offenders serving criminal sentences are transferred to treatment facilities and held indefinitely. As one individual describes civil commitment, “It’s worse than prison. In prison I wasn’t happy, but I was content because I knew I had a release date.” An estimated 5,400 individuals are currently civilly committed under these laws.
This Note argues that such laws do not adequately protect respondents’ due process rights. To that end, this Note proposes a more rights-protective application of Mathews to expand procedural protections for respondents in SVP civil commitment proceedings and offers two additional procedures to better protect respondents’ rights
Confronting Eugenics Means Finally Confronting Its Ableist Roots
Get PDFIn September 2020, a whistleblower complaint was filed alleging that hysterectomies are being performed on women at an immigration detention center in alarmingly high rates. Regrettably, forced sterilizations are part of the nation’s long-standing history of weaponizing reproduction to subjugate socially marginalized communities. While public outrage in response to the whistleblower complaint was swift and relentless, it largely failed to acknowledge how eugenic ideologies and practices, including compulsory sterilizations, are ongoing and deeply entrenched in ableism. Indeed, a conversation that recognizes the ways in which eugenics continues to target people with disabilities is long overdue.
This Article contextualizes how eugenics has targeted people with disabilities over time, the ways in which these ideologies and practices persist, and why analysis and advocacy concerning eugenics—including the current abuses at immigration detention centers—that do not center the experiences of people with disabilities, especially people with disabilities who are also members of other socially marginalized communities, are inadequate. First, the Article explores the evolution of eugenics and its harmful effects on people with disabilities in the United States, including contemporary examples of eugenic policies and practices. Next, it describes ableism and its relation to eugenics, highlighting how eugenics is deeply rooted in ableism. Finally, the Article concludes by suggesting a path forward that addresses the role of ableism in eugenics, specifically discussing normative legal and policy implications. It also considers opportunities for collaboration across communities
Weighing Pain: How the Harm of Immigration Detention Must Be Factored in Custody Decisions
Get PDFThe United States is currently in the midst of a “third wave of potential pretrial detention reform.” And while certain reforms are gaining traction in an effort to reduce pretrial criminal detention, efforts to do the same for immigration detention have lagged. Reformers and abolitionists make the case that immigration detention needs to be either restricted or eliminated entirely. Nonetheless, the number of people held in detention for immigration purposes rises year after year. Not only do the numbers of people in immigration detention grow, but the systems in place have grown less concerned with the harsh consequences of detention to the most vulnerable.
By turning a blind eye to detention harms, the immigration custodial system categorically subordinates the fundamental liberty interest against confinement to the government’s ambiguous interest in crime prevention
Taking the Lead: A Strategic Analysis of Stealthing and the Best Route for Potential Civil Plaintiffs to Recover
Get PDFA pervasive trend invading the sexual interactions between men and women, and homosexual men, is “stealthing” or “nonconsensual condom removal.” Stealthing garnered national and legal attention following Alexandra Brodsky’s article and study concerning the practice published in 2017. A typical stealthing case involves an initial, consensual sexual relationship between two parties predicated on the use of contraception. During the act, the partner removes the condom without the knowledge or consent of their sexual partner.
Despite its widespread impact, there has yet to be a criminal or civil case concerning nonconsensual condom removal brought in the United States, and the legislature has not proactively criminalized the conduct. The motives of the perpetrator as well as the harm suffered by the victims provide a compelling basis for a legal remedy, but it is difficult to predict how courts will respond when confronted with a stealthing case.
The primary goal for advocates of stealthing victims should be to obtain a legal remedy for their client with a secondary, long-term goal of gaining widespread recognition of the violation as being deserving of a specific cause of action. This Note will suggest that the best way to insure both the short-term and long-term goals is not through the creation of a new tort to address stealthing, but by using the existing precedent of battery as the legal basis for stealthing claims
Reimagining Civil Case Management
No full textCourt rules are necessary, but insufficient by themselves to address problems of cost and delay. Instead, state courts today are embracing a considerably broader view of civil case management, one that encompasses the total constellation of court rules, business practices, culture and governance, and staffing and technology infrastructure. Effective case management now recognizes the importance of five core components that are necessary to achieve timely, cost-effective, and procedurally fair justice: (1) triage to ensure that cases receive attention proportional to their needs; (2) process simplification to remove procedural barriers that unnecessarily complicate litigation; (3) stakeholder engagement to ensure clear communication about case management objectives at every stage of the litigation; (4) effective use of court staffing and technology resources; and (5) an ongoing commitment to data management and performance management. Finally, it is critically important that effective case management not be viewed as an end in itself, but rather the means to achieve the ultimate goal of greater justice for all litigants served by the courts.
This abstract has been taken from the author\u27s introduction
Open Development Cambodia in Phnom Penh, Cambodia
No full textThis summer, I will conduct legal research to promote ODC\u27s mission of open, transparent, and apolitical information sharing. My work will focus on foreign direct investment in the oil and gas industry in Cambodia, highlighting social corporate responsibility, environmental impacts, and economic development
Central and Eastern European Law Institute in Prague, Czech Republic
No full textThis summer, I will assist in developing training materials for an international network of legal and judicial professionals working to implement more just processes in their home countries. CEELI is committed to advancing the Rule of Law through communication operations, programming, and research
An Evaluation Framework for Allied Legal Professional Programs: Assessing Improvements in Access to Justice
No full textThe American legal system has a civil access-to-justice gap, wherein many people with civil legal issues are unable to obtain legal assistance. People with civil legal issues who cannot afford an attorney frequently must proceed through the legal system on their own. As the number of Self-Represented Litigants (SRLs) grows, several jurisdictions have investigated the creation of an additional tier of legal service providers, who can give limited legal assistance at a lower price than attorneys. For the purposes of this report, we will refer to these service providers as Allied Legal Professionals (ALPs). ALP programs can involve a wide range of provider certification models, from a month-long training process to become a technician to a years-long combination of legal education, examinations, and work experience. ALP programs are sometimes controversial, with stakeholders raising concerns about the effectiveness and sustainability of the new legal roles.
Section 1 of this report discusses the primary considerations that courts should take into account as they develop new ALP programs. Section 2 provides an evaluation framework describing the data and analyses needed to evaluate the extent to which an ALP program is meeting its primary goals. In many cases, a valid and useful evaluation of the ALP program will depend on courts preparing to collect the right data before the program has launched. It is therefore crucial that courts proactively prepare for a complete evaluation process from the outset.
This abstract has been taken from the authors\u27 executive summary