4328 research outputs found
Sort by
Private Prosecution in America
No full textPrivate Prosecution in America is the first comprehensive examination of a practice that dates back to the colonial era. Tracking its origins to medieval times and the English common law, the book shows how private prosecutors were once a mainstay of early American criminal procedure. Private prosecutors—acting on their own behalf, as next of kin, or through retained counsel—initiated prosecutions, presented evidence in court, and sought the punishment of offenders.
Until the rise and professionalization of public prosecutors\u27 offices, private prosecutors played a major role in the criminal justice system, including in capital cases. After conducting a 50-state survey and recounting how some locales still allow private prosecutions by interested parties, the book argues that such prosecutions violate defendants\u27 constitutional rights and should be outlawed.https://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/fac_books/1122/thumbnail.jp
Megacorporations are jacking up prices \u27because they can,\u27 pushing red-hot inflation to historic levels
Get PDFThis article argues that corporations may be taking advantages of supply chain bottlenecks and shortages to collude and raise prices illegally. Although price fixing is illegal, the current levels of penalties are far too low. This gives firms an incentive to collude. Before the pandemic, when inflation was low, consumers and the antitrust enforcers would have been more likely to notice any sudden price increases and investigate whether they were caused by collusion. But using bottlenecks and shortages as cover, companies can take advantage of their years of consolidation and collude more easily with less chance of it being detected. Thus, anticompetitive activity, including price fixing, is likely to be caused by the current supply chain bottlenecks and shortages, and thus be contributing to inflation
Asking the Menstruation Question to Achieve Menstrual Justice
Get PDFMenstruation is a situs of discrimination, oppression, harassment, and microaggression. Employers fire workers for bleeding and experiencing period pain. Schools control menstruating students’ access to bathrooms, products, and menstrual education. Prisons control their residents’ free access to menstrual products. There are both “obvious and non-obvious relationships” between menstrual discrimination and discrimination on the basis of race, gender, class, gender identity, and disability. This Essay suggests we ask the “menstruation question” as part of our examination of all forms of intersectional oppressions and to achieve menstrual justice. For example, if we see something racist, we should ask “where is the menstrual oppression in this?” So too, if we see menstrual oppression, we should ask, “where is the racism in this?” Through this process, we discover the multidimensionality of menstrual injustices and how they operate as structural intersectionality. We learn that “dismantling any one form of subordination is impossible without dismantling every other.” Therefore, asking the menstruation question is critical to achieve menstrual justice
The Rule of Law: A Necessary Pillar of Free and Democratic Societies for Protecting Human Rights
Get PDFThis essay traces the history and development of the concept of the Rule of Law from ancient times through the present. It describes the elements of the Rule of Law and its importance to the protection of human rights in a variety of contexts, including under domestic and international law. From ancient Greece and Rome to the Enlightenment, and from the American and French Revolutions to modern times, the Rule of Law has played a key role in societies around the world. The essay discusses definitions of the Rule of Law, its origins, and its development over time, including in Europe, America’s founding period, and the post–World War II era. In particular, the essay discusses the intellectual contributions of historical figures such as the Italian criminal-law theorist Cesare Beccaria, the French jurist, Baron de Montesquieu, and American revolutionaries who played major roles in laying the now centuries-old foundation for the development of the modern-day Rule of Law concept (i.e., in drafting early American constitutions and laws, including the U.S. Constitution and its Bill of Rights). The essay explores a wide range of topics, from the creation of the United Nations and the ratification of international conventions and human rights treaties, to the adoption of South Africa’s post–apartheid constitution, to Donald Trump’s continuous and systematic assault on the Rule of Law, human rights, and democratic institutions and norms. The essay also highlights the Rule of Law’s symbiotic relationship to the protection of fundamental human rights such as the rights to equality, to vote, and to be free from discrimination, cruelty and torture. Arguing that various Trump Administration acts and policies (e.g., separating children from their parents at the U.S.-Mexico border and the death penalty’s use) and the outrageous and brazen efforts of Donald Trump and his campaign and allies to discriminate against and disenfranchise voters violate core Rule of Law principles, the essay concludes by emphasizing the Rule of Law’s continuing and critical importance to the protection of civil liberties and fundamental human rights in the twenty-first century
The Authoritative Text as Imperative to Comprehensibility of Legislation
Get PDFThe most understandable of texts is of little use as law if it is not clear that it is authoritative. This is the comparative lesson of this essay. American law is—Americans say—indeterminate. American law is indeterminate because American texts, clear as they may be in wording, often are not authoritative; other texts apply too and may be inconsistent. German law is rarely indeterminate in this sense.
This essay identifies in bullet-points some comparative aspects of clarity of American and German law. Why is American law indeterminate? Why is German law not? What, if anything, do these differences counsel for future European Union law? I identify five areas of differences. 1. Legal System and Statutes, 2. Lawmaking. 3. Federalism. 4. Constitutional Review and 5. Law Application
