The Catholic University of America Columbus School of Law
Not a member yet
5983 research outputs found
Sort by
Improving Foster Care and Adoption Policy to Give More Children a Stable Family
No full textThe second presentation of the day focused on foster care reform. It outlined barriers within the current system—including the lack of support for foster parents, the policies and lack of adherence to policies that can leave children trapped in the system, and religious liberty challenges to faith-based adoption and foster care services—and potential avenues for reform
Ransomware Attacks on City Governments: Past, Present, and Future
No full textOn February 22, 2022, the Catholic Law community joined together for the second presentation of the 2022 Student Scholars Series, given by third-year law student Mercedes Wilson-Barthes. Wilson-Barthes\u27 work entitled, Ransomware Attacks on City Governments: Past, Present, and Future, examines the increase in ransomware attacks on cities, existing legislation, and recommendations to strengthen the federal response
Judicial Clerkship Opinion Writing Conference
No full textOn February 24-26, 2021, The Catholic University of America Columbus School of Law (Catholic Law) hosted 31 rising law clerks from across the country who will be serving in the chambers of Federal Circuit Courts, Federal District Courts, and State Appellate Courts in the upcoming year. The conference was coordinated by Professor A.G. Harmon, Associate Dean of Bench and Bar Programs.
The two-day, in-person conference provided the conferees the opportunity to learn the particulars of judicial opinion writing—a unique conference focus undertaken by the Law School to serve both the bench and bar by training law students in this important skill
The Vatican and Permanent Neutrality
No full textThe essays in this book cover a fast-paced 150 years of Vatican diplomacy, starting from the fall of the Papal States in 1870 to the present day. They trace the transformation of the Vatican from a state like any other to an entity uniquely providing spiritual and moral sustenance in world affairs. In particular, the book details the Holy See’s use of neutrality as a tool and the principal statecraft in its diplomatic portmanteau. This concept of “permanent neutrality,” as codified in the Lateran Treaties of 1929, is a central concept adding to the Vatican\u27s uniqueness and, as a result, the analysis of its policies does not easily fit within standard international relations or foreign policy scholarship. These essays consider in detail the Vatican’s history with “permanent neutrality” and its application in diplomacy toward delicate situations as, for instance, vis a vis Fascist Italy, Nazi Germany, and Imperial Japan, but also in the international relations of the Cold War in debates about nuclear non-proliferation, or outreach toward the third world, including Cuba and Venezuela. The book also considers the ineluctable tension between pastoral teachings and realpolitik, as the church faces a reckoning with its history.https://scholarship.law.edu/fac_books/1141/thumbnail.jp
Columbus Community Legal Services Law Clinic (1970s)
No full texthttps://scholarship.law.edu/historical_photos/1014/thumbnail.jp
The Rise of 5G Technology: How Internet Privacy and Protection of Personal Data Is a Must in An Evolving Digital Landscape
Get PDFRecovering Classical Legal Constitutionalism: A Critique of Professor Vermeule’s New Theory,
Get PDFProfessor Adrian Vermeule has provoked renewed interest in the relationship between the classical natural law tradition and the Constitution of the United States with his book, Common Good Constitutionalism: Recovering the Classical Legal Tradition. As scholars self-consciously working in that tradition, we welcome contemporary attention to that perennial legal philosophy. Yet in reading and rereading the book, we found ourselves frustrated with it, notwithstanding the apparent agreement we shared with the author at some abstract level of principle. And that abstraction, it turns out, is just the problem with the book’s application of the classical legal tradition to constitutional law. All the right concepts are there for a sound approach to constitutionalism: understanding law as a reasoned ordinance, for the common good, authored by one with responsibility for the community, and promulgated. Too often, though, the only thing missing from this theory of constitutional law was a law, namely the Constitution of the United States
Artificial Intelligence and Corporate Decisions: Fantasy, Reality or Destiny
Get PDFFueled by the ever-growing significance of big data and advances in AI, tasks in relation to decision-making in contemporary societies have been increasingly delegated to AI at different levels. While there is massive investment all over the world related to one side of AI, namely engineering, it is also important to create rules and competence related to humanistic AI and its effects on people and societies. This article aims to examine AI’s role in the boardroom and associated legal challenges, by exploring the interplay between AI and corporate law and governance. We observe that the delegation of board tasks to AI may tackle situations where urgent decisions need to be made on the basis of a large quantity of data. AI will also ease the tension between plausible hypotheses for the formal analysis of business judgments and a lack of capability to understand and subsequently choose among the options available to directors. As a powerful tool to radicalize and change decision makers’ habits and rationales, AI can assist or advise directors in using big data more effectively and efficiently for more informed and higher-quality decisions, which will result in higher perceived legitimacy. Therefore, we propose the imposition of a duty to use AI to suggest options and disclose the responses of the board to these suggestions, in order to satisfy the standard of care for rational decision making by prudent and diligent directors, and to promote the fair, accountable, and transparent application of AI in the boardroom
The Anomaly That Is Privacy: Data Privacy Concerns Related to the Rise of Microchip Implants in Humans
Get PDFThe “Liberty of Silence” Challenging State Legislation that Strips Municipalities of Authority to Remove Confederate Monuments
Get PDFThere are roughly 700 Confederate monuments still standing in courthouse lawns, parks, and downtown squares in virtually every city, town, and village throughout the “Old South.” Most of these Confederate monuments are located in states that have enacted legislation that bans the removal of Confederate monuments. Such legislative bans are in effect in Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee. Legislation that bans removal of Confederate monuments from public spaces poses a racial justice issue for millions of residents in these states because it forces political majorities in Southern communities (many constituting majority-minority communities) to host a Confederate monument that local residents view as racist. Cities that would remove their local Confederate monument, but are precluded from doing so by state legislation banning such removal, have failed in their efforts to develop a successful litigation strategy to challenge the constitutionality of state monument removal bans. Such litigation efforts fail because lower courts interpret United States Supreme Court precedent to hold that a city does not possess any constitutional rights that it can enforce against its own state government. Unable to assert any constitutional right of its own, cities have been unable to gain standing to challenge the constitutionality of state legislation that bans the removal of a city’s Confederate monument. See, e.g., State of Alabama v. City of Birmingham, 299 So.3d. 220 (Ala, S. Ct. 2019). This article develops a constitutional theory that overcomes the main hurdle that has prevented local jurisdictions from successfully challenging state monument removal bans. The argument in this article is structured on the Constitution’s coerced speech doctrine. The hurdles to effectively challenging state monument removal bans can be surmounted when cities combine with residents to jointly assert in litigation the residents’ First Amendment right not to be coerced by state government into an unwanted association with a Confederate monument’s objectionable pro-Confederate racist messaging. Through such litigation, a city’s residents, with the assistance of their local government, are able to assert their “Liberty of Silence.