3246 research outputs found
Sort by
Introduction: Intelligent Entertainment: Shaping Policies on The Algorithmic Generation and Regulation of Creative Works
Get PDF
Cracking the Code: Computer Code as Pure Speech and Its First Amendment Implications on the 3D Printed Firearms Controversy
Get PDFFIU Law Class of 2020
No full texthttps://ecollections.law.fiu.edu/graduate_composite_boards/1017/thumbnail.jp
Just A Minute, Isn’t That De Minimis: California Should Not Burden or Require National Employers to Compensate Employees for De Minimis Off-the-Clock Work Activities
Get PDF
Commentary on Via v. Putnam
No full textJoann Putnam went to her grave with the comfort of knowing she had entered into a binding contract with her husband, Edgar Putnam, to protect and provide for her son, Robert Blackburn, and the couple’s five children. In November 1985, six months before Joann’s death, Joann and Edgar had executed mutual wills. These were not simply mirror wills.https://ecollections.law.fiu.edu/faculty_books/1283/thumbnail.jp
Concepts, Not Nomenclature: Universal Injunctions, Declaratory Judgments, Opinions and Precedent
Get PDFBattle lines are drawn on the permissibility and validity of injunctions in federal constitutional litigation purporting to halt government enforcement of a challenged law against all possible targets of that law and to protect all rights holders against enforcement. Courts, members of the Supreme Court, and legal scholars are divided — some supporting and others rejecting them as impermissible.; I have staked my position in the latter camp.From that starting point, this paper considers three subsidiary issues: 1) the proper label for these injunctions, arguing that “universal” or “non-particularized” is a more accurate term than the prevailing “nationwide”; 2) how universality applies to the related constitutional remedy of declaratory judgments; and 3) the distinction between court judgments and judicial opinions, where supporters of universal injunctions err in giving a judgment the prospective legal effects and consequences of an opinion. The paper suggests that the debate over the scope of injunctions is an unfortunate and unnecessary distraction, because no one takes universality literally or seriously