DOCSLIB.ORG

Sandra Day O'connor College of Law Arizona State University Spring 2013 Volume 3

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sandra Day O'connor College of Law Arizona State University Spring 2013 Volume 3 LAW JOURNAL FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE SANDRA DAY O’CONNOR COLLEGE OF LAW ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY SPRING 2013 VOLUME 3 Wrongs Against Immigrants’ Rights: Why Terminating the Parental Rights of Deported Immigrants Raises Constitutional and Human Rights Concerns Rachel Zoghlin Funding the Healing: Getting Victims Proper Restitution in Child Pornography Possession Cases Julia Jarrett Conflict in the Courts: The Federal Nursing Home Reform Amendment and § 1983 Causes of Action Susan J. Kennedy The Limits of Guilt and Shame and the Future of Affirmative Action Donald L. Beschle Closing the Loophole on the ‘Equal Opportunity/Bisexual’ Harasser Defense Jose Carrillo Why the ALI Should Redraft the Animal-Cruelty Provision of the Model Penal Code Nicole Pakiz Law Journal for Social Justice is supported by the Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law at Arizona State University. The Law Journal for Social Justice mailing address is: Law Journal for Social Justice, P.O. Box 877906, 1100 S. McAllister Ave., Tempe, AZ 85287. The Law Journal for Social Justice email address is: [email protected] . Subscription: Law Journal for Social Justice is an online journal. Editions are accessible through the URL: http://www.law.asu.edu/ljsj/, and http://www.ljsj.wordpress.com/journal Copyright: © Copyright 2013 by Law Journal for Social Justice. All rights reserved except as otherwise provided. LAW JOURNAL FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE SANDRA DAY O’CONNOR COLLEGE OF LAW ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY Volume 3 Spring 2013 Editors-in-Chief Laura Clymer Michael Malin Executive Articles Editors Executive Managing Symposium Editor Jose Carrillo Editor Kyle Riggs Janette Corral Tara Williams Executive Production Notes & Comments Executive Business Editor Editor Manager Ben Helford Shifa Al-khatib Stephanie Skogan Blog Managing Editors Managing Editors Community Outreach & Ben Helford Tim Brody Alumni Relations Melody Goodwin Maureen Feeney Manager Connie Goudreau Patty Lepkowski James Hammer David Lake Blog Contributors & Associate Editors Articles Editors Associate Editors Kylie El-Wailly Fernando Anzaldua Anthony Green Robert Erickson Nakissa Azizi Saman Golestan Ruth Faulkner Jeremiah Chin Melody Goodwin Daryl Gonzalez Seth Draper Liban Yousuf Justin Hoffman C.B. Misbach Erin Iungerich Kathryn Krejci Robert Lundberg Benjamin Rundall Natali Segovia Monica Thompson Lori Van Haren Nick Wearne Ashley Williams Faculty Advisors Mac Woods Zachary Kramer Miguel Zarate-Mancilla Jon M. Sands Arizona State University Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law Faculty 2012-2013 MICHAEL M. CROW, B.A., PH.D. ANDREW CARTER B.A., J.D. President of the University Associate Clinical Professor of Law DOUGLAS J. SYLVESTER, J.D. SUSAN CHESLER, B.A., J.D. Dean, Sandra Day O’Conner College Clinical Professor of Law of Law; Professor of Law and Faculty ADAM CHODOROW, B.A., M.A., J.D., LL.M. Fellow, Center for Law, Science, and Professor of Law; Faculty Fellow, Innovation Center for Law, Science, and Innovation; KENNETH W. ABBOTT, A.B., J.D. Faculty Editor, Jurimetrics: The Journal of Professor of Law; Willard H. Pedrick Law, Science, and Technology and Distinguished Research Scholar; Faculty Associate Dean for Innovative Ventures Fellow, Center for Law, Science & ROBERT N. CLINTON, B.A., J.D. Innovation; Faculty Affiliate, Center for Foundation Professor of Law; Faculty Law and Global Affairs Advisory Board; Fellow, Center for Law, Science & Faculty Affiliate, Professor of Global Innovation Studies, School of Politics & Global Studies EVELYN H. CRUZ, B.A., J.D. ANDREW ASKLAND, A.B., B.S., M.A., PH. Clinical Professor of Law and D., J.D. Director, Immigration Law and Policy Director, D.C. Program Clinic CHRISTOPHER BAIER, B.S., J.D. JAIME DAHLSTEDT, B.A., J.D., L.L.M. Chief Financial Officer and Assistant Associate Clinical Professor of Law Dean of Business Operations and Director, Ruth V. McGregor Family JENNIFER BARNES, B.S., J.D. Protection Clinic Director of the Externship Program SELWYN L. DALLYN, B.A., J.D. LEILA BARRAZA B.A., M.P.H., J.D. Clinical Professor of Law Fellow, Public Health Law & Policy M. ROBERT DAUBER, B.A., J.D. Program and Deputy Director, Network for Clinical Professor of Law Public Health Law - Western Region BETH DIFELICE, M.L.S., J.D. ROBERT D. BARTELS, B.A., J.D. Assistant Director, Ross-Blakley Law Charles M. Brewer Professor of Trial Library & Head of Public Services Advocacy LINDA DEMAINE, B.A., J.D., PH.D. PAUL BENDER, A.B., LL.B. Professor of Law; Affiliate Professor Professor of Law & Dean Emeritus of Psychology; Director, Law & Psychology MICHAEL A. BERCH, B.A., J.D. Graduate; Program, and Faculty Fellow, Emeritus Professor of Law Center for Law, Science, and Innovation DANIEL BODANSKY, A.B., J.D. IRA MARK ELLMAN, B.A., M.A., J.D. Lincoln Professor of Law, Ethics & Willard H. Pedrick Distinguished Sustainability; Affiliate Faculty Member, Research Scholar & Professor of Law; Center for Law and Global Affairs; Affiliate Faculty Fellow, Center for Law, Science, & Faculty Member, Center for Law, Science & Innovation; Affiliate Professor of Innovation and Affiliate Faculty Member, Psychology Global Institute of Sustainability, School of JOSEPH M. FELLER, B.A., PH.D., J.D. Sustainability Professor of Law and Faculty Fellow, SARAH BUEL, B.A., J.D. Center for Law, Science, & Innovation Clinical Professor and Founding AARON X. FELLMETH, A.B., M.A., J.D. Director, Diane Halle Center for Family Professor of Law; Faculty Fellow, Justice Center for Law, Science, and Innovation; TIMOTHY P. BURR, B.S., J.D. Faculty Fellow, Center for Law and Global Director, Foreclosure Mediation Unit Affairs GUY A. CARDINEAU, A.B., B.S., PH.D. PATRICIA FERGUSON-BOHNEE, B.A., J.D. Emeritus Professor of Law Faculty Director, Indian Legal CHARLES R. CALLEROS, B.A., J.D. Program, Clinical Professor of Law and Professor of Law Director Indian Legal Clinic Arizona State University Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law Faculty 2012-2013 DALE BECK FURNISH, A.B., J.D., LL.M. DAVID KADER, B.A., J.D., LL.M. Emeritus Professor of Law Professor of Law; Faculty Affiliate, JOEL GARREAU, Center for the Study of Religion and Director, The Prevail Project: Wise Conflict; Faculty Affiliate, Arizona Center Governance for Challenging Future; Co- for Medieval & Renaissance Studies Director, The ASU-New America and Faculty Affiliate, Melikian Center: Foundation Partnership and Affiliate Russian, Eurasian & East European Studies Faculty Member, ASU Consortium for Jewish Studies Science, Policy & Outcomes Marcy Karin, B.A., J.D., LL.M. DAVID GARTNER, J.D., PH.D. Associate Clinical Professor & Associate Professor and Affiliate Director of the Work/Life Policy Unit, Civil Professor, School of Public Affairs Justice Clinic KEVIN GOVER, A.B., J.D. DENNIS S. KARJALA, B.S.E., M.S., PH.D., Professor of Law and Affiliate J.D. Professor, American Indian Studies Jack E. Brown Chair, Professor of BETSY GREY, B.A., J.D. Law and Faculty Fellow, Center for Law, Professor of Law, Alan A. Matheson Science, & Innovation Fellow and Faculty Fellow, Center for Law, ORDE KITTRIE, B.A., J.D. Science, & Innovation Professor of Law and Faculty Fellow, ZACHARY GUBLER, B.A., J.D. Center for Law, Science, and Innovation Associate Professor of Law ZACHARY KRAMER, B.A., J.D. SANFORD GUERIN, LL.M., J.D. Associate Dean for Intellectual Life Emeritus Professor of Law and Professor of Law ANNE HERBERT, A.B., J.D. AMY LANGENFELD, B.A., J.D. Director for Undergraduate Associate Clinical Professor of Law Education and Senior Lecturer in Law GARY T. LOWENTHAL, A.B., J.D. TAMARA HERRERA, B.A., J.D. Emeritus Professor of Law Clinical Professor of Law and MYLES V. LYNK, A.B., J.D. Coordinator, Legal Writing Curriculum Kiewit Foundation Prof. of Law and CARISSA BYRNE HESSICK, B.A., J.D. the Legal Profession; Faculty Fellow, Professor of Law Center for the Study of Law, Science, & F. ANDREW HESSICK, B.A., J.D. Innovation; Program in Public Health Law Professor of Law and Policy and Affiliated Faculty, Justice ART HINSHAW, A.B., J.D., LL.M. and Social Inquiry, School of Social Director of the Lodestar Dispute Transformation, CLAS Resolution Program; Interim Director, GARY E. MARCHANT, B.SC, PH.D. M.P.P., Clinical Program; Clinical Professor of J.D. Law Lincoln Professor of Emerging KIMBERLY HOLST, B.A., J.D. Technologies, Law, & Ethics; Professor of Associate Clinical Professor Life Sciences, Executive Director and JAMES G. HODGE JR., B.S., J.D, LL.M. Faculty Fellow, Center for the Study of Law, Lincoln Professor of Health Law and Science, & Innovation Ethics; Director, Public Health Law ALAN A. MATHESON, B.A., M.S., J.D. Network - Western Region; Director, Public Professor of Law and Dean Emeritus Health Law and Policy Program; Faculty KRISTIN MAYES, B.A., M.P.A., J.D. Fellow, Center for Law, Science & Professor of Practice; Faculty Innovation; Affiliate Professor, Global Director, Program on Law & Sustainability Health, School of Human Evolution & ERIC W. MENKHUS, B.S.E., M.B.A., J.D. Social Change; Affiliate Faculty, School of Clinical Professor of Law; Faculty Public Affairs; Affiliate Faculty, Department Fellow, Center for Law, Science & of Biomedical Informatics Innovation; Director, Innovation Advancement Program Arizona State University Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law Faculty 2012-2013 JEFFRIE G. MURPHY, B.A., PH.D. REBECCA TSOSIE, B.A., J.D. Regents’ Professor of Law, Professor of Law; Willard H.Pedrick Philosophy, and Religious Studies Distinguished Research Scholar; Executive CHAD NOREUIL, B.A., J.D. Director, Indian Legal Program: Faculty Clinical Professor of Law Fellow, Center for the Study of Law, Science CATHERINE GAGE O’GRADY, B.A., J.D. & Innovation, and Affiliate Professor Professor of Law American Indian Studies DANIEL G. ORENSTEIN, B.A., J.D. JAMES WEINSTEIN, B.A., J.D. Fellow and Faculty Associate, Public Amelia Lewis Professor of Health Law & Policy Program and Deputy Constitutional Law; Faculty Fellow, Center Director, Network for Public Health Law - for Law, Science & Innovation Western Region MICHAEL J.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • IN the SUPREME COURT of TENNESSEE at KNOXVILLE January 27, 2016 Session
    IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE January 27, 2016 Session STATE OF TENNESSEE v. THOMAS WHITED Appeal by Permission from the Court of Criminal Appeals Appeal from the Criminal Court for Knox County No. 100430 Steven Wayne Sword, Judge _____________________________ No. E2013-02523-SC-R11-CD – Filed November 7, 2016 _____________________________ A jury convicted the defendant on nine counts of especially aggravated sexual exploitation of a minor, one count of attempt to commit that offense, thirteen counts of observation without consent, and one count of attempt to commit that offense. The convictions arose out of the defendant‘s hidden-camera videotaping of his twelve-year- old daughter and her teenage friend while they were in various stages of undress. The trial court sentenced the defendant to an effective sentence of twenty-two years. In a divided opinion, the Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed his convictions and sentence. In determining that the hidden-camera videos constituted prohibited child pornography under the child sexual exploitation statutes, the Court of Criminal Appeals relied in part on the six specific factors set forth in United States v. Dost, 636 F. Supp. 828 (S.D. Cal. 1986), sometimes referred to as the ―Dost factors.‖ The defendant now appeals his nine convictions for especially aggravated sexual exploitation of a minor, and he also challenges his sentence. We hold that, under the three child sexual exploitation statutes, Tennessee Code Annotated sections 39-17-1003, -1004, and -1005 (2014), the content of the prohibited material is judged by the same standard, regardless of whether the accused produced it, distributed it, or merely possessed it.
    [Show full text]
  • Explanatory Report to the OPSC Guidelines
    Explanatory Report to the Guidelines regarding the implementation of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography Interagency Working Group September 2019 Written by Susanna Greijer and Jaap Doek With input from the “Interagency Working Group on the OPSC Guidelines” English original, September 2019 September 2019 Copyright ECPAT International ECPAT International 328/1 Phayathai Road Rachathewi, Bangkok 10400 Thailand Tel: +66 2 215 3388 Fax: +66 2 215 8272 Email: [email protected] Website: www.ecpat.org From the United Nations Official Documents System (CRC/C/156). © United Nations, 2019. Reprinted with the permission of the United Nations The views expressed in the Explanatory Report attached to the “Guidelines regarding the implementation of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, prostitution and child pornography” (CRC/C/156) are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations Graphic design: SO Graphiste Freelance Explanatory Report to the Guidelines regarding the implementation of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography Preface On 30 May 2019, during its 81st session, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (the Committee) adopted its first ever Guidelines for the implementation of one of the legal instruments included under its monitoring mandate. The Guidelines regarding the implementation of the Optional Protocol to the CRC on the Sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography (OPSC Guidelines or Guidelines) are aimed to make it easier for States parties to understand the provisions contained in the OPSC as well as what is expected of them in terms of implementation and compliance.
    [Show full text]
  • 18 of 71 DOCUMENTS Caution As Of: Mar 30, 2007 UNITED STATES OF
    Page 1 444 F.3d 1286, *; 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 8384, **; 19 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. C 418 18 of 71 DOCUMENTS Caution As of: Mar 30, 2007 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus MICHAEL WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant. No. 04-15128 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT 444 F.3d 1286; 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 8384; 19 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. C 418 April 6, 2006, Decided April 6, 2006, Filed SUBSEQUENT HISTORY: As Amended April REAVLEY, * Circuit Judges. 21, 2006. Rehearing, en banc, denied by United States v. Williams, 186 Fed. Appx. 983, 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 25218 (11th Cir. Fla., 2006) * Honorable Thomas M. Reavley, United US Supreme Court certiorari granted by United States Circuit Judge for the Fifth Circuit, States v. Williams, 2007 U.S. LEXIS 3581 (U.S., sitting by designation. Mar. 26, 2007) OPINION BY: Thomas M. REAVLEY PRIOR HISTORY: [**1] Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern OPINION: [*1288] REAVLEY, Circuit Judge: District of Florida. D. C. Docket No. 04-20299-CR- Michael Williams appeals his conviction for DMM. promotion of child pornography under 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(3)(B) on the grounds of facial DISPOSITION: CONVICTION REVERSED unconstitutionality. For this reason, we reverse that AND SENTENCE ON COUNT ONE VACATED; conviction. Williams was also convicted of SENTENCE ON COUNT TWO AFFIRMED. possession of child pornography under 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(5)(B), and he appeals his sentence for that offense on the grounds that the court COUNSEL: For Williams, Michael, Appellant: unconstitutionally enhanced his sentence under a Grillo, Ophelia M., Ophelia M.
    [Show full text]
  • The Limits of Child Pornography
    The Limits of Child Pornography ∗ CARISSA BYRNE HESSICK Although the First Amendment ordinarily protects the creation, distribution, and possession of visual images, the Supreme Court has declared that those protections do not apply to child pornography. But the Court has failed to clearly define child pornography as a category of speech. Providing a precise definition of the child pornography exception to the First Amendment has become increasingly important because recent years have seen a dramatic increase in the penalties associated with the creation, distribution, and possession of child pornography. This Article proposes a clear definition of the child pornography exception. It argues that an image ought to fall within the exception only if a child was sexually exploited or abused in the creation of the image. That the circulation of an image might inflict privacy or reputational harm on the minor depicted should be insufficient to categorize that image as child pornography for constitutional purposes. This proposed definition would place concrete limits on child pornography prosecutions; it would also prevent prosecution in many cases in which the minor depicted is above the age of consent, the image was created through computer morphing, or the image is the result of surreptitious filming or photographing of a minor. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 1438 I. THE SUPREME COURT’S GUIDANCE ON CHILD PORNOGRAPHY ........................ 1443 A. NEW YORK
    [Show full text]
  • 1994 John Marshall National Moot Court Competition in Information and Privacy Law: Bench Memorandum, 13 J
    The John Marshall Journal of Information Technology & Privacy Law Volume 13 Issue 3 Journal of Computer & Information Law Article 6 - Spring 1995 Spring 1995 1994 John Marshall National Moot Court Competition in Information and Privacy Law: Bench Memorandum, 13 J. Marshall J. Computer & Info. L. 481 (1995) Gary L. Gassman Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.uic.edu/jitpl Part of the Computer Law Commons, Internet Law Commons, Privacy Law Commons, and the Science and Technology Law Commons Recommended Citation Gary L. Gassman, 1994 John Marshall National Moot Court Competition in Information and Privacy Law: Bench Memorandum, 13 J. Marshall J. Computer & Info. L. 481 (1995) https://repository.law.uic.edu/jitpl/vol13/iss3/6 This Moot Court Competition is brought to you for free and open access by UIC Law Open Access Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in The John Marshall Journal of Information Technology & Privacy Law by an authorized administrator of UIC Law Open Access Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. MOOT COURT COMPETION BENCH MEMORANDUM SYSOP, USER AND PROGRAMMER LIABILITY: THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF COMPUTER GENERATED CHILD PORNOGRAPHY by GARY L. GASSMAN THE THIRTEENTH ANNUAL JOHN MARSHALL LAW SCHOOL NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION IN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND PRIVACY LAW No. 94-241 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MARSHALL Dede Domingo, a minor, by ) Douglas and Madeline Domingo, her parents and next friends, ) Respondents, ) v. ) George Gress, ) Petitioner. ) I. STATEMENT OF THE CASE Plaintiff, Dede Domingo, is fifteen years old and lives with her legal parents and guardians, plaintiffs Douglas and Madeline Domingo, in the city of Melrose in the State of Marshall.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Child Pornography Offenses
    FEDERAL CHILD PORNOGRAPHY OFFENSES Patti B. Saris Chair William B. Carr, Jr. Vice Chair Ketanji B. Jackson Vice Chair Ricardo H. Hinojosa Commissioner Beryl A. Howell Commissioner Dabney L. Friedrich Commissioner Jonathan J. Wroblewski Commissioner, Ex-officio Isaac Fulwood, Jr. Commissioner, Ex-officio FEDERAL CHILD PORNOGRAPHY OFFENSES TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................... i A. Overview .............................................................................................................................. i B. Summary of the Child Pornography Sentencing Scheme .................................................. iv C. Highlights of the Commission’s Report ............................................................................ vi D. Recommendations to Congress ....................................................................................... xvii E. Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... xxi CHAPTER 1: THE PURPOSES AND METHODOLOGY OF THIS REPORT ...........................................1 A. Introduction ..........................................................................................................................1 B. Background ..........................................................................................................................3 C. General Trends in Sentencing Data .....................................................................................6
    [Show full text]
  • The Expansion of Child Pornography Law Carissa B
    University of North Carolina School of Law Carolina Law Scholarship Repository Faculty Publications Faculty Scholarship 2018 The Expansion of Child Pornography Law Carissa B. Hessick University of North Carolina School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.unc.edu/faculty_publications Part of the Criminal Law Commons, and the First Amendment Commons Publication: New Criminal Law Review This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at Carolina Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of Carolina Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE EXPANSION OF CHILD PORNOGRAPHY LAW Carissa Byrne Hessick This Symposium essay identifies two dramatic expansions of child pornography law: prosecutions for possessing images of children who are clothed and not engaged in any sexual activity, and prosecutions for possessing smaller portions of artistic and non-pornographic images. These prosecutions have expanded the definition of the term ‘‘child pornography’’ well beyond its initial meaning. What is more, they signal that child pornography laws are being used to punish people not necessarily because of the nature of the picture they possess, but rather because of the conclusion that those individuals are sexually attracted to chil- dren. If law enforcement concludes that a person finds an image of a child to be sexually arousing, then these laws can subject that individual to punishment, even though the image would have been perfectly innocuous had it been pos- sessed by someone else. Keywords: child pornography, criminal law, First Amendment, Texas, New Jersey INTRODUCTION Over the past four decades, America has waged a legal battle against child pornography.
    [Show full text]
  • Freud on the Court: Re-Interpreting Sexting & Child Pornography Laws
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Fordham University School of Law Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal Volume 23 Volume XXIII Number 3 Volume XXIII Book 3 Article 3 2013 Freud on the Court: Re-interpreting Sexting & Child Pornography Laws Matthew H. Birkhold Princeton University; Columbia Law School Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/iplj Part of the Intellectual Property Law Commons Recommended Citation Matthew H. Birkhold, Freud on the Court: Re-interpreting Sexting & Child Pornography Laws, 23 Fordham Intell. Prop. Media & Ent. L.J. 897 (2013). Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/iplj/vol23/iss3/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. It has been accepted for inclusion in Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal by an authorized editor of FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Freud on the Court: Re-interpreting Sexting & Child Pornography Laws Cover Page Footnote Ph.D. candidate, German, Princeton University; J.D. candidate, Columbia Law School. For helpful comments, I would like to thank Amy Adler, Alexander Birkhold, Peter Brooks, Jordan Elkind, Michael Herz, Lawrence Rosen, Kim Lane Scheppele, and Martin Stone, as well as the participants of Princeton’s LAPA seminar. I am also grateful to the participants of Peter Brooks’seminar on Law, Psychoanalysis, and Ideas of Human Agency as part of the series of seminars and lectures on The Ethics of Reading and the Cultures of Professionalism.
    [Show full text]
  • Refining Child Pornography Law
    Revised Pages Refining Child Pornography Law The legal definition of child pornography is, at best, unclear. In part because of this ambiguity and in part because of the nature of the crime itself, the prosecution and sentencing of perpetrators, the protection of and restitution for victims, and the means for preventing repeat offenses are deeply controversial. In an effort to clarify the questions and begin to formulate answers, in this volume, experts in law and the social sciences examine child pornography law and its consequences. Focusing on the roles of language and crime definition, the contributors present a range of views about the increasingly visible role child pornography plays in the national conversation on child safety, as well as the wisdom of the punishment of those who produce, distribute, and possess materials that may be considered child pornography. Carissa Byrne Hessick is Professor of Law at the University of North Carolina School of Law. Revised Pages Law, Meaning, and Violence The scope of Law, Meaning, and Violence is defined by the wide-ranging scholarly debates sig- naled by each of the words in the title. Those debates have taken place among and between law- yers, anthropologists, political theorists, sociologists, and historians, as well as literary and cul- tural critics. This series is intended to recognize the importance of such ongoing conversations about law, meaning, and violence as well as to encourage and further them. Series Editors: Martha Minow, Harvard Law School Austin Sarat, Amherst College recent titles in the series Refining Child Pornography Law: Crime, Language, and Social Consequences, edited by Carissa Byrne Hessick The First Global Prosecutor: Promise and Constraints, edited by Martha Minow, C.
    [Show full text]
  • The Shifting Law of Sexual Speech: Rethinking Robert Mapplethorpe
    University of Chicago Legal Forum Volume 2020 12/01/2020 Article 2 2020 The Shifting Law of Sexual Speech: Rethinking Robert Mapplethorpe Amy Adler Follow this and additional works at: https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclf Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Adler, Amy (2020) "The Shifting Law of Sexual Speech: Rethinking Robert Mapplethorpe," University of Chicago Legal Forum: Vol. 2020 , Article 2. Available at: https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclf/vol2020/iss1/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Chicago Unbound. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Chicago Legal Forum by an authorized editor of Chicago Unbound. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Shifting Law of Sexual Speech: Rethinking Robert Mapplethorpe Cover Page Footnote Photo permissions: Jim, Sausalito, 1977 © Robert Mapplethorpe Foundation. Used by permission. Carnations, 1978 © Robert Mapplethorpe Foundation. Used by permission. Lee Leigh, 1980 © Robert Mapplethorpe Foundation. Used by permission. Ajitto, 1981 © Robert Mapplethorpe Foundation. Used by permission. Dan S., 1980 © Robert Mapplethorpe Foundation. Used by permission. Self Portrait, 1988 © Robert Mapplethorpe Foundation. Used by permission. X Portfolio, 1978 © Robert Mapplethorpe Foundation. Used by permission. This article is available in University of Chicago Legal Forum: https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclf/vol2020/ iss1/2 The Shifting Law of Sexual Speech: Rethinking Robert Mapplethorpe Amy Adler† † Emily Kempin Professor of Law, NYU School of Law. I would like to thank the University of Chicago Legal Forum for hosting me at the 2019 Symposium: “What’s the Harm? The Future of the First Amendment” where I presented an earlier draft of this paper.
    [Show full text]
  • The Attributes of God A.W
    The Attributes Of God A.W. Pink FBC Adult Christian Education Dec 2010 – Feb 2011 Lesson # 1 – 5 December 2010 Arthur Walkington Pink (1 April 1886 – 15 July 1952) was an English Christian evangelist and Biblical scholar known for his solidly biblical and Puritan-like teachings. Pink was born in Nottingham, England and became a Christian in 1908, at the age of 22. Though born to Christian parents, prior to conversion he migrated into a Theosophical society (an occult gnostic group popular in England during that time), and quickly rose in prominence within their ranks. His conversion came from his father's patient admonitions from Scripture. It was the verse, Proverbs 14:12, 'there is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death,' which particularly struck his heart and compelled him to renounce Theosophy and follow Jesus. Desiring to grow in knowledge of the Bible, Pink immigrated to the United States to study at Moody Bible Institute. Impatient, he left there after only two months and began his first pastorate in Silverton Colorado. In 1916 he married Vera E. Russell (January 8, 1893 - July 17, 1962), who was from Kentucky. In May of 1929, Pink and his wife moved to Morton's Gap and joined the Baptist Church there. Pink had hoped to work on his periodical "Studies in the Scriptures," have a Bible Conference and evangelistic ministry in the area, and be a fellow helper to another pastor, C.D. Cole. Within less then a year, the friendship between Pink and Cole dissolved.
    [Show full text]
  • The Age of Consent: When Is Sexting No Longer Speech Integral to Criminal Conduct Antonio M
    Cornell Law Review Volume 97 Article 5 Issue 2 January 2012 The Age of Consent: When is Sexting No Longer Speech Integral to Criminal Conduct Antonio M. Haynes Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Antonio M. Haynes, The Age of Consent: When is Sexting No Longer Speech Integral to Criminal Conduct, 97 Cornell L. Rev. 369 (2012) Available at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr/vol97/iss2/5 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Cornell Law Review by an authorized administrator of Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. NOTE THE AGE OF CONSENT: WHEN IS SEXTING NO LONGER "SPEECH INTEGRAL TO CRIMINAL CONDUCT"? Antonio M. Haynest INTRODUCTION .................................................... 369 I. SEXTING: WHAT IS IT? WHY ARE TEENS DOING IT? ....... 375 II. INCENDIARY INCOHERENCE: THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHILD- PORNOGRAPHY LAw........................................ 378 A. The Journey from Clandestine Child Abuse to Jane and Jim 's Cell Phones .............................. 378 B. Incoherence As-Applied ............................ 385 C. What of the First Amendment Rights of Minors? .... 388 D. Pedophiles and Sexually Active Minors Are Not Functionally Equivalent ............................. 390 III. AFTER STEVENS, SEXTING PROSECUTIONS ARE "PRESUMPTIVELY INVALID".................................. 392 A. Statutory-Rape Laws ................................ 395 B. Tying Child-Pornography Statutes to the Age of Consent Would Reaffirm First Amendment Principles ........................................... 396 IV. SEXTING AS A SEX ACT? ................................... 398 A. Old Battles in a New Medium ...................... 399 B. Sexting: A Bilateral Sexual Exchange ..............
    [Show full text]