Notre Dame Law Review最新文献_第5页

2. Notre Dame: The Virgin in Nineteenth-Century France 2. 巴黎圣母院:19世纪法国的圣母

IF 0.9 3区社会学

Notre Dame Law Review Pub Date : 2018-07-01 DOI: 10.11647/obp.0143.02

J. Ziolkowski

引用次数: 0

1. Tumbling Back into France, by Way of Philology 1. 从语言学的角度，滚落回法国

IF 0.9 3区社会学

Notre Dame Law Review Pub Date : 2018-07-01 DOI: 10.11647/OBP.0143.01

J. Ziolkowski

引用次数: 0

5. Le Jongleur de Notre Dame 5. 巴黎圣母院的杂耍者

IF 0.9 3区社会学

Notre Dame Law Review Pub Date : 2018-07-01 DOI: 10.11647/obp.0143.05

Jan M. Ziolkowski

引用次数: 0

3. Franglais Juggling 3.英语外来语杂耍

IF 0.9 3区社会学

Notre Dame Law Review Pub Date : 2018-07-01 DOI: 10.11647/OBP.0143.03

Jan M. Ziolkowski

引用次数: 0

1. The Medieval Beginnings of Our Lady’s Tumbler 1. 圣母杯的中世纪起源

IF 0.9 3区社会学

Notre Dame Law Review Pub Date : 2018-06-01 DOI: 10.11647/OBP.0132.01

(six-volume set) J. Ziolkowski

引用次数: 0

3. Cistercian Monks and Lay Brothers 3.西多会修士和平信徒

IF 0.9 3区社会学

Notre Dame Law Review Pub Date : 2018-06-01 DOI: 10.11647/obp.0132.03

(six-volume set) J. Ziolkowski

引用次数: 0

5. A Troupe of Sources and Analogues 5. 一群来源和类似物

IF 0.9 3区社会学

Notre Dame Law Review Pub Date : 2018-06-01 DOI: 10.11647/obp.0132.05

(six-volume set) J. Ziolkowski

引用次数: 0

Securities Law in the Sixties: The Supreme Court, the Second Circuit, and the Triumph of Purpose Over Text 《六十年代的证券法:最高法院、第二巡回法院和宗旨战胜文本》

IF 0.9 3区社会学

Notre Dame Law Review Pub Date : 2018-04-09 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.3119969

A. Pritchard, R. Thompson

{"title":"Securities Law in the Sixties: The Supreme Court, the Second Circuit, and the Triumph of Purpose Over Text","authors":"A. Pritchard, R. Thompson","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3119969","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3119969","url":null,"abstract":"This articles analyzes the Supreme Court’s leading securities cases from 1962 to 1972—Capital Gains, J.I. Case v. Borak, Mills v. Electric Auto-Lite Co., Bankers Life, and Affiliated Ute—relying not just on the published opinions, but also the justices’ internal letters, memos, and conference notes. The Sixties Court did not simply apply the text as enacted by Congress, but instead invoked the securities laws’ purposes as a guide to interpretation. The Court became a partner of Congress in shaping the securities laws, rather than a mere agent. The interpretive space opened by the Court’s invocation of purpose allowed a dramatic expansion in the law of securities fraud. Encouraged by the high court’s dynamic statutory interpretation doctrine, the Second Circuit—the “Mother Court” for securities law—developed new causes of action that transformed both public and private enforcement of the securities laws. The insider trading prohibition found a new home in the flexible confines of Rule 10b-5. Implied private rights of action encouraged class actions to flourish. The growth of fiduciary duty in the 1960s created a blueprint for “federal corporation law.” The Supreme Court’s “counter-revolutionary” turn in the 1970s cut back on purposivism and the doctrinal innovations of the Sixties, but the approaches to insider trading and private rights of action survived, remaining pillars of securities regulation today.","PeriodicalId":47176,"journal":{"name":"Notre Dame Law Review","volume":"16 1","pages":"371"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2018-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86671954","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

The State of the Death Penalty 死刑的现状

IF 0.9 3区社会学

Notre Dame Law Review Pub Date : 2018-02-21 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.3124455

A. Desai, Brandon L. Garrett

{"title":"The State of the Death Penalty","authors":"A. Desai, Brandon L. Garrett","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3124455","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3124455","url":null,"abstract":"The death penalty is in decline in America and most death penalty states do not regularly impose death sentences. In 2016 and 2017, states reached modern lows in imposed death sentences, with just thirty-one defendants sentenced to death in 2016 and thirty-nine in 2017, as compared with over three hundred per year in the 1990s. In 2016, only thirteen states imposed death sentences, and in 2017, fourteen did so, although thirty-one states retain the death penalty. What explains this remarkable and quite unexpected trend? In this Article, we present new analysis of state-level legislative changes that might have been expected to impact death sentences. First, life without parole (LWOP) statutes, now enacted in nearly every state, might have been expected to reduce death sentences because they give jurors a non-capital option at trial. Second, legislatures have moved, albeit at varying paces, to comply with the Supreme Court’s holding in Ring v. Arizona, which requires that the final decision in capital sentencing be made not by a judge, but by a jury. Third, states at different times have created state-wide public defender offices to represent capital defendants at trial. In addition, the decline in homicides and homicide rates could be expected to contribute to the decline in state-level death sentencing. We find that contrary to the expectations of many observers, changes in the law such as adoption of LWOP and jury sentencing, did not consistently or significantly impact death sentencing. The decline in homicides and homicide rates is correlated with changes in death sentencing at the state level. However, this Article finds that state provision of capital trial representation is far more strongly and robustly correlated with reduced death sentencing than these other factors. The findings bolster the argument that adequacy of counsel has greater implications for the administration of the death penalty than other legal factors. These findings also have implications beyond the death penalty and they underscore the importance of a structural understanding of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel in our system of criminal justice.","PeriodicalId":47176,"journal":{"name":"Notre Dame Law Review","volume":"20 1","pages":"1255"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2018-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82139550","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 2

Due Process, Free Expression, and the Administrative State 正当程序、言论自由和行政国家

IF 0.9 3区社会学

Notre Dame Law Review Pub Date : 2018-02-12 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.3122697

Martin H. Redish, K. McCall

{"title":"Due Process, Free Expression, and the Administrative State","authors":"Martin H. Redish, K. McCall","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3122697","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3122697","url":null,"abstract":"The Supreme Court has long imposed on the judiciary a due process requirement of neutrality. Any temptation to the reasonable judge to decide a case other than on its merits is deemed unconstitutional, even in the absence of any showing of actual bias. The Court has been wisely willing to risk over-enforcement of the neutral adjudicator requirement, rather than under-enforcement. In the administrative context, however, the Court has imposed the exact opposite presumption: that absent a clear showing of bias, administrative adjudicators will be assumed to satisfy due process, even though they are part of the very agency instituting the adversary proceeding and will often have played a direct role in the institution of the proceeding. This Article argues that because of their built-in connections to the interests of the agencies for which they work, administrators should be deemed at least as inherently suspect, for due process purposes, as are judges. As in judicial proceedings, property or other constitutional rights may well be at stake, and due process protections are triggered equally in both contexts. The Article acknowledges the practical reality that many will consider it simply too late in the day to force so sweeping revisions in the administrative process, despite the serious constitutional problems it raises. Therefore as a second line of attack, the Article argues that a categorical exception be made to the blanket assumption of administrative adjudicatory neutrality for those cases challenging the constitutionality of agency action. In such situations, the administrators’ connection to their own agencies renders them inherently ill-equipped to neutrally adjudicate such challenges. This is particularly so, the Article argues, when First Amendment rights of free expression are implicated. Because of their simultaneous importance and fragility, the Article argues that plausible claims that proposed agency adjudicatory action will contravene a regulated party’s First Amendment rights should be allowed to reach the courts prior to the conduct of the administrative proceeding.","PeriodicalId":47176,"journal":{"name":"Notre Dame Law Review","volume":"19 1","pages":"297-328"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2018-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89582725","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1