Showing papers on "Supreme court published in 2019"
TL;DR: The systematic shrinking of the scope of the Sherman Act by the Supreme Court over the past 40 years may make this difficult as mentioned in this paper, and thus it may make it difficult to enforce.
Abstract: Accumulating evidence points to the need for more vigorous antitrust enforcement in the United States in three areas. First, stricter merger control is warranted in an economy where large, highly efficient and profitable “superstar” firms account for an increasing share of economic activity. Evidence from merger retrospectives further supports the conclusion that stricter merger control is needed. Second, greater vigilance is needed to prevent dominant firms, including the tech titans, from engaging in exclusionary conduct. The systematic shrinking of the scope of the Sherman Act by the Supreme Court over the past 40 years may make this difficult. Third, greater antitrust scrutiny should be given to the monopsony power of employers in labor markets.
61 citations
TL;DR: This special issue aims to further Microaggression Theory by providing theoretical and empirical papers that focus on the manifestation and impact of microaggressions on LGBTQ people.
Abstract: Though the Supreme Court of the U.S. legalized same-sex marriage in 2015, heterosexism and transphobia has continued to manifest through many systems in the US — from lack of federal protection in ...
49 citations
Posted Content•
TL;DR: In State v Loomis, the defense argued that the consideration of risk assessments during sentencing was a violation of due process because the accuracy of the algorithmic prediction could not be verified as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: The United States optimizes the efficiency of its growing criminal justice system with algorithms however, legal scholars have overlooked how to frame courtroom debates about algorithmic predictions. In State v Loomis, the defense argued that the court’s consideration of risk assessments during sentencing was a violation of due process because the accuracy of the algorithmic prediction could not be verified. The Wisconsin Supreme Court upheld the consideration of predictive risk at sentencing because the assessment was disclosed and the defendant could challenge the prediction by verifying the accuracy of data fed into the algorithm.
Was the court correct about how to argue with an algorithm?
The Loomis court ignored the computational procedures that processed the data within the algorithm. How algorithms calculate data is equally as important as the quality of the data calculated. The arguments in Loomis revealed a need for new forms of reasoning to justify the logic of evidence-based tools. A “data science reasoning” could provide ways to dispute the integrity of predictive algorithms with arguments grounded in how the technology works.
This article’s contribution is a series of arguments that could support due process claims concerning predictive algorithms, specifically the Correctional Offender Management Profiling for Alternative Sanctions (“COMPAS”) risk assessment. As a comprehensive treatment, this article outlines the due process arguments in Loomis, analyzes arguments in an ongoing academic debate about COMPAS, and proposes alternative arguments based on the algorithm’s organizational context.
Risk assessment has dominated one of the first wide-ranging academic debates within the emerging field of data science. ProPublica investigative journalists claimed that the COMPAS algorithm is biased and released their findings as open data sets. The ProPublica data started a prolific and mathematically-specific conversation about risk assessment as well as a broader conversation on the social impact of algorithms. The ProPublica-COMPAS debate repeatedly considered three main themes: mathematical definitions of fairness, explainable interpretation of models, and the importance of population comparison groups.
While the Loomis decision addressed permissible use for a risk assessment at sentencing, a deeper understanding of daily practice within the organization could extend debates about algorithms to questions about procurement, implementation, or training. The criminal justice organization that purchased the risk assessment is in the best position to justify how one individual’s assessment matches the algorithm designed for its administrative needs. People subject to a risk assessment cannot conjecture how the algorithm ranked them without knowing why they were classified within a certain group and what criteria control the rankings. The controversy over risk assessment algorithms hints at whether procedural due process is the cost of automating a criminal justice system that is operating at administrative capacity.
46 citations
TL;DR: The authors studied the effect of the world's largest school feeding program on children's learning outcomes and found that prolonged exposure to midday meals has a robust positive effect on learning achievement, and investigated various channels that may account for this improvement including complementary schooling inputs, heterogeneous responses by socioeconomic status, and intra-household redistribution.
45 citations
TL;DR: The impact of the 2010 constitution has been mixed as discussed by the authors, with the Supreme Court demonstrating its capacity to act as an independent institution, but did little to sustain electoral legitimacy, and the elections therefore demonstrate how formal institutions alone cannot change political logics and reveal the continued significance of individual politicians and informal institutions.
Abstract: This article asks what Kenya’s 2017 general elections tell us about the capacity of a new constitution to reduce the stakes of political competition and prospects of political instability. Three constitutional changes are particularly important: the adoption of a 50% + 1 threshold for the presidential election; the devolution of power to 47 county governments; and the introduction of a Supreme Court with the right to hear presidential electoral petitions. We find that the impact of the 2010 constitution has been mixed. The 50% plus 1 threshold encouraged coalition formation, but this dynamic has long been evident. Devolution has given a wider set of Kenyans a stake in the system, but has also created new structures that can be used to channel dissent against the state. The Supreme Court demonstrated its capacity to act as an independent institution, but did little to sustain electoral legitimacy. Indeed, while the 2010 constitution has clearly reshaped the political landscape, it was a personal deal that ended the post-election impasse. The elections therefore demonstrate how formal institutions alone cannot change political logics and reveal the continued significance of individual politicians and informal institutions that may compete with or complement their formal counterparts.
44 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors used Indian Constitution as a source of Information for study along with case laws and judgements of different courts in India to find if personal data privacy is a fundamental right in India.
Abstract: The purpose of this study is to identify how the privacy policy can be framed for protection of personal data and how the latest judgement of full bench of Supreme Court of India has dealt with right to privacy in India.,The study uses the latest Supreme Court judgement on right to privacy and historical cases on right to privacy in India. This paper uses Indian Constitution as a source of Information for study along with case laws and judgements of different courts in India.,This paper tries to find if personal data privacy is a fundamental right in India. In addition, the paper provides recommendations to different concerned authorities on protecting personal information in online platform.,This study deals with privacy issues so far as Indian citizens are concerns and does not focus on other countries. Moreover, the study tries to understand the issue of fundamental rights from Indian Constitution perspective. In addition, the recommendations provided to the policymakers and other authorities of India have wide implications for formulation of new policy and management of personal data, so that it should not go to wrong hands and the personal data and privacy is protected of the citizens.,Millions of people put their personal information in online platform. In addition, there are few government initiatives in India such as Aadhaar card where the biometric information is taken from the residents of India, and in many cases, the personal data are compromised under various circumstances. As the personal data of the citizens are in question, thus the study has direct practical implication mainly for all the citizens whose personal data are available in online platform.,This study has social implication as it dealt with the “personal data” of the citizens of India. As the paper discusses the issue of protection of personal data in the context of right to privacy, thus this study has a direct social impact so far as online citizen of India is concerned.,This paper is timely, original and discusses the contemporary issue of online data privacy and fundamental right in India. This paper is a useful resource for the researchers, policymakers and online users who deal with personal data-, right to privacy and data privacy policy-related areas.
38 citations
Book•
03 Oct 2019TL;DR: Krotoszynski as discussed by the authors argues that the contemporary Supreme Court rigorously enforces the rules against content and viewpoint discrimination for those who possess the wherewithal to speak but when citizens need the government's assistance to speak -for example, access to public property for protest -free speech rights have declined.
Abstract: The standard account of the First Amendment presupposes that the Supreme Court has consistently expanded the scope of free speech rights over time. This account holds true in some areas, but not in others. In this illuminating work, Ronald J. Krotoszynski, Jr acknowledges that the contemporary Supreme Court rigorously enforces the rules against content and viewpoint discrimination for those who possess the wherewithal to speak but when citizens need the government's assistance to speak - for example, access to public property for protest - free speech rights have declined. Instead of using open-ended balancing tests, the Roberts and Rehnquist Courts have opted for bright line, categorical rules that minimize judicial discretion. Opportunities for democratic engagement could be enhanced, however, if the federal courts returned to the Warren Court's balancing approach and vested federal judges with discretionary authority to require government to assist would-be speakers. This book should be read by anyone concerned with free speech and its place in democratic self-government.
37 citations
01 Apr 2019
TL;DR: All approaches tested, including topic model, word embedding, and language model-based classifiers, performed well with as little as a few hundred judgments, but more work needs to be done to optimize state-of-the-art methods for the legal domain.
Abstract: This paper conducts a comparative study on the performance of various machine learning approaches for classifying judgments into legal areas. Using a novel dataset of 6,227 Singapore Supreme Court judgments, we investigate how state-of-the-art NLP methods compare against traditional statistical models when applied to a legal corpus that comprised few but lengthy documents. All approaches tested, including topic model, word embedding, and language model-based classifiers, performed well with as little as a few hundred judgments. However, more work needs to be done to optimize state-of-the-art methods for the legal domain.
36 citations
TL;DR: While the Supreme Court's legitimacy is generally considered essential to its influence, scholars continue to debate whether the Court's decisions affect individuals' assessments of it as discussed by the authors, and the last we...
Abstract: While the Supreme Court’s legitimacy is generally considered essential to its influence, scholars continue to debate whether the Court’s decisions affect individuals’ assessments of it. The last we...
32 citations
01 May 2019
TL;DR: In this article, the authors describe and critique the judicial reasoning of Indonesia's Supreme Court, through the lens of the Court's reviews of subnational laws during 2011-17, and conclude that most of the decisions were critically flawed, with either very little or no reasoning, and inconsistencies with past decisions.
Abstract: This article describes and critiques the judicial reasoning of Indonesia’s Supreme Court, through the lens of the Court’s reviews of subnational laws during 2011–17. The resulting picture is a negative one. Most of the Court’s decisions were critically flawed, with either very little or no reasoning, and inconsistencies with past decisions. Worse, the Court appears keen to avoid hearing important cases that raise difficult political issues, even though the law governing those issues is clear and easy to apply. These inadequacies are perpetuated by genuine uncertainty about the precise jurisdiction of the Court in judicial review cases. However, the Court has not sought to resolve this uncertainty. Indeed, these decisions appear to reflect a court paying little regard to judicial transparency and accountability, and unwilling or unable to act as an effective check on government power.
31 citations
TL;DR: This article used the level of emotional arousal, as measured by vocal pitch, in each of the Justices' voices during these arguments to accurately predict many of their eventual votes on these cases.
Abstract: Do judges telegraph their preferences during oral arguments? Using the U.S. Supreme Court as our example, we demonstrate that Justices implicitly reveal their leanings during oral arguments, even before arguments and deliberations have concluded. Specifically, we extract the emotional content of over 3,000 hours of audio recordings spanning 30 years of oral arguments before the Court. We then use the level of emotional arousal, as measured by vocal pitch, in each of the Justices’ voices during these arguments to accurately predict many of their eventual votes on these cases. Our approach yields predictions that are statistically and practically significant and robust to including a range of controls; in turn, this suggests that subconscious vocal inflections carry information that legal, political, and textual information do not.
TL;DR: This work explains how to use one variant of boosted decision trees, AdaBoosted decision trees (ADTs), for social science predictions, and finds that the ADT approach outperforms existing predictive models.
Abstract: Though used frequently in machine learning, boosted decision trees are largely unused in political science, despite many useful properties. We explain how to use one variant of boosted decision trees, AdaBoosted decision trees (ADTs), for social science predictions. We illustrate their use by examining a well-known political prediction problem, predicting U.S. Supreme Court rulings. We find that our ADT approach outperforms existing predictive models. We also provide two additional examples of the approach, one predicting the onset of civil wars and the other predicting county-level vote shares in U.S. presidential elections.
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors identify several areas in which economics research could potentially make significant contributions to the practical antitrust treatment of platforms and identify several ways that economics research can be used to improve the enforcement of antitrust laws.
Abstract: Although the economics of multisided platforms has developed important insights for antitrust policy, there are critical respects in which the body of academic knowledge falls short of providing useful advice to enforcement agencies and the courts. Indeed, there is a substantial risk that recent scholarship will be misapplied to the detriment of sound antitrust policy, as evidenced by the US Supreme Court's recent decision in American Express. In this note, I identify several areas in which economics research could potentially make significant contributions to the practical antitrust treatment of platforms.
TL;DR: The Supreme Court decision in United States v. Booker as discussed by the authors seemed to portend a new era for federal sentencing, by making federal guidelines advisory rather than mandatory, and authorizing judg...
Abstract: The Supreme Court decision in United States v. Booker seemed to portend a new era for federal sentencing. By making federal guidelines advisory rather than “mandatory,” and authorizing judg...
TL;DR: The authors argued that source credibility is a prerequisite for judicial legitimacy and proposed a framing theory that requires source credibility as a precondition for the legitimacy of the judicial system to be restored.
Abstract: Many believe that President Trump’s criticisms of the judiciary pose real and immediate threats to judicial legitimacy. However, framing theory suggests that source credibility is a prerequisite fo...
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors take up this oversight in relation to the 2016 U.S. Supreme Court decision on Citizens United and present an analysis of the implications of the decision.
Abstract: Distance—physical, material distance—is an obviously spatial concept, but one rarely engaged by legal or feminist geographers. We take up this oversight in relation to the 2016 U.S. Supreme Court d...
TL;DR: The authors uncovers stage legislative responses to the Supreme Court's liber... and shows the importance of non-judicial actors in constitutional development, which is consistent with recent scholarship showing that non-judgmental actors play a crucial role in the development of the legal system.
Abstract: Consistent with recent scholarship showing the importance of nonjudicial actors in constitutional development, this article uncovers stage legislative responses to the Supreme Court’s liber...
Book•
13 Sep 2019
TL;DR: The Dictionary of Public Policy and Administration as mentioned in this paper provides definitions of all the key terms, concepts, processes, and practices of contemporary public policy and administration, as well as summaries of major rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Abstract: The Dictionary of Public Policy and Administration offers definitions of all the key terms, concepts, processes and practices of contemporary public policy and administration. Included are brief biographies of major scholars and influential practitioners, summaries of major rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court, overviews of significant laws, descriptions of important government agencies, and explanations of historical trends and governing doctrines. The Dictionary is designed to be the single most useful tool that a student or practitioner of public administration could have-the book to keep at their side while they are reading other textbooks in the field.
12 Dec 2019
TL;DR: The FIRE 2019 AILA Track as discussed by the authors focused on evaluating different methods of retrieving relevant prior/precedent cases and statutes given a factual scenario, and two tasks for this track: (i) identifying relevant prior cases for a given situation (Precedent Retrieval), and (ii) identifying most relevant statutes for a particular situation (Statute Retrievability).
Abstract: The FIRE 2019 AILA track focused on creating a framework for evaluating different methods of retrieving relevant prior/precedent cases and statutes given a factual scenario. There were two tasks for this track: (i) Identifying relevant prior cases for a given situation (Precedent Retrieval), and (ii) Identifying most relevant statutes for a given situation (Statute Retrieval). Given a situation that can lead to filing a case, the precedent retrieval task aims at finding case documents where similar legal situations were addressed. The statute retrieval task aims at finding relevant statutes that are applicable to the situation. The factual scenarios, statutes and prior case documents used in the tasks were from the Indian Supreme Court judiciary.
TL;DR: In 2004, India took a significant step forward for human rights by repealing the Prevention of Terrorism Act of 2002, which had established a permissive set of legal rules to prosecute acts of terrorism largely outside the ordinary rules of the regular criminal justice system as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: In 2004, India took a significant step forward for human rights by repealing the Prevention of Terrorism Act of 2002, which had established a permissive set of legal rules to prosecute acts of terrorism largely outside the ordinary rules of the regular criminal justice system. While POTA itself was enacted in the aftermath of the major terrorist attacks of 2001 in both the United States and India, the statute built upon a long tradition of antiterrorism and other security laws in India dating since well before independence. While India has faced serious threats from terrorism and other forms of politicized violence for decades, these special antiterrorism laws have not proven particularly effective in combating terrorism. Terrorism has persisted as a problem notwithstanding these laws, under which few of the individuals charged have been convicted. Moreover, like antiterrorism laws in other countries, including the United States, aspects of India’s antiterrorism laws have raised significant human rights concerns. Some of those concerns have remained even in the aftermath of POTA’s repeal, since the Indian government has preserved many of the law’s provisions in other statutes. Other, similar laws also remain in place at both the central and state levels, such as the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. Attentiveness to these human rights concerns is not simply a moral and legal imperative, but also a crucial strategic imperative. As the Supreme Court of India has recognized, “[t]errorism often thrives where human rights are violated,” and “[t]he lack of hope for justice provides breeding grounds for terrorism.” Since terrorists often deliberately seek “to provoke an over-reaction” and thereby drive a wedge between government and its citizens – or between ethnic, racial, or religious communities – adhering to human rights obligations when combating terrorism helps to ensure that advocates of violence do not win sympathy from the ranks of those harmed and alienated by the state.
TL;DR: The separation-of-powers literature focuses on how the preferences of one branch constrain the behavior of its counterparts as discussed by the authors. Yet, in much of this work, scholars do not address how responsive behavi...
Abstract: The separation-of-powers literature focuses on how the preferences of one branch constrain the behavior of its counterparts. Yet, in much of this work, scholars do not address how responsive behavi...
01 Mar 2019
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors examine the possibility of an "unconstitutional" constitution, i.e., one-term limit on presidential terms, as well as protecting provisions punishing attempts to alter that limit, to be unconstitutional.
Abstract: The unconstitutional constitutional amendment doctrine has emerged as a highly successful, albeit still controversial, export in comparative constitutional law. The doctrine has often been defended as protecting a delegation from the people to the political institutions that they created. Other work has noted the doctrine’s potential utility in guarding against abusive constitutionalism. In this article, we consider how these justifications fare when expanded to encompass claims against the original constitution itself, rather than a later amendment to the text. That is, beyond the unconstitutional constitutional amendment doctrine, can or should there be a doctrine of an unconstitutional constitution? Our question is spurred by a puzzling 2015 case from Honduras where the Supreme Court held an unamendable one-term limit on presidential terms, as well as protective provisions punishing attempts to alter that limit, to be unconstitutional. What is particularly striking about the case is that these provisions were not later amendments to the constitution, but rather parts of the original 1982 constitution itself. Thus, this article examines the possibility of ‘an unconstitutional constitution’, what we predict to be the next trend in global constitutionalism.
TL;DR: The authors found slow but continual U.S. centralization in all fields followed by a mild centralization spurt during the 1930s and substantial acceleration during the 1960s and 1970s.
Abstract: Part of a project measuring dynamic de/centralization across twenty-two policy fields and five fiscal indicators in six federations from their founding to 2010, this study finds slow but continual U.S. centralization in all fields followed by a mild centralization spurt during the 1930s and substantial acceleration during the 1960s and 1970s. Little fiscal centralization is found, except for increased conditions attached to federal aid. The principal instruments of centralization have been Congress and the Supreme Court; the principal political agents have been political parties and interest groups responding to opportunities created by exogenous forces such as market integration and technological change.
TL;DR: The manner in which London Health Sciences Center has approached local and regional requests for MAID is described, including the administration, ethics, privacy, and clinical process, with the aim of ensuring that this procedure is managed in a respectful, confidential, safe, efficient, and patient-centered manner.
Abstract: Background:Following the Supreme Court of Canada’s Carter Decision, medical assistance in dying (MAID) became possible with individual court orders in February 2016. Subsequently, on June 17, 2016,...
[...]
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors used Federal Election Commission (FEC) records to put together a comprehensive database of the political contributions made by over 3,500 individuals who served as CEOs of S&P 1500 companies during the period 2000-2017.
Abstract: CEOs of public companies have influence over the political spending of their firms, which has been attracting significant attention since the Supreme Court decision in Citizens United. Furthermore, the policy views expressed by CEOs receive substantial consideration from policymakers and the public. The political preferences of CEOs, we argue, are therefore important for a full understanding of U.S. policymaking and politics. To contribute to this understanding, we provide empirical evidence on the partisan leanings of public-company CEOs.We use Federal Election Commission (FEC) records to put together a comprehensive database of the political contributions made by over 3,500 individuals who served as CEOs of S&P 1500 companies during the period 2000-2017. We find that these political contributions display substantial partisan preferences in support of Republican candidates. We identify how this pattern is related to the company’s industry, geographical region, and CEO gender. To highlight the significance of CEO’s partisan preferences for some corporate decisions, we show that public companies led by Republican CEOs tend to be less transparent to investors with respect to their political spending. We conclude by discussing the potential policy implications of our analysis.
TL;DR: In this article, a meta-narrative of transgender individuals staking their claim to Indian citizenship through the trope of nationalism is presented. But, the authors argue that such a meta narrative risks the danger of missing out on the micro narratives of resistance and protests emerging from within India's transgender movements that disrupt any singular narrative of trans individuals performing nationalism to seek citizenship rights.
Abstract: In a 2014 judgment, the Supreme Court of India affirmed the right of every Indian citizen to choose their gender identity regardless of gender affirmation surgery. Following this judgment, states across India have been constituting transgender welfare boards and the Indian government has approved the Transgender Persons’ (Protection of Rights) Bill, 2018 that is supposed to be the one law that will safeguard transgender individuals from any form of discrimination. This legal recognition also coincides with a series of media campaigns that depict transgender individuals staking their claim to Indian citizenship through the trope of nationalism, which is always already majoritarian Hindu nationalism. Thus, these twin developments raise the question of whether performing Hindu nationalism is the only way to claim Indian citizenship. Recent queer studies scholarship from India warns us of the danger of queer and transgender movements getting folded into majoritarian Hindu nationalism, creating constitutive outsides comprised of non-citizens who cannot perform such nationalism. This paper argues that such a meta-narrative risks the danger of missing out on the micro-narratives of resistance and protests emerging from within India’s transgender movements that disrupt any singular narrative of transgender individuals performing nationalism to seek citizenship rights.
TL;DR: This article provided a new perspective on judicial behavior, looking "off the board" to understand the behavior of the U.S. Supreme Court and found that justices on the Supreme Court strategically respond to public opinion but rarely shape public opinion.
Abstract: Scholars believe that justices on the U.S. Supreme Court strategically respond to—but rarely shape—public opinion. This article provides a new perspective on judicial behavior. Looking “off the ben...
Book•
24 Jul 2019
TL;DR: In this article, the authors compare the Obama administration's efforts to expand equal rights for the transgender community, especially in employment, education, and military service, with the Trump administration's determination to rescind the Obama-era initiatives.
Abstract: This book examines the transgender community’s struggle for equality over the last decade, comparing the Obama and Trump administrations’ stance on transgender rights policies. Transgender rights claims have assumed an important place on the nation’s policymaking agenda as society has increasingly become aware that transgender individuals are subject to discrimination because they do not conform to the norms of the gender identity they were assigned at birth. With Congress virtually absent from the policymaking process, the executive branch and the federal courts have been chiefly responsible for determining the parameters of transgender rights policies.
The study contrasts the Obama administration’s efforts to expand equal rights for the transgender community, especially in employment, education, and military service, with the Trump administration’s determination to rescind the Obama-era initiatives. In their efforts to do so, Trump administration officials have urged the courts to reverse decisions extending the benefit of civil rights laws and constitutional guarantees to the transgender community, arguing that gender identity is outside the scope of these protections. Although most federal courts have been inclined to accept the Obama administration’s perspective on transgender rights, ultimately, this will be a matter for the U.S. Supreme Court to decide.
The book is appropriate for students, scholars, and interested general readers.
19 Sep 2019
TL;DR: The 2006 Supreme Court ruling in eBay vs. MercExchange removed the presumption of injunctive relief from infringement and marked a sea change in U.S. patent policy.