STU Scholarly Works (St. Thomas University)
Not a member yet
1001 research outputs found
Sort by
Congressional Unilateral Tax Treaty Overrides: The Latter in Time Doctrine Is Out of Time!\u27
No full textThe current form of globalization has resulted in greater global economic integration and liberalization, political openness, and cultural and social acceptance. As the world economy continues to weaken national economic orders, and as nations become more dependent upon international trade, good relations between nations may provide greater global wealth and political stability. Global integration requires a cooperative multilateralist approach, encouraging international alliances, partnerships and institutions. The current global shift, however, finds the United States in a period of protectionism. As a result of 9/11, the United States has begun a strategy of preemption, one triggered at creating measures aimed at preventing substantial casualties to the U.S., whether military or economic. The actions taken in furtherance of this strategy, such as the invasion of Iraq without the consent of the Security Council, altered the perception of the United States around the world. Furthermore, these actions were in direct contradiction of Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice\u27s pledge to support and uphold the system of international rules and treaties that allow us to take advantage of our freedom. International tax treaties are a vital instrument in developing and stimulating economies throughout the world.\u27 Countries enter into tax treaties to promote investment, growth, and commerce by avoiding double taxation and preventing tax evasion. Unilateral actions, such as Congress amending the tax code to override an international tax treaty, bear significant negative impacts upon the potential development of economies and the political relationship between the nations. Congress\u27 ability to override these treaties negates the anti-imperial design of the Constitution and creates negative consequences for economic development and commerce. In spite of this, treaties are often partially or completely abrogated in a unilateral fashion. It is vital for the United States to adhere to treaties into which it enters and pay heed to the reliance of other nations on these treaties. The United States retains more capacity than any other actor to improve the quality of the international system, so the question is whether it will continue to possess such capacity. The determination of this question appears to depend on how the nation develops its\u27 international relations under the new leadership of President Barack Obama. President Obama believes it is illegal and unwise for the President to disregard international human rights treaties that have been ratified by the United States Senate, yet, the question remains whether he feels the same about overriding international tax treaties. President Obama stated the United States is in need of repairing relationships with other nations, whereby strengthening its economic alliances and garnering the support for the United States to compete on a global scale.\u27 Due to President Obama\u27s overwhelming dedication to international policy, it seems inevitable the question will be answered sooner than expected, especially considering the historic lack of urgency to address this matter. This article examines the questionable jurisprudence allowing the United States to override treaties unilaterally, freely negotiated between two sovereign nations, through the later-in-time doctrine. Through the perspective of tax conventions, this article provides an overview of the historical development and context of unilateral treaty overrides. The following analysis will demonstrate the flawed reasoning behind the enactment of the later-in-time doctrine; the necessity to distinguish between Indian and sovereign nations; the contravention of the executive branch\u27s treaty powers; the flawed interpretations of the Supremacy Clause; and the growing requirement to fulfill international obligations. The analysis provides a plausible solution by applying a heightened scrutiny to domestic tax statutes attempting to override prior-in-time treaties. The call for heightened scrutiny is to be applied before potential overrides are granted; it is not meant to displace Congress\u27 power to override international tax treaties by way of the tax code. In the case that an override is allowed, the void left from the unfulfilled obligations should spur the United States to make restitution to the parties injured
International Legal Instrument on Human Trafficking and a Victim-Oriented Approach: Which Gaps Are to be Filled
No full textThe present contribution will first provide a description of the evolution of the international anti-trafficking legal action, with particular attention to the specific provisions aimed at ensuring victim protection. This article will attempt to explore which possible improvements could be adopted in order to make such an action more effective in the light of the contemporary characterization of the awful practice of trafficking in human beings
Blakely, Apprendi, Booker, Begay, and Santos: Judicial Minimalism and the U.S. Supreme Court\u27s Ill-Conceived Attempts at a Rational Jurisprudence
No full textThe approach the Court has taken in the cases discussed herein has regrettably resulted in a waste of judicial, prosecutorial and defense resources at a time when the United States has more individuals in prison than any other industrialized nation in the world. More importantly, these decisions have left the law in a state of deliberate confusion and have harmed the individual defendants, many of whom are minorities whose rights are already fragile. The Court\u27s unfinished decisions have also created a state of uncertainty that has been equally damaging to the victims of crime and to the integrity of the judicial system as a whole
Playoff or Bust: The Bowl Championship Series Debate Hits Congress (again)
No full textThis paper will review the proposed legislation that seeks to revise the current Bowl Championship Series (BCS) format. It will discuss the strengths and weaknesses inherent in each legislation. Special attention will be given to the feasibility of implementing the requirements of each legislation and the effect it will have on the NCAA Division I FBS member schools
What\u27cha Gonna Do Brother When Hulkmania Runs Wild on You: A Practitioner\u27s Guide to Section 322.09 of the Florida Statutes
No full textIn the 1980s and 1990s, our generation grew up watching Hulk Hogan in the ring. We would watch in awe as he would rip his yellow and red shirt and scream catchy slogans. He told us to [t]rain, say your prayers, and eat your vitamins., We watched him star in movies, such as Rocky III and Mr. Nanny. Later, our generation was hooked on Hogan Knows Best, a reality show featuring Hulk Hogan and his family, which aired on VH1. However, on August 26, 2007, the Hogans were forced into the spotlight for another reason. Nick, Hulk Hogan\u27s youngest child, was involved in a horrific automobile accident, severely injuring his passenger, John Graziano. There were reports that he lost control of the vehicle while engaging in light to light drag racing. On March 24, 2008, the guardian of John Graziano, Peter Musante, filed suit on behalf of John, naming Terry Bollea, Linda Bollea, Nick Bollea, and Daniel Jacobs as defendants. The suit contained several counts. Count II of the complaint specifically alleged the negligence of Terry Bollea, pursuant to section 322.09 of the Florida Statutes. This statute imputes negligence upon the person who signs for a minor\u27s driver\u27s license. Many practitioners are unaware of this statute. It is often overlooked when drafting pleadings and rarely pled. It has the possibility for being a powerful tool for a skillful practitioner. This statute could either win or lose your client a greater award in damages. A prudent practitioner needs to know how to tackle section 322.09. Part II of this article will examine Nick Hogan\u27s accident and the events that led up to the filing of John Graziano\u27s lawsuit against the Hogans. Part III will analyze section 322.09 of the Florida Statutes and corresponding case law. Part IV will guide practitioners as to how to allege negligence under and how to defend against this statute. It will educate practitioners as to the importance and power of section 322.09
Front Matter
No full textFront Matter includes the Table of Contents for St. Thomas Law Review Volume 21, Issue 2, Winter 2009
Front Matter
No full textFront Matter includes Masthead, advisors, and Table of Contents for the Intercultural Human Rights Law Review Volume 4 (2009)
Congressional Responsibility in Controlling the War Machine
No full textPart I reviews the constitutional enumeration of congressional and executive war powers and their historical use from the days of the Framers to the current U.S.-Iraq conflict, and goes on to evaluate the constitutionality of the President\u27s initiation of this war. Part II discusses the judicially-created idea of inherent presidential power and its constitutionality, and examines more recent cases that addressed the abilities of Congress to restrict and limit power. The section concludes by addressing the judiciary\u27s (rarely-utilized) role in mediating disputes between the President and Congress. Part III addresses the lack of accountability of our Congress in the fall of 2002, and traces the discussions and debates leading to the affirmative vote for the authorization to use force against Iraq. This section aims to emphasize the need for Senators and Congressmen to perform their jobs competently and without political self-interest if our nation is to avoid future foreign policy disasters. Part IV concludes by addressing some of constitutional issues posed by the efforts, in the Spring of 2007, by the newly elected Democrat controlled Congress to change policy in Iraq by conditioning appropriations to timing for troop withdrawals. However, the primary purpose of this section is to address lessons learned and urge for more vigilance and prudence by the American people and its representatives in the future
Where Are the Victims? The Credibility Gap in Human Trafficking Research
No full textNothing drives the passion and stirs the emotion, especially in the U.S., more than the horrendous stories of modem-day human slavery. Whether sexual, domestic, or labor, the terror and horror that human trafficking victims have endured defies the scope of our sensitivities. Most who work in human service fields have heard many stories of these survivors. The dedication of the practitioners and law enforcement officers who are involved in the apprehending and prosecution of offenders, and advocate for victims in these very complex cases, is evident in this symposium alone. As a nation, the stain of slavery has tarnished the idealism of freedom that this country cites as its foundation. In response to the concerns about rising human trafficking in the U.S., Congress passed the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000. Since Congress first acted on this, the federal government has supplied more than 150 million dollars to establish task forces to fight human trafficking in the U.S. alone. However, the most recent data suggests that there are tens of thousands fewer victims than originally cited. The gap between the original number of victims trafficked and the data that currently exists is of concern to these authors. The purpose of this article is to: (1) examine the gaps between the numbers originally presented and those currently reported; (2) identify the language commonly used when discussing human trafficking that may undermine credibility related to victims; and (3) provide suggestions for action that would strengthen future arguments for federal funds to serve victims of human trafficking
Front Matter
No full textFront Matter includes the Table of Contents for St. Thomas Law Review Volume 22, Issue 1, Fall 2009