Stanford Law Review最新文献_第5页

The end of privacy. 隐私的终结。

IF 4.9 1区社会学

Stanford Law Review Pub Date : 2008-10-01

Jed Rubenfeld

引用次数: 0

Transparency is the Solution, Not the Problem: A Reply to Bruce Green 透明是解决方案，而不是问题:回复布鲁斯·格林

IF 4.9 1区社会学

Stanford Law Review Pub Date : 2008-06-06 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.1177786

William H. Simon

引用次数: 1

Viewpoint Diversity and Media Consolidation: An Empirical Study 观点多样性与媒体整合的实证研究

IF 4.9 1区社会学

Stanford Law Review Pub Date : 2008-03-11 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.1121229

Daniel E. Ho, K. Quinn

{"title":"Viewpoint Diversity and Media Consolidation: An Empirical Study","authors":"Daniel E. Ho, K. Quinn","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1121229","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1121229","url":null,"abstract":"One of the central predicates of legal regulation of media ownership is that ownership consolidation reduces substantive viewpoint diversity. Appellate courts and in turn the Federal Communications Commission have increasingly demanded evidence for this convergence hypothesis, but extant empirical measures of viewpoint diversity sidestep the problem, ignoring diversity, viewpoints, or both. Our article develops and offers a finely-tuned, time-varying statistical measure of editorial viewpoint diversity, based on a new database of over 1600 editorials in 25 top papers from 1988-2004. Using this new measure, we assess the validity of the convergence hypothesis by examining the evolution of editorial viewpoints over the course of five major mergers and acquisitions. Our data reveals complex patterns that defy extant accounts, showing stability, convergence and divergence of viewpoints in the face of - and depending on the circumstances of - consolidation. These findings fundamentally challenge extant empirical regulatory assumptions - pointing to the crucial role of editorial policies - and deeply inform the viability of the ownership regulations and the interpretation of the 1996 Telecommunications Act.","PeriodicalId":51386,"journal":{"name":"Stanford Law Review","volume":"61 1","pages":"781"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2008-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68144073","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"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: 36

Sovereign Wealth Funds and Corporate Governance: A Minimalist Response to the New Mercantilism 主权财富基金与公司治理:对新重商主义的极简回应

IF 4.9 1区社会学

Stanford Law Review Pub Date : 2008-03-01 DOI: 10.3406/ecofi.2009.5520

R. Gilson, C. Milhaupt

引用次数: 73

Keeping Control of Terrorists Without Losing Control of Constitutionalism 既要控制恐怖分子，又要保持对宪政的控制

IF 4.9 1区社会学

Stanford Law Review Pub Date : 2008-01-26 DOI: 10.4324/9781315260150-8

C. Walker

{"title":"Keeping Control of Terrorists Without Losing Control of Constitutionalism","authors":"C. Walker","doi":"10.4324/9781315260150-8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315260150-8","url":null,"abstract":"The anticipatory risk of mass terrorism casualties or even the nightmare of the use of weapons of mass destruction conduces towards interventions which are preemptive or preventative. The threat of terrorism to life and liberty cannot be addressed simply by ex post facto rectification for the sake of justice. An inevitable consequence of this risk dynamic will be an intelligence-led approach, that is, governmental net-casting for information and for potential assailants on a wide and prescient scale. Several measures in U.K. law could be considered as test cases of counter-terrorism control measures. Probably the most appropriate are the eponymous control orders under the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005. The system imposed by the Act encompasses both operative dynamics: the imperative to respond to anticipatory risk and the need to extend action to the \"neighbor\" terrorist. Foremost in the inquiry will be the following questions: what circumstances gave rise to the policy of control orders; what are the main elements of the policy and how is it implemented; is it possible to maintain constitutionalism when dealing with a non-criminal justice mechanism of this kind; and, what lessons can be derived for future policy?","PeriodicalId":51386,"journal":{"name":"Stanford Law Review","volume":"10 1","pages":"1395"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2008-01-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70643523","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"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: 36

Crawford's Aftershock: Aligning the Regulation of Non-Testimonial Hearsay with the History and Purposes of the Confrontation Clause 克劳福德的余震:非证言传闻的规制与对抗条款的历史和目的的对接

IF 4.9 1区社会学

Stanford Law Review Pub Date : 2008-01-01 DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.1024245

Fred O. Smith, Jr.

{"title":"Crawford's Aftershock: Aligning the Regulation of Non-Testimonial Hearsay with the History and Purposes of the Confrontation Clause","authors":"Fred O. Smith, Jr.","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1024245","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1024245","url":null,"abstract":"Through Crawford v. Washington and its progeny, the United States Supreme Court has limited the reach of the Confrontation Clause to testimonial hearsay. Testimonial hearsay, the court reasoned, was the primary object of the clause. Other commentators have highlighted the history that persuasively shows that banning testimonial hearsay was the chief motivation behind the Confrontation Clause. But what do the purposes and history of the clause have to say about the admission of non-testimonial hearsay statements? Part I examines common law near the Founding, and argues that non-testimonial hearsay was one of the ills that the Confrontation Clause was designed to protect against. Part I additionally proposes a two-tiered approach to interpreting the clause, in which testimonial statements receive the most vigorous form of constitutional scrutiny, but non-testimonial statements receive meaningful scrutiny as well. Part II of the paper then explores what confrontation should mean, both historically and practically, in the context of non-testimonial hearsay. After marshaling relevant caselaw, historical texts, jury instructions and practitioners' guides, Part II additionally concludes that simply re-implementing the old pre-Crawford regime would not adequately or faithfully result in the type of meaningful confrontation demanded by the clause. Part III then proposes four interpretive reforms that would bring American courts closer to harmonizing the Confrontation Clause's regulation with the provision's full range of historical and practical values.","PeriodicalId":51386,"journal":{"name":"Stanford Law Review","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2008-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68129018","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"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 Market for Bad Legal Advice: Academic Professional Responsibility Consulting as an Example 不良法律咨询市场:以学术职业责任咨询为例

IF 4.9 1区社会学

Stanford Law Review Pub Date : 2007-12-18 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.1025984

William H. Simon

引用次数: 6

Doubtful duty: physicians' legal obligation to treat during an epidemic. 可疑责任:医生在流行病期间治疗的法律义务。

IF 4.9 1区社会学

Stanford Law Review Pub Date : 2007-11-01

Ariel R Schwartz

引用次数: 0

Holmes on Emergencies 福尔摩斯谈紧急事件

IF 4.9 1区社会学

Stanford Law Review Pub Date : 2007-07-05 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.998601

Adrian Vermeule

引用次数: 4

Equality in the War on Terror 反恐战争中的平等

IF 4.9 1区社会学

Stanford Law Review Pub Date : 2007-04-27 DOI: 10.4324/9781315260150-9

N. Katyal

{"title":"Equality in the War on Terror","authors":"N. Katyal","doi":"10.4324/9781315260150-9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315260150-9","url":null,"abstract":"Today, much public attention and litigation in the wake of the government's response to the September 11, 2001 attacks centers on one or another claims about the government's substantive illegality (such as claims based on the Due Process Clause). This is a mistake. Instead of focusing on the ultimate individual liberty questions, challenges should first focus on equality. Since the terrorist attacks, the government has repeatedly singled out aliens for special disfavor. For example, the Military Commissions Act blatantly discriminates against aliens - shunting the 20 million green-card holders and 5 billion people across the planet into a different, and far inferior, trial procedure than what American citizens face. Since at least the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment's equality guarantee, such legislation has never been placed in the United States Code. The equality challenges are the next big thing in the war on terror. While discrimination by the federal government against aliens might be justified when it is handing out government benefits, it is not appropriate when deciding whether someone can be put before a tribunal with the power to dispense the most awesome powers of government, such as life imprisonment and the death penalty. When legislation singles out only powerless aliens, moreover, the standard checks on government abuse, such as political accountability, fail to operate. The result is not only that the legislation runs afoul of the Constitution's guarantee of equal protection, it also eliminates the legislation from the zone of deference traditionally due to the political branches.","PeriodicalId":51386,"journal":{"name":"Stanford Law Review","volume":"59 1","pages":"1365"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2007-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70643560","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"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: 6