Title I--improving the academic achievement of the disadvantaged; Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)--assistance to states for the education of children with disabilities. Final regulations

The Secretary amends the regulations governing programs administered under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) (referred to in these regulations as the Title I program) and the regulations governing programs under Part B of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (referred to in these regulations as the IDEA program). These regulations provide States with additional flexibility regarding State, local educational agency (LEA), and school accountability for the achievement of a small group of students with disabilities whose progress is such that, even after receiving appropriate instruction, including special education and related services designed to address the students' individual needs, the students' individualized education program (IEP) teams (IEP Teams) are reasonably certain that the students will not achieve grade-level proficiency within the year covered by the students' IEPs.     

‘The beneficent and legal godfather’: a history of the guardianship of unaccompanied immigrant and refugee children in Australia, 1946–1975

Abstract

In Australia in 1946, the Immigration (Guardianship of Children) Act was passed. This Act was intended to support the postwar migration to Australia of British children, unaccompanied by their parents, and provided them a guardian in Australia: the Immigration Minister. This key provision of the Act continues into the present, covering all unaccompanied child migrants, including refugees. Starting with the parliamentary debates which occurred at the formation of the Act in 1946, this article traces a history of the Act until its first High Court challenge in 1975. In doing so, a focus is placed on a series of key questions raised by its production of categories: How does the Act construct ideas of migranthood? What do the discussions it has provoked have to say about notions of parenthood and the ideal family? And, finally, what concepts of the child have been produced through this legislative and legal history? Through an examination of archival materials, parliamentary debates, court records, and newspaper coverage, this article explores the discursive productions of the Act, following the understanding that ideas of the family, of parenthood, of guardianship, of migrant status, and of the child are not natural, but instead are historically created and produced, here through racialized techniques of governmentality.     

Assistance to States for the Education of Children with Disabilities. Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, Department of Education. Final regulations

The Secretary amends the regulations for the Assistance to States for the Education of Children with Disabilities program under Part B of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA; Part B). This amendment is needed to implement the statutory provision that for any fiscal year in which the appropriation for section 611 of the IDEA exceeds $4.1 billion, a local educational agency (LEA) may treat as local funds up to 20 percent of the amount it receives that exceeds the amount it received during the prior fiscal year. The amendment is intended to ensure effective implementation of the 20 percent rule by clarifying which funds under Part B of IDEA can be included in the 20 percent calculation, and, as a result, to reduce the potential for audit exceptions.     

Neuro-linguistic programming and the police: Worthwhile or not?

In the seventies Bandler and Grinder (1975, 1979; Grinder &; Bandler, 1976) developed their model of Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP). The aim of this model is to facilitate communication between persons (Particularly between counselors and clients). There is a growing body of literature on NLP; it is nowadays even used in a police context (Gray, 1991; Mayers, 1993; Rhoads &; Solomon, 1987). What does NLP mean? To what extent does empirical research support the NLP-model? And, to what extent is NLP useful for the police? This article addresses these three questions.     

Early intervention program for infants and toddlers with disabilities. Final regulations

The Secretary issues final regulations governing the Early Intervention Program for Infants and Toddlers with Disabilities. These regulations are needed to reflect changes made to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, as amended by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (Act or IDEA).     

Final regulations on school assessments: an attempt to align the NCLBA and the IDEIA

The Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education (DOE) issued final regulations on education assessments under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA), which went into effect on May 9, 2007. These regulations cover how students with disabilities are going to participate in state- and district-wide assessments, and are part of the DOE's effort to align the NCLBA and the IDEIA. This article reviews the new assessment regulations and evaluates whether and how they benefit children with disabilities.     

Mental health issues and the Canadian criminal justice system**

The critics assert that a significant proportion of incarcerated individuals suffers from mental health issues, i.e. ‘the criminalization hypothesis.’ The current paper reviews the scholarly literature to address five interrelated questions: (1) What are the risks of those classified as mentally ill for committing crimes and, in particular, violent crimes? (2) As the gatekeepers to the criminal justice system, what happens during ‘first encounters’ between the police with those who have mental illnesses? (3) What community-based services are available for effective diversions as an alternative to incarceration for those with mental illnesses? (4) What are the impacts of treatment options upon those experiencing mental illnesses while incarcerated, including the impact upon recidivism? (5) What types of pre-release planning and community responses have the most positive effects to help reduce recidivism and assist offenders in coping with mental health issues in the Canadian context? After summarizing key evidence pertaining to these questions, the paper presents case studies as exemplars of ‘best practices’ to illustrate promising directions conducive to integrated, holistic, and effective responses at the intersection of the criminal justice and mental health systems.     

The Role of Culture in Legal Languages,Legal Interpretation and Legal Translation

The aim of this short essay is to highlight and concisely explore—but not address in depth—some cultural aspects related to legal languages, legal interpretation and legal translation. We would like to consider briefly the following questions: How can elements of legal language, as exemplified by proper names and euphemisms, be connected with cultural (extra-linguistic) factors influencing language units’ formation? How can judicial discourse reflect the culture of a given justice system? How can the legal interpretation affect the degree of legal culture? Are theories of legal interpretation universal or applicable to specific legal cultures? What is the impact of culture on the context of legal translation? How can the cultural background affect the decision to use terms in translation? How does cyberculture impact legal translation?

     

Evaluation and presentation of forensic DNA evidence in European laboratories.

The first part of this article describes Bayes' theorem and its practical application to scientific evidence. Secondly, statements proposed by European DNA laboratories are presented, analysed and commented upon. Finally, the authors reiterate their proposal of adopting a likelihood ratio framework justified by the usefulness of the approach in practical context of DNA cases. Note that this framework underlines the main questions the experts have to answer at trial: to what degree does the evidence support the prosecutor's hypothesis? and to what degree does the evidence support the defence's hypothesis?     

Welfare Reform and the Shifting Threshold of Support for Disabled People

Among the highly significant changes to the benefits system made by the Welfare Reform Act 2012 is provision for a new disability benefit, personal independence payment (PIP). PIP is replacing disability living allowance (DLA), received by three million people, as the principal form of state financial support towards disability‐related care and mobility costs for those of working age. The legislation, including regulations prescribing a new disability assessment framework, plays its traditional role in this field of rationing access to benefit and directing front‐line policy implementation. This article examines how, in the context of the Coalition government's welfare reforms, PIP shifts the threshold of entitlement for people with disabilities and it assesses PIP's potential impact on equality and the right to independent living, to whose realisation disability benefits may be expected to contribute significantly. It also considers the impact on disabled people of other relevant reforms, including the controversial ‘bedroom tax’.     

A Tale of Two Laws: The U.S. Congress Confronts Habeas Corpus Petitions and Section 1983 Lawsuits

Actions by state prisoners have comprised a large and growing body of litigation in the U.S. federal courts over the past thirty years. State prisoners can challenge the validity of their state trial court convictions (habeas corpus petitions) and the constitutionality of the conditions of their confinement to state prisons and jails (Section 1983 lawsuits). Currently, one out of every five civil cases filed in the federal system is brought by a jail or prison inmate. When in the past did these cases begin to arise? What is the present trend? What does the future hold concerning the number of cases likely to be filed? These questions are at the heart of the current research. Care is needed in addressing these queries because it is neither easy nor obvious to know what propels the volume of litigation. Moreover, the future is especially difficult to predict in light of recent legislation adopted by the United States Congress to limit the number of habeas corpus petitions and the number of Section 1983 lawsuits filed each year. The unique contribution of the current research is threefold. First, an improved methodology is used to describe past patterns and to forecast future trends. Simply stated, prisoner litigation is hypothesized to be related to the number of prisoners. As the number of prisoners increases, the volume of litigation increases proportionately. What is not obvious about this relationship is that it has persisted over the past decades despite substantial changes in legal doctrines designed to affect the filing of the litigation. Second, the effects of two major congressional actions passed in 1996 to limit prisoner litigation are examined and assessed for their success in achieving their intended objectives. The first of these, the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, which sought to restrict habeas corpus petitions, is judged to have virtually no impact. The second piece of legislation, the Prisoner Litigation Reform Act, which sought to curtail lawsuits against correctional officials, appears to have lowered the volume of litigation in the short‐term, but has not disrupted the underlying link between the number of prisoners and the number of lawsuits. Finally, estimates are made of the future volume of litigation and the corresponding number of federal judges needed to resolve prisoner litigation. These estimates have the advantage of being based on significant statistical relationships and accounting for the effects of recent congressional action.     

New Institutionalism and Naturalism in Socio‐Legal Analysis: Institutionalist Approaches to Regulatory Decision Making

Through drawing on the work particularly of sociological and organizational theorists socio-legal work has added considerably to an understanding of the uses of law and discretion, and shown the contingency of the operation of law on the economic, political and organizational context. Some important questions still remain unanswered, however. In particular, if in decision making law is not determinative, but rather decisions are shaped by other bureaucratic or organizational norms, political and economic pressures and an individual's own world views and interests, what role does law play? Further, what impact does the decision process, in which different norms or considerations all bear, have on law? In starting to answer these questions the article examines the models of decision processes and decision behavior which underly the different new institutionalist analyses, and suggests that whilst they provide some insights, they have their own limits.     

Provocation and Pluralism

What is the best way to reflect human diversity in the structure of the provocation defence, and similar excusatory defences in the criminal law? The House of Lords recently concluded that the right way is to allow the jury to personalise and thereby qualify the apparently uniform ‘reasonable person’ standard mentioned in section 3 of the Homicide Act 1957. In this paper we argue that this is not the right way at all. We argue that the reasonable person standard, unqualified, already accommodates the only variations between people that the law should want to accommodate in an excusatory defence. To defend this view we revive the common law's tripartite analysis of the ‘objective’ (or impersonal) issues in the provocation defence: first, was there an action capable of constituting a provocation? second, how provocative was it? and third, how much self‐control should have been exhibited in the face of it? We show that these questions each have a built‐in sensitivity to certain variations between different defendants' situations, but that this does not detract from their objectivity (or impersonality). We argue that no more sensitivity is needed in the name of human diversity, and what is more that no more sensitivity is desirable.     

Improving APA science translation amicus briefs

This commentary uses APA's brief inPrice Waterhouse v. Hopkins to examine a number of issues concerning such briefs submitted to appellate courts: What are the purposes of APA's science translation briefs? What role conflicts emerge between legal advocates and empirical scientists? In what ways are these exacerbated or lessened by the respective duties of advocates and scientists? In what ways may the conflicts be compelled by differences between legal and empirical questions? How adequate are Brandeis briefs as a tool for communicating empirical research findings to appellate courts? Are any of the usual adversarial protections maintained? What is the question the court might look to the brief, and to the field, to answer? What is the role for meta-analyses? For what interests might APA as an amicus advocate? In addition to organizational self-interest and the public interest, does it ever make sense to advocate, in a purported science translation brief, on behalf of an ultimate issue in the case or for one of the parties to the litigation? To these difficult problems, I suggest a potentially simple solution.     

Punishing Cruelly: Punishment, Cruelty, and Mercy

What is cruelty? How and why does it matter? What do the legal rejection of cruelty and the requirements of mercy entail? This essay asks these questions of Lucius Seneca, who first articulated an agent-based conception of cruelty in the context of punishment. The hypothesis is submitted that the answers to these questions offered in Seneca’s De clementia constitute one of the turning points in the evolution of practical reason in law. I conclude, however, by arguing that even the mainstream punitive practices of contemporary western societies fail to meet the modest imperatives of the rejection of cruelty and the unconditionality of mercy propounded by Seneca.     

Faith-based efforts to improve prisoner reentry: Assessing the logic and evidence

Prisoner reentry constitutes one of the central criminal justice challenges confronting U.S. society. Coinciding with this emerging social problem has been increased policymaker interest in faith-based programs to improve outcomes for vulnerable populations, including released prisoners. Critical questions about the nature and effects of faith-based reentry programs remain largely unaddressed, however: (1) What is a “faith-based” program? (2) How does or could such a program reduce recidivism and improve other behavioral outcomes among released offenders? (3) What is the evidence concerning the impacts of faith-based reentry programs? (4) What are critical implementation issues that may affect the operations and impacts of such programs? This article examines each of these questions and identifies critical conceptual, theoretical, and research gaps in the literature. It highlights that the term “faith-based” is used inconsistently, that the precise causal relationship, if any, between various measures of faith and crime remains in question, and that few rigorous evaluations of faith-based reentry programs exist. It then discusses recommendations for improving knowledge and practice.     

What is a ‘university’? (The English Patient)

The term ‘university’ is used in most cases with only a vague understanding of exactly what a university is and does. Is a university anything with the word in its title or does the word actually convey a meaning as to the purpose of the institution? Much of the time this does not matter—people have an understanding of what it is, what it does and what it means. However, with globalisation and the creation of alliances and networks, the creation of the European Higher Education Area, competition for the best students and scholars, competition for funding, ‘league tables’ etc. the need for clarity and transparency increases. Even with cultural diversity this should be easy, but the impact of government policy may in fact skew the understanding, removing the word in England from the universal concept of what a university is and replacing it with a narrow English law definition.     

法证披露模型:应当向法证专家披露什么和法证专家应当披露什么?

法律上的披露问题主要集中在检控方向辩护方提供或者隐瞒了哪些证据。在本文中,我们将披露的概念扩展到更广泛的情境下,在这种情境下,披露失误可能导致误判。我们引入了一个概念模型,即“法证信息披露”,它涉及哪些信息应该披露给法证检验人员,以及法证检验人员应当披露哪些信息。本文全面概述了四类利益相关者的动态交互:法证服务、调查、法律和外部利益相关者。我们通过五个问题讨论了法证信息披露模式的有效实施,即如果要向法证检验人员或者由法证检验人员提供最好的信息,以提高法证决策质素,并尽量减少偏差,则什么时候进行披露?披露什么?如何披露?向谁披露?为什么披露?     

The Teaching and Higher Education Act 1998—impact on the student contract

The relationship that exists in law between a student and the Higher Education Institution at which they first wish to study and then do study has been looked at in the past in terms of both private law (contract or contracts) and public law (member of the corporation etc.). The Teaching and Higher Education Act introduces a new component into the equation for the vast majority of students (the undergraduates) by requiring, subject to ‘means testing’, a direct contribution to fees. What effect might this have? The largest effect is that it will confirm the move to a student/HEI contract that is a consumer contract. The possible new admissions cycle will also play a part in the alteration of communications and formation of the contract. This shift will also impact upon how disputes might be resolved in the future and the level, clarity and timing of information that the HEI must provide.     

行贿意愿差异与大湾区廉政合作治理:基于A市与香港的比较研究

粤港澳大湾区各城市在社会环境上的差异,既是廉政建设区域间合作的挑战,也是机遇。在不同的社会背景下,人们对腐败的认知和接受程度不同,这在很大程度上通过行贿意愿的差异呈现。因此,了解社会环境对行贿意愿的影响,不仅有助于制定行之有效的廉政治理策略,也凸显不同地区之间信息交流和治理合作的重要性。那么,在不同的社会场景下,人们的行贿意愿会有怎样的差异?受到哪些社会环境因素的影响?行贿意愿差异的比较研究对廉政合作治理具有什么理论和政策涵义?新制度主义理论为回答这些问题提供了有益的启发。2019年在香港与大湾区A城市所作的问卷调查为不同地区相异的社会条件下的行贿意愿差异提供了分析依据。研究结果表明,在行贿场景所预示的社会条件发生变化时,市民行贿的意愿也随之变化。这种变化受到制度环境因素和社会环境因素两方面的影响。因此,在香港与大湾区其他城市社会条件不尽相同、而经济和社会交往又不断增加的情况下,如何抑制跨境贿赂是廉政合作治理必须面对的重要问题。