Is a Local Government’s Decision ‘In Writing?’:The U.S. Supreme Court to Rule

Abstract

An application to place a 108‐foot‐tall cell tower in a residential neighborhood. An outpouring of opposition. A public hearing. A denial—by unanimous vote on an oral motion. And a letter to the applicant stating that the application had been denied and referring to the hearing’s minutes, which reflect reasons why the board may have denied the application. These are the key facts of T‐Mobile South, LLC v. City of Roswell, No. 13‐ 975, a case that the U.S. Supreme Court will consider this fall. The case’s central legal question is also straightforward. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 states that “ [a]ny decision . . . to deny a request . . . shall be in writing. ” The Court will decide whether it is sufficient for a city to state in writing that it has denied the application and to refer to the record, or whether the written denial must also describe the reasons for the city’s decision. The case could have significant impacts on how local zoning boards function and on the form their decisions must take to survive legal challenge. It also could lead to effects on local governments well beyond the narrow issue presented here.     

Buddhism,Mindfulness, and Transformative Politics

This article examines whether the American cultural phenomena of the practice of Buddhism or the Buddhism-derived technique of mindfulness are likely to be helpful to the political left. It summarizes the central teachings of the ancient Buddhist texts, with particular focus on the issues of mindfulness and politics. It also reviews the political history of Buddhist countries. The author argues that although modern Buddhism has shed its historical embrace of absolutist monarchy in favor of republicanism, and although there is some ideological overlap between Buddhism and the American Left, Buddhism in America is too small a movement for it to be of much significance for progressive politics. Mindfulness appears to be capable of becoming a much larger phenomenon, but its separation from its Buddhist origins makes it also unlikely to be strategically important for the Left.     

Using the Referral Decision Scale to Screen Mentally Ill Jail Detainees: Validity and Implementation Issues

The prevalence of serious mental illnesses in jail populations is significantly greater than in the general population. Identifying individuals who warrant psychiatric evaluations is important and benefits correctional staff as well as detainees. One widely used screening instrument intended for this task is the Referral Decision Scale (RDS). This paper reviews the development and validation of the RDS. Using data from a multisite study which assessed postrelease outcomes for detainees with mental illness, various types of validity are addressed. The results confirm that the RDS has some inherent characteristics that seriously limit its practical application as a screening instrument for use by correctional staff.     

Citizen response to regional integration in the Americas: The cases of Costa Rica and El Salvador

This study examines public opinion in Costa Rica and El Salvador regarding regional integration in Central America. Recent efforts at regional integration as well as the response of the governments of the above countries to those efforts are reviewed. Public opinion toward regional integration is significantly more positive but less structured in El Salvador than in Costa Rica. Differences in the international and domestic contexts help to explain the differential responses in these two countries. Likewise, contextual factors help to account for differences between Central American and European publics in attitudes toward regional integration. Charles L. Davis is associate professor of political science at the University of Kentucky. His interests are Latin American politics and comparative political behavior. Matthew J. Gabel is assistant professor of political science at the University of Kentucky. His interests are European politics and the politics of regional integration. Kenneth M. Coleman is a former professor at the University of Kentucky, the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, and the University of New Mexico. His interests are Latin American politics and public opinion.     

Inca, Sailor, Soldier, King: Gregor MacGregor and the Early Nineteenth‐Century Caribbean

This article examines the recruiting practices, political propositions and changing identities of the Scottish adventurer Gregor MacGregor in the early nineteenth‐century Caribbean. Based on original archival research and revision of the existing secondary literature, it seeks to understand why he has consistently been judged as a failure, and why neither Scotland nor any of the countries MacGregor worked in have wanted to claim him as their own hero. After an introduction providing biographical details and some historical context for the Caribbean in the period 1811–1830, the article looks in detail at what have been seen to be his successes and failures in the Caribbean region. It asks to what extent questions of ethnicity or masculinity have affected the way contemporaries and historians viewed MacGregor and his actions. In conclusion, it suggests that although he was a soldier and a sailor, and he was declared both an Inca and a King, his career was deemed a failure by both contemporaries and historians in Scotland, South America and the Caribbean. The main explanation for this negative assessment is that his ambitions continually fell foul of the interests of various Caribbean elites and of the distinctive historical circumstances of the region.¹