8700 research outputs found
Sort by
Deterring Prison Versus Police Civil Rights Violations: Legal Challenges, Public Policy, and Institutional Failures
No full textThe status of incarcerated individuals falls categorically below that of non-incarcerated individuals in our society, yet most would agree they deserve protection from governmental abuses of power. This Note evaluates the current legal, institutional, political, and societal circumstances that contribute to the immense difficulties faced by individuals alleging civil rights violations under the Eighth Amendment, primarily through the avenue of U.S.C. § 1983. Due to similarities in civil rights claims, this Note compares the barriers faced by incarcerated plaintiffs to those encountered in police misconduct claims, highlighting key discrepancies that undermine accountability and deterrence.
A primary barrier is the significantly higher burden of proof imposed on convicted prisoners, whose claims must satisfy the stringent Eighth Amendment subjective intent standard. Further complicating justice for prisoners are procedural obstacles such as the Qualified Immunity Doctrine and the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA). These legal and procedural challenges are compounded by severe evidentiary difficulties stemming from the inherently closed and isolated nature of prisons. Cumulatively, these factors, coupled with a lack of public awareness, result in an absence of deterrence for correctional officers\u27 misconduct, as financial and employment consequences are largely non-existent. The violations and inhumane treatment of incarcerated individuals will remain largely unchecked unless major legal and policy reforms rooted in justice and basic human rights are enacted to bring greater transparency, accountability, and independent oversight to correctional institutions
\u3cem\u3eJarkesy\u3c/em\u3e, the Seventh Amendment, and Tax Penalties
Full text linkIn 2024, in the Jarkesy case, a divided Supreme Court held unconstitutional a provision of the Dodd-Frank Act that allowed the SEC to assert securities law anti-fraud penalties through administrative proceedings subject to judicial review. The Jarkesy majority concluded that the invalidated procedure violated the Seventh Amendment’s guarantee of jury trial in some civil cases.
The dissent predicted that the reasoning of Jarkesy could be applied outside of the securities law area, putting hundreds of other statutes at peril of constitutional invalidation. This Article examines one such possible “spillover.” The Article explores whether Jarkesy threatens the current procedures by which federal civil tax penalties are determined and assessed. These procedures typically do not provide for jury trials. Are they therefore suspect on Seventh Amendment grounds?
This issue is important to the viability of the tax system that underlies all the federal Government does. The issue also is timely because Jarkesy arguments already have been raised—but not yet definitively resolved—in federal tax penalty cases
Standardizing Space Technologies as Admissible Evidence: Legal and Ethical Frameworks for U.S. Courts and the International Criminal Court
Full text linkThis paper explores the increasing role of satellite and other space technologies — such as optical satellite imagery, radar, and artificial intelligence (AI) — in legal proceedings both in the U.S. and internationally. It examines relevant Supreme Court and appellate cases, as well as key international rulings, to assess how courts are addressing the legal challenges posed by surveillance technologies. These cases reveal the tension between advancing technology and existing privacy protections, highlighting the need for updated legal frameworks. The analysis also covers federal laws, including the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, alongside proposed legislation like the American Privacy Rights Act and state-level regulations in Florida, California, and Texas. Internationally, it considers a piecemeal approach, where countries develop regulations independently, and advocates for a structured process beginning with national standards and bilateral agreements, progressing to International Organization for Standardization (ISO) guidelines, and culminating in establishing the International Space AI Regulatory Authority (ISARA), with the Satellite Evidence Standards and Verification Committee (SEVC) dedicated to legal oversight of satellite data. Modeled after the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and the International Maritime Organization (IMO), ISARA and SEVC would promote data reliability, strengthen frameworks for space-derived evidence, safeguard individual rights, and encourage international collaboration
The Form Doesn’t Know Anything: A Response to Chowdhury, Chudkowski & Gulati
Full text linkMerger and acquisition agreements differ significantly from sovereign bonds. While I have criticized the stubborn persistence of harmful or ineffective boilerplate in the M&A deal world, this persistence does not stem from a desire for uniformity or blind adherence to a sacred form. The dynamics involved in negotiating merger and acquisition agreements often dictate that comments on a form agreement be kept to a minimum, making the improvement of the form a secondary goal. Moreover, what one party considers bad boilerplate may be seen as beneficial by another. Many of the myths supposedly debunked by Chowdhury, Chudkowski & Gulati may, in fact, not be myths at all, at least in M&A. But one conclusion they draw appears to apply equally to M&A—the tug of form and market is strong indeed
Single-Owner \u3cem\u3eSociedades\u3c/em\u3e Within the Corporate Landscape of Latin America
Full text linkThe concept of a sociedad in Latin America has undergone profound changes throughout this century. Following the example set by the French Code de commerce of 1807, the sociedad was initially viewed as a contractual arrangement between two or more partners who make contributions to a business for purposes of sharing in the resulting profit or loss, wherein a plurality of partners was an intrinsic component. Nonetheless, the notion of a sociedad has evolved to entail the establishment of a separate legal entity, making the plurality of partners requirement increasingly obsolete for its formation and/or operation.
This Article describes the most salient features exhibited by each of the major categories of corporate vehicles in Latin America, covering traditional multi-partner companies such as the sociedad anónima (S.A.) and the sociedad de responsabilidad limitada (S.R.L.), as well as the various single-owner entities that have arisen over the past two decades, beginning with the sociedad por acciones simplificada (S.A.S.), initially promulgated in Colombia in 2008 but quickly adopted in other countries, along with the Chilean sociedad por acciones (SpA).
The contractual arrangement versus separate legal entity dichotomy surrounding the nature of a sociedad appears to be clearly leaning towards the latter, at least in Latin America, given the recent proliferation of single-owner entities. This Article concludes by discussing how the S.A.S. has emerged as the favorite mercantile vehicle across Latin America for both local entrepreneurs and foreign investors seeking greater flexibility to manage their commercial affairs with less formalities while still enjoying limited liability