8700 research outputs found
Sort by
Freedom from Speech
Get PDFThe importance of freedom of speech in a democratic society is usually taken as a given, but freedom from speech is no less important in safeguarding the values of truth, autonomy, and democracy. Freedom from speech includes both the right of the individual to not be forced to speak and the freedom to avoid the speech of others. This essay attempts to highlight the significance of freedom from speech in order to clarify the importance of the First Amendment right against compelled speech; provide an explanation for when the right of free speech yields to other rights; and offer a framework for evaluating unsettled or contentious questions about free speech doctrine and practice
“Incorrigibility is Inconsistent with Youth”: The Supreme Court’s Missed Opportunity to Cure the Contradiction Implicit in Discretionary JLWOP Sentencing
Get PDFThe juvenile life without parole (“JLWOP”) caselaw is based in part on the science underlying adolescent brain development. Numerous research studies have examined the behaviors and brain processes of adolescents. Courts have relied on these findings in reaching some of its most important decisions affecting juveniles implicated in the criminal justice system. The latest of those decisions came in 2021 with the Jones v. Mississippi case before the United States Supreme Court. The Court held that a sentencing court is not required to make a specific finding of permanent incorrigibility before sentencing the juvenile defendant to life without parole. This Comment exposes the contradiction implicit in the permanent incorrigibility standard applied in JLWOP cases: how can juveniles be found to have transient characteristics but also be deemed permanently incorrigible? Specifically, the paradox lies in a discretionary JLWOP sentence because it implies that the juvenile’s crime reflects permanent incorrigibility, and the child is forever incapable of being reformed. However, adolescent brain science supports the findings that juveniles possess temporary attributes, and the adolescent brain continues to develop through adulthood, such that juveniles have an enhanced capacity for rehabilitation. Moreover, courts have adopted these scientific truths as binding precedent. Ultimately, the Supreme Court justices missed a perfect opportunity in Jones to eliminate the contradictory permanent incorrigibility standard from the JLWOP sentencing scheme
Protective Styles, a Protected Class: Revisiting \u3cem\u3eEEOC v. Catastrophe Management Solutions\u3c/em\u3e
Get PDFFor years, Black people have been forced to place extra thought into their appearance, especially in the workplace. Extra thought and extra effort all to avoid being looked down upon as unkept or unprofessional. Finally, there is a wave of legislation being introduced and passed to rectify this problem. While strides are being made, there is still much work to be done. The amount of work left to be done is illustrated by a slew of unfavorable federal cases brought in the face of discrimination against Black hair and hairstyles. This paper explores one of those cases as well as the significance of protective and natural Black hairstyles to the Black community, and why it is imperative for this significance to not only be respected but also protected
International Law & Covid-19 Symposium
Get PDFThe COVID-19 pandemic has sent shock waves through the international community, exposing systemic failures and highlighting injustices. At the same time, it has provided an opening to consider new approaches, including lessons for international law. On April 12 and 16, 2021, the University of Miami School of Law International and Graduate Law Programs and Human Rights Clinic, in collaboration with the Human Rights Society, Health Law Association, Environmental Law Program, and University of Miami International and Comparative Law Review hosted a symposium on the impact of COVID-19 on international law. The International Law and COVID-19 Symposium specifically focused on the intersections of COVID-19 with human rights and public health, including state obligations towards vulnerable populations, rights restrictions to protect public health, environmental aspects, reactions by international and regional human rights bodies, and public health responses
The IACHR’s Comprehensive Response To The Covid-19 Pandemic And Its Intersectional Impacts On Human Rights
Get PDFThe region of the Americas is facing unprecedented humanitarian and social challenges as a consequence of the Covid-19 pandemic. As such, the regional institutions need to deliver rapid and effective responses to the region’s inhabitants. In this way, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter IACHR or the Commission) has aimed to deliver a timely answer so that States, the Civil Society, and stakeholders can assure individuals that the treatment of the pandemic incorporates a human rights approach from the Inter-American System’s framework. The purpose of this work will be to give a brief takeaway on how the IACHR has responded to those challenges and how it has assessed the differentiated, intersectional, and gender-unequal impacts this health crisis has had on human rights, particularly on economic, social, cultural and environmental rights (hereinafter ESCER). This paper will focus on the rights of people and groups who, because of the special state of vulnerability they are in, have been hit the hardest by the pandemic. It will discuss how the Commission—specially supported by the Office of the Special Rapporteur for Economic, Social, Cultural, and Environmental Rights (REDESCA)—has responded to the challenges and incidents brought on by the Covid-19 pandemic and how it has delivered recommendations to States regarding women, indigenous people, people living in poverty and extreme poverty, people of African descent, LGBTI people, older people, persons with disabilities, and people who are being deprived of liberty. Finally, the article will explore the future steps that need to be taken to increase the protection of human rights in other global crises
International Rights Affecting the COVID–19 Vaccine Race
Get PDFThe impact of the COVID–19 pandemic has been felt world-wide, and despite having several vaccines in the market at this point, there are still issues of accessibility for certain countries. International intellectual property law has been a breeding ground for the exploration of intellectual curiosity and creation as it provides strong protections to creators. These strong protections have allowed for the monopolization of certain goods, such as vaccines, under the concept of patents. While patents are important to incentivize pharmaceutical companies to create life–saving medicines, these protections have also become a barrier for access to medicines, especially in less–developed countries. This Note seeks to address the interplay between international intellectual property rights and the right to health under the inter-national human rights framework. Specifically, it will dis-cuss the two differing rights through the United States and Canada’s efforts to promote creation of COVID–19 vaccine candidates. In order to highlight the financial driver behind patent protections, this note will compare the production and patenting process of the COVID–19 vaccines, a virus that also heavily impacted developed countries, versus the under–funded Ebola virus, which predominantly effected less–developed countries. Finally, this Note will offer recommendations on how countries, and pharmaceutical companies, can take a human rights approach by utilizing patent protection exceptions in order to make COVID–19 vaccines accessible to all countries
Why Reproductive Health Rights Should No Longer Be A Partisan Issue: A Call To Invest in Family Planning
Get PDFThe concepts of family planning and reproductive health rights are often obscured by the controversy that surrounds the topic of abortion. This controversy has substantially impacted the U.S.’s outlook on reproductive health rights and its support toward family planning organizations, often limiting funding and aid depending on each administration’s political views. While international law has recognized the importance of reproductive health rights and the necessity of family planning programs, the U.S. continues to fall be-hind when it comes to promoting such rights. This article calls for a bipartisan effort to end these regressive and harmful anti–abortion policies so that the U.S. can direct its aid to pursue positive health outcomes for women. Despite the politics of each administration, women’s health and the right to reproductive self–autonomy are human rights that should not be contingent on a political agenda