-
Jane Aiken, Ann Shalleck, Elizabeth Mertz, Stewart Macaulay, and Thomas Mitchell
-
Susan Bennett
Highlighting the displacement and loss of community created by urban renewal in the District of Columbia neighborhood of Barry Farm, this chapter summarizes the work of the National Commission on Urban Problems and the consequences of the Uniform Relocation Assistance Act (42 USC 4601), the HOPE VI plan, the Gautreaux program, and the Moving to Opportunity program. As a means of responding to the needs of residents facing redevelopment-generated upheaval, the author proposes the use of social impact statements (SIS), the urban renewal equivalent of an environmental impact statement. These statements would evaluate how all residents measure their investment in their community, capturing values that transcend the supposed fair market value of a home. The first of those values is substantive, an articulation of the tangible and intangible elements of losing “place attachment” (the emotional bonds built over time with physical and social features of a locale) and “place dependence” (a more concrete assessment of how a place fulfills a range of needs). The second of those values involves process: residents would participate in the articulation of loss, but would also receive standing to petition for suspension of the development process until they are relocated in a way that assures that their “comparable replacement dwellings” truly compensate for the physical, social, and psychological dislocation which the social impact statement illuminates. These measurements have great potential to provide both a practical tool to broaden meaningful involvement in redevelopment and a new measure for just compensation in eminent domain. The author argues that the construction and adoption of social impact statements could be incorporated into existing requirements for land use developments in general, and public housing redevelopment in particular, and would inject rigor into the assumptions upon which dislocations of poor people are based.
-
Michael W. Carroll
This chapter focuses on the ways in which intellectual property law can act as a barrier to data sharing. Intellectual property laws supply exclusive rights that can enable a researcher, employer or funder to ‘own’ data; they can then bring legal claims against persons who access or reuse data without permission. Some of these rights attach automatically to data, data sets, or databases, and thus must be managed properly to enable robust data sharing in climate science. Other rights are created by contract, and the policies around such privately created rights must be understood and analyzed. This chapter briefly describes the variety of climate data needed by researchers and the role of intellectual property and related rights in governing access to and use of such data.
-
Michael W. Carroll
-
Jennifer C. Daskal
-
Christine Farley
This chapter addresses the proliferation of green marks (both trademarks and certification marks) and the role that they may play in addressing climate change. It emphasizes the important role played by consumers and their buying power, so long as consumers possess good information about environmental standards and companies adhere to those standards, in forcing companies to meet environmental standards. But it also addresses the problem of “green fatigue” and “greenwashing” as consumers become overwhelmed with insufficiently regulated information regarding environmental compliance. The chapter also discusses barriers to registration of eco-friendly marks and recommendations for improving the informational value of green certification marks.
-
Christine Farley
In this chapter, we outline the provisions introduced by the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) with respect to trademarks. Similar to the provisions related to patents, copyright, and other rights, section II of Part II of TRIPS (Articles 15–21) mandates minimal trademark standards – such as requirements for protection, rights granted, duration of protection, and requirements for trademark transactions – for the Members of the World Trade Organization (WTO). Following the general principles adopted as part of the TRIPS’ framework, section II does not require that WTO Members to adopt specific mechanisms to implement the mandated TRIPS' standards on trademarks into their national laws. Instead, WTO Members remain free to implement the mandated trademark standards based on their existing and/or preferred national laws, subject to the general principles of: (a) national treatment that is provided under Article 3 of TRIPS (specifically dictating equal treatment for, or non-discrimination between, foreign and domestic individuals and companies in their respective territories); and (b) the most-favored-nation treatment under Article 4 of TRIPS (under which any “advantage, favor, privilege, or immunity” granted to the nationals of a WTO Member will be extended to the nationals of other WTO Members). Following the general rule in Article 64 of TRIPS, WTO Members are also empowered to challenge other Members under the WTO Dispute Settlements Understanding (DSU) should they believe that the national laws of the challenged Member violates or does not fully comply with the TRIPS mandated trademark standards.5 Article 1 of TRIPS additionally imposes the compliance of WTO Members with certain provisions on trademarks of the Paris Convention for the Protection of Intellectual Property (Paris Convention).
-
Jeffrey Lubbers
-
Nancy D. Polikoff
Summary
INTRODUCTION
Joan Stanley died of cancer in 1968, leaving behind her unmarried partner of eighteen years, Peter Stanley, and their two young children, Kimberly, one and a half years old, and Peter Jr., two and a half years old. In Illinois, a legal “parent” included both married and unmarried mothers but only married fathers. Therefore, the State of Illinois instituted a court proceeding to make the children wards of the state because they lacked parents.
The hearing that followed was brief. The evidence showed that Peter and Joan Stanley were not married, that Peter Stanley was the father of the children and had lived with and supported them, and that at some point after Joan Stanley's death, Peter Stanley had arranged for the toddlers to live with his friends, the Nesses. The state's attorney did not allege that Peter Stanley had neglected the children. The judge concluded that the children lacked parents as a matter of law, made them wards of the state, and appointed the Nesses as guardians.
Stanley appealed to the Illinois Supreme Court, where he again lost. He then obtained review in the U.S. Supreme Court, where he argued that declaring his children to be wards of the state without a showing of his parental unfitness violated his right to due process under the Fourteenth Amendment. He prevailed. The Court determined that Stanley had a substantial interest in “the children he had sired and raised.” The Court had never before made such a statement about a nonmarital father. It ruled that as a matter of due process, all parents, including Peter Stanley, were constitutionally entitled to a hearing on fitness before the state could assume custody of their children. The Court rejected the state's argument that unmarried fathers were so seldom fit that it was administratively inefficient to provide them all hearings. It reasoned that “the Constitution recognizes higher values than speed and efficiency.”
LARGER CONTEXT
For hundreds of years, a set of laws had punished sex outside of marriage, imposed catastrophic consequences for bearing children outside of marriage, assumed and fostered “separate spheres” for men and women, and imposed gendered requirements within marriage. By the end of the 1970s, those laws had changed, with the U.S. Supreme Court playing a major role in the legal transformation.
-
Macarena Saez
Summary
In 1980, after the divorce of Randy and Melody DeShaney, a court granted Randy DeShaney custody of his one-year-old son, Joshua.1 In 1982, Winnebago County Department of Social Services (DSS) received the first report that Joshua may have been subject to abuse by Randy. DSS, however, took no action until 1983, when hospital authorities notified DSS that Joshua had been admitted with injuries consistent with child abuse. DSS ordered Joshua’s temporary removal from the parental home and formed an ad hoc team to review Joshua’s situation. The team decided that there was no conclusive evidence of abuse and returned Joshua to Randy, issuing several recommendations agreed to by Randy, including that he obtain counseling services, enroll Joshua in a preschool program, and that his girlfriend move out of the home (on suspicion that she may be abusing Joshua).
-
Brenda Smith, Maria L. Ontiveros, Kathryn M. Stanchi, Linda L. Berger, and Bridget J. Crawford
What would United States Supreme Court opinions look like if key decisions on gender issues were written with a feminist perspective? Feminist Judgments brings together a group of scholars and lawyers to rewrite, using feminist reasoning, the most significant US Supreme Court cases on gender from the 1800s to the present day. The twenty-five opinions in this volume demonstrate that judges with feminist viewpoints could have changed the course of the law. The rewritten decisions reveal that previously accepted judicial outcomes were not necessary or inevitable and demonstrate that feminist reasoning increases the judicial capacity for justice. Feminist Judgments opens a path for a long overdue discussion of the real impact of judicial diversity on the law as well as the influence of perspective on judging.
- Contains contributions from more than 50 feminist scholars and lawyers, so readers will learn about feminist reasoning from experienced writers and thinkers
- People interested in the Supreme Court, politics, feminism and women's studies will gain from varied and informed perspectives through a feminist lens
-
David Snyder
-
David Snyder
-
Lindsay Wiley, Manel Kappagoda, and Anne Pearson
-
Richard Wilson
No region of the world has been more vocal and persistent in its opposition to U.S. death penalty practice than Europe, which has itself become a death penalty-free zone. The chapter will examine the actions taken by European legislative and judicial bodies against U.S. practice of the death penalty, as well as those of the other regional treaty bodies, with particular attention to the Inter-American human rights system, in which the U.S. reluctantly participates. It then will examine U.S. interactions with its treaty partners in the area of extradition, where death penalty policy is acted out in the exchanges of prisoners, both accused and convicted, between countries. Finally, the chapter will conclude with an analysis of the impacts on the capital sentencing of foreign nationals in the U.S. courts, particularly as a result of the U.S. executive branch and courts’ efforts at compliance with the judgment of the International Court of Justice in the Avena case, involving 51 Mexican nationals on death row in the U.S.
-
Christine Farley
Since 1967, Pro-Football has registered six marks that include the term “redskins,” a derogatory racial epithet that refers to Native Americans. The use of disparaging marks dates back to the 19th century when brands commercialized racial stereotypes, such as Aunt Jemima. Today, offensive marks, including those that ridicule race, ethnicity, gender and religion are proliferating prompting the question of what role trademark law plays in protecting the interests of diverse communities. Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act prohibits the registration of marks that consist of matter that may disparage or bring into contempt or disrepute any person, institution, or belief. In this chapter, I review the policy goals and challenges in barring the registration of offensive marks and conclude that trademark law can play an important, albeit limited role in fostering diversity. U.S. trademark law only seeks to regulate the registration and not the use of offensive trademarks. Nevertheless, the symbolic gesture of the federal government cancelling the registration of a mark on the basis that it disparages people is significant and may affect the way society views the mark. Thus the government can perform important signaling for civility without abridging the freedom of speech.
-
Christine Haight Farley
Since 1967, Pro-Football has registered six marks that include the term “redskins,” a derogatory racial epithet that refers to Native Americans. The use of disparaging marks dates back to the 19th century when brands commercialized racial stereotypes, such as Aunt Jemima. Today, offensive marks, including those that ridicule race, ethnicity, gender and religion are proliferating prompting the question of what role trademark law plays in protecting the interests of diverse communities. Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act prohibits the registration of marks that consist of matter that may disparage or bring into contempt or disrepute any person, institution, or belief. In this chapter, I review the policy goals and challenges in barring the registration of offensive marks and conclude that trademark law can play an important, albeit limited role in fostering diversity. U.S. trademark law only seeks to regulate the registration and not the use of offensive trademarks. Nevertheless, the symbolic gesture of the federal government cancelling the registration of a mark on the basis that it disparages people is significant and may affect the way society views the mark. Thus the government can perform important signaling for civility without abridging the freedom of speech.
-
Susan Franck, James Freda, Kellen Lavin, Tobias A. Lehmann, and Anne van Aaken
ICCA Congress Series No. 18 comprises the proceedings of the twenty-second Congress of the International Council for Commercial Arbitration (ICCA), held in Miami in 2014. The articles by leading arbitration practitioners and scholars from around the world address the challenges, both perceived and real, to the legitimacy of international arbitration.
The volume focusses on the twin pillars of legitimacy: justice, in procedure and outcome, and precision at every phase of the proceedings. Contributions on justice explore issues related to diversity, fairness and whether arbitral institutions can do more to foster legitimacy – based on the responses of nine international arbitral institutions to a survey on this topic. Articles focussing on precision address burdens, standards and procedures in respect of proof; interim measures and document production; witnesses and experts; and standards governing investor misconduct in investment arbitration.
The volume opens with a spirited Keynote Address in defence of bilateral investment treaties and also reports the results of a theme-related empirical survey of Congress Participants on demographics, precision and justice in international arbitration, carried out during the Opening Plenary Session of the Congress.
-
Lewis Grossman
Printing is not supported at the primary Gallery Thumbnail page. Please first navigate to a specific Image before printing.
