13203 research outputs found
Sort by
A Proposal to Amend Rule of Evidence 404 To Admit Prior Acts Evidence in Domestic Violence Prosecutions
Get PDF
More Steps Toward Fully Electronic Interbank Check Collection and Return: Amendments to Federal Reserve Board Regulation CC and a Regulatory Resolution of a Circuit Split
Get PDFThis article analyzes two actions in 2017 and 2018, respectively, by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System that amend Regulation CC, which governs expedited deposit availability and collection of checks generally and implements the Expedited Funds Availability Act of 1987 and the Check Clearing for the 21st Century Act of 2003. It selects examples from the two sets of amendments that highlight regulatory strategies being used by the Board to facilitate faster payments through the movement of electronic images of checks or electronic information among banks in the check-collection process. Those strategies involve creation of new forms of instruments that can be treated as checks or used to return checks to depositary banks, and, in the 2018 amendments, establishment of a presumption that reallocates risks in collection long a feature of Anglo-American payments law, the doctrine of Price v. Neal. The strategies offer evidence of the surgical precision with which the Board has acted over the past 30 years to modernize check collection regulation with little use of its authority to preempt state laws, primarily Articles 3 and 4 of the Uniform Commercial Code (“UCC”). This article does not describe or evaluate all provisions of Regulation CC that the Board revised or added in 2017 and 2018
Original Nation Approaches to Inter-National Law (ONAIL): Decoupling of the Nation and the State and the Search for New Legal Orders
Get PDFTo elucidate the basic tenet of ONAIL, this paper is structured in the following way.5 The first section defines the nation and the state, as the misuse of these terms and related concepts has gravely obscured, distorted, and misrepresented the identity, role of law, geography, history, and reasons and causes behind conflicts and wars, regional struggles, refugee flows, genocide, human rights violations, and rapidlydegrading condition of natural environment and ecosystems. Terms such as the state, nation, and nation-state have been used interchangeably, despite the fact that their origins, geographies, histories, and relations to the role of law are quite distinct. The second section explains why the neologism, Original Nation, is used in this paper to delineate the nation, peoples, history, culture, identity, and tradition, instead of Fourth World, a common terminology that has been used in the analysis of the world system. Such terminology has been predicated on the scholarship of a three-tiered system-the First, Second, and Third Worlds-derived from the state-centric, geopolitical model that ONAIL opposes, challenges, and tries to overcome.
The third section focuses on actual examples of ongoing struggles of multiple nations and peoples against the intrusion of states-such as state-sponsored terrorism and state-supported corporate exploitationthat have resulted in ethnocide and ecocide in the homeland of nations and peoples. The U.S. government recognized in 1950 that the most immediate crises of nation-state conflicts, including an indigenous nationalist revolution, would arise in Asia. 6 Since then, major struggles between the nation and the state have been concentrated in Asia, including the Moro in the Philippines, the Rohingya in Myanmar, the West Papua in Indonesia, the Kashmir at the India and Pakistan borders, and the Kurd in the southwestern region of Asia. These struggles stem from respective nations\u27 resistance against states\u27 denial of the right to self-determination, state-sponsored unsustainable environmental projects in the homeland, the usurpation of natural resources, and the eradication of biological and cultural diversity.
The analysis of the theoretical basis of ONAIL is the focus of the fourth section. Specific discussions focus on the critique of simultaneous processes of the state-building and nation-destroying project; the state\u27s role in serving as a prime instrument of international law against the interest of nations and peoples; possibilities for constructing a true alliance among nations against the state and international organizations and corporations; the recognition of the nation\u27s rights under international law and judgments of international tribunals largely organized by the nation and peoples; ONAIL\u27s strong opposition to the privatization of the ancestral land, as well as the practice of biopiracy and bio-colonialism by intellectually propertizing nations\u27 knowledge; and the preservation of cultural and biological diversity by cultivating potential collaborations with the state\u27s judicial and legislative sectors. The last section concludes with remarks on the future of the ONAIL scholarship and possible alliance-building among nations, peoples, scholars, on-the-ground activists, grassroots organizations, and others
Derivative Suit Under the Saudi Companies Law: Theory and Best Practice
Get PDFSaudi Arabia has been focused on diversification of its economy and attracting foreign investors. Countries that provide strong shareholder protection are more likely to attract foreign investors. However, there is a need for greater protection of minority shareholders in Saudi Arabia. This is because Saudi’s companies law fails to equip minority shareholders with adequate protective rights. A current issue with the new Saudi companies law can be linked to derivative suit, which is very important for both foreign investors and local investors. Derivative suit in Saudi Arabia is very limited and difficult to pursue because under article 79 of Saudi Companies Law derivative suits can be exercised only if the shareholder obtains permission from the general assembly. If such permission is not obtained, the shareholder may file a tort claim in his/her own name and at his/her own expense. This is problematic because Saudi Arabia market is a concentrated ownership market where family owned businesses are dominant.
In this research, I propose that the Saudi companies law should be amended and remove the requirement for approval from the general assembly to file a derivative suit in the case that the company does not use its right to file the suit. Also, the courts should has the right to scrutinize the case to determine whether a claim has merits or not before the shareholder proceed with the case. In addition, shareholders who filed a derivative suit should recover costs so that the award of damages were not strictly for the company.
I will support my arguments by analyzing existed published empirical studies on minority shareholder’s protections and derivative suit. I hope that my research will contribute to the scholarship of minority shareholders and derivative suit
Opioid Policing
Get PDFThis Article identifies and explores a new, local law enforcement approach to alleged drug offenders. Initially limited to a few police departments, but now expanding rapidly across the country, this innovation takes one of two primary forms. The first is a diversion program through which officers refer alleged offenders to community-based social services rather than initiate criminal proceedings. The second form offers legal amnesty as well as priority access to drug detoxification programs to users who voluntarily relinquish illicit drugs. Because the upsurge in addiction to —and death from—opioids has spurred this innovation, I refer to it as “opioid policing.”
This new approach improves in key ways upon previous state responses to illicit drug use. Opioid policing has explicit public-health aims—seeking improved life outcomes for people addicted to drugs without relying on arrest. By contrast, the War on Drugs incentivized arrests, which create myriad negative consequences for drug-law offenders—with few discernible offsetting social gains. Opioid policing also avoids the most problematic aspects of specialized drug courts. Scholars and reformers have documented how these courts provide substandard treatment and employ procedures that frequently lead to more, rather than less, entanglement with the criminal system. Unlike the drug court, opioid policing operates at the pre-booking phase, rather than after legal proceedings have already begun, allowing drug users to avoid the harms of criminal processing entirely.
Notwithstanding its salutary features, opioid policing retains key troubling characteristics of both War on Drugs policing and drug courts. The structure of opioid policing programs creates incentives for law enforcement to expand, rather than reduce, surveillance of marginalized populations. What is more, opioid policing may re-entrench rather than disrupt the distributive inequities of race and class that permeate previous state responses to illicit drug use. Ultimately, the assessment this Article undertakes reveals both the limitations of drug-reform efforts situated within law enforcement as well as the reach and the power of the contemporary carceral state
Enforcement Mechanisms for International Standards of Judicial Independence: The Role of Government and Private Actors
Get PDFIn 2017, the prevailing political party in Poland, Law and Justice (Prawo i Sprawiedliwos6), proposed a series of radical legislative changes designed to strip the Polish judiciary of its independence. Though the European Union (EU) has extensively investigated this egregious attack on the rule of law, no concrete steps have been taken to impose sanctums on, or otherwise discipline, the Polish government for defying EU ideals. Despite the fundamental importance of judicial independence in maintaining the rule of law, there are presently no widely adopted international standards of judicial independence. Therefore, no guidelines are promulgated for governments to follow, and no well-executed path of action exits to shepherd wayward countries back into compliance. Something must be done. This paper seeks to explore the history behind the current judicial crisis in Poland, the possibility of implementing concrete international standards of judicial independence, and the feasibility of enforcement mechanisms driven by private actors
Defining Critical Infrastructure for a Global Application
Get PDFA Google search for the phrase critical infrastructure turns up 189 million results in little more than a half second: \u27\u27global critical infrastructure has 151 million results; and definition of critical infrastructure yields 71.5 million results. The list of what industries and sectors fall under the critical infrastructure designation expands as time progresses and technology develops. As the threat of cyberattacks increases and this frontier of terrorism continues to emerge, attacks on critical infrastructure are high on the list of concerns and the need for protective measures imperative. The focus on protecting critical infrastructure does not stop at the borders of individual nation-states as calls for international efforts to protect national critical infrastructures are being made. Without clearly defined boundaries on what constitutes critical infrastructure at a global level, however, international efforts to protect critical infrastructure will be unduly burdensome and overbroad. Before moving toward international efforts for protecting critical infrastructure, the global community must come together to define which critical infrastructures are worth this additional level of protection
Taming Sherman\u27s Wilderness
Get PDFThis Note proceeds in four Parts. Part I outlines the interpretive difficulties spawned by the vagueness of the Sherman Act—particularly, the judiciary’s necessary but undeniable departures from the text of the statute and the resulting doctrinal confusion. Part II considers ways in which the judiciary’s decision-making in Sherman Act cases approximates agency rulemaking and whether it makes sense to delegate interpretive authority to an antitrust agency. Yet, while the agency solution has upside, it would not easily escape criticisms that the Act does not provide sufficient notice of the conduct it proscribes and that the Act is an impermissible delegation of legislative authority. Part III examines these two hurdles, taking stock of separation of powers and void-for-vagueness principles. Part IV concludes