7078 research outputs found
Sort by
Social Media Use and Viewpoint Discrimination: A First Amendment Judicial Tightrope Walk with Rights and Risk Hanging in the Balance
No full textThis Article examines the judicial reaction by United States courts to viewpoint discrimination challenges involving social media disputes and investigates the risks of a rights-centric approach to these legal claims. Increasingly, social media users in the United States rely on social media networking platforms for their consumption and dissemination of news and information and their exchange of ideas and opinions. As the national conversation and court of public opinion in the United States move online, courts of law face difficult questions about how social media use impacts bedrock constitutional principles surrounding free speech and debate. The constitutional limits of viewpoint discrimination under United States Supreme Court First Amendment jurisprudence provide the legal framework to address such questions. However, lower courts struggle to apply this jurisprudence in their adjudication of viewpoint discrimination claims brought by social media users. This Article analyzes the risks posed by this judicial reaction to a rights- centric approach to these viewpoint discrimination claims
An Empirical Evaluation of EADA and NCAA College Sports Financial Data: Applications for Research and Litigation
Get PDFNon
Third-Class Citizenship: The Escalating Legal Consequences of Committing a “Violent” Crime
Get PDFFor many years, American legislatures have been steadily attaching a wide range of legal consequences to convictions — and sometimes even just charges — for crimes that are classified as “violent.” These consequences affect many key aspects of the criminal process, including pretrial detention, eligibility for pretrial diversion, sentencing, eligibility for parole and other opportunities for release from incarceration, and the length and intensity of supervision in the community. The consequences can also affect a person’s legal status and rights long after the sentence for the underlying offense has been served. A conviction for a violent crime can result in registration requirements, lifetime disqualification from employment in certain fields, and a loss of parental rights, among many other “collateral consequences.” While a criminal conviction of any sort relegates a person to a kind of second-class citizenship in the United States, a conviction for a violent crime increasingly seems even more momentous — pushing the person into a veritable third-class citizenship. This article provides the first systematic treatment of the legal consequences that result from a violence charge or conviction. The article surveys the statutory law of all fifty states, including the diverse and sometimes surprisingly broad definitions of what counts as a violent crime. While the article’s aims are primarily empirical, concerns are raised along the way regarding the fairness and utility of the growing length and severity of sentences imposed on “violent” offenders and of the increasingly daunting barriers to their reintegration into society
I Had a Lakehouse in Tahoe : The Legal Ramifications of California Tapping Lake Tahoe and how it Affects Homeowners
Get PDFnon
Constructive Trusts and Fraudulent Transfers: When Worlds Collide
Get PDFWhen Ponzi schemes collapse and enter into bankruptcy liquidation, bankruptcy trustees assume that conveyances made by the debtor for no consideration are fraudulent conveyances. This Article argues that they are not. Virtually all the assets held by a Ponzi scheme are held in constructive trust for the victims of the fraud. If victims of the fraud can trace the proceeds of their investments into property transferred to a third party, the third party holds the asset transferred in trust for the relevant victim. When a bankruptcy trustee characterizes the asset as a fraudulently conveyed asset, the trustee expropriates the asset from the victim on behalf of the unsecured creditors of the Ponzi scheme. There are only two justifications for this expropriation. First, tracing is impossible or too costly. This claim reduces to the theory that a thief should not restore the loot to the victim when it is costly to do so. Second, when the third party points out that the victims (not the bankruptcy trustee) own the cause of action for restoration of the loot, the third party is making an impermissible ius tertii defense. Being estopped from this defense, the third party must surrender the transferred asset to the bankruptcy trustee. This essentially completes the expropriation of victim property for the benefit of the unsecured creditors, who are scarcely entitled to enjoy this stolen property
A Mathematical Solution to the Sine of Madness that is Pharmaceutical Compulsory Licensing Under the TRIPS Agreement and the Doha Declaration
Get PDFA viable economic solution is necessary to address the shortcomings, textual ambiguities, and deficiencies engulfing international patent protection, leading to the inability of LDCs facing public health crises or national emergencies and lacking pharmaceutical manufacturing facilities to obtain generic pharmaceuticals. This Note poses a solution to this problem via another Amendment to the TRIPS Agreement and the Doha Declaration, which provides a mathematical framework to determine when and under what circumstances a compulsory license should be granted. Furthermore, this Note contemplates establishment of a WTO subcommittee to oversee this proposed solution and to ensure compliance with this Amendment. This concrete solution will drastically improve access to pharmaceuticals for the LDC’s in dire need of them