Date of Publication:
Sebastian Braun et al., Introduction to American Indian Studies: Policies, Histories, and Contemporary Perspectives (Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, 2021)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Grant Christensen et al., Tribal Court Litigation, in Recent Developments in Business and Corporate Litigation (American Bar Association, Business Law Section, 2021)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Royal C. Gardner, Opportunities and Challenges for Synergies Across Biodiversity-Related Conventions in the Context of Human Health and Zoonotic Diseases: The Role of Scientific Advisory Bodies, in Biological Diversity and International Law: Challenges for the Post 2020 Scenario (Mar Campins and Teresa Fajardo eds., Spring Nature, 2021)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
This chapter examines the work of the scientific advisory bodies of five biodiversity-related conventions: the Ramsar Convention, Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species, Convention on Migratory Species, Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbirds, and Convention on Biological Diversity. It will discuss how the scientific advisory bodies have collaborated in the past, through ad hoc or more formalized approaches, and how they may work more closely together in the future through the emergence of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), especially in the context of human health and infectious diseases. In doing so, this chapter considers how the scientific advisory bodies have responded to outbreaks of highly pathogenic avian influenza, Ebola virus disease, and COVID-19. While institutional constraints exist, IPBES provides an opportunity for the scientific advisory bodies—and thus the biodiversity-related conventions themselves—to more effectively emphasize the need for biodiversity conservation as preventive measures for human health and well-being.
Date of Publication:
Louis J. Virelli and Richard W. Murphy, Supreme Court News, 46 Administrative & Regulatory Law News 18 (2021)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Walter Hellerstein and Andrew D. Appleby, Platforms: The Postscript, 100 Tax Notes State 1365 (2021)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Kenneth G. Dau-Schmidt et al., Legal Protection for the Individual Employee (6th ed., West Academic, 2021)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Dagmar Rita Myslinska, Not Quite Right: Representations of Eastern Europeans in ECJ Discourse, 34 International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society 271 (2021)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Although the increasing responsiveness of the Court of Justice of the European Union (the ‘ECJ’) jurisprudence to western Member States’ concerns regarding Central and Eastern European (‘CEE’) nationals’ mobility has garnered academic attention, ECJ discourse has not been scrutinised for how it approaches the CEE region or CEE movers. Applying postcolonial theory, this article seeks to fill this gap and to explore whether there are any indications that ECJ discourse is in line with the historical western-centric inferiorisation of the CEE region. A critical discourse analysis of a set of ECJ judgments and corresponding Advocate General opinions pertaining to CEE nationals illustrates not only how the ECJ adopts numerous discursive strategies to maintain its authority, but also how it tends to prioritise values of the western Member States, while overlooking interests of CEE movers. Its one-sided approach is further reinforced by referring to irrelevant facts and negative assumptions to create an image of CEE nationals as socially and economically inferior to westerners, as not belonging to the proper EU polity and as not quite deserving of EU law’s protections. By silencing CEE nationals’ voices, while disregarding the background of east/west socio-economic and political power differentials and precariousness experienced by many CEE workers in the west, such racialising discourse normalises ethnicity- and class-based stereotypes. These findings also help to contextualise both EU and western policies targeting CEE movers and evidence of their unequal outcomes in the west, and are in line with today’s nuanced expressions of racisms. By illustrating the ECJ’s role in addressing values pertinent to mobile CEE individuals, this study facilitates a fuller appreciation of the ECJ’s power in shaping and reflecting western-centric EU identity and policies. Engaging with such issues will not only allow us to better appreciate—and question—the ECJ’s legitimacy, but might also facilitate a better understanding of power dynamics within the EU. This study also makes significant theoretical and methodological contributions. It expands (and complicates) the application of postcolonial theory to contemporary intra-EU processes, while illustrating the usefulness of applying critical discourse analysis to exploring differentiation, exclusion, subordination and power within legal language.
Date of Publication:
Darryl Wilson, Keeping Current-Property, 35 Probate and Property 22 (2021)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Ellen S. Podgor, The Dichotomy Between Overcriminalization and Underregulation, 70 Am. U. L. Rev. 1061 (2021)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) failed to properly investigate Bernard Madoff’s multi-billion-dollar Ponzi scheme for over ten years. Many individuals and charities suffered devastating financial consequences from this criminal conduct, and when eventually charged and convicted, Madoff received a sentence of 150 years in prison. Improper regulatory oversight was also faulted in the investigation following the Deepwater Horizon tragedy. Employees of the company lost their lives, and individuals were charged with criminal offenses. These are just two of the many examples of agency failures to properly enforce and provide regulatory oversight, with eventual criminal prosecutions resulting from the conduct. The question is whether the harms accruing from misconduct and later criminal prosecutions could have been prevented if agency oversight had been stronger. Even if criminal punishment were still necessitated, would prompt agency action have diminished the public harm and likewise decreased the perpetrator’s criminal culpability?
Criminalization and regulation, although two distinct systems, can be evaluated from the perspective of their substantive structure—a universe of statutes or regulations; as well as their enforcement procedures—the prosecution of crimes or enforcement of regulatory provisions. The correlation between criminalization and regulation is less noticed, however, as the advocacy tends to land in two camps: 1) those advocating for increased criminalization and regulation; or, 2) those claiming overcriminalization and overregulation.
This Article examines the polarized approach to overcriminalization and underregulation from both a substantive and procedural perspective, presenting the need to look holistically at government authority to achieve the maximum societal benefit. Focusing only on the costs and benefits of regulation fails to consider the ramifications to criminal conduct and prosecutions in an overcriminalized world. This Article posits a moderated approach, premised on political economy, that offers a paradigm that could lead to a reduction in our carceral environment, and a reduction in criminal conduct.
Date of Publication:
Robyn Powell and Sasha Albert, Supporting Disabled Parents and Their Families: Perspectives and Recommendations from Parents, Attorneys, and Child Welfare Professionals, 15 Journal of Public Child Welfare 529 (2021)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
While it is well-established that parents with disabilities and their families are over-represented in the child welfare system, no known research has described the parents,’ child welfare professionals,’ and attorneys’ perspectives on the system’s capacity to support them or their recommendations for improvement. This qualitative phenomenological study involved semi-structured interviews with 15 disabled parents, 15 child welfare professionals, and 15 parent attorneys. Respondents agreed that the child welfare system lacks expertise on disability and adequate services for disabled parents, and holds negative attitudes about them. Respondents recommended robust training for professionals on parents with disabilities, and individually-tailored services for disabled parents.