8700 research outputs found
Sort by
Town Hall on the Sustainable Development Goals and Racial Justice in Miami–Dade County
Full text linkLessons for the Trump Administration from the Biden U.S. National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism
No full textIn May 2023, the Biden Administration issued the first-ever U.S. National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism [hereinafter National Strategy] with a goal of hindering further normalization of antisemitism by increasing public awareness of antisemitism and highlighting positive Jewish contributions to America. Recent events, however-particularly the social and political upheaval over protests of the war in Gaza-have led to public contestation over Israel, increased instances of antisemitism, and the partisan politicization of Jewish issues. Now, the Trump Administration explicitly purports to fight antisemitism by widespread attacks on universities over antisemitism on campus. Does this mean that the National Strategy has become anachronistic, ineffective, or even unnecessary? This Article argues that rather than scrapping the antisemitism awareness goal of the National Strategy, the current moment instead strongly reinforces the need to focus effectively on antisemitism awareness. It calls on the Trump Administration to recognize the complexity and conspiracist character of antisemitism and to commit to the broad anti-antisemitism goals of the National Strategy. Investing in effective antisemitism awareness initiatives is critical not only because of the threat of increasing antisemitism for American Jews, but also because antisemitism, as a central element of white nationalism, ultimately threatens American diversity and society as a whole.
To be sure, even if increasing awareness of antisemitism and its harms is needed, what kind of antisemitism awareness initiatives are likely to be effective today? Is the National Strategy\u27s still the right approach? While its refrained take on Holocaust education in school is on the right track, the Article argues that operationalizing the National Strategy\u27s approach requires a much more intensive focus on affective, emotion-focused initiatives in Holocaust education. The Article also suggests that the National Strategy\u27s call to anti-antisemitism in culture and media must confront both the structural factors in the arts and news coverage that tend to stereotype and reinforce antisemitic tropes, as well as the complex history of antisemitism in American media and the arts. Ultimately, and in keeping with the National Strategy\u27s own recommendations, the Article argues that further and continuing empirical research on antisemitism is needed to help ground and continuously evaluate the effectiveness of such anti-antisemitism initiatives going forward
Authoritarian Transfers
No full textThe rapid proliferation of foreign agent laws globally has become a hallmark of rising authoritarianism, with these laws weaponized to suppress dissent and stifle civil society. While the post-World War II study of legal transplants focused on liberal legal orders, the rise of authoritarian regimes has introduced a new dimension: the transnational movement and adaptation of authoritarian legal frameworks, or authoritarian transfers. This Article fills a critical gap by developing an analytical framework to distinguish authoritarian transfers from democratic ones, using transfer theory, a central theme in comparative law that explores how laws travel, adapt, and transform within new social orders. Authoritarian transfers develop through power-driven narratives, punitive legal tools, and chilling effects on civil society. They differ from liberal transfers in their coercive narratives, legal technicalities, and distributive consequences. Moreover, this Article explores global resistance to these practices and underscores how the “failures” of liberal legal transfers have allowed authoritarian frameworks to flourish, providing new insights into the interplay of ideology, law, and governance. Finally, this Article argues that comparative law can play a vital role in resisting authoritarianism by exposing the mechanics of authoritarian transfers, fostering accountability, and strengthening democratic resilience against these repressive legal tools
Magic Mushrooms as Medicine: What the United States Can Learn from Jamaica’s Unregulated Psilocybin Industry as FDA Approval Nears
No full textIn 1970, Congress passed the Controlled Substances Act and swiftly placed psilocybin (the active chemical in “magic mushrooms”) under Schedule I—the strictest level of regulation withheld for substances with “no currently accepted medical use.” While the United States has maintained this rigid framework, Jamaica has taken the opposite approach. Psilocybin was never listed under Jamaica’s Dangerous Drugs Act, and remains unregulated. In recent decades, research has shown that psilocybin, when administered in controlled settings, can effectively treat depression, anxiety, and other psychiatric conditions. In response, the Jamaican government has not only preserved psilocybin’s legality but has encouraged research and industry development. Today, as the United States faces a mental health crisis, pharmaceutical companies are in the final stages of FDA clinical trials for psilocybin–based treatments targeting major depressive disorder and treatment–resistant depression. If approved, this medical recognition would compel federal rescheduling and the creation of a novel American regulatory framework for psilocybin therapy. In light of potential deregulation, this Note examines the Jamaican model as a case study, where psilocybin’s legal status has fostered both innovation and inequity. The country’s “shroom boom” has advanced psychiatric research and generated economic growth, but the absence of regulation has also led to safety risks and limited access for locals. Drawing lessons from Jamaica, this Note proposes a dual–policy framework under the Controlled Substances Act. FDA–approved psilocybin formulations should be placed in Schedule III to maximize accessibility in supervised clinical settings, while natural, non–pharmaceutical psilocybin should be rescheduled to Schedule II to promote continued research under controlled conditions. This balanced framework emphasizes safety, accessibility, and scientific research, allowing psilocybin to develop into a transformative tool in American mental health treatment
The Samsung Succession and Art Donations: The Necessity of Tax Incentives in Preserving and Expanding the Cultural Heritage of South Korea
No full textUntil recently, South Korea’s laws did not allow the donation of art as a form of inheritance tax payment. In fact, there has been a general lack of tax benefits on art donations in the country. Experts often attribute this deficiency to two reasons: the lack of a national and widespread art appraisal system and the traditional view that such tax laws benefit only the rich. The tide, however, turned in 2020. Two national events provided the impetus for tax law reform that allows the donation of art as a form of inheritance tax payment: the Samsung succession and the Kansong Art Museum auction. Because South Korean inheritance taxes are amongst the highest in the world (up to fifty percent) and are levied against the beneficiary, not the estate, based on the value of the inheritance, inheritors of art facing significant tax bills must make a choice: sell the art (often overseas) or donate it to art museums essentially for free. Some, unfortunately, resort to a third choice, and destroy the art altogether. Tax incentives and disincentives can therefore decide the fate of certain artworks and alter the scope of art that enters into the collection of art museums. Tax laws can decide whether the people of South Korea have access to a certain part of their cultural heritage. The events of 2020 shed light not only on the direct impact tax laws can have on the preservation of the country’s cultural heritage but also on the fact that the recent reforms fell short of addressing the necessity of tax benefits on art donations. While artworks can now be used as a form of inheritance tax payment, payment is limited to the taxes levied on the art. Such a form of payment is also only allowed when payment with financial and real estate assets is first determined to be inadequate and the valuation of the art is approved by the Ministry of Culture. No deduction or credit applies yet to voluntary donations. These limitations stand in stark contrast to the tax benefits that are permitted in the United States. In the U.S., charitable contributions of art to qualified organizations can lead to itemized deductions on income or estate taxes as well as potential exemptions from capital gains taxes and the federal gift tax. Although such benefits are not immune to criticism and abuse, there are no doubt meritorious: they promote philanthropy and allow important works of art to be preserved and displayed for generations to come. This Note therefore proposes that the South Korean public will benefit from more legislative reform that allows similar tax benefits on art donations as in the U.S. The introduction of income and estate tax deductions for qualifying donations, combined with national and institutional safeguards—such as a national art appraisal agency with independent, qualified appraisal mechanisms—offers an effective means to incentivize donations and democratize cultural ownership
Beware of the Dangers of the State-Created Danger Doctrine: A Look at the Ninth Circuit\u27s Approach
Full text linkThe Fourteenth Amendment applies to state, not private, actors. It, like the whole of our Constitution, operates as a negative restraint on government. The Due Process Clause thus forbids states from taking certain action—but it does not and cannot compel the state to act ab initio. These core concepts formed the basis of the Supreme Court’s decision in DeShaney v. Winnebago County, where the Court reaffirmed that the only instance where the state assumes an affirmative duty to provide safety and security is when the state itself restrains an individual from protecting themselves.
Yet, since DeShaney, the circuit courts have sharply divided over whether the Court impliedly recognized a second category of liability: the so-called state-created danger doctrine. The circuits have either rejected the theory outright, accepted it in name only, accepted and applied it sparingly, or accepted and applied it to increasingly attenuated circumstances of state involvement. The Ninth Circuit stands alone in the last category.
Because the state-created danger doctrine stands on such uncertain constitutional footing, is applied wildly inconsistently across circuits, and substitutes judicial review for judicial governance, the Ninth Circuit is wrong to continually broaden its reach and the Supreme Court should course correct
Circular 33/2024 de UEFA, ¿cambio de paradigma?
No full textRecientemente la UEFA implementó unos cambios significativos a la Authorisation Rules governing International Club Competitions. Uno de los cambios en la regulación tiene que ver el arbitraje deportivo bajo la UEFA, particularmente tiene que ver con la introducción de Dublin, en Irlanda, como alternativa de sede para un arbitraje, complementando a Lausanne, Suiza, que es la sede oficial del TAS
The Scope of the Subchapter V Corporate Debtor’s “Fresh Start”: The Eleventh Circuit Is Poised to Weigh In
Full text linkThe fifth anniversary of the effective date of The Small Business Reorganization Act of 2019 (SBRA) was February 19, 2025. This is a significant milestone in bankruptcy law as SBRA represents the most significant reform to Chapter 11 since the enactment of the Bankruptcy Code in 1978. SBRA created Subchapter V— a new tool for small businesses to rescue such businesses in financial distress. A significant body of caselaw has developed on a host of legal issues arising under SBRA over the last five years. One area that is evolving pertains to the scope of discharge available to small business corporate debtors under Subchapter V. This Article examines the caselaw that has developed within the Eleventh Circuit addressing the scope of the discharge for corporate debtors. The issue is now on appeal at the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals in the case of In re Monkey Trading. The pending appeal is considered and ramifications of such a decision on Subchapter V practice, as well as the potential split among the Courts of Appeals
