1412 research outputs found
Sort by
Perez: A Call for a Renewed Look at Chevron, Jurisdictional Questions, and Statutory Silence
Get PDFIn City of Arlington v. FCC, the Supreme Court ended the debate over whether an agency\u27s interpretation of the scope of its jurisdiction should receive Chevron deference, answering in the affirmative. This Comment, however, argues that the Supreme Court should revisit this issue and establish a no-deference rule for jurisdictional cases in which the agency\u27s assertion of power comes from statutory silence.
The Ninth Circuit\u27s recent decision in Oregon Restaurant & Lodging Ass\u27n v. Perez serves as the vehicle for illustrating the necessity of this Comment\u27s proposed no-deference rule. This Comment examines how the Perez decision fits within this narrow issue of jurisdictional questions and merits establishment of this Comment\u27s rule. In support of this proposal, this Comment draws on Chevron\u27s presumption of congressional intent. This no-deference rule also serves as a valuable safeguard against agency aggrandizement
In Re R.R.N.: Redefining Caretaker for North Carolina Child Protective Services
Get PDFIn 2015, the North Carolina Supreme Court interpreted for the first time the definition of caretaker as provided in the State\u27s Juvenile Code. The court narrowed the definition, providing that the statutory language an adult relative entrusted with the juvenile\u27s care means an adult relative who has a significant degree of parental-type responsibility for the child. The court\u27s interpretation has made caretaker equivalent to in loco parentis, which results in a heightened standard that likely was not intended by the legislature. This Comment discusses the far-reaching effects of the court\u27s decision on North Carolina\u27s child welfare services, law enforcement, and practitioners who represent or interact with these agencies. This Comment also explores solutions to bridge the widening gap in service provision to the families and children of North Carolina
Intellectual Property Channeling for Digital Works
Get PDFMarket economies are based on free competition, which can include copying. Yet intellectual property protection in the United States prohibits copying in certain circumstances to incentivize innovation and creativity. New breeds of digital works are challenging our historical application of intellectual property law. These include certain categories of software programs as well as digital manufacturing files. These new works look deceptively like works from a previous era and thus, courts might languorously treat them as they have older works. This would be a mistake. This Article analyzes these works in terms of existing intellectual property doctrine and constructs a normative framework for channeling the works among the different intellectual property regimes and, in some cases, away from intellectual property protection altogether
Reading, \u27Riting, and Regulating Speech: Why Schools Can\u27t Punish Off-Campus Speech and How the North Carolina Legislature Has Tried to Fill the Gaps
Get PDFThe intersection between school discipline and free speech has sparked debates over how far a school\u27s authority extends beyond campus. The internet and the nationwide conversation about cyberbullying have only magnified the debate. In Tinker v. Des Moines, the Supreme Court recognized that students do retain their First Amendment rights while under the school\u27s authority. The Court then went on to hold that a school can punish a student for his or her on-campus speech if the speech causes a substantial or material disruption to school activities or if the speech invades the rights of another student. Whether this test applies to speech made off-campus was left unanswered, and lower courts were left struggling to supply a solution. Attempting to answer this question, a few circuit courts have created their own tests. The Fourth Circuit follows a nexus test, the Eighth Circuit applies a reasonably foreseeable test, and the Ninth Circuit uses a mixed approach.
While schools are limited in what off-campus speech they can punish, legislatures can regulate what school districts cannot reach. The North Carolina legislature passed an anti-bullying statute in 2009. The law was subsequently struck down as unconstitutional by the North Carolina Supreme Court in the case State v. Bishop.
This Comment will explore precedent surrounding a school\u27s authority to punish off-campus speech, highlighting the tests used by the Fourth, Eighth, and Ninth Circuits. It will advocate that Tinker does not permit a school to punish an off-campus student speaker when the effects of the speech make its way on campus. This Comment will then critique specific North Carolina anti-bullying statutes and propose factors for a law that would better withstand judicial scrutiny
Heller in the Lower Courts
Get PDFA discussion of how federal circuit courts have applied Heller, with a focus on lower court views of Heller’s holding and scope, the extent to which Heller provides a general framework for constitutional analysis in Second Amendment cases, what guidance Heller provides for resolving cases involving the right to arms in public places, the development of analytical frameworks beyond Heller, and whether lower courts have given proper deference to Heller in their Second Amendment decisions.
Moderated by Professor Sarah Ludington
North Carolina\u27s Research Triangle Park: A Success Story of Private Industry Fostering Public Investment to Create a Homegrown Commercial Park
Get PDFResearch parks across the globe have attempted to duplicate North Carolina\u27s Research Triangle Park Few, however, have achieved its size, scale, and success. Understanding the success of Research Triangle Park, or recreating it elsewhere, requires understanding the Park\u27s beginnings. By detailing the Park\u27s history, this Article examines how the Park\u27s early transformation from a for-profit venture to a non-profit enterprise fostered the collaboration between government, business, and area universities necessary to the Park\u27s longevity and success. Although the Park\u27s unique history did not create a blueprint for future parks to follow, important lessons from the Park\u27s transition from a private venture to a public enterprise can be applied globally