'An effective mask for terror': Democracy,death squads and Northern Ireland

Defining terrorism solely as anti-state activity is in the ascendant in the aftermath of 9/11. Yet the existence of death squads – paramilitary groups involved in state-sponsored or state-tolerated terror against political opponents – reveals that the state can also be terrorist. Most commonly, death squads exist in non-democratic states, and most of the literature on death squads focuses on such societies. This article seeks to examine the circumstances in which death squads and democracy can coexist, looking specifically at the case of loyalist paramilitary violence and state collusion in Northern Ireland.     

The Consistency of the U.S. Supreme Court's "Pro-State" Bloc

This article examines the bloc of U.S. Supreme Court justicesthat produced the "pro-state" decisions in United States v.Lopez, Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida, and Printz v. UnitedStates. We are concerned primarily with the bloc's coherenceand consistency across other cases of interest to state governmentsover the 1994–1996 terms. The labeling of individual justicesand the Court in general as "pro-state" depends in part on thecases subjected to analysis; the greater the inclusiveness ofthe list of "cases of interest to the states, " the more thebloc seems to fray and the less coherent the Court's direction.     

UK Government Policy,Credit Unions,and Payday Loans

This article outlines how successive UK governments’ policies first created a three-tier system of credit unions and then posited credit unions as alternatives to payday lenders. The three-tier framework is used for an analysis of loans offered on credit union websites. The findings indicate that while the first two tiers of credit unions now offer loans to people who have not saved with them previously, they do so in ways consistent with credit unions’ original character, rather than in ways that replicate commercial payday loans. The other tier of credit unions appears unable to offer such loans.     

Juvenile Shackling Reform: The Judicial Role in Ensuring Trauma‐Informed Courts and Why States Are Rethinking Restraints

In juvenile courts around the country, youth are routinely shackled, without any evidence that these young people are a danger to anyone or likely to attempt flight. A number of states are moving away from this practice. Shackling reform initiatives are motivated by constitutional issues, emerging science around adolescent development, and a growing recognition of the need for trauma‐informed, evidence‐based courts. Judges are ultimately responsible for safeguarding the rights of the young people who appear in court, and must uphold the dignity of the courtroom. A review of jurisdictions that have adopted limits on juvenile shackling shows that these policies have not resulted in breaches of safety.     

The re‐equilibration of democracy in inter‐war Ireland

This article examines the process of democratic stabilization in inter‐war Ireland. The Irish case is a classic example of what Linz calls re‐equilibration. Re‐equilibration is a political process that, following a crisis which has seriously endangered democratic institutions, results in their continued existence at the same or higher levels of effectiveness and legitimacy. The contention of the article is that the Fianna Fáil party's transformation of the democratic institutions of the Irish Free State in the 1930s constituted a case of democratic re‐equilibration, whereby the institutions of independent Ireland were given a greater degree of effectiveness and legitimacy. Indeed, since the main Irish parties had only recently been involved in a civil war, the Irish example could well be the classic case of re‐equilibration this century. The analysis of democratic re‐equilibration between 1922 and 1937 focuses on the Fianna Fáil party's transformation from being a semi‐loyal opposition party to being a party of government, emphasizing the impact on those political actors who remained hostile to the existence of the Free State.