Fordham Urban Law Journal
About: Fordham Urban Law Journal is an academic journal. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Supreme court & Legislation. It has an ISSN identifier of 0199-4646. Over the lifetime, 986 publication(s) have been published receiving 6138 citation(s). The journal is also known as: The Fordham urban law journal.
Topics: Supreme court, Legislation, Statute, Criminal justice, Population
Papers published on a yearly basis
01 Jan 2011-Fordham Urban Law Journal
TL;DR: In economic life, the possibilities for rational social action, for planning, for reform, for solving problems depend not upon our choice among mythical grand alternatives but largely upon choice among particular social techniques as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: In economic life the possibilities for rational social action, for planning, for reform--in short, for solving problems--depend not upon our choice among mythical grand alternatives but largely upon choice among particular social techniques ... techniques and not "isms" are the kernel of rational social action in the Western world. (1) Far-reaching developments in the global economy have us revisiting basic questions about government: what its role should be, what it can and cannot do, and how best to do it. (2) INTRODUCTION: THE REVOLUTION THAT NO ONE NOTICED A fundamental re-thinking is currently underway throughout the world about how to cope with public problems. (3) Stimulated by popular frustrations with the cost and effectiveness of government programs and by a new-found faith in liberal economic theories, serious questions are being raised about the capabilities, and even the motivations, of public-sector institutions. Long a staple of American political discourse, such questioning has spread to other parts of the world as well, unleashing an extraordinary torrent of reform. (4) As a consequence, governments from the United States and Canada to Malaysia and New Zealand are being challenged to reinvent, downsize, privatize, devolve, decentralize, deregulate and de-layer themselves, subject themselves to performance tests, and contract themselves out. Underlying much of this reform surge is a set of theories that portrays government agencies as tightly structured hierarchies insulated from market forces and from effective citizen pressure and therefore free to serve the personal and institutional interests of bureaucrats instead. (5) Even defenders of government among the reformers argue that we are saddled with the wrong kinds of governments at the present time, industrial-era governments "with their sluggish, centralized bureaucracies, their preoccupation with rules and regulations, and their hierarchical chains of command." (6) Largely overlooked in these accounts, however, is the extent to which the structure of modern government already embodies many of the features that these reforms seek to implement. In point of fact, a technological revolution has taken place in the operation of the public sector over the past fifty years both in the United States and, increasingly, in other parts of the world; but it is a revolution that few people recognize. The heart of this revolution has been a fundamental transformation not just in the scope and scale of government action, but in its basic forms. A massive proliferation has occurred in the tools of public action, in the instruments or means used to address public problems. Where earlier government activity was largely restricted to the direct delivery of goods or services by government bureaucrats, it now embraces a dizzying array of loans, loan guarantees, grants, contracts, social regulation, economic regulation, insurance, tax expenditures, vouchers, and much more. What makes this development particularly significant is that each of these tools has its own operating procedures, its own skill requirements, its own delivery mechanism, indeed its own "political economy." Each therefore imparts its own "twist" to the operation of the programs that embody it. Loan guarantees, for example, rely on commercial banks to extend assisted credit to qualified borrowers. In the process, commercial lending officers become the implementing agents of government lending programs. Since private bankers have their own world-view, their own decision rules, and their own priorities, left to their own devices they likely will produce programs that differ markedly from those that would result from direct government lending, not to mention outright government grants. Perhaps most importantly, like loan guarantees, many of these "newer" tools share an important common feature: they are highly indirect. They rely heavily on a wide assortment of "third parties"--commercial banks, private hospitals, social service agencies, industrial corporations, universities, day-care centers, other levels of government, financiers, construction firms, and many more--to deliver publicly financed services and pursue authorized public purposes. …
01 Jan 2000-Fordham Urban Law Journal
TL;DR: This paper explored patterns of police "stop and frisk" activity across New York City neighborhoods and found that racial composition, poverty levels, and extent of social disorganization are strong predictors of race and crime-specific stops.
Abstract: This article explores patterns of police ”stop and frisk” activity across New York City neighborhoods. While “Broken Windows” theory may account for higher stop and frisk activity for “quality of life” crimes, the authors suggest neighborhood characteristics like racial composition, poverty levels, and extent of social disorganization are strong predictors of raceand crime-specific stops. The authors consider whether street-stops in various neighborhoods comply with the Terry standard of reasonable suspicion as insight into the social and strategic meaning of policing. Their empirical evidence suggests policing focuses on policing poor people in poor places. Their strategy departs from ”Broken Windows” theory by concentrating on people and not disorder. They suggest racially disparate police targeting raises concern about legitimacy of law, weakens citizen cooperation with police, and undermines the social goals of policing.
01 Mar 2003-Fordham Urban Law Journal
TL;DR: Problem solving courts as discussed by the authors are specialized tribunals established to deal with specific problems, often involving individuals who need social, mental health, or substance abuse treatment services, such as mental health problems, or problems of family and domestic violence.
Abstract: I. PROBLEM SOLVING COURTS: A TRANSFORMATION IN THE JUDICIAL ROLE In the past dozen or so years, a remarkable transformation has occurred in the role of the courts. (1) Courts traditionally have functioned as governmental mechanisms of dispute resolution, resolving disputes between private parties concerning property, contracts, and tort damages, or between the government and an individual concerning allegations of criminal wrongdoing or regulatory violations. In these cases, courts typically have functioned as neutral arbiters, resolving issues of historical facts or supervising juries engaged in the adjudicatory process. Recently, a range of new kinds of problems, many of which are social and psychological in nature, have appeared before the courts. These cases require the courts to not only resolve disputed issues of fact, but also to attempt to solve a variety of human problems that are responsible for bringing the case to court. Traditional courts limit their attention to the narrow dispute in controversy. These newer courts, however, attempt to understand and address the underlying problem that is responsible for the immediate dispute, and to help the individuals before the court to effectively deal with the problem in ways that will prevent recurring court involvement. The new courts, increasingly known as problem solving courts, (2) are specialized tribunals established to deal with specific problems, often involving individuals who need social, mental health, or substance abuse treatment services. These courts also include criminal cases involving individuals with drug or alcoholism problems, mental health problems, or problems of family and domestic violence. The juvenile court is the forerunner of these specialized courts; it was started in Chicago in 1899 as an attempt to provide a rehabilitative approach to the problem of juvenile delinquency, rather than the punitive approach of the adult criminal court. (3) The modern antecedents of this movement are the drug treatment courts, founded in Miami in 1989. (4) The drug treatment court was a response to the recognition that processing nonviolent drug possession charges in the criminal courts and then sentencing the offender to prison did not succeed in changing the offender's addictive behavior. (5) Criminal court dockets had become swollen with these drug cases, and the essentially retributivist intervention of the criminal court and prison seemed to do little to avoid repetition of the underlying problem. (6) The result was a "revolving door effect in which [drug offenders typically] resumed their drug-abusing behavior after [being] released from prison." (7) Instead of relying on the traditional criminal justice approach, the drug treatment court emphasized the offender's rehabilitation, and placed the judge as a member of the treatment team. (8) Offenders accepting diversion to the drug treatment court, or pleading guilty and agreeing to participate in the drug treatment court as a condition of probation, agreed to several conditions; to remain drug-free, "to participate in a prescribed course of drug treatment, to submit to periodic drug testing in order to monitor their compliance [with the treatment plan], and to report [periodically] to court for judicial supervision of their progress." (9) These court's success in helping many addicts to end their addiction and to avoid re-involvement with the criminal court led to a tremendous growth in the number of drug courts nationally and internationally, with the result that, as of December 2000, there were 697 such courts in America, and many more in the planning stage. (10) Indeed, there now are juvenile drug treatment courts, which specialize in juveniles with drug abuse problems, and dependency drug treatment courts, that deal with families with drug problems that are charged with child abuse or neglect. (11) Other specialized treatment courts or problem solving courts, as they are now known, include domestic violence courts, (12) which attempt to protect the victims of domestic violence, to motivate perpetrators of domestic violence to attend batterer's intervention programs, and to monitor compliance with court orders and treatment progress. …
01 Feb 2009-Fordham Urban Law Journal
TL;DR: In this article, the authors provide an overview of the national and international contexts of urban climate governance focusing on the United Kingdom and the United States, and compare London and Los Angeles, repectively, as examples of global cities.
Abstract: Introduction I. Urban Climate Governance A. International Context B. Local Government and Climate Governance in the United Kingdom C. Local Government and Climate Governance in the United States II. Climate Policy and Action in London A. London's Socio-Economic and Environmental Profile B. Competencies and Powers for Climate Governance in London C. The Evolution of Climate Change Policy in London D. Climate Governance in Action III. Climate Policy and Action in Los Angeles A. Los Angeles's Socio-Economic and Environmental Profile. B. Competencies and Powers for Climate Governance in Los Angeles C. The Evolution of Climate Change Policy in Los Angeles D. Climate Governance in Action IV. Comparing London and Los Angeles: Modes of Governing and the Role of Law A. Self-Governing B. Control and Compliance C. Provision D. Enabling E. Summary Conclusion INTRODUCTION Cities are increasingly recognized as significant producers and able managers of carbon emission. (1) They have become the predominant source of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions--perhaps as much as 70% by some accounts (2)--and places where vulnerability to climate change may be acute. For the world's major cities, climate change is therefore becoming an issue of increasing political and environmental significance. But how cities go about addressing the issue of climate change is not yet well understood. The competency and capacity of local government to address a multi-layered environmental problem such as climate change is largely determined by the legal structures within which it is embedded, but also by factors such as critical individuals, past successes, business consensus, public opinion, market opportunities, and environmental advocacy. (3) Climate change policy at national and international levels has developed significantly over the past two decades. In 1992, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change was adopted at the Rio Summit with countries pledging to "prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system" and to inventory and report on their greenhouse gas ("GHG") emissions. (4) In 1997, the Kyoto Protocol established mandatory targets for industrialized countries to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases by 2008 through 2012, along with a range of economic instruments designed to assist with this goal. (5) Over the past decade, negotiations have continued as the economic instruments of the Kyoto Protocol, including the Clean Development Mechanism, Emissions Trading, and Joint Implementation, were finalized. (6) Although not all countries are on track to meet their targets under the Kyoto Protocol--and the United States remains outside of it--negotiations are now under way to develop a "post-2012" agreement. (7) To date, most analysis has focused on the role of nation-states in the design, promotion, and implementation of various "post-2012" policy architectures and instruments. A growing body of literature is pointing to the emergence of a range of non-nation state actors, such as multinational companies, carbon trading and offset organizations, and global cities, that have entered this policy arena and have developed their own initiatives and approaches to addressing this issue. (8) This Article examines how global cities are governing climate change. Part I of this Article provides an overview of the national and international contexts of urban climate governance focusing on the United Kingdom and the United States. Parts II and III analyze London and Los Angeles, repectively, as examples of global cities. They provide a thorough examination of climate change policies and actions in these two cities, based on approximately thirty in-depth interviews with government, business and civil society representatives during 2007-08, as well as official documents and grey literature. …
01 Jan 1994-Fordham Urban Law Journal
TL;DR: This Article addresses how concepts of race and ethnicity have been operationalized as a basis for defining and locating subpopulations (either explicitly or implicitly) for the purpose of analyzing environmental equity issues, and recommends some future directions.
Abstract: This Article addresses how concepts of race and ethnicity have been operationalized as a basis for defining and locating subpopulations (either explicitly or implicitly) for the purpose of analyzing environmental equity issues, and recommends some future directions. Part II focuses on how subpopulations are currently defined and on some problems encountered to date. The implications of these inconsistencies on the accuracy of health and environmental risk measures for a given subpopulation are addressed. Part III focuses on how spatial areas have been defined to aggregate these subpopulations within confined geographic boundaries.
Related Journals (5)
Fordham Law Review
2.2K papers, 12.8K citations
Hastings Law Journal
1.2K papers, 8.5K citations
Northwestern University Law Review
706 papers, 7.8K citations
Stanford Law Review
1.9K papers, 50.4K citations
Yale Journal on Regulation
385 papers, 6.8K citations