Digital Commons @ UDC Law (University of the District of Columbia Law Library)
Not a member yet
840 research outputs found
Sort by
Changing the Narrative in Child Welfare Cases
No full textRepresenting Parents in Child Welfare Cases is a guide for attorneys representing parents accused of parental unfitness due to abuse or neglect. Leading experts provide insights into every step of the legal process, from the initial interview with the parent(s), through court hearings, to issues attendant to the Child Abuse and Neglect Registry System. Parents’ attorney’s must be prepared to navigate the obstacles created by the emotional nature of this work. Representing parents can be a lonely job, and natural biases against an accused parent can create additional obstacles from judicial officers, opposing counsel, social workers and service providers who are typically charged with assisting the reunification process. On the other side, competent legal representation often is the sole consistent support a parent has when he or she is pulled the child welfare system. This book offers practical, hands-on tips for attorneys at each stage of the process
Protecting Sacred Ground: The San Manuel Ruling and Implications for Indian Cultural Resource Preservation
No full textSix hundred years ago, all land in America was Indian land.1 Then, [Europe] conducted some of her adventurous sons into this western world.., and discovery gave title... [which] could be consummated by possession. 2 This doctrine of discovery, agreed upon between colonial powers, essentially granted title to anyone who could occupy American soil. Europeans quickly scrambled to negotiate peace treaties with native tribes so that they could install settlers and thereby claim territory. The inherent problems with these treaties were numerous; beyond conflicting interests,3 outright fraud,4 and language barriers, the terms of transfer were inherently invalid because the government that was taking possession of the land already had absolute title to it
The Struggle to Rise Above the Shadows Before Sunset: A Critical Discussion on The Need to Lift The Expiration and Renewal Requirements of DACA and DAPA
No full textReasoning that judicial economy is best served when a law enforcement agency determines how to expend its limited enforcemen tresources, the Supreme Court has held that the decision to exercise prosecutorial discretion is presumptively unreviewable.1 In the realm of immigration law, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and the recently announced Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) promote the goal of judicial economy by imposing a freeze on the deportation of eligible noncitizens who either entered the United States as children or who have a child who is a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident (LPR).2 In doing so, these programs conserve enforcement resources on these low priority cases. The social policy underlying DACA is that children or individuals brought to the U.S. as children lack the intent to violate immigration laws and should not be removed from the only country they know as home. DAPA, which shields the parents of U.S. citizensand LPRs from removal, hinges on the public interest in protecting thefamily unit.4 To date, the DAPA program has been suspended due to afederal court injunction order.5 DACA relief lasts two years and isrenewable but only for an additional two years.
Transfers of Detained Families Traumatizes Mothers and Children and Interferes With Access to Lawyers
No full textAvoiding Unintended Disclosure: Representing Clients with HIV and AIDS
No full textWhen the HIV/AIDS epidemic was initially recognized in the United States, many attorneys wondered what it would mean to represent a client with HIV. As the number of HIV-infected individuals grew, so did the need for attorneys to represent them. Specifically, attorneys questioned whether or not their duty of confidentiality would expose them to civil liability from failing to protect a third party.1 In response to this concern, several law review articles were written discussing the dilemma faced by attorneys bound by professional rules of conduct.2 These articles focused on the needs of the attorney and the public rather than the HIV-infected client, 3 though there was some discussion on clients engaged in risky sexual behavior.4 Even when no affirmative duty to disclose existed, the discussions rarely focused on the client and his need for confidentiality.
Few, if any articles, have focused on the effects disclosure has on the client and the ways in which attorneys can avoid disclosure. Few attorneys representing clients with HIV/AIDS will be faced with the moral dilemma discussed in law review articles written twenty years ago.5 More commonly, the attorney and client will be in agreement about whether disclosure of the client’s seropositivity is necessary or advisable. When the client has determined that he does not want this confidential information disclosed, the lawyer must make every effort to avoid both intended and unintended disclosure. Due to the nature of the information and the discrimination that the client could possibly face, the attorney must be hyper-vigilant to avoid disclosure and take additional measures to protect the information from disclosure. This article draws from my experiences teaching in and supervising student attorneys enrolled in the UDC HIV/AIDS Legal Clinic (Clinic) and uses examples from the Clinic to discuss a lawyer’s ethical duties to a client with HIV or AIDS. The article begins with a description of the Clinic, a brief overview of the HIV/AIDS epidemic, and a discussion of the history of confidentiality laws protecting HIV-related data from improper disclosure. The article argues that Rule 1.6 of the ABA\u27s Model Rules of Professional Conduct provides a floor to lawyers representing clients with HIV and AIDS and not a ceiling. Lawyers representing clients with HIV and AIDS owe a heightened duty of confidentiality