2208 research outputs found
Sort by
Symposium Introduction: Advancing Intellectual Property Goals Through Prevention and Alternative Dispute Resolution
Get PDFThis essay offers a brief background to the issues that prompted a global exploration of alternative methods for preventing and resolving IP disputes. Part One describes the exploding importance of IP rights and law and consequent challenges to court adjudication. Part Two offers a snapshot of current IP enforcement methods: traditional and emerging, public and private, domestic and international. Part Three suggests factors toward matching IP problems with alternative procedures for their effective resolution. Finally, woven throughout this essay is a recommendation of stronger involvement by public domestic or international bodies in dispute prevention and ADR methods
The North American Free Trade Agreement and Its Legacy on the Resolution of Intellectual Property Disputes
Get PDF
From Papal Bull to Racial Rule: Indians of the Americas, Race, and the Foundations of International Law
Get PDFRethinking Gender Equality in the Legal Profession\u27s Pipeline to Power: A Study on Media Coverage of Supreme Court Nominees (Phase 1, the Introduction Week)
Get PDFThree women now sit on the Supreme Court of the United States, and a fourth recently retired, suggesting the attainment of formal gender equality. Despite this appearance of progress, women remain significantly underrepresented in major leadership roles within the legal profession, where they face extensive gender bias and stereotyping. This gender bias and stereotyping is also leveraged against women who are featured in the media, illustrated vividly by coverage of the most recent Supreme Court nominations. Headlines from mainstream news, Then Comes the Marriage Question in the New York Times or The Supreme Court Needs More Mothers in the Washington Post, and from the online blog arena, Elena Kagan v. Sonia Sotomayor: Who Wore it Better? in AbovetheLaw.com or Put a Mom on the Court in TheDailyBeast.com, are just a sampling of those that emerged during the nomination period for Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, two highly accomplished, well-qualified nominees.
The gendered nature of these and other articles led us to conduct an empirical study using quantitative and qualitative content analysis to examine media coverage of every Supreme Court nominee since Justices Powell and Rehnquist, a starting point selected in light of the feminist movement\u27s influence at the time. Our project sits at the unique interdisciplinary intersection of law, gender studies, mass media, and political science. This Article presents results from the first phase of data analysis, looking at the week following a president\u27s announcement of a nominee, and we report five preliminary findings. In identifying these findings, we assess the gendered portrayals of nominees to the Court, and we reflect upon how this knowledge might motivate the resolution of gender disparity in the legal profession\u27s pipeline to power
The Latina/o Academy of Arts and Sciences: A Political and Epistemic Challenge to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences
Get PDF
Symposium Introduction: Advancing Intellectual Property Goals Through Prevention and Alternative Dispute Resolution
Get PDFSocial-Network Theory and the Diffusion of the Search-and-Seizure Exclusionary Rule Among State Courts Between Weeks and Wolf
Get PDFIn light of the Supreme Court’s recent narrowing of the Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule in cases like Herring v. United States and Davis v. United States, there is renewed interest in whether state supreme courts will maintain or similarly narrow the search and seizure exclusionary rule for violations of their own state constitutions. The pattern of early adoptions of the exclusionary rule as a matter of state law before it was mandated by the federal Constitution may provide interesting insights into how the state supreme courts will respond to cases such as Herring and Davis. This article uses social-network theory to evaluate the patterns of communication and influence across state courts in the diffusion of the search and seizure exclusionary rule as a matter of state constitutional law. During the period studied, the Supreme Court made the exclusionary rule mandatory in federal criminal prosecutions for violations of the Fourth Amendment, but had not yet ruled that the Fourth Amendment applied to the states. We conceptualize the diffusion of the exclusionary rule in state courts as a matter of state law as a two-stage process. The first stage concerns whether the issue of exclusion of evidence obtained through illegal searches and seizures in violation of state constitutional law was presented to state supreme courts following adoption of the federal exclusionary rule in Weeks v. United States.
The second stage concerns whether the state courts adopted the exclusionary rule as a matter of state law, before Wolf v. Colorado, when the Fourth Amendment was made applicable to the states. This article uses logistic regressions to evaluate the pattern of communication and influence among state courts in the diffusion of the exclusionary rule at each stage in the process. The results are striking. They suggest that precedents by other state supreme courts in the same West legal reporting regions were more influential in determining whether the question would arise in a particular state than precedents by state supreme courts in neighboring states, or the same federal circuit regions, or the same census regions. But precedents by other state supreme courts in the same federal circuit regions appear to have been more influential in determining whether the exclusionary rule would be adopted than precedents in neighboring states, the same West reporting regions, or the same census regions. These results both corroborate and extend those of previous studies