Intersections,Immigration, and Partner Violence: A View From a New Gateway—Baltimore,Maryland

This article reports on the results of exploratory surveys with immigrant women regarding their observations of intimate partner violence and criminal justice practices in their communities in the emerging immigrant gateway of Baltimore, Maryland. Using an intersectional/interlocking theoretical framework, it asks how nativity interacts with other social locations in the experiences of partner violence through surveys of women representing 5 language groups. The study found high levels of awareness of the problem of partner violence in immigrant communities and strong awareness of many U.S. criminal justice approaches to the problem. Although the women preferred informal sources of support in a situation of abuse, they strongly supported government intervention. We found low levels of awareness of the Violence Against Women Act as well as little support for the higher levels of prosecution for batterers, even though arrest was sometimes approved. The article calls for sensitive policies and practices that take into account the particular vulnerabilities of the foreign-born, especially in localities where national diversity is relatively novel.     

Anger and Aggression: A New Beginning?

Within our civilian population, Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) has become a major health problem. Consequences of anger and aggression have resulted in incarceration rates which place the United States as the world's leader with 2.2 million people in prisons and jails. The current treatment of anger and aggression is based primarily on theories that were developed in the early 1980s. Advances in neuroscientific knowledge have exponentially added to our understanding of the underlying biological basis and neuroanatomy of violence and aggression. Through a binaural sound‐based non‐verbal intervention, we have found a key to unlock long‐term memory (Reconsolidation) that facilitates rapid remediation of anger and violence issues. Within our Pilot Study findings, a number of our combat‐veterans with Post‐Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) experienced a positive transformation in their capacity to evidence empathy, intimacy and social engagement as contrasted with their prior isolative tendencies. We extrapolate how this intervention might positively impact those engaged in Anger Management (AM) and IPV programs.     

Digitised Justice: The New Two Tiers?

Criminal Law Forum - Prevailing conditions of access to justice and due process in the Singapore courts are criticised through McBarnet’s two-tier lens and Carlen’s dramaturgical...     

Originalism 2.0 Meets the First Amendment: The “New Originalism,” Interpretive Methodology,and Freedom of Expression

Constitutional originalism emerged as a legal and political movement in the last quarter of the twentieth century largely as a conservative reaction to perceived excesses of the Supreme Court of the United States. Early originalist attempts to formulate a coherent constitutional methodology were met with stinging criticism from many scholars. In recent years, a group of constitutional scholars has championed a different approach under the rubric “the New Originalism.” One of the key methodological innovations of New Originalism has been to reject the search for the intentions of the framer or ratifiers of constitutional provisions and instead seek to identify the “original public meaning” of such provisions. This article explores New Originalism in the context of the First Amendment speech and press clauses. The article also analyzes originalist opinions by Supreme Court justices to determine if New Originalism is affecting how the justices approach First Amendment interpretation.