Aligning National Bank Priorities with the Public Interest: National Benefit Banks and a New Stakeholder Approach

Banks have particular characteristics that set them apart from other business entities, including being more highly leveraged, benefiting from government safety nets, and generating massive negative externalities when they fail. These attributes mean that in addition to shareholder interests, bank directors should be allowed to carefully consider the interests of nonshareholders, such as creditors, taxpayers, and the overall economy, when making decisions. While directors of banks in states that have enacted constituency statutes may be allowed to consider nonshareholder interests, no federal act expressly allows directors of federally chartered banks to consider such interests. Moreover, to date, thirty‐seven states have enacted legislation to allow for the formation of public benefit corporations that require directors to consider the interests of nonshareholders. No federal law provides a clear path for federally chartered banks to do this. This article proposes dual federal legislation that would (1) enable directors of all federally chartered banks to expressly consider nonshareholder constituents when making decisions and (2) allow for the formation of national benefit banks that would require directors to consider nonshareholder interests in their decision‐making.     

“Intuitive” Lie Detection of Children’s Deception by Law Enforcement Officials and University Students

Adults ability to detect childrens deception was examined. Police officers, customs officers, and university students attempted to differentiate between children who lied or told the truth about a transgression. When children were simply questioned about the event (Experiment 1), the adult groups could not distinguish between lie-tellers and truth-tellers. However, participants were more accurate when the children had participated in moral reasoning tasks (Experiment 2) or promised to tell the truth (Experiment 3) before being interviewed. Additional exposure to the children did not affect accuracy (Experiment 4). Customs officers were more certain about their judgments than other groups, but no more accurate. Overall, adults have a limited ability to identify childrens deception, regardless of their experience with lie detection.     

Eyewitness Accuracy Rates in Police Showup and Lineup Presentations: A Meta-Analytic Comparison

Meta-analysis is used to compare identification accuracy rates in showups and lineups. Eight papers were located, providing 12 tests of the hypothesis and including 3013 participants. Results indicate that showups generate lower choosing rates than lineups. In target present conditions, showups and lineups yield approximately equal hit rates, and in target absent conditions, showups produce a significantly higher level of correct rejections. False identification rates are approximately equal in showups and lineups when lineup foil choices are excluded from analysis. Dangerous false identifications are more numerous for showups when an innocent suspect resembles the perpetrator. Function of lineup foils, assessment strategies for false identifications, and the potential impact of biases in lineup practice are suggested as additional considerations in evaluation of showup versus lineup efficacy.     

Certification – An Overview

Delinquents are better managed in the juvenile court, though the adult system may be necessary for the few cases in which juvenile facilities and jurisdictional time remaining cannot adequately protect the public.     

FAMILY CARE COMMITMENT DISCRIMINATION: BRIDGING THE GAP BETWEEN WORK AND FAMILY

This Note discusses the pervasive problem of employment discrimination based on family responsibilities, or family care commitment discrimination. Employees with family care commitments often find themselves being pulled in opposing directions—between work and family. When an employee is forced to choose work, for financial reasons, over family, his or her family ends up suffering. The current state and federal statutes aimed at employment discrimination are insufficient to deal with family care commitment discrimination. This Note proposes a change to the current legislation and explains how this change will protect employees and families, while causing employers to internalize externalities by adopting more family‐friendly policies.