DOCSLIB.ORG

Regent University Law Review

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

REGENT UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW VOLUME 30 2017-2018 NUMBER 1 CONTENTS FOREWORD HAMILTON'S "WINNING" SHOT: A SHORT-TERM VICTORY Tessa L. Dysart 1 ARTICLES STANDING IN A POST-SPOKEO ENVIRONMENT The Honorable Henry E. Hudson ChristopherM. Keegan P. Thomas DiStanislao, III 11 CRITIQUING THE CRITICS OF THE CRITICS: QUESTIONING THE EMPIRICAL BASIS FOR THE FEDERALIZATION OF CRIMINAL LAW Paul Chen Ben Hagglund 33 CONVENTION DISTINGUISHED PANELISTS ProfessorJohn S. Baker, Jr. The Honorable Ron DeSantis Mr. Roger Pilon The HonorableLuther Strange, III ProfessorJonathan Turley Moderated by: The Honorable William H. Pryor, Jr. 57 ESSAYS CHEVRON DEFERENCE: WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? E. Duncan Getchell, Jr. Michael H. Brady 105 INRE NEELY: THE "PEDESTAL PRINCIPLE" AND JUDICIAL FIRST AMENDMENT LIBERTIES IN AN ERA OF INCREASING THOUGHT CONFORMITY The Honorable Vance D. Day 119 ATKINS TEST FOR EXCLUDING INTELLECTUALLY DISABLED PERSONS FROM EXECUTION WITHSTANDS BARRAGE OF CHALLENGES BY STATE COURTS The Honorable Joseph A. Migliozzi, Jr. Ashley Hughes 135 NOTES INTENT OR GROSS NEGLIGENCE: HILLARY CLINTON SHOULD BE CHARGED UNDER 18 U.S.C. § 793 FOR MISHANDLING CLASSIFIED INFORMATION Shannon Fields 149 A CASE STUDY IN THE INTERPRETATION AND CONSTRUCTION OF VIRGINIA TAX STATUTES: DOES THE BUSINESS LICENSE TAX EXEMPTION IN SECTION 58.1-3703 STILL APPLY TO MOTOR CARRIERS? Matthew E. Morse 173 REGENT UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW UNIVERSITY OFFICERS PHILLIP D. WALKER, Chairman of the Board of Trustees B.S., Western Carolina University DR. M. G. "PAT" ROBERTSON, Chancellorand CEO B.A., Washington & Lee; J.D., Yale University Law School; M. Div., New York Theological Seminary MICHAEL V. HERNANDEz, Dean;Professor B.A., University of Virginia; J.D., University of Virginia School of Law L.O. NATT GANTT II, Associate Dean of Academic Affairs; Professor; Co-Director, Centerfor Ethical Formation & Legal Education Reform A.B., Duke University; J.D., Harvard Law School; M.Div., Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary KIMBERLY R. VAN ESSENDELFT, Assistant Dean of Students Affairs; Principal Lecturer B.A., University of Virginia; J.D., College of William and Mary, Marshall- Wythe School of Law S. ERNIE WALTON, Assistant Dean of Admissions, Lecturer;Academic and Administrative Director, Centerfor Global Justice, Human Rights, and the Rule of Law B.S., Houghton College; J.D., Regent University School of Law JUDGE PATRICIA L. WEST, (RET.), Associate Dean of Careerand Alumni Affairs; DistinguishedProfessor of Law and Government B.A., College of William and Mary; J.D., College of William and Mary, Marshall-Wythe School of Law FACULTY JOHN ASHCROFT, DistinguishedProfessor of Law and Government A.B., Yale University; J.D., University of Chicago Law School JAMES M. BOLAND, Associate Professor; Director, Legal Analysis, Research and Writing B.A., Wheaton College; J.D., Regent University School of Law JEFFREY A. BRAUCH, Professor;Executive Director, Centerfor Global Justice, Human Rights, and the Rule of Law; Director, LL.M. Programs B.A., University of Wisconsin at Madison; J.D., University of Chicago Law School BRUCE N. CAMERON, Reed Larson Professor of Labor Law B.A., Andrews University; J.D., Emory University School of Law DOUGLAS H. COOK, Associate Vice Presidentfor Academic Affairs; Professor B.A., Miami University; J.D., The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law DR. JAMES A. DAVIDS, Associate Professor B.A., Calvin College; J.D., Duke University School of Law; Ph.D., Regent University ERIC A. DEGRoFF, Professor B.A., University of Kansas; M.P.A., University of Southern California; J.D., Regent University School of Law JAMES J. DUANE, Professor B.A., Harvard University; J.D., Harvard Law School THOMAS C. FOLSOM, Senior Lecturer B.S., U.S. Air Force Academy; J.D., Georgetown University Law Center CALEB N. GRIFFIN, Assistant Professor B.B.A., Oklahoma Christian University; J.D. Harvard Law School LouIs W. HENSLER III, Professor B.A., Bob Jones University; J.D., University of Chicago Law School HARRY G. HUTCHISON, DistinguishedProfessor of Law B.A., Wayne State University; M.A., Wayne State University; M.B.A., University of Michigan; J.D., Wayne State University Law School; P.G.C.E., University of Bristol (British & European Labour Law) BRADLEY P. JACOB, Associate Professor B.A., University of Delaware; J.D., University of Chicago Law School JANIS L. KIRKLAND, PrincipalLecturer; Director, Wealth Management Concentration,M.A. Program;Acting and Assistant Director, Legal Analysis, Research & Writing Program B.S., College of William and Mary; J.D., T.C. Williams School of Law, University of Richmond LYNNE MARIE KOHM, Professor;John Brown McCarty Professor of Family Law B.A., State University of New York at Albany; J.D., Syracuse University College of Law BENJAMIN V. MADISON III, Professor;Director, Bar Passage Initiatives;Co- Director, Center for Ethical Formation & Legal Education Reform B.A., Randolph-Macon College; M.A., College of William and Mary; J.D., College of William and Mary, Marshall-Wythe School of Law KATHLEEN A. McKEE, Associate Professor;Director, Experiential Learning B.A., State University of New York at Albany; J.D., Columbus School of Law, Catholic University; LL.M., Georgetown University Law Center JAMES E. MURPHY, Lecturer;Director, M.A. in Law Program;Business Affairs Manager B.A., University of Iowa; J.D., University of Oklahoma College of Law MICHAEL P. SCHUTT, Associate Professor;Global Recruiter B.A., Stephen F. Austin State University; J.D., University of Texas School of Law DR. JAY A. SEKULOW, DistinguishedProfessor of Law B.A., Mercer University; J.D., Mercer University School of Law; Ph.D., Regent University CRAIG A. STERN, Professor;Director, Honors Program B.A., Yale University; J.D., University of Virginia School of Law GLORIA A. WHITTICO, Associate Professor;Director, Academic Success Program A.B., College of William and Mary; J.D., University of Virginia School of Law ADJUNCT FACULTY CHARLES P. CARDWELL B.A., University of Maryland-College Park; J.D., Washington College of Law, American University LAURA B. HERNANDEZ B.A., Houghton College; J.D., T.C. Williams School of Law, University of Richmond JOSHUA L. JENKINS B.A., University of Arkansas; J.D., Regent University School of Law THE HONORABLE D. ARTHUR KELSEY B.A., Old Dominion University; J.D., College of William and Mary, Marshall- Wythe School of Law JESSICA KRENTZ B.A., The University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire; J.D., Regent University School of Law HEE EUN LEE B.A., Vassar College; M.A., Syracuse University; J.D. Syracuse University College of Law JAMES A. METCALFE B.A., U.S. Naval Academy; J.D., College of William and Mary, Marshall- Wythe School of Law THE HONORABLE H. THOMAS PADRICK, JR. B.A. Old Dominion University; Virginia State Bar Law Reader Program STEPHEN P. PFEIFFER B.A., Carroll College; J.D., Regent University School of Law HUGO R. VALVERDE B.S., College of William and Mary; M.E.M., Duke University; J.D., Regent University School of Law LAW LIBRARY ADMINISTRATION MARGARET L. CHRISTIANSEN, Electronic Services and Digital Initiatives Librarian B.S., William Woods College; J.D., Regent University School of Law; M.S.I.S., Florida State University MARIE S. HAMM, Director, Law Library Dual B.S., Mount Olive College; J.D., Regent University School of Law; M.L.S., Syracuse University WILLIAM E. MAGEE, Assistant Directorfor Public Services B.A., Old Dominion University; J.D., Regent University School of Law; M.L.S., Catholic University REGENT UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW ISSN 1056-3962. The Regent University Law Review is published at Regent University and is produced and edited by the students of the Regent University School of Law under the supervision of the faculty. The domestic subscription rate is $10.00 per issue. Third-class postage paid at Virginia Beach, Virginia. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Editor- in-Chief, Law Review, Regent University School of Law, Virginia Beach, VA 23464-9800. Absent receipt of notice to the contrary, subscriptions to the Law Review are renewed automatically each year. Claims for issues not received will be filled for published issues within one year before the receipt of the claim. Subscription claims for issues beyond this limitation period will not be honored. All articles copyright C 2017 Regent University Law Review, except where otherwise expressly indicated. For permission to reprint an article or any portion thereof, please address your written request to the holder of the copyright. For any article to which Regent University Law Review holds the copyright, permission is granted to reprint any portion of the article for educational use (including inclusion in a casebook intended primarily for classroom use), provided that: (1) in the case of copies distributed in class, students are charged no more than the cost of duplication; (2) the article is identified on each copy according to THE BLUEBOOK: A UNIFORM SYSTEM OF CITATION (20th ed. 2015); (3) proper notice of copyright is affixed to each copy; and (4) Regent University Law Review is notified in writing of the use. Regent University Law Review accepts unsolicited manuscripts by email addressed to the Editor-in-Chief. Citations in submitted manuscripts should use footnotes and conform to THE BLUEBOOK: A UNIFORM SYSTEM OF CITATION (20th ed. 2015). Address all correspondence to Editor-in-Chief, Regent University Law Review, Regent University School of Law, 1000 Regent University Drive, RH 252C, Virginia Beach, VA 23464. Regent University Law Review's e-mail address is [email protected], and Law Review's website address is www.regentuniversitylawreview.com. Opinions expressed in any part of the Regent University Law Review are those of individual contributors and do not necessarily reflect the policies and opinions of its editors and staff, Regent University School of Law, its administrationand faculty, or Regent University. The seal of the Regent University Law Review symbolizes the Christianheritage of Regent University. The shield represents the shield of faith.
Recommended publications
  • Officials Say Flynn Discussed Sanctions

    Officials Say Flynn Discussed Sanctions

    Officials say Flynn discussed sanctions The Washington Post February 10, 2017 Friday, Met 2 Edition Copyright 2017 The Washington Post All Rights Reserved Distribution: Every Zone Section: A-SECTION; Pg. A08 Length: 1971 words Byline: Greg Miller;Adam Entous;Ellen Nakashima Body Talks with Russia envoy said to have occurred before Trump took office National security adviser Michael Flynn privately discussed U.S. sanctions against Russia with that country's ambassador to the United States during the month before President Trump took office, contrary to public assertions by Trump officials, current and former U.S. officials said. Flynn's communications with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak were interpreted by some senior U.S. officials as an inappropriate and potentially illegal signal to the Kremlin that it could expect a reprieve from sanctions that were being imposed by the Obama administration in late December to punish Russia for its alleged interference in the 2016 election. Flynn on Wednesday denied that he had discussed sanctions with Kislyak. Asked in an interview whether he had ever done so, he twice said, "No." On Thursday, Flynn, through his spokesman, backed away from the denial. The spokesman said Flynn "indicated that while he had no recollection of discussing sanctions, he couldn't be certain that the topic never came up." Officials said this week that the FBI is continuing to examine Flynn's communications with Kislyak. Several officials emphasized that while sanctions were discussed, they did not see evidence that Flynn had an intent to convey an explicit promise to take action after the inauguration. Flynn's contacts with the ambassador attracted attention within the Obama administration because of the timing.
  • Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Criminal Justice Oversight of the Committee on the Judiciary United States Senate One Hundred Sixth Congress First Session

    Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Criminal Justice Oversight of the Committee on the Judiciary United States Senate One Hundred Sixth Congress First Session

    S. HRG. 106-673 OVERSIGHT OF FEDERAL ASSET FORFEITURE: ITS ROLE IN FIGHTING CRIME HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE OVERSIGHT OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION ON FEDERAL ASSET FORFEITURE, FOCUSING ON ITS ROLE IN FIGHTING CRIME AND THE NEED FOR REFORM OF THE ASSET FORFEITURE LAWS JULY 21, 1999 Serial No. J-106-38 Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary Department of Justice NOV30 2000 MAIN LIBRARY U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 66-959 CC WASHINGTON : 2000 COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah, Chairman STROM THURMOND, South Carolina PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., Delaware JON KYL, Arizona HERBERT KOHL, Wisconsin MIKE DEWINE, Ohio DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California JOHN ASHCROFT, Missouri RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin SPENCER ABRAHAM, Michigan ROBERT G. TORRICELLI, New Jersey JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York BOB SMITH, New Hampshire MANUS COONEY, Chief Counsel and Staff Director BRUCE A. COHEN, Minority Chief Counsel SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE OVERSIGHT STROM THURMOND, South Carolina, Chairman MIKE DEWINE, Ohio CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York JOHN ASHCROFT, Missouri JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., Delaware SPENCER ABRAHAM, Michigan ROBERT G. TORRICELLI, New Jersey JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont GARRY MALPHRUS, Chief Counsel GLEN SHOR, Legislative Assistant (II) CONTENTS STATEMENT OF COMMITTEE MEMBER Page Thurmond, Hon. Strom, U.S. Senator from the State of South Carolina 1 DeWine, Hon. Mike, U.S. Senator from the State of Ohio 3 Schumer, Hon.
  • Transcript Prepared from a Tape Recording.]

    Transcript Prepared from a Tape Recording.]

    1 THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION A Brookings Judicial Issues Forum PRESIDENTIAL WAR POWERS: HAS THE GOVERNMENT GONE TOO FAR? STUART TAYLOR - Moderator Non-resident Senior Fellow, Brookings Institution Friday, March 17, 2006 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. Falk Auditorium 1776 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. [TRANSCRIPT PREPARED FROM A TAPE RECORDING.] MILLER REPORTING CO., INC. 735 8th STREET, S.E. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20003-2802 (202) 546-6666 2 C O N T E N T S SPEAKER PAGE Lou Fisher Specialist in the Law Library, Library of Congress 7 Roger Pilon Vice president for Legal Affairs, Cato Institute 15 William Galston Senior Fellow, Brookings Institution 26 Andrew McBride Partner, Wiley, Rein & Fielding 35 Discussion Q&A 44 MILLER REPORTING CO., INC. 735 8th STREET, S.E. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20003-2802 (202) 546-6666 3 P R O C E E D I N G S MR. STUART TAYLOR: [in progress] terrorism, which is already longer than the civil war or World War II, has no end in site. Just two weeks after 9/11, a Justice Department official named John Yew penned a memo that could be called the Bush Doctrine on War Powers. He wrote this. "Congress may not place any limits on the president's determinations as to any terrorist threat, the amount of military force to be used in response, or the method, timing and nature of the response. These decisions, under our Constitution, are for the president alone to make." Since then, the administration lawyers have argued that the president has the following powers: He could launch a major preemptive invasion without congressional approval, although ultimately he did obtain congressional approval in the case of Iraq.
  • Sexual Assault in the Political Sphere Robert Larsen University of Nebraska-Lincoln

    Sexual Assault in the Political Sphere Robert Larsen University of Nebraska-Lincoln

    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Honors Theses, University of Nebraska-Lincoln Honors Program Spring 3-12-2018 Sexual Assault in the Political Sphere Robert Larsen University of Nebraska-Lincoln Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/honorstheses Part of the American Politics Commons, and the Politics and Social Change Commons Larsen, Robert, "Sexual Assault in the Political Sphere" (2018). Honors Theses, University of Nebraska-Lincoln. 46. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/honorstheses/46 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Honors Program at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors Theses, University of Nebraska-Lincoln by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. SEXUAL ASSAULT IN THE POLITICAL SPHERE An Undergraduate Honors Thesis Submitted in Partial fulfillment of University Honors Program Requirements University of Nebraska-Lincoln by Robert E. Larsen, BA Political Science College of Arts and Sciences March 12, 2018 Faculty Mentors: John Gruhl, PhD, Political Science 1 Abstract This project sought to analyze how sexual assault in the political sphere is perceived and treated in contemporary society in the United States of America. The thesis analyzed eight cases of sexual misconduct, including six from the past thirty years. In each case, the reaction of party and social leaders, of the politician’s constituents and of the politician himself were looked at, as well as the consequences the politician faced. The results were then analyzed side-by-side to discover similarities and differences between ho cases of sexual assault allegations were treated and in terms of what happened to the politician after the allegations came out.
  • The Constitutional Protection of Property Rights: America and Europe

    The Constitutional Protection of Property Rights: America and Europe

    The Constitutional Protection of Property Rights: America and Europe by Roger Pilon, Ph.D., J.D. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………. 1 II. THE AMERICAN THEORY OF LEGITIMACY…………………………... 3 A. Natural Rights and the Limits of Political Consent……………………..... 3 B. Individual Liberty, Limited Government………………………………… 4 C. Political and Legal Legitimacy…………………………………………... 6 III. PROPERTY IN THE STATE OF NATURE………………………………… 7 A. Human Rights as Property Rights………………………………………... 7 B. Original Acquisition……………………………………………………… 8 C. Positive Law.…………………………………………….….……………. 10 D. Rights of Use..…………………………………………….……………… 12 E. Nuisance and Endangerment……………………………………………... 14 F. Rights, Values, and the Pursuit of Happiness……………………………. 15 IV. FROM NATURAL TO CONSTITUTIONAL LAW………………………... 16 A. Public Goods and “Public” Pursuits……………………………………… 16 B. A Constitution for Liberty………………………………………………... 18 C. The Constitution and Property Rights……………………………………. 20 D. From Limited Government to Leviathan………………………………… 22 i E. Judicial “Activism” and “Restraint”……………………………………... 25 V. THE SUPREME COURT’S TREATMENT OF PROPERTY RIGHTS……. 27 A. Government Actions Affecting Property: In Summary………………….. 28 B. The Court Stumbles Through the Cases………………………………….. 33 1. Regulatory Takings…………………………………….……………... 33 a. Physical Invasion Cases…..…………………………………… 33 b. Diminution-of-Value Cases…...………………………..……… 35 c. Regulatory Exaction Cases…………………….…………….… 52 d. Temporary Takings………………………………..…………… 55 2. Eminent Domain…………………………………………………….... 58 a. Blight
  • Banking and Insurance - Should Ever the Twain Meet? Emeric Fischer William & Mary Law School

    Banking and Insurance - Should Ever the Twain Meet? Emeric Fischer William & Mary Law School

    College of William & Mary Law School William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository Faculty Publications Faculty and Deans 1992 Banking and Insurance - Should Ever the Twain Meet? Emeric Fischer William & Mary Law School Repository Citation Fischer, Emeric, "Banking and Insurance - Should Ever the Twain Meet?" (1992). Faculty Publications. 485. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/facpubs/485 Copyright c 1992 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/facpubs Emeric Fischer* Banking and Insurance-Should Ever the Twain Meet? TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction . 727 II. Evolution of Banking in the United States . 731 A. Banking Prior to the Civil War .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 731 1. From the Revolutionary War to 1836 . 731 2. The State Free Banking System, 1837 to 1864 . 733 B. The National Free Banking System, 1864 to 1933 . 734 1. Prior to 1913 . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 734 2. Mter 1913 . 735 III. Regulation of Banking . 737 A. The Glass-Steagall Act and the FDIC . 737 B. Policy Goals of Federal Regulation. 738 1. The Broad Goals . 739 2. General Constraints on Federal Banking Policy . 739 C. The Policy Implementing Tools (Regulatory Mechanisms) . 741 1. Entry Restrictions .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 741 2. Capitalization Requirements..................... 743 3. Limitation of and Prohibition Against Specific Activities. 744 4. Restrictions on Mfiliations and Geographic Expansion . 749 5. Lending and Borrowing Limitations . 750 * R. Hugh and Nolie A. Haynes Professor of Law, William and Mary School of Law. B.S. University of South Carolina 1951; J.D. 1963 and M.L.&T. 1964 College of William and Mary, Marshall-Wythe School of Law.
  • How an Outdated Electoral Structure Has Led to Political Polarization in the United States

    How an Outdated Electoral Structure Has Led to Political Polarization in the United States

    The United States Election System: How an Outdated Electoral Structure has led to Political Polarization in the United States by Jake Fitzharris A THESIS submitted to Oregon State University Honors College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Honors Baccalaureate of Science in Political Science and Psychology (Honors Associate) Presented January 24, 2019 Commencement June 2019 AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Jake Fitzharris for the degree of Honors Baccalaureate of Science in Political Science and Psychology presented on January 24, 2019. Title: The United States Election System: How an Outdated Electoral Structure has led to Political Polarization in the United States. Abstract approved:_____________________________________________________ Christopher Nichols Political Polarization in the United States is at a level higher today than at any point in the past few decades. Possible causes of this rise in polarization have been provided from various sources, including explanations such as mass media and income inequality. Through historical analysis and a wide literature review, this thesis explores a major factor in political polarization, the United States election system. The thesis argues that the election system in the United States exacerbates the intensely polarized political climate of the modern day United States in three main ways: the electoral college, which produces the persisting two party system, primary elections, which reinforce extreme candidate views, and districting, which tends to increase politically uniform districts and lead candidates to position themselves at the poles rather than in the center. The thesis concludes that the only way to eliminate political polarization stemming from all of these sources would be to implement a unique proportional representation system for the United States.
  • The Evolution of the Digital Political Advertising Network

    The Evolution of the Digital Political Advertising Network

    PLATFORMS AND OUTSIDERS IN PARTY NETWORKS: THE EVOLUTION OF THE DIGITAL POLITICAL ADVERTISING NETWORK Bridget Barrett A thesis submitted to the faculty at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts at the Hussman School of Journalism and Media. Chapel Hill 2020 Approved by: Daniel Kreiss Adam Saffer Adam Sheingate © 2020 Bridget Barrett ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT Bridget Barrett: Platforms and Outsiders in Party Networks: The Evolution of the Digital Political Advertising Network (Under the direction of Daniel Kreiss) Scholars seldom examine the companies that campaigns hire to run digital advertising. This thesis presents the first network analysis of relationships between federal political committees (n = 2,077) and the companies they hired for electoral digital political advertising services (n = 1,034) across 13 years (2003–2016) and three election cycles (2008, 2012, and 2016). The network expanded from 333 nodes in 2008 to 2,202 nodes in 2016. In 2012 and 2016, Facebook and Google had the highest normalized betweenness centrality (.34 and .27 in 2012 and .55 and .24 in 2016 respectively). Given their positions in the network, Facebook and Google should be considered consequential members of party networks. Of advertising agencies hired in the 2016 electoral cycle, 23% had no declared political specialization and were hired disproportionately by non-incumbents. The thesis argues their motivations may not be as well-aligned with party goals as those of established political professionals. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES .................................................................................................................... V POLITICAL CONSULTING AND PARTY NETWORKS ...............................................................................
  • HOW CONSTITUTIONAL CORRUPTION HAS LED to IDEOLOGICAL LITMUS TESTS for JUDICIAL Nomineest

    HOW CONSTITUTIONAL CORRUPTION HAS LED to IDEOLOGICAL LITMUS TESTS for JUDICIAL Nomineest

    HOW CONSTITUTIONAL CORRUPTION HAS LED TO IDEOLOGICAL LITMUS TESTS FOR JUDICIAL NOMINEESt Roger Pilon* I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The 2000 presidential election was widely understood to be a battle for the courts. When George W. Bush finally won, following the Supreme Court's split decision in Bush v. Gore, many Democratic activists simply dug in their heels, vowing to frustrate Bush's efforts to fill vacancies on the federal courts. After Democrats took control of the Senate in May of 2001, they began calling explicitly for ideological litmus tests for judicial nominees. And they started a confirmation stall, especially for circuit court nominees, that continues to this day. Thus, eight of Bush's first 11 circuit court nominees went for over a year without even a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, and most have still not come before the committee.' As the backlog of nominees grows, Democrats are quite explicit about the politics of the matter: their aim is to keep "highly credentialed, conservative ideologues" from the bench.2 The rationales they offer contend that judges today are, and perhaps should be, "setting national policy." 3 One such "policy" they abhor is "[t]he Supreme Court's recent 5- 4 decisions that constrain Congressional power."4 Thus the importance, they say, of placing "sympathetic judges" on the bench, judges who share "the core values held by most of our country's citizens."5 Their view, in a word, is that everything is politics, nothing is law. t This article is the first publication of a revised version of ROGER PILON, CATO INSTITUTE, PoLICY ANALYSIS No.
  • A Modest Proposal on Must-Carry, the 1992 Cable Act, and Regulation Generally: Go Back to Basics Roger Pilon

    A Modest Proposal on Must-Carry, the 1992 Cable Act, and Regulation Generally: Go Back to Basics Roger Pilon

    Hastings Communications and Entertainment Law Journal Volume 17 | Number 1 Article 3 1-1-1994 A Modest Proposal on Must-Carry, the 1992 Cable Act, and Regulation Generally: Go Back to Basics Roger Pilon Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/ hastings_comm_ent_law_journal Part of the Communications Law Commons, Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law Commons, and the Intellectual Property Law Commons Recommended Citation Roger Pilon, A Modest Proposal on Must-Carry, the 1992 Cable Act, and Regulation Generally: Go Back to Basics, 17 Hastings Comm. & Ent. L.J. 41 (1994). Available at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_comm_ent_law_journal/vol17/iss1/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hastings Communications and Entertainment Law Journal by an authorized editor of UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A Modest Proposal on "Must-Carry," the 1992 Cable Act, and Regulation Generally: Go Back to Basicst by ROGER PILON* Table of Contents I. The 1992 Cable A ct ..................................... II. Must-Carry and the Court .............................. III. Must-Carry and the Constitution ....................... A. The Original Design ................................ B. The Commerce Clause Under the Original Design. C. Judicial Methodology Under the Original Design... D. Must-Carry Under the Original Design ............. IV. Must-Carry and Modern "Scrutiny Theory" . ........... t An earlier version of this Article was presented on February 25, 1994, at a symposium entitled The 1992 Cable Act: Freedom of Expression Issues, sponsored by and held at the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information (CITI), Columbia Business School, Columbia University.
  • Voters' Pamphlet Primary Election 2020 for Lane County

    Voters' Pamphlet Primary Election 2020 for Lane County

    Voters’ Pamphlet Oregon Primary Election May 19, 2020 Certificate of Correctness I, Bev Clarno, Secretary of State of the State of Oregon, do hereby certify that this guide has been correctly prepared in accordance with the law in order to assist electors in voting at the Primary Election to be held throughout the State on May 19, 2020. Witness my hand and the Seal of the State of Oregon in Salem, Oregon, this 6th day of April, 2020. Bev Clarno Oregon Secretary of State Oregon votes by mail. Ballots will be mailed to registered voters beginning April 29. OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE ELECTIONS DIVISION STEPHEN N. TROUT BEV CLARNO DIRECTOR SECRETARY OF STATE 255 CAPITOL ST NE, SUITE 501 SALEM, OREGON 97310 (503) 986-1518 Dear Oregon Voter, The information this Voters’ Pamphlet provides is designed to assist you in participating in the May 19, 2020, Primary Election. Primary elections serve two main purposes. The first is for all voters to be able to cast ballots for candidates for nonpartisan offices like judges and some county and other local offices. The second is for the voters registered with a major political party to select their nominees for partisan office like US President. Those registered as not affiliated with a political party, or registered with a minor party (Constitution, Independent, Libertarian, Pacific Green, Progressive, Working Families) will receive a ballot that includes only nonpartisan offices. The US Supreme Court has ruled that political parties get to decide who votes in their primaries so unless you are registered as a Republican or Democrat you will not have candidates for President or any partisan office on your May Primary ballot.
  • Interstate Banking Developments in Florida: Pushing Through Legal Barriers and Toward a Level Playing Field

    Interstate Banking Developments in Florida: Pushing Through Legal Barriers and Toward a Level Playing Field

    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by NSU Works Nova Law Review Volume 9, Issue 1 1984 Article 1 Interstate Banking Developments in Florida: Pushing Through Legal Barriers and Toward a Level Playing Field Scott W. Dunlap∗ ∗ Copyright c 1984 by the authors. Nova Law Review is produced by The Berkeley Electronic Press (bepress). https://nsuworks.nova.edu/nlr Interstate Banking Developments in Florida: Pushing Through Legal Barriers and Toward a Level Playing Field Scott W. Dunlap Abstract The Florida banking market is one of the most coveted in the country. KEYWORDS: Banking, Florida, Legal Barriers Dunlap: Interstate Banking Developments in Florida: Pushing Through Legal Interstate Banking Developments in Florida: Pushing Through Legal Barriers and Toward a Level Playing Field Scott W. Dunlap* I. Introduction The Florida banking market is one of the most coveted in the country.1 The Sunshine State is one of the fastest growing states in the nation,2 and this growth provides increased deposits in the State's' banks. As long as this growth continues, new businesses which need funds to begin operations will be attracted to Florida. In short, the in- flux of people and businesses into the state insure that Florida will re- main a deposit-rich state, requiring large amounts of capital to fund its continued growth. Because banks depend on both obtaining deposits and making loans for their existence, the Florida banking market is quite attractive. Until recently, Florida excluded out-of-state banks and bank hold- ing companies3 from its retail banking market.4 This did not mean that * B.S., University of North Carolina; J.D., University of Florida.