Cosleeping and sudden unexpected infant deaths in Kentucky: a 10-year retrospective case review

This retrospective case review investigates modifiable risk factors in sudden unexpected infant deaths, including those attributed to sudden infant death syndrome, and examines the impact of cosleeping with adults or siblings. The study examines sudden unexpected infant deaths from 1991 to 2000 in the state of Kentucky, excluding homicides and deaths from identifiable natural causes. Meta-analysis provides a cosleeping prevalence control in normal infants. Based on the findings described herein, we conclude that cosleeping may represent a risk factor in sudden unexpected infant deaths and that a full scene investigation, including whether the infant was cosleeping, should be sought in all cases of sudden infant death.     

Are Government Employees more Likely to Vote?: An Analysis of Turnout in the 1996 U.S. National Election

In this paper we develop and test a model of voter turnoutthat permits us to differentiate turnout rates for governmentemployees and other citizens, controlling for the effects of awide range of other variables relating to turnout. Using 1996ANES data, we find that there is a significant difference inturnout rates for bureaucrats and nonbureaucrats, both insimple bivariate analyses and in a full multivariate model.The magnitude and significance of the coefficient forgovernment employment, even in the face of controls, suggeststhere is something about government employment per sethat has an effect on turnout.     

现代型诉讼的意义、性质和特点

本文从解决现代工业化社会产生的新型纠纷入手,对传统民事诉讼的构造及理论提出了反思,并从实证立场探索现代型诉讼体系的建立和发展。     

中国法中的代位求偿权

本文论述了中国法中代位求偿权的含义及范围 ,保险人的直接诉权 ,被保险人保全代位求偿权的义务 ;指出中国海上保险中的代位求偿权制度存在许多问题 ;建议立法、司法机关尽快采取措施予以解决。     

历史·文化与比较法--西非之谜

本文运用人类学研究中的五种比较法,由浅及深地从历史与文化的角度论证了西非的两个相似族群接受世界宗教的差异,最终得出文化反映社会少于反映历史的结论.     

Brute Force (Anti) Federalism

States are engaging in brute force (anti) federalism, where both sides of the political spectrum push agendas that extend beyond the Founder's early ideal of balanced federalism, using popular support and special interest groups' interests as their springboard. These trial-and-error tactics increase vertical and interstate horizontal frictions, create political and economic challenges for businesses, and increase American polarization. However, they also allow states the opportunity to force an increasingly stalemated federal government into action. This article introduces the concept of brute force (anti) federalism by first examining the evolution of modern federalism. It then offers a sampling of state brute force efforts, analyzes the effect of popular momentum and special interest groups on state political activity, advances broad-based perspectives surrounding brute force (anti) federalism, and poses additional questions to be considered.     

Case Baiting

In 2014, New Jersey passed the Sports Wagering Act, permitting sports betting at state casino and racetrack venues, in direct conflict with the federal Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act. In 2017, South Dakota passed Senate Bill 106, requiring that certain e-commerce retailers collect and remit sales tax, in violation of federal law. The two U.S. Supreme Court decisions arising from challenges to these state statutes—South Dakota v. Wayfair and Murphy v. NCAA—exemplify U.S. Supreme Court “case baiting.” Case baiting is a tactic states implement to challenge federal directives by passing state legislation that directly conflicts with federal law to lure the Court into granting certiorari and ruling in their favor. This article argues that South Dakota's and New Jersey's triumphs pave the way for other jurisdictions to pursue similar strategies across multiple legal issues such as abortion restrictions and immigration law. In addition, this article suggests that case baiting invites further scholarly exploration of important policy considerations, including the use of this tactic as a novel approach to the application of law and strategy, whether case baiting promotes the Court's progression toward a more quasi-legislative role, and whether passing conflict legislation violates state legislators’ oaths of office.     

VimarSeguros诉M／V．SkyReefer案后撤销外国法院管辖条款的尝试

本文主要介绍美国最高法院审理的 Sky Reefer案的判决对美国法院认定提单中外国法院管辖条款的效力产生的重大影响 ,并介绍了 SkyReefer案之前及之后发生的重要案例以认识美国法院对该条款的态度转变过程。最后 ,作者根据实践提出了自己主张的可行办法