Nevada Law Journal最新文献_第3页

Nevada Law Journal Pub Date : 2010-11-07 DOI: 10.4013/rechtd.2011.31.05

Mootz, J. Francis

引用次数: 1

As Time Goes by: Hermeneutics and Originalism 随着时间的流逝:解释学和原旨主义

Nevada Law Journal Pub Date : 2010-08-23 DOI: 10.4013/rechtd.2011.31.06

John T. Valauri

引用次数: 0

Masculinities, Post-Racialism and the Gates Controversy: The False Equivalence Between Officer and Civilian 男子气概、后种族主义与盖茨之争:军官与平民之间的错误等同

Nevada Law Journal Pub Date : 2010-03-22 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.1576751

F. Cooper

{"title":"Masculinities, Post-Racialism and the Gates Controversy: The False Equivalence Between Officer and Civilian","authors":"F. Cooper","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1576751","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1576751","url":null,"abstract":"On Thursday, July 16, 2009, white male police officer James Crowley was called to the home of prominent black male scholar Henry Louis Gates, Jr. on a report of a potential break-in. After confirming that no break-in had occurred and Gates’s identity, Crowley arrested Gates for disorderly conduct. Gates was promptly released without charges, and claimed he had been racially profiled. After the event became a national controversy, some people said that Gates was the true racist for assuming Crowley was racist. Only the parties “beer summit” with the President and Vice-president cooled the controversy. This article asks why Crowley arrested Gates and why some view Gates as the culprit. The answer to the first question is that this was not just racial profiling, but also a masculinity contest. The arrest can be conceived of as resulting from the ways the parties challenged each others’ masculinities, which resulted in a masculinity contest. Specifically, Gates’s violation of the unofficial rule of deference to the badge created a masculinity challenge for Crowley and resulted in a masculinity contest between the parties that Crowley resolved by arresting Gates. The answer to the second question is that race was indeed the dominant factor, but because of post-racialism, not traditional racism. Whereas colorblind ideology presumed the best way to reach an egalitarian society was to pretend race does not matter, post-racial ideology assumes we have reached that state. The ironic result of Obama’s election was to make it harder for the mainstream to see Crowley as implicitly biased and easier for them to see Gates as the true racist for having called Crowley racist. The complicated nature of the Gates arrest and controversy reveals the need for a scholarly program demonstrating that norms of masculinity, while invisible, strongly influence behavior and that post-racialism, while explicitly progressive, hides implicit bias from view.","PeriodicalId":198476,"journal":{"name":"Nevada Law Journal","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116182145","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 10

To Have and To Hold: What Does Love (of Money) Have to do with Joint Tax Filing? 拥有和持有:对金钱的热爱与共同纳税申报有什么关系?

Nevada Law Journal Pub Date : 2009-02-16 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.1344431

S. Mcmahon

{"title":"To Have and To Hold: What Does Love (of Money) Have to do with Joint Tax Filing?","authors":"S. Mcmahon","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1344431","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1344431","url":null,"abstract":"Wealthy taxpayers have always attempted to reduce their federal income taxes. Before 1948, one popular method was to shift income between spouses so that more of a husband’s income could be reported by, and taxed to, his lower-income, and thus lower tax bracket, wife. In 1948 Congress removed married couples’ incentive to engage in this tax avoidance behavior by adding nationalized income-splitting to the joint return. This effectively gave those filing joint returns tax brackets that were twice as wide as those of single taxpayers, and, as a result, married couples with a single or primary income-earner paid relatively less income tax than their single counterparts. Today there is debate over returning to an individual-based income tax system, similar to that which operated before 1948. Evaluating that proposal, this paper first explores the development of the income-splitting joint return to evaluate the potential costs and consequences of a return to an individual system. Individual-filing incentivized avoidance behavior, reducing the progressiveness of the income tax while giving tax advantages to those who engaged in tax-planning and an increased relative tax burden to those who did not. Second, the paper considers the prospect of the Internal Revenue Service reining in a renewal of this type of tax avoidance today. Returning to a system of individual filing will increase complexity in the tax code and add incentives and opportunities for tax avoidance at a time when the IRS is already struggling under the burden of non-compliance. Finally, in case practical concerns are not persuasive enough, this paper examines how best to evaluate married couples’ ability to pay taxes on a theoretical basis. Calculations on a unitary basis, it contends, remain more accurate for comparing married taxpayers to other taxpayers and it is that comparison, between couples as opposed to within couples, which reflects relative abilities to pay. As a result of these considerations, this paper concludes that joint filing remains the best filing unit.","PeriodicalId":198476,"journal":{"name":"Nevada Law Journal","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-02-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126895529","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 4

If You Love Arbitration, Set it Free: How 'Mandatory' Undermines 'Arbitration' 如果你喜欢仲裁，就让它自由:“强制性”如何破坏“仲裁”

Nevada Law Journal Pub Date : 2007-08-01 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.1006826

David S. Schwartz

{"title":"If You Love Arbitration, Set it Free: How 'Mandatory' Undermines 'Arbitration'","authors":"David S. Schwartz","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1006826","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1006826","url":null,"abstract":"By forcing employment and consumer cases into the mandatory arbitration system, the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Federal Arbitration Act has created inexorable pressures to judicialize arbitration, thereby tending to undermine what is valuable about arbitration as a dispute resolution process. A large and rapidly-expanding body of judicial doctrine - external arbitration law - now frames arbitration with decisional law on enforceability of arbitration clauses, arbitrability of issues, the judicial enforcement procedures for arbitrations both before and after the award, and sundry related matters. In addition, arbitration is becoming internally judicialized with formal procedures for how a case will be arbitrated, rules imposed extra-contractually, by case law, statute, professional organizations, and the arbitration providers themselves. Finally, academic commentators exacerbate this process of surrounding and infusing arbitration with formal law by focusing on increasingly specific doctrinal questions reflecting acceptance of or resignation to the mandatory arbitration regime. In other words, contemporary arbitration law is largely how courts and commentators cope with the two big mistakes underlying the Supreme Court's FAA interpretation. Believers in arbitration as a faster, simpler and cheaper alternative to litigation should support legislative reversal of judicially-created doctrine of mandatory arbitration.","PeriodicalId":198476,"journal":{"name":"Nevada Law Journal","volume":"166 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2007-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115293680","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 2

The Lawyer's Role(s) in Deliberative Democracy 律师在协商民主中的作用

Nevada Law Journal Pub Date : 2005-08-24 DOI: 10.4324/9781315248592-13

Carrie Menkel‐Meadow

{"title":"The Lawyer's Role(s) in Deliberative Democracy","authors":"Carrie Menkel‐Meadow","doi":"10.4324/9781315248592-13","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315248592-13","url":null,"abstract":"This article explores the possible marriage of recent political theory on deliberative democracy with conflict resolution theory and practice. It reviews the theoretical framework for encouraging more active public participation in both governmental and political decision making (Guttman & Thompson, Bohman, Habermas, Hampshire) and asks how processes can be structured to maximize political participation through several different modes of discourse: reasoned argument/principle; trading of preferences/bargaining and appeals to passion, emotion, and deeply held beliefs. The article suggests a variety of different modes of conflict resolution sorted by the need for constitutive, permanent or ad hoc decision-making, plenary vs. committee or task oriented organizational principles and whether deliberations are to be private and confidential or transparent and public, with predictions about how different outcomes will be produced by different process structures. In addition, the article suggests that lawyers might be particularly well suited (with additional disciplinary training) to performing Tocquevillian facilitative roles between and among deliberators in processes that seek to increase participative democracy and improve the quality of decision making.","PeriodicalId":198476,"journal":{"name":"Nevada Law Journal","volume":"26 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2005-08-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127870938","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 30

Response: Public Litigation, Private Arbitration? 回应:公共诉讼，私人仲裁?

Nevada Law Journal Pub Date : 1900-01-01 DOI: 10.7282/T3MS3X1C

David L. Noll

{"title":"Response: Public Litigation, Private Arbitration?","authors":"David L. Noll","doi":"10.7282/T3MS3X1C","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7282/T3MS3X1C","url":null,"abstract":"How should disputes be allocated between litigation and arbitration? Given strong incentives for many actors to arbitrate everything, the question turns fundamentally on the scope of arbitration under the applicable law. In Re-Inventing Arbitration: How Expanding the Scope of Arbitration Is Re-Shaping Its Form and Blurring the Line Between Private and Public Adjudication, Professor Deborah Hensler and Damira Khatam posit that the “public” or “private” nature of a dispute provides the key to whether it belongs in arbitration. While arbitration of private disputes is ok, disputes with “public policy dimensions” belong in the courts. Hensler and Khatam therefore suggest that Congress override Supreme Court decisions mandating arbitration of employment and consumer disputes, which, they contend, would restore domestic arbitration to its proper sphere. But can disputes really be divided into public and private categories that provide the key to whether they belong in arbitration? This Response suggests that on close examination it is exceedingly difficult to identify a reliable proxy for the public or private nature of a dispute. The absence of such a proxy suggests there is an inescapably political dimension to how disputes are allocated between litigation and arbitration. Whether a category of disputes should be heard in a public court because the disputes impact the public interest turns out to depend on contested judgments about where the public interest lies. This, in turn, suggests a more fundamental reason for Congress to revisit the scope of arbitration under the FAA. If the allocation of disputes between litigation and arbitration is an inescapably political question, it should ideally be addressed by an institution accountable to democratic politics.","PeriodicalId":198476,"journal":{"name":"Nevada Law Journal","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130127011","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Hiding the Statute in Plain View: University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar 隐藏在普通视野中的法规:德克萨斯大学西南医学中心诉纳萨尔案

Nevada Law Journal Pub Date : 1900-01-01 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.2341828

M. J. Zimmer

{"title":"Hiding the Statute in Plain View: University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar","authors":"M. J. Zimmer","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2341828","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2341828","url":null,"abstract":"The Supreme Court decided in University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar that the “a motivating factor” level of proof to establish liability set forth in §§ 703(m) and the same-decision defense to full remedies of 706(g)(2)(B) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 does not apply to claims of retaliation brought pursuant to § 704(a). Instead, Title VII retaliation must be the “but-for” cause of the adverse action plaintiff challenges. The obvious impact of Nassar is that it makes it more difficult for plaintiffs to prove retaliation. In some ways, Nassar is a surprise because the Court had consistently held for plaintiffs in a number of retaliation cases. In other ways, it was not a surprise that the Court would move its retaliation jurisprudence more in line with its recent pro-employer, anti-civil rights interpretation of statutes typified by its decision in Gross v. FBL Financial, Inc. To reach its desired decision, the Court had to forego the plain meaning approach to statutory interpretation that in Gross it said was to be used. The Court reached its conclusion by hiding the terms and the structure of Title VII in plain sight while replacing the actual terms of the statute with terms of its own creation. Further, the majority of the Court was captivated by a hypothetical presented by counsel for the employer of employees gaming retaliation law, a fact pattern that does not appear to have happened in any reported case, with that captivation indicative of the majority’s perspective favoring employers over employees in its recent antidiscrimination decisions.","PeriodicalId":198476,"journal":{"name":"Nevada Law Journal","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128692556","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Restraining Forced Marriage 禁止强迫婚姻

Nevada Law Journal Pub Date : 1900-01-01 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.2962589

L. Martin

{"title":"Restraining Forced Marriage","authors":"L. Martin","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2962589","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2962589","url":null,"abstract":"Although long a component of international women’s human rights platforms, forced marriage is only presently gaining attention as a critical problem in the United States. In recent years, a number of states have considered legislation to redress forced and child marriage, most by increasing the minimum age to marry and/or mandating judicial approval of marriages involving minors. Although civil marriage reform is important, it alone is insufficient to combat forced marriage. Even where civil marriage is limited to adults, minors remain vulnerable to forced customary, religious, common law marriages, and marriages consecrated abroad. Further, intended spouses of all ages remain vulnerable to conduct intended to coerce their consent to marry. To prevent and redress forced marriage, potential victims need ready access to emergency civil injunc- tive relief. Civil protection orders are the central civil injunctive remedy relied upon to address intimate partner violence, rape, and stalking in the United States. The expedited and flexible remedies of civil protection orders could also help combat forced marriages; however, common legal standards create barriers to relief for those vulnerable to forced marriage. This Article is the first to undertake a detailed evaluation of the viability of civil protection orders to prevent and redress forced marriage. Although protection orders show promise as a tool to prevent and redress forced marriage in many states, the nuances of the governing legal standards reduce the practical utility of the remedy for those who lack expert guidance. To enhance the accessibility of protection orders in the context of forced marriage, this article proposes that states create a new forced marriage protection order like that established in the United Kingdom to address the specific needs of those facing this problem.","PeriodicalId":198476,"journal":{"name":"Nevada Law Journal","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128286240","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 4

Insuring Landslides: America’s Uninsured Natural Catastrophes 《滑坡保险:美国未投保的自然灾害》

Nevada Law Journal Pub Date : 1900-01-01 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.2566238

Christopher C. French

引用次数: 1