STU Scholarly Works (St. Thomas University)
Not a member yet
1001 research outputs found
Sort by
Human Trafficking in Finland
No full textHuman trafficking is one of the largest criminal industries in the world. Human trafficking, also referred to as modem-day slavery, ruthlessly intervenes with a person\u27s freedom and human dignity. It is a widespread phenomenon all over the world and no country is completely immune to it. Countries can act as places of source, transit or destination. The perpetrators take control of the victims and take away their freedom for the purpose of exploitation, prostitution and other sexual abuse, forced labor or trade in bodily organs. Victims have no control over their work, living conditions or movement, and cannot choose whether they work or not. This article focuses on trafficking in human beings in Finland using policy-oriented jurisprudence as guidance. To be able to understand the phenomenon of human trafficking in Finland, we will first define human trafficking as an international crime and then discuss the trade in human beings in Finland. Conflicting claims and perspectives of both claimants will be considered. After discussing past trends in decision concerning human trafficking, the article will focus on predicting future decisions. It will end by appraising past and future decisions, discuss alternatives, and present recommendations on how to prevent human trafficking and improve the situation of victims in the country
Ghosts Have Rights Too! A New Era in Contractual Rights: Third-Party Invocation in Forum Selection Clauses
No full textIn the wake of non-party adhesion becoming an increasingly large problem for the federal and state courts, this comment proposes a modification to the test set forth by Judge Posner in Raintree. This comment also makes a call to the Supreme Court for action in determining a ceiling standard for non-party invocation of forum selection clauses. Part II of this comment considers the direction of the Supreme Court in past decisions on forum selection clauses in general and the implications of these decisions on the future of the clauses. Part III discusses the relatively new question surrounding forum selection clauses with respect to non-party invocation of the clause and the issues it creates in general. Part IV discusses the test created by Judge Posner and the Raintree court, which suggests a compartmentalized approach to the issue. Part V further considers the Raintree test as a portion of a more cumulative test that breaks the analysis down to consider parties that have a relationship to the actual contract itself versus those with a relationship to the signatory parties of the contract. Part VI provides final conclusive thoughts and a call to the Supreme Court to take action and create a ceiling standard for nonparty invocation that may be followed by the lower courts
Rationality, Legitimacy, & the Law
No full textAmerican legal realism was committed to examining legal reasoning in terms of the actual experiences of judges. Because the realist project sought to use social science tools to examine human nature, the contemporary rise of cognitive neuroscience provides an occasion for reexamining legal realism\u27s foundational critique of the law. Realism\u27s attempt to examine the actual facts of Judicial behavior and to pursue a scientific description and prediction of judicial behavior appears to be a suitable vehicle for considering the relevance of cognitive neuroscience for legal theory. Cognitive neuroscience has provided convincing evidence for rejecting the traditional bifurcation between reason and emotion. Moreover, cognitive neuroscience has revealed key heuristic biases in human reasoning. As such, the dominant form of legal reasoning might rely on a flawed conception of rationality. Therefore this flawed understanding may have implications for the legitimacy of judicial decisions. Rule-based reasoning has informed the image of rational adjudication that undergirds our conception of the rule of law, but rulebased reasoning does not appear to be a complete description of how judges decide cases. Furthermore, the received view of legal rationality does not appear capable of accounting for alternative theories of adjudication
Culture and the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
No full textBook: The Cultural Dimension of Human Rights
The intersections between culture and human rights have engaged some of the most heated and controversial debates across international law and theory. As understandings of culture have evolved in recent decades to encompass culture as ways of life, there has been a shift in emphasis from national cultures to cultural diversity within and across states. This has entailed a push to more fully articulate cultural rights within human rights law. This book analyses a range of responses by international law, and particularly human rights law, to some of the thorniest, perennial, and sometimes violent confrontations fuelled by culture in relations between individuals, groups and the state in international society. Across the different issues tackled, the chapters are tied by one unifying thread — that culture is understood, protected and promoted not only for its physical manifestations. Rather, it is the relationship of culture to people, individually or in groups, and the diversity of these relationships which is being protected and promoted; hence, the fundamental overlap between culture and human rights.https://scholarship.stu.edu/faculty_book_chapters/1021/thumbnail.jp
Contract Law & Practice, 3d (Vol. 25, Washington Practice Series)
No full textContract Law & Practice provides state-specific commentary and critical discussion of contract law, analyzing those cases that have significant impact on standards covering contract formation, interpretation, and construction. Topics covered include: Formation of contracts Statute of frauds Parol evidence rule Interpretation and construction of contracts Promissory estoppel/detrimental reliance Contracts violative of public policy Conditions Unconscionability and misconduct defenses Performance and nonperformance Modification and rescission Third-party beneficiaries Assignment and delegation Damages Specific performance and injunctions Discharge of contracts and limitation defenses Employment contracts Jury instructions
The guide also includes a table of cases, forms, and pleadings.https://scholarship.stu.edu/faculty_books/1032/thumbnail.jp
Front Matter
No full textFront Matter includes Masthead, advisors, and Table of Contents for the Intercultural Human Rights Law Review Volume 9 (2014)
The Role of Law, Judicial Reform and the Protection of Human Rights in Moldova and Transnistria
No full textThis article will provide an overview of human rights violations in Transnistria, with an emphasis on the cases brought before the European Court of Human Rights. The role of human rights NGOs (such as Promo-LEX), reform-minded civil society, and the influence of the Russian Federation and the Republic of Moldova in the PMR will be explored. The current situation will be analyzed in the context of the resumption of the 5+2 negotiation, as well as the major judicial reform effort (the Strategy for Justice Sector Reform, 2011-2015) that the governing coalition in Moldova, formerly the Alliance for European Integration and now the Pro- European Coalition, is undertaking with the support of the international community
Privacy and Security Post-Snowden: Surveillance Law and Policy in the United States and India
No full textThe paper is organized in a dual format, through the lens of two behemoths within the information technology sector: the United States and India. While India is an emerging superpower just beginning to recognize the role of information privacy in its society, the United States has a long paper trail of attempts to establish a settled framework for privacy enforcement. This article is subdivided into five sections in accordance with the New Haven\u27 approach to give the reader comprehensive insight into the vexing issues that surround the information privacy debate today. Part I provides an interdisciplinary perspective into the rise of the surveillance state and questions whether governments can rein in highly-sophisticated technology to ensure equilibrium between individual privacy and national security. Part II outlines a general privacy claim in the current era of mass surveillance, taking into account the perspectives of privacy advocates and the intelligence community as a vehicle to identify the various values at play. Part III documents past trends in decision-making that have shaped the current information privacy infrastructure in the United States and India taking into account the growth of the surveillance state. Part IV sheds light on the future privacy landscape and the growth of the surveillance state following the NSA scandal. In Part V, this author will recommend a privacy framework that can exist transnationally and effectively balance national security interests and personal privacy rights
Trademarks, Domain Names, and ICANN: An Evolving Dance
No full textThe aim of this article is to provide insight into the various policies trademark owners can utilize to ensure protection of their domain name-related trademarks on the United States Patent and Trademark Office ( USPTO )\u27 Principal Register as well as the various mechanisms trademark owners can use to protect their registered or non-registered marks against third party activities within the domain name system. The article will examine the USPTO\u27s policies regarding trademark registration on the Principal Register for marks that contain top-level domains ( TLDs ) as a part of the domain name in the applied for mark as well as for marks that consist solely of a TLD. In reviewing the dynamic evolution that has occurred in the relationship between trademarks and domain names, the role that the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers ( ICANN ) has had, and continues to have, in shaping and framing global trademark protections is of great significance. This overview will also present the options all trademark owners have to protect their marks that are used as domain names or as TLDs by third parties without their authorization. In doing so, this article will highlight key trademark protection initiatives developed by ICANN historically, as well as recent initiatives developed as a part of ICANN\u27s 2012 new gTLD program. This article will also provide an introduction to independent initiatives by certain TLD registry operators who strive to further enhance the trademark protections within their specific TLDs
Live Free and Nullify: Against Purging Capital Juries of Death Penalty Opponents
No full textThe work of death-qualifying a capital jury can be an intensive, “exacting,” and ultimately high-stakes endeavor. A jury is qualified, at least doctrinally, to sit in judgment of a peer facing death if its members’ views on the death penalty would not “prevent or substantially impair” them from abiding by court instruction, their oaths, and the limits of the law. A prospective juror must “be willing to consider all of the penalties provided by state law” and “not be irrevocably committed, before the trial has begun, to vote against . . . death regardless of the facts and circumstances.” Exactly which words, sentiments, and demeanors trigger removal is an exercise in line drawing that has split the nation’s highest court. In practice, mere reflection and discomfort on the part of death penalty equivocators have rendered prospective jurors ineligible. A man who admitted to supporting the ultimate penalty for a person who “was in my home, [and] killed my children,”8 but told the court that he would “prefer to see a person rehabilitated” and that he did not “know if [he] could push for the death penalty,” found himself dismissed for cause on the basis of those answers. Trial judges are lent wide discretion in divining the boundaries of acceptable death penalty reservations, and the public has seemingly gleaned that room for misgivings is narrow. Nearly forty percent of Americans believe their views on the death penalty would disqualify them from serving on a capital jury — a body meant to reflect “a fair cross section of the community” on a matter meant to incorporate the “conscience of the community.” Capital juries whose members reject the death penalty out of hand, without consideration of the individual circumstances of the case or defendant, could be said to be nullifying the law on capital punishment. A jury generally nullifies the law when it fails to apply it as interpreted and instructed by the judge, instead acquitting a defendant whom the state has proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The nullifying jury sends a message of disapprobation, targeted at the specific prosecution or the general enforcement of the criminal law at issue. Proponents characterize this blunt tool as a right long ago conferred to the jury, as much ingrained in American historical traditions as in the country’s constitutional law. Detractors distinguish the right to nullify — an arguable and largely academic proposition — from the power to nullify, conceding that the latter is an “anomaly in the rule of law” that is merely “tolerated.” Its validity notwithstanding, the practice is intentionally shrouded in mystery — left unspoken and, at times, outright denied. “[P]urging nullifiers from juries is an American tradition,” but it does not have to persist. The prospect of jury nullification as legitimate runs in particular tension with the Supreme Court’s death qualifying jurisprudence. This Note argues that the for-cause removal of antideath jurors ought to be abolished. Part I provides background on the historical development and current status of the nullification doctrine generally. Part II offers doctrinal support for the case against striking potential nullifiers with antideath values from capital juries. The Part argues that, even if nullification is not a right, it is a jury prerogative that is rightfully unreviewable and inevitable, and the Part explains how a reimagined death-qualification jurisprudence would affect the practice of voir dire. Part III presents the affirmative case for allowing opponents of the death penalty to serve on capital juries. It argues that the evil of arbitrary imposition is a feature already inextricably woven into the criminal justice system and, because death is different, somewhat arbitrary capital mercy is a fitting counterbalance to a system that already overpenalizes. It proceeds to note that in excluding death penalty opponents from capital juries, community values unrepresented through the democratic process are inappropriately flouted. This Note contests the notion that nullifying juries are usurping legislative prerogatives, and insists these juries act akin to judges, serving as an institutional check when the state exerts its most sobering power: its right to kill. In resolving the tension between the nullification prerogative and the death-qualification schema, states active in capital litigation ought to allow “jurors to make full use of their range of moral learning.