8700 research outputs found
Sort by
A Means to an End: How the Expansion of The Federal Arbitration Act of 1925 by the Supreme Court Created a Loophole for Corporations to Avoid Claims by Consumers and Workers Alike
Get PDFA Means to an End: How the Expansion of The Federal Arbitration Act of 1925 by the Supreme Court Created a Loophole for Corporations to Avoid Claims by Consumers and Workers Alike Arbitration is rarely thought of outside the legal and business world by the everyday lay person. Whether we know it or not—all of us, in some capacity, have agreed to a mandatory arbitration clause. A contract for cellular service, an employer-employee arrangement, or an agreement to open a bank account are just a few common examples that lock not only clients, but also employees, in contracts that contain mandatory arbitration clauses. In 1925, the Federal Arbitration Act was imagined to propel the efficiency of justice. However, the Supreme Court has greatly expanded the scope of the Act; which, in turn, has twisted the original intent of the Federal Arbitration Act and created a loophole for corporations to avoid class action litigation all together without even looking toward the merits of each case. Allowing this kind of abuse only deprives consumers and employees of their Seventh Amendment right to trial as mandatory arbitration clauses only seem to become more commonplace. Originally, the Federal Arbitration Act was enacted to create another avenue to dispute resolution in order to speed up cases where both parties agreed to avoid trial. Now, arbitration is a wonderland for large companies where the world of justice is flipped on its head and rules of evidence are thrown out without any regard for the law. Even though arbitration is a private dispute resolution, this should not undermine basic due process measures. Simply because large corporations want to avoid the expenses of the trial courts and damages, this does not mean justice should be put on the wayside. Individuals may be left in a worse position after arbitration— even if they come out on the winning side
A More Pixelated Union: A Look at the Path to Unionization in the Video Game Industry under Trump’s National Labor Relations Board
Get PDFIn the past twenty years, the video game industry has become one of the largest entertainment industries not only in the United States but in the entire world. Yet as video game sales continue to increase at massive rates, it seems the conditions for those making the games have not improved with it, at least according to some in the know. While other entertainment industries have moved to unionize, those in the video game industry have yet to take that leap. To make matters worse, during the administration of President Donald J. Trump, the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) shifted labor law against employees and unions by making decisions that were more employer friendly, and by all accounts, it seems this conservative pivot in labor law will continue long after President Trump leaves the White House. Given the current attitudes on unions and the recent decisions by Trump’s NLRB, what would it even take for video game developers to unionize? This comment will discuss the barriers to unionization in the video game industry based on recent NLRB decisions and the overall process of unionizing itself
FTC Enforcement Authority in the Modern Era: A Commission in Crisis?
Get PDFThis note provides a brief history of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC)’s enforcement authority before analyzing the U.S. Court of Appeals for the seventh Circuit’s circuit-splitting decision in FTC v. Credit Bureau Center, LLC. As the Supreme Court prepares to tackle questions surrounding authority to seek monetary relief, I contextualize how enforcement authority has historically been derived before analyzing how the issue may be resolved. Doing so involves engaging several cases that may prove consequential in determining the outcome and outlines potential legislative solutions to the battle over restitution. Before arriving at the most likely scenarios, a view of the budding relationship between consumer protections giants the FTC and Consumer Financial Protections Bureau (CFPB) provides potential for a synergistic solution, but uncertainty surrounding both institutions indicates a murky outlook on a purely administrative resolution. This in-depth dive, breaking down various aspects of the administrative predicament, details the common law history of traditional restitution authority in the FTC, examines challenges facing the FTC and CFPB, and explores how similar issues facing the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) may affect FTC enforcement authority
Out of Reach: The MDLEA’s Impermissible Extraterritorial Reach on Maritime Drug–Traffickers
Get PDF46 U.S.C. § 70503, known as the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act (MDLEA), prohibits individuals on board covered vessels from manufacturing, distributing, or possessing with an intent to distribute or manufacture, a controlled substance. The statute, as enacted, permits the prosecution of individuals arrested beyond U.S. jurisdiction and even within the territorial seas of other States. This provision is argued to be an impermissible extraterritorial reach absent a nexus requirement—showing a connection between the drug smuggling activity and the U.S. Recently, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals held the statute’s extraterritorial reach and lack of nexus requirement as unconstitutional under the Foreign Commerce Clause and Offenses Clause of the U.S. Constitution. This note explores the background and development of the MDLEA and argues its unconstitutionality
Denying Cultural Intellectual Property: An International Perspective on Anjali Vats\u27s The Color of Creatorship
Get PDFIn The Color of Creatorship, Anjali Vats offers a compelling analysis of intellectual property (IP) laws through the lens of critical race theory. Providing a persuasive account of the role of racialized perspectives and colonial histories in the making of IP laws, Vats calls on activists to persuade lawmakers that knowledge production comes in a variety of forms. She makes a valuable contribution to the literature on race and IP, asking us to think about IP citizenship and how this has been framed in the United States. In this brief essay, I will connect Vats\u27s analysis to some of the issues that arise in relation to international IP.
While she acknowledges the global issues and histories, Vats focuses primarily on the role of race in shaping IP law in the United States. However, the book engages in some discussion of the international aspects, primarily focusing on the Indian Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (TKDL).1 Vats connects her theories to traditional knowledge discussions and dignity-based analyses of IP. At its core, this critical race framing calls for an acknowledgement of the personhood and dignity of creators of color. This aligns with the language one might find in an international human rights approach to IP, which requires recognition for the basic dignity of every person by virtue of their humanity. This essay will elaborate on these points, discussing the book in relation to traditional knowledge, human rights, and human flourishing approaches to IP
The Jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights Should Outlive Defection
Get PDFThe Inter-American Court of Human Rights’ jurisdiction should outlive the purpose of any state to denounce the American Convention on Human Rights in order to avoid disadvantageous international rules and circumvent the international adjudicative authority to protect victims of human rights violations. I begin by outlining the Human Rights jus cogens nature integrated into the universal international human rights law. Following that, I review leading international court cases approaching the jurisdictional paradigm on treaty defections. Furthermore, I propose two conjunctive new elements modifying the mechanical jurisdictional paradigm: the constitutional internationalized human rights treaties and the substantial reviewability of a treaty’s defection. I conclude by examining the interface concerning the American Convention on Human Rights and Latin American constitutions. In approaching the Latin American constitutions, I will demonstrate how what I refer to as the “jus cogens complementary jurisdictional model” would operate