7078 research outputs found
Sort by
The International Commitments of the Fifty States
Get PDFU.S. law allocates power to conduct foreign relations primarily to the federal government, but it is well known that states routinely maintain foreign relations of their own. Much of this activity appears to result in legal and political commitments, whether in the form of “sister state” agreements or binding pledges to cooperate on discrete issues such as investment, environmental protection, and transportation. These commitments are at least loosely comparable to international treaties and may either advance or disserve state and national interests.
Yet very little is known about the commitments that are in force. For the most part, neither federal nor state law requires states to publish them or even report them to Congress or the executive branch. Few state agencies voluntarily post pertinent information online. Legal database companies have not included the commitments in their catalogs. And academic research has not served as an adequate, alternative source of transparency. The resulting uncertainty about modern practice inhibits the accountability of state governments to their voters, complicates any effort on the part of state officials to learn best practices, and impedes enforcement of the Article I Treaty Clause and the Compact Clause of the U.S. Constitution, both of which circumscribe state power in this area.
This Article resolves the present uncertainty by providing fresh transparency on state commitments with the national, regional, and local governments of foreign sovereigns. Through freedom-of-information requests to every major executive department and agency in each of the fifty states, I obtained a trove of hundreds of previously unpublished commitments, including many that appear to advance state and national interests in underappreciated ways, along with some that operate in significant tension—if not outright conflict—with federal law or foreign policy. The Article analyzes this collection to reveal new trends, promote accountability, identify lessons for negotiators, and facilitate norm consolidation in domestic law. The Article concludes by proposing measures to strengthen the legality and transparency of future commitments
Gender Confirmation Surgery and the Federal Prison System: Eighth Amendment Framework and Proposed Alternatives
Get PDFAs reform for individuals with gender dysphoria has developed, the prison system\u27s accommodation of those individuals\u27 needs has underperformed. There have been a number of cases in the past few years where inmates who are experiencing gender dysphoria have not received adequate care in the form of gender confirmation surgery. Four of the Federal Appellate Circuit Courts have decided that a physician\u27s refusal to provide an inmate with gender confirmation surgery is not a violation of the 8th Amendment. One circuit ruled differently and held that denial of the surgery to an inmate experiencing gender dysphoria does violate the 8th Amendment\u27s right against cruel and unusual punishment.
This Comment discusses the circuit split surrounding the issue of whether denying an inmate with gender dysphoria gender confirmation surgery is a violation of the 8th Amendment. This Comment argues that should SCOTUS grant review of one of these cases, it should hold as the 9th Circuit does in Edmo v. Corizon and rule that denial does violate the 8th Amendment. Further, this Comment discusses whether or not the 8th Amendment is the best way for inmates to seek redress on this issue and concludes that it does not. And while there is no perfect solution, this Comment recommends other ways to sue for this issue in order for inmates to receive better outcomes
Wisconsin and the State of Dairy
Get PDFWisconsin has earned the nickname America’s Dairyland. While farming has maintained its popularity through the decades, the farms have changed. Small family farms were replaced by large factory farms called Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs). CAFOs benefit society by making meat and dairy cheaper. However, the factory farms are major polluters and nuisance producers, so the laws and regulations need to be tightened to hold CAFOs accountable.
This Comment explores how CAFOs rose to dominance due to Wisconsin’s lenient Right to Farm (RTF) law and the potential solutions to the problems from CAFOs. This Comment begins by discussing the history of the RTF law and the growth of CAFOs in Wisconsin. The Wisconsin Legislature enacted the RTF, which gave farmers protection from frivolous lawsuits. This enactment likely helped the large farms, called CAFOs, to take over the countryside. Then, the Comment shifts focus to the emerging problems from CAFOs due to Wisconsin’s inadequate regulations and concludes by proposing potential solutions to the various problems presented by CAFOs
