scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Institution

Georgetown University Law Center

About: Georgetown University Law Center is a based out in . It is known for research contribution in the topics: Supreme court & Global health. The organization has 585 authors who have published 2488 publications receiving 36650 citations. The organization is also known as: Georgetown Law & GULC.


Papers
More filters
Posted Content
TL;DR: The 2001 Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (2001 Tax Relief Act) seeks, in part, to provide taxpayers with significant relief from all major forms of marriage penalties for the next ten years as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: Historically, American society has venerated the institution of marriage for religious, moral, and cultural reasons. Much political rhetoric emphasizes the necessity of preserving family values. The present tax system, however, discourages marriage by levying a marriage penalty on nearly 22 million married couples. Although the marriage penalty affects taxpayers across the economic spectrum, it most severely affects low-income couples. Congress designed the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) to benefit the working poor, but both the EITC phase-out ranges and certain qualification rules generate a most egregious marriage penalty that still plagues low-income families today. The Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (2001 Tax Relief Act) seeks, in part, to provide taxpayers with significant relief from all major forms of marriage penalties for the next ten years. Specifically, the 2001 Act: provides taxpayers filing joint returns with twice the standard deduction enjoyed by single taxpayers; expands the 15% tax bracket for taxpayers filing joint returns to twice the corresponding bracket for single taxpayers; and increases the phase-out ranges of the EITC by ten percent for married couples filing jointly. That notwithstanding, marriage penalty relief is limited by inherent deficiencies that suggest the need for a more comprehensive, long-term solution to the problem. This article proposes two potential solutions to the disparate tax treatment still threatening millions of married and single taxpayers. The first entails a combination of reinstating the pre-1990 head of household requirements for the EITC and adjusting the EITC phase-out ranges for couples filing joint returns to double the value for single taxpayers. The second solution involves mandatory separate returns in conjunction with a legislative override of a 1930 Supreme Court case, Lucas v. Earl. In sections II and III, this article outlines the history of the marriage penalty, then traces the development of the EITC within the marriage penalty framework. In particular, section III addresses the primary problems with the EITC that continue to give rise to the marriage penalty. With the historical and conceptual foundations established, section IV evaluates two proposed tax reforms designed to combat the EITC marriage penalty. Section V concludes by suggesting more cogent alternative solutions to the 2001 Tax Relief Act that would entirely eliminate the marriage penalty generated by the earned income tax credit.

2 citations

Posted Content
TL;DR: The distinction between arguments for constitutionalism and for judicial review is discussed in this article, with a focus on the distinction between political and substantive justice, and among different types of judicial review.
Abstract: Is constitutional judicial review a necessary component of a just polity? A striking feature of the current debate is its tendency to proceed as if the question could be answered in the same way always and everywhere. Defenders of constitutional review argue that it is a conceptually necessary feature of constitutionalism, the rule of law, and the effective protection of individual rights. Critics claim that it is necessarily inconsistent with progressive politics and democratic engagement. Largely missing from the debate is a fairly obvious point: Like any other institution, constitutional review must be evaluated within a particular temporal, cultural, and political context.Part I of this article lays out the groundwork for my discussion by separating out several questions that are too often conflated. It addresses the distinction between arguments for constitutionalism and for judicial review, between arguments for judicial review grounded in political and substantive justice, and among arguments for different types of judicial review. The Part concludes that the embrace of constitutionalism, the choice between substantive or political justice, and the choice among different types of judicial review all depend upon context.Given the conclusions in Part I, the argument in Part II will come as no surprise. The wisdom of providing for judicial review turns on the type of judicial review we are talking about and on the relationship between judicial power on the one hand and constitutionalism, political, and substantive justice on the other. All of these factors are different in different times and places. It follows that judicial power to invalidate statutes and executive actions is a contingent good.A brief coda discusses the implications of this argument for the discipline of comparative constitutional law.

2 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors identify the effects of hypothetical collaborators' identity traits and type of collaboration on preferences for punishment, forgiveness, and reintegration, and find that the nature of collaboration matters more than the identity of the collaborator.
Abstract: Rebel groups that govern territory require the support of large numbers of civilians. After conflict ends, these civilians are often perceived as rebel collaborators. Yet, we know relatively little about what victimized populations think is the appropriate response to collaborators. This gap in our knowledge has serious implications for the durability of peace. Through experiments embedded in an original survey of Mosul, an Iraqi city that experienced governance by the Islamic State, we identify the effects of hypothetical collaborators' (1) identity traits and (2) type of collaboration on preferences for punishment, forgiveness, and reintegration. Contrary to the government's harsh and indiscriminate approach to prosecuting collaborators, participants prefer more lenient punishments - or no punishment - for some. We find that the nature of collaboration matters more than the identity of the collaborator. Our design helps identify the conditions under which former rebel collaborators may be successfully reintegrated into post-conflict societies.

2 citations

Posted Content
TL;DR: The Playpen cases as mentioned in this paper show that the potential for graymail in domestic criminal prosecutions can be mitigated by applying the Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA) with regard to classified information by prescribing workable procedures for disclosure in evidence.
Abstract: Following World War II, the expansion of the bureaucratized intelligence services and the Federal Bureau of Investigation resulted in the development and refinement of evidentiary privileges to protect intelligence and law enforcement sources and methods from disclosure at trial. In cases involving the intelligence services and the national security establishment, the clash between these evidentiary privileges and defendants' discovery rights resulted in "graymail"-the trial tactic of forcing prosecutors into a dilemma between dismissing charges or disclosing sensitive or classified information about their sources and methods. The Classified Information Procedures Act has, for the most part, solved the problem of graymail with regard to classified information by prescribing workable procedures for its disclosure in evidence. However, law enforcement sources and methods that are sensitive but unclassified are protected by the law enforcement evidentiary privilege, and thus still subject to graymail. Law enforcement's increased use of secret surveillance technology like cell site simulators and zero-day vulnerabilities has exacerbated the problem of graymail in domestic criminal prosecutions. In the Playpen cases, a series of prosecutions arising from a sting of a child pornography ring, the FBI retroactively classified the source code of the Network Investigative Technique (NIT) the Bureau used to hack the Playpen dark web server. As a result, the Playpen cases offer a unique opportunity to observe graymail tactics in nearly identical cases both with and without CIPA's mechanism for controlled disclosure. CIPA's success in mitigating graymail in the Playpen cases argues that an analogous statutory mechanism for controlled disclosure would be the best way to mitigate the potential for graymail in other cases involving secret, but unclassified, law enforcement sources and methods.

2 citations


Authors

Showing all 585 results

NameH-indexPapersCitations
Lawrence O. Gostin7587923066
Michael J. Saks381555398
Chirag Shah343415056
Sara J. Rosenbaum344256907
Mark Dybul33614171
Steven C. Salop3312011330
Joost Pauwelyn321543429
Mark Tushnet312674754
Gorik Ooms291243013
Alicia Ely Yamin291222703
Julie E. Cohen28632666
James G. Hodge272252874
John H. Jackson271022919
Margaret M. Blair26754711
William W. Bratton251122037
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
American University
13K papers, 367.2K citations

78% related

Brookings Institution
2.7K papers, 135.3K citations

78% related

London School of Economics and Political Science
35K papers, 1.4M citations

78% related

Bocconi University
8.9K papers, 344.1K citations

75% related

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
1.9K papers, 118K citations

75% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
202174
2020146
2019115
2018113
2017109
2016118