Suchergebnisse

Copyright © 2016, The Honors Undergraduate Research Journal, University of Oklahoma. All rights revert to authors. ; Today's society, as many before it, views sugar as the embodiment of pleasure, luxury, and jubilance. Society's infatuation with sugar is seen in the figurative usage of the word sweet, the association of children with sweetness, the belief that sugar makes one giddy, and the necessary presence of sugar at joyous celebrations. What festivity would be complete without the consumption of sugary delights? Yet, the role sugar played in the project of empire and the long-standing effects of the sugar trade tell a bleaker tale of a commodity stained with the blood of humans and marked with the treachery of consumerism. Though numerous commodities, or more specifically cash crops, helped to shape society, sugar is unmatched in its effects on economies, cultures, politics, health, and the environment. The study of the sugar revolution reveals "the transformative power of a single commodity" that is best termed as "crop determinism" (Higman 213). The immense influence of sugar and the similar current cash crop domination expose the power of agriculture in our society and, ultimately, the power of consumers and their desires. The conditions that gave birth to the sugar revolution in the Caribbean and the consequences of commodity globalization display the unparalleled power of sugar in society then and now, as well as the lengths humans are willing to go in order to maintain a consumer-based economy. ; The Honors Undergraduate Research Journal (THURJ) is a publication of the Joe C. and Carole Kerr McClendon Honors College at the University of Oklahoma. The views expressed in THURJ are solely those of the contributors and should not be attributed to the Editorial Staff, the Honors College, or the University of Oklahoma. ; undergraduate

__Abstract__ Most recently, several countries on the European continent have admitted, or are discussing to admit, English as an optional court language. This article provides some information about the background of these recent initiatives, projects and reforms, clarifies the idea on which they are based and explores the purposes they pursue. It then identifies in a theoretical way the various possible degrees of admitting English as a court language and the surrounding questions of practical implementation. These general issues are followed by a presentation of the initiatives, projects and reforms in France, Switzerland and Germany. Not surprisingly, the idea of admitting English as a court language has not only found support, but has also been criticised in legal academia and beyond. Therefore, the article then attempts to give a structured overview of the debate, followed by some own thoughts on the arguments which are being put forward. It concludes with an appeal not to restrict the arguments in favour of admitting English as a court language to merely economic aspects, but also to give due weight to the fact that admitting English may facilitate access to justice and may result in bringing back cases to the public justice system.

Three types of strategies have been common for court reform programmes: the 'holistic', the 'tactical', and the 'strategic' approach. This Research and Policy Note discusses strategic court reform and its underlying ideas. Its main intention is to alert those involved in judicial reform to some of the pitfalls and choices connected to particular types of interventions. The concluding remarks will comment on the political nature of judicial reform and on a model to design a proper sequence of interventions for judicial reform.

CONTENT: U. S. District Courts, District of Arizona, Statement regarding depositing bail money by other than defendants, December 13, 1922. BIOGRAPHICAL HISTORY: The Day Family were anglo Indian traders, on the Navajo Reservation in eastern Arizona. The collection includes the personal and business papers of Sam Day, Sr. (1845-1925) surveyor, Indian trader, legislator and United States Indian Commissioner; Anna Day, Sam Sr.'s wife (1872-1932); and of their children, Charles L. Day (1879-1918), Samuel Day, Jr. (1889-1944), United States deputy Marshall. The collection includes information on Navajo culture, stories and legends; the looting of Canyon del Muerta, and the Frank Dugan murder.

The research problem this dissertation addresses is how judicial practices generate administrative justice in asylum determination procedures. Previous research on immigration policies argues that when asylum determinations are processed in courts, principles of administrative justice are ensured and immigrants' rights protected. In this dissertation, I challenge that argument by approaching administrative justice as an empirical phenomenon open for different types of interpretations. Instead of assuming that administrative justice characterizes courts, I assume that this concept acquires particular meanings through the practices of the courts. Empirically, this dissertation studies practices of assessing asylum claims at the Swedish migration courts. The migration courts are the result of a major reform of the Swedish asylum procedure that took place in 2006, with the motive to end inhumane rejections of asylum seekers by enhancing administrative justice in the asylum process. By interviewing and observing judges at the migration courts, litigators from the Migration Board and public counsels from different law firms, this interpretive and ethnographic study analyzes how administrative justice acquires meanings in the daily practices of assessing asylum claims at the migration courts. The main result is that a ceremonial version of administrative justice is generated at the migration courts. This version of administrative justice forefronts symbolic dimensions of justice. The asylum appeal procedure succeeds in communicating justice through rituals, building design and metaphors, which emphasize objectivity, impartiality and certainty on behalf of the judicial practices. However, these symbols of justice disguise several unfair aspects of the asylum appeal procedure, such as inequality in resources and trustworthiness between the state's representative and the asylum applicants as well as the uncertainty inherent in both the factual and the credibility assessment of asylum claims. The implications of these findings are that immigration policy research needs to reconsider the relationship between the courts and immigrants' rights by paying more attention to the everyday practices of ensuing administrative justice in courts than on the instances when courts oppose political attempts to restrict immigrants' rights.

Vols. for 1874/75-1876/77 have variant title: Report of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to the Legislative Assembly; other slight variations in title. ; Title from caption. ; Mode of access: Internet.

"Promulgated: August 19, 2021." "This order is effective August 23, 2021 and shall remain in effect until further order of this Court." "This standing order shall replace Boston Municipal Court standing order 13-20 (issued December 1, 2020 and effective December 7, 2020) and District Court standing order 12-20 (issued November 19, 2020, effective November 23, 2020), which orders are rescinded on June 1, 2021 when Joint standing order 1-21 of the Boston Municipal Court Department and District Court Department became effective."

This Article is the first to examine the behavior of judges and their law clerks (officially entitled référendaires) at the Court of Justice of the European Union. It identifies a number of serious issues affecting Court performance. First, the Article finds that the Court's high judicial salaries and lack of procedural safe-guards for EU judicial appointments attract political appointees. As a consequence, some judges who are selected are not compe-tent to perform their duties and are dominated by their référen-daires. Moreover, the high turnover rate of EU judges hampers their productivity and increases their dependence on the référen-daires. Using a sample of data hand-collected from LinkedIn, the Article demonstrates that référendaires are drawn from a rela-tively closed social network. There is no open platform for re-cruiting référendaires, and the requirement of French as the working language significantly limits the pool of eligible candi-dates. The inefficiency of the référendaire labor market results in less competition, leading many référendaires to stay longer at the Court. The revolving door between the Court and the European Commission raises serious conflict issues, as the Commission is able to exert influence on the Court from the inside and gain a comparative advantage in litigation. In addition, the Court's practice of issuing a single, collegial decision encourages free-riding, increases pressures for judges and référendaires to con-form, and suppresses dissent, as illustrated in the Microsoft case. Last but not least, the division of labor between the General Court and the Court of Justice could lead to divergent incentives for judges working at different levels of the Court.

"Date of Issuance: June 9, 2021; Effective Date: June 15, 2021." "It is hereby ORDERED that Juvenile Court Standing Order 1-21 issued on January 11, 2021 is rescinded and superseded by this Standing Order. This Standing Order is effective on June 15, 2021 and will remain in effect until a subsequent order issues rescinding this Standing Order."

Within U.S. constitutional culture, courts stand curiously apart from the society in which they sit. Among the many purposes this process of alienation serves is to "neutralize" the cognitive dissonance produced by Americans' current self-conception and the role our forebears' social and political culture played in producing historic injustice. The legal culture establishes such dissonance in part by structuring American constitutional argument around anticanonical cases: most especially "Dred Scott v. Sandford," "Plessy v. Ferguson," and "Lochner v. New York." The widely held view that these decisions were "wrong the day they were decided" emphasizes the role of independent courts in producing them and diminishes the roles of culture in creating them and of social movements in overcoming them. This essay argues for approaching these decisions as ordinary products of political culture rather than extraordinary products of judicial malfeasance. Doing so honors those who struggled for progress and may invigorate our political imagination in the present.

The importance of the rule of law for the functioning of a democratic state makes this research topic relevant. The study aims to examine the principle of impartiality as one of the key principles of legal procedures, define its place in the provisions of international treaties, international legal acts, and the legislation of Ukraine, and study its interpretation in practice of the European Court of Human Rights. The main research method we used in the article was the formal-legal method, which allowed us to ana-lyze the legal framework of international law, court practice, and the legislation of Ukraine. This, in turn, helped us to examine the level of legal regulation on the principle of impartiality and find out cer-tain gaps. The article explores the practice of the European Court of Human Rights and, on its basis, substantiates as the conclusion the importance of the principle of impartiality in judicial activity. More-over, having analyzed the legislation of Ukraine, we revealed the need to refine the consolidation of the principle of impartiality and its detailed interpretation in regulatory legal acts, in particular, the Law of Ukraine On the Judiciary and Status of Judges. The practical significance of the article is to prepare the basis for amendments to the legislation of Ukraine.

This report discusses various proposals that have been made to limit the jurisdiction of federal courts to hear cases regarding particular areas of constitutional law such as busing, abortion, prayer in school, and most recently, reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. Proposals of this type are often referred to as "court-stripping" legislation.

Includes chronological index. ; "The plan for the organization of the Inventory is as follows: Series I consists of reports on the administration of the survey, acknowledgements, and general discussions of the location, condition and content of federal archives in the states. Succeeding series contain the detailed information secured by workers of the survey, in inventory form, a separate series number being assigned to each of the executive departments (except the Department of state) and other major units of the federal government. Within each series no.1 is a general introduction to the field organization and records of the governmental agency concerned; the succeeding numbers contain the inventory proper, separate numbers being assigned to each state in alphabetical order. Thus, in each series, the inventory for Alabama is no.2, and for Arizona no.3, that for Arkansas no.4 etc."--Preface, Series II, no.3. Within each series, some numbers are issued by the Historical records survey, some by the National archives project, and some by the Survey of federal archives. Place of publication varies.Series numbers have been assigned as follows: II. Federal courts, III. Department of the Treasury, IV. Department of war, V. Department of justice, VI. Post offfice department, VII. Department of the navy, VIII. Department of the interior, IX, Department of agriculture, X. Department of commerce, XI, Department of labor, XII, Veterans' administration, XIII. Federal civil works administration, XIVV Emergency relief administration, XV,Works progress administration, XVI, Farm credit administration and XVII, Miscellaneous agencies. ; Mode of access: Internet. ; Google Book Project scanned 150618.

At head of title: Appendix to the Law journal for 1827. ; Mode of access: Internet.

This dissertation examines how judicial institutions in sub-Saharan Africa were used to both legitimize repression and maintain autocratic survival during the postcolonial period, as well as the enduring legacies of these tactics on post-autocratic rule of law. When autocrats turn to courts, these moves are often heralded as signs of democratic opening. However, courts can also become forums of repression, where political rivals are criminally prosecuted for anti-regime behavior. Despite these trends, courts remain relatively understudied in repression research. In fact, conventional definitions of repression are almost exclusively extrajudicial, defined as the arbitrary use of coercive violence to threaten or intimidate its target. While a separate scholarship on authoritarian judiciaries draws attention to the autocratic functions of law and order, these findings tend to be disconnected from research on repression. This has limited theory-building on how and why courts are used to contain democratic dissent. To analyze the politicization of courts in comparative and historical perspective, I develop a theoretical framework that extends beyond conventional notions of judicial independence, re-conceptualizing judicial power along the following three dimensions: jurisdiction, function, and compliance. Jurisdiction refers to the scope of judicial decision-making, or whether judges are allowed to decide cases of political import. Once jurisdiction is granted, function refers to the actual tasks judges are required to perform in service of the regime. For example, one critical function of courts under autocratic rule is to provide a forum for the government to formally prosecute political rivals. Finally, compliance describes whether judges ultimately obey regime objectives, in this case, by convicting rivals for crimes against the state. Evaluated jointly, these three dimensions of judicial power help explain why judges become major political players in some autocratic contexts, but not others. Using this framework, I argue that courts help autocrats both punish challengers and deter future coordination against the regime. These outcomes are achieved through a trial, defined as a formal, ritualized routine which generates common knowledge regarding the rules of political order. Establishing such rules or laws is vital towards regulating insider conflict within the regime, which is important towards maintaining autocratic survival. I refer to this process, wherein laws and courts are used to repress political rivals, as a judicial strategy of repression.My findings utilize archival research, fieldwork interviews, and natural language processing of both web-scraped media and historical documents. My research contributes to broader debates on autocratic governance, judicial politics, postcolonial legacies, and varieties of state repression.