The Law and Ethics Collection focuses on academic theses concerned by ethical aspects in law.

Recent Submissions

  • O JUSPOSITIVISMO SOB A ÓTICA DE HEBERT HART E RONALD DWORKIN

    Reis Friede (Centro Cultural Justiça Federal, 2020-06-01)
    The discussion that evolve the Jusnaturalism and the Juspositivism is inspirated the reflections of jurists and philosophers. Although it is possible to affirm that many of the historical controversies associated with the confrontation between Positive Lawand Natural Law have already been overcome, there are many aspects that deserve an academic dedication. Notwithstanding divergent opinions, which advocate the theoretical weakening of the subject, the passing of centuries demonstrates just the opposite, since it has not succeeded in eliminating the esteem of the thinkers for the theme developed. In this way, this article discusses Juspositivism under the view of Hebert Hart and Ronald Dworkin.
  • Torah and Temple in Judean Pseudepigrapha:From Jubilees to Fourth Ezra and Second Baruch

    Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek Münster; Doering, L. (Lutz) (2021-05-31)
    Dieser Aufsatz untersucht die Vorstellungen von Tora und Tempel im Jubiläenbuch aus dem 2. Jahrhundert v. Chr. und in den Apokalypsen nach 70 n. Chr. 4 Esra und 2 Baruch. Jeder dieser Texte umfasst in seiner Vorstellung von Tora mehr als den Pentateuch (z.T. Aspekte des Naturrechts), obwohl sich die Details unterscheiden. Darüber hinaus hat jeder dieser Texte eine differenzierte Sicht des Tempels und wendet eine bestimmte Form der Urzeit-Endzeit-Korrelation bezüglich des erwarteten zukünftigen Tempels an.
  • Natural law and human rights

    González García, Alexander (Universidad Libre, 2017-07-03)
    This article studies the proposal of the Catholic Church towards a common base for interreligious dialogue. For the Church, dialogue with other religions can not be based on the commandments of love, as Muslim leaders suggest in their document "A Common Word" (2007), because it is an exclusive idea between Christians and Muslims; that is why the Church presents in several documents the idea of the natural law as a common pillar for all people, believers and non-believers, since God has provided humanity with reason, and this can guide human beings towards common benefit. This article analyzes the natural law as a valid means for interreligious relations.
  • Texas: A Weak Governor State, or Is It?

    Beal, Ron (Digital Commons at St. Mary's University, 2021-05-01)
    The current Texas Constitution was adopted in 1876 and was written after the Civil War and the Reconstruction Period when Federal troops occupied the State. The general perception is that the Federal troops used the Governor, in essence, to impose a form of dictatorship over the people. It was clearly the intent of the new constitution’s framers to create a very weak governor form of government in order to spread its powers to many independently elected officials. It provided that the state officers who were appointed by the Governor and approved by the Senate were semi-independent from the Governor by having set terms and they could only be removed for cause during their term by trial dictated by the Legislature or the approval of 2/3s of the Senate. During the 19th and 20th Centuries, the framers’ intent was fulfilled by what many called “a do-nothing officer” whose election was similar to a beauty pageant. However, things changed during the 21st Century with the long-time service of Governor Perry who demanded strict loyalty of his officers and due to his many re-elections, guaranteed he would appoint all state officers and be there when their terms expired. Yet, his successor, Governor Greg Abbott has imposed significant structural changes of questionable constitutionality that has caused his office to have new, significant powers not exercised by prior governors under our current constitution. In June of 2018, the Chief of Staff of Governor Abbott sent a letter “clarifying” the rulemaking process by stating all new rules of all regulatory agencies must be evaluated by the Governor’s office and presumably “approved” before the agency could commence notice and comment rulemaking. It is the opinion of the Governor’s office that this may be done totally in secret and the office has refused to say who is cooperating, what type of review is done, does the Governor say yes, no or modify and most importantly, do the agency officials follows his order. This paper explores whether the Governor has the power to demand and perform this review function from a constitutional and statutory basis related to the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). There is literally a total lack of case law on the governor’s delegated power “to take care the laws be faithfully executed.” The APA is wholly silent as to the involvement of the Governor in rulemaking. This paper asserts that the Governor can request such involvement in rulemaking, but the state officers can also refuse. More importantly, there is a strong argument the Legislature has impliedly prohibited this action or could expressly do so. An equally powerful assertion of power by Governor Abbott is a practice that other governors may have engaged in but there is a total lack of proof. It is the position of the Governor’s office that when an appointed officer’s term expires, he/she may remain in office if the Governor has not appointed someone else and thereby, some have remained in office for as long as 13 years. This paper analyzes the appropriate provisions in the constitution and establishes that this practice is a gross distortion of the meaning of the provisions and is clearly unconstitutional. To allow state officers to manage state agencies while serving at the discretion of the Governor vests an enormous power in the Governor to directly control state agencies and their power which is the antithesis of the framer’s intent.
  • “Lawyers’ Work”: Does the Court Have a Legitimacy Crisis?

    Bloom, Lackland (Digital Commons at St. Mary's University, 2021-05-01)
    Talk of the Supreme Court’s legitimacy is pervasive. It can’t be avoided by anyone paying attention. The question this article addresses is does the Supreme Court have a legitimacy crisis. The title “Lawyers’ Work” is taken from Justice Scalia’s dissenting opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey in which he declared that as long as the Court decides cases by engaging in “Lawyers’ Work” the public will leave it alone. This article concludes that Justice Scalia was partially though not entirely correct. The article begins by considering the concept of judicial legitimacy as developed and studied by political scientists. Next it considers what qualifies as “Lawyers Work.” Then it explores the various crises of legitimacy that have plagued the Court throughout its history. It concludes that the Court has often lost public support resulting in a legitimacy crisis by failing to decide cases through the application of lawyer’s work but has also lost public support and consequently a claim to legitimacy by attempting to resolve controversies that fall beyond judicial competence. The article concludes that the Court’s reservoir of public support is indeed deep and permits the Court to decide cases contrary to public opinion to a large extent without adverse consequence to its legitimacy. However, when the Court gets too far out of synch with public opinion, the constitutional check of the nomination and appointment power has been exercised to alter the Court’s composition and redirect its doctrine. Arguably, that is exactly what has transpired over the last few years. Consequently, the Court does not have a legitimacy crisis. Rather the constitutional system is simply self-correcting.
  • Prisoners’ Rights

    Smith, Brenda V. (Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law, 2004-04-16)
  • Gender, Sexuality and Violence

    Smith, Brenda V.; Robinson, Commissioner Tracy (Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law, 2013-06-07)
  • Equal Injustice for All: High Quality Self-Representation Does Not Ensure a Matter Is “Fairly Heard”

    Goldschmidt, Jona (Seattle University School of Law Digital Commons, 2021-05-30)
  • Civil Disobedience from a Biblical Perspective

    Reed, Gabriel (Scholars Crossing, 2021-05-21)
    To say that civil disobedience is a complicated topic is to severely understate the topic. It is a subject matter that has derived many different and disparate opinions, points of view, and public policies. Specifically, within America today, we observe calls for civil disobedience from both sides of the political spectrum, over several divergent political ideals. These issues are, primarily, driven from both sides’ desire to provide protection and provision for the oppressed and those who cannot necessarily speak for themselves. The definition of who is necessarily oppressed and whom their oppressors are varies from person to person, regardless of political affiliation. At the present moment, the general consensus from either side of the fence appears to be that we are existing in an increasingly flawed system, and that there appears to be fewer and fewer ways to address it within the bounds of our current legal system. This has led both sides to take drastic measures increasingly outside the rule of law in order for their voices to be heard. For Judeo-Christians, this causes no small amount of conflict. What manner of steps should those of the mind to intervene for whatever issue they feel is pressing be capable of doing, within the moral framework of their own worldview? In this essay, these issues shall be examined, both with regards to our own American and Western history, and when it comes to Biblical viewpoints on such pressing matters. To begin, this essay shall define certain terms as can give a framework for better understanding what lies around the legality of a matter.
  • Symposium Introduction: Law, Religion, and Human Rights in Global Perspective

    Modak-Truran, Mark C. (MC Law Digital Commons, 2003-01-01)
    The essays and articles in this Symposium highlight the importance of religion for properly understanding the nature of law, feminism, globalization, human rights, international legal history, and judicial decision making. These essays and articles also challenge the academy to accept a more sophisticated understanding of religion and to understand its importance for all academic inquiry.
  • Getting Away With Murder: How California State Law Determined Recovery in First Roundup Cancer Case Johnson V. Monsato Co.

    Quattlebaum, Eliza L. (Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law Digital Repository, 2021-05-05)
  • Les codes de conduite sont-ils effectifs ? le cas de la maquiladora du Guatemala

    Trudeau, Gilles; Saulnier, Anne-Marie (2007-11-05)
    Mémoire numérisé par la Direction des bibliothèques de l'Université de Montréal.
  • Constitutional Law - Right to Effective Assistance of Counsel in Federal Courts and Waiver Thereof

    Adams, Richard M., S.Ed. (University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository, 1955-04-01)
    Indicted for illegal traffic in narcotics, petitioner and his trial counsel allegedly attempted to fabricate an alibi on the false testimony of petitioner's girl friend. The evidence indicated that on several occasions before trial, the girl was invited to the office of petitioner's attorney, given narcotics, and told to memorize certain false testimony to be used in petitioner's defense. Later the girl bad a change of mind and agreed to testify for the government Despite the strenuous objections of defendant's counsel, a description of this alleged fraud on the court was given in the prosecution's opening statement, and the witness was permitted to testify. The defense attorney refused the court's offer of additional counsel and proceeded to conduct the defense alone. Petitioner was convicted as charged in the indictment, whereupon, with the aid of new counsel appointed by the court, be filed a motion to vacate judgment There was no question on the admissibility of testimony showing the attempted fabrication of evidence. Yet the petitioner contended that this evidence so discredited his attorney in the eyes of the jury that be did not have the effective assistance of counsel guaranteed by the Fifth and Sixth Amendments; therefore the court should have either advised him of his constitutional rights or, acting sua sponte, appointed other counsel in his behalf. The lower court rejected this line of argument On appeal, held, affirmed with one judge dissenting. The majority found that even if petitioner was prejudiced, be was in no position to say that the court should have rescued him from his own wrongdoing. Harvey v. United States, (D.C. Cir. 1954) 215 F. (2d) 330.
  • The Coronavirus Pandemic Shutdown and Distributive Justice: Why Courts Should Refocus The Fifth Amendment Takings Analysis

    Harris, Timothy M. (Digital Commons at Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School, 2021-02-01)
    The 2020 Coronavirus Pandemic and the ensuing shutdown of private businesses—to promote the public’ s health and safety— demonstrated the wide reach of state and local governments’ police power. Many businesses closed and many went bankrupt as various government programs failed to keep their enterprises afloat. These businesses were shut down to further the national interest in stemming a global pandemic. This is an archetypal example of regulating for the public health—preventing a direct threat that sickened hundreds of thousands of Americans. But some businesses were disproportionately hit while others flourished. Many who bore the brunt of these regulations sued, alleging their property was taken by the government without just compensation. These unfortunate businesses and individuals are unlikely to be successful, absent arbitrary action by the government, a physical invasion, or other egregious circumstances. The Takings Clause is therefore woefully inadequate to provide what Aristotle called “distributive justice”—the equal distribution of benefits and burdens throughout society. Courts should therefore refocus the takings analysis to ensure fairness and justice by considering whether a regulation has a disproportionate, catastrophic, and sudden impact.
  • Martha Stewart Saved! Insider Violations of Rule 10b-5 for Misrepresented or Undisclosed Personal Facts

    Heminway, Joan M (Legal Scholarship Repository: A Service of the Joel A. Katz Library, 2006-01-01)
    This article analyses the criminal securities fraud charges brought against Martha Stewart. Stewart was acquitted of these charges by a federal district court judge in February 2004. Specifically, the article initially focuses on whether the securities fraud charges brought against Stewart were valid as a matter of prosecutorial discretion and substantive law and whether the court was correct in granting Stewart's motion for acquittal before handing the rest of her case to the jury for deliberation. The article then offers substantive and procedural observations about Rule 10b-5 cases like the one brought against Stewart.
  • Do Judges Systematically Favor the Interests of the Legal Profession?

    Barton, Benjamin H (Legal Scholarship Repository: A Service of the Joel A. Katz Library, 2007-05-01)
    This Article answers this question with the following jurisprudential hypothesis: many legal outcomes can be explained, and future cases predicted, by asking a very simple question, is there a plausible legal result in this case that will significantly affect the interests of the legal profession (positively or negatively)? If so, the case will be decided in the way that offers the best result for the legal profession. The article presents theoretical support from the new institutionalism, cognitive psychology and economic theory. The Article then gathers and analyzes supporting cases from areas as diverse as constitutional law, torts, professional responsibility, employment law, evidence, and criminal procedure. The questions considered include: why are lawyers the only American profession to be truly and completely self-regulated? Why is it that the attorney-client privilege is the oldest and most jealously protected professional privilege? Why is it that the Supreme Court has repeatedly struck down bans on commercial speech, except for bans on in-person lawyer solicitations and some types of lawyer advertising? Why is it that the Miranda right to consult with an attorney is more protected than the right to remain silent? Why is legal malpractice so much harder to prove than medical malpractice? The Article finishes with some of the ramifications of the lawyer-judge hypothesis, including brief consideration of whether our judiciary should be staffed by lawyer-judges at all.
  • Do Judges Systematically Favor the Interests of the Legal Profession?

    Barton, Benjamin H (Legal Scholarship Repository: A Service of the Joel A. Katz Library, 2007-05-01)
    This Article answers this question with the following jurisprudential hypothesis: many legal outcomes can be explained, and future cases predicted, by asking a very simple question, is there a plausible legal result in this case that will significantly affect the interests of the legal profession (positively or negatively)? If so, the case will be decided in the way that offers the best result for the legal profession. The article presents theoretical support from the new institutionalism, cognitive psychology and economic theory. The Article then gathers and analyzes supporting cases from areas as diverse as constitutional law, torts, professional responsibility, employment law, evidence, and criminal procedure. The questions considered include: why are lawyers the only American profession to be truly and completely self-regulated? Why is it that the attorney-client privilege is the oldest and most jealously protected professional privilege? Why is it that the Supreme Court has repeatedly struck down bans on commercial speech, except for bans on in-person lawyer solicitations and some types of lawyer advertising? Why is it that the Miranda right to consult with an attorney is more protected than the right to remain silent? Why is legal malpractice so much harder to prove than medical malpractice? The Article finishes with some of the ramifications of the lawyer-judge hypothesis, including brief consideration of whether our judiciary should be staffed by lawyer-judges at all.
  • The Injustice Of Justice: The Pursuit of a Harmonious, Just, and Merciful World

    Boyle, Robert W (Digital Commons @ Salve Regina, 2009-04-01)
    There is no one universal definition of Justice. Such a limited view of right and wrong conflicts with our infinitely diverse world. The key to a harmonious global community is that justice is malleable and fluid, similar to water, where it can take the shape of its environment while still retaining the properties of fundamental rights. Our world will never come to a universal agreement on justice, due to the deeply embedded cultural beliefs and differing views, so a single understanding of justice is impossible. If the world can have a baseline understanding of right and wrong and the flexibility to understand different perspectives, although we may never totally achieve it, we may pursue the ultimate understanding of Justice.
  • The Impact of Standardized Testing on Student Performance in the United States

    Linden, Stephanie (Digital Commons @ Salve Regina, 2007-05-01)
    In the United States, the current trend in education is the dependence on standardized testing to improve our current education system. The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 mandates higher test scores and improved academic performance in schools nation-wide, especially inner city schools. This thesis will attempt to evaluate whether standardized testing and the methods used to assess high performance has helped to create a better education system in the United States, or whether it has hindered student performance. There has been much discussion about this topic, some positive and some not. In this paper I will present both sides of the issue. I will base my recommendations on the most current research, journal articles, and personal editorials from practicing teachers and administrators. I will evaluate the United States’ performance on international testing such as the TIMSS, as compared to other countries with different methodologies. This theme directly relates to the mission of the Pell Center because education is part of the national public policy and something that teachers, administrators, parents, and the general public have definite opinions about. It also influences international education, as other countries around the world debate new educational policies such as national curriculums and the use of standardized testing.
  • The moral difference between premature infants and neonates compared to older patients

    Bourgeault, Guy; Meadow, William; Janvier, Annie (2012-03-07)
    Thèse numérisée par la Division de la gestion de documents et des archives de l'Université de Montréal.

View more