3722 research outputs found
Sort by
Red Cardinal, White Snow
No full textIn Red Cardinal, White Snow, Susan Ayres tells us in the first poem that childhood is not a meadow, and she will document the spirit shatter of mental illness and family trauma. But these stunning poems do so for the sake of talking back to ruin, showing us the beauty of love under pressure, how illumination coexists with heartache, and disorder strengthens kindness. These poems are a master class in the art of becoming human. ~Betsy Sholl
The poems in Red Cardinal, White Snow by Susan Ayres allow readers to touch “the broken membrane between sanity and terror.” That membrane has all the voltage and punch of a live wire, but the powerful, heart-heavy, and earthy, images ground us, keep us safe as we are reminded how shockingly fragile living and loving well can be. ~Tomás Q. Morín
In Red Cardinal, White Snow, the poet’s work has been to mold the mud of experience into a vase of words. And she has succeeded by calling on all the shaping devices of poetic form. From the brilliant title and perfectly chosen Octavio Paz epigraph, to the striking metaphors, and memorable diction (“susurrated stories”), Ayres’ poems transform howls of anguish into art. What an accomplishment. ~Bonnie Lyons, author of So Fa
Section 1: Defining Arbitration and Addressing Structural Bias
Get PDFThe Supreme Court’s jurisprudence pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) has successfully encouraged the use of arbitration to resolve disputes of all types, including those arising out of contracts of adhesion. Meanwhile, with one very limited exception, neither Congress nor the Supreme Court has done anything to assure those bound by adhesive contracts that the required arbitration process will be fair, impartial, and consistent with due process principles. The FAA does not even include a definition of arbitration to guide arbitration providers and individual arbitrators. This chapter proposes the addition of a definition of arbitration to the FAA to make it clear that: (1) arbitration is a decision-making process involving binding adjudication by a third party; (2) arbitration must meet the requirements of due process, including but not limited to an impartial arbitrator; and (3) arbitration providers must have a mechanism in place to assure sufficient due process and impartiality. In the adhesive contract context, this last requirement would help ensure that judicial enforcement of arbitration clauses and arbitral awards is conditioned on a sufficient showing of the safeguards put into place to protect structural bias – which should then both justify requests for discovery on this issue and incentivize arbitration providers’ establishment of the needed structural and procedural safeguards
Book Review: Transformative Negotiation: Strategies for Everyday Change and Equitable Futures
Get PDFThis volume makes an immense contribution to the field of negotiation and to dispute resolution more generally. The book covers a vast amount of ground, effectively connecting theory to practice and harnessing large amounts of research to support its arguments and advice. Perhaps most importantly, this reviewer found reading the book to be—as the title suggests—a transformative experience
Cross-Border Impacts Related to Transboundary Aquifers: Characterizing Legal Responsibility and Liability
No full textGroundwater recognizes none of the political boundaries that humanity has drawn on maps. As a result, when groundwater traverses borders and frontiers it raises questions of responsibility and liability pertaining to the use, management, exploitation, and administration of cross-border aquifers. This occurs both at the international level where two or more sovereign nations, as well as at the domestic level where two or more subnational political units, overlay a common aquifer. The law applicable to transboundary groundwater resources at both levels of governance is presently quite primitive and lacking. Moreover, the relationship of groundwater law to surface water law is often non-existent.
This book provides a foundation for the development of such norms. It explores circumstances under which the use, management, exploitation, and administration of a transboundary aquifer might cause harm to a neighboring political unit and, thereby, result in legal responsibility and/or liability. It assesses cause and effect relationships with reference to conceptual models of transboundary aquifers developed by Eckstein & Eckstein (2005). Notions of gaining and losing stream relationships, recharging and non-recharging aquifers, groundwater flow direction, the impact of groundwater pumping, anthropogenic contamination, and other concepts are utilized to describe scenarios in which harm could traverse a political boundary. The book then translates that analysis into notions of responsibility and liability that are more common in the legal realm
North American Energy in the Crossfire
Get PDFNorth America is the beating heart of global energy markets un-dergoing a terrible energy crisis that threatens to upend both the economy and global security. The clearest path out of this global crisis is increasing energy supplies from North America, which can restore energy security and drive a transition to cleaner energy sources. The U.S., Mexico, and Canada have abundant and varied resources to surmount this challenge but are in dire need of stronger cooperation across borders, and between private and public actors to achieve this goal. This Article shows how energy law changes in the U.S. and Mexico present under-studied dangers to cross-border en-ergy trade and sets an agenda for legal reform to enable mutually beneficial fuel and power trade.The United States has recently emerged from history’s biggest oil boom, and along with its neighbors, is becoming the crossroads for an increasingly global two-way trade in oil and gas. The U.S., Mexico, and Canada are major global energy producers and consum-ers, and their different balance of products creates important trading opportunities. The United States and Mexico, in particular, have much to gain from expanded energy trade. Yet there is an increasing danger that this potential will be squandered. Growing movements against eminent domain, infrastructure permits, and energy exports in the United States, and moves to re-nationalize the energy sector in Mexico are making energy companies increasingly wary of investing in the future of U.S.-Mexico energy trade. Ironically, politicians on both sides of the border accuse each other of being the source of un-certainty for the future of the North American energy industry. This Article uncovers the fault lines undermining North America’s energy potential and proposes principles for an energy agreement that could be adopted either by the United States Mexico Canada Agreement (USMCA) partners or by direct negotiations between the U.S. and Mexico to secure the benefits of increased energy trade and increase cooperation in energy and climate policy
Charging Abortion
Get PDFAs long as Roe v. Wade remained good law, prosecutors could largely avoid the question of abortion. The Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization has now placed prosecutors at the forefront of the abortion wars. Some chief prosecutors in antiabortion states have pledged to not enforce antiabortion laws, whereas others are targeting even out-of-state providers. This post-Dobbs reality, wherein the ability to obtain an abortion depends not only on the politics of one’s state but also the policies of one’s local district attorney, has received minimal scrutiny from legal scholars.
Prosecutors have broad charging discretion, but prevailing ethical rules and standards do not allow them to disregard laws that they regard as unjust. Nevertheless, since prosecutors do not have unlimited resources, and abortion cases are complex and sensitive, they should use their discretion to focus only on cases in which abortion care endangers women and in instances of coercion, as they did pre-Roe. Extraterritorial applications of antiabortion law are constitutionally suspect and are unlikely to further the public interest. Abortion is one of the most contentious issues in American life. In a morally pluralistic society, prosecutors must strive for neutrality in the abortion wars by relying on professional standards to guide their charging discretion rather than following public opinion and the dictates of individual conscience
Consumer Law for Gen Z Law Students
Get PDFWhether they are consumers, representing consumers, or advising clients dealing with consumers, law school graduates will inevitably confront numerous consumer law issues. Moreover, most students entering law school are members of Generation Z and face a new wave of consumer laws arising from the 2007–2009 recession and the rapid growth of new technologies. Clickwrap agreements, email spoofing, cybercrimes, cryptocurrencies, fintech, identity theft, online disparagement, data privacy, artificial intelligence, robocalling, and autonomous vehicles are among the evolving topics in modern consumer law. Despite the growth in consumer law concerns, many law students have limited access to consumer law options, with almost 40% of law schools not offering any consumer law courses and less than 30% hosting consumer law clinics. Even where classes are taught, they are often not available annually
Constitutional Property and Progressive Property’s Compatibility: A Reappraisal
Get PDFProgressive property theory is driven by a desire to improve the law, and legal outcomes, for those on the margins of society. At the same time, it largely assumes the compatibility of constitutional property rights with its aims. However, constitutional property doctrine is often ambiguous on the core question of what distribution of collective burdens is susceptible to invalidation. Such ambiguity in turn can support political over-inflation of the strength of constitutional protection for property rights. Given the resulting chilling effect that constitutional property rights can have on measures that interfere with property rights, the Article argues that progressive property should be more sceptical of property rights guarantees that are interpreted judicially as having anti-redistributive effects. At the very least, it should more closely analyse and account for the political effects of such rights
Cultural Property: “Progressive Property In Action”
Get PDFCultural property law fulfills many of the normative and jurisprudential goals of progressive property theory. Cultural property limits the normal prerogatives of owners in order to give legal substance to the interests of the public or of specially protected non-owners. It recognizes that preservation of and access to heritage resources advance public values such as cultural enrichment and community identity. The proliferation of cultural property laws and their acceptance by courts has occurred despite a resurgent property fundamentalism embraced by the Supreme Court. Thus, this Article seeks to explicate the category of cultural property, its fulfillment of progressive theory, and its success in an adverse legal environment. The article originated as part of a symposium responding to Rachael Walsh’s Property Rights and Social Justice: Progressive Property in Act
Unequal Land: Towards Full Recognition of Indigenous People’s Religious Rights
Get PDFIndigenous people face disparate treatment regarding religious free-exercise claims in the United States court system. Specifically, courts misconstrue native religious practices and hold native religious practitioners to a higher standard of proof than practitioners of mainstream religions in their free-exercise claims. This Article analyzes the history of oppression of indigenous people in the United States and the congressional intent to remedy such oppression through legislation. Further, this Article argues that despite Congress’s efforts to remedy the oppression of indigenous peoples, courts still utilize a problematic analysis of indigenous free-exercise claims. To resolve the inconsistent treatment between native and mainstream religious practitioners, this Article argues that courts should do three things when analyzing an indigenous free-exercise claim: (1) presume indigenous peoples suffer subjective harm from the government action at issue; (2) apply the law through an anti-subordination lens; and (3) broadly construe the Religious Freedom Restoration Act