凯洛案后美国土地征收立法新动向

凯洛案后美国联邦和州层面的新立法对于土地征收权的动用施加更多限制的同时,也规定了很多例外的情形,对于“公共使用”涵义的解读要想回归到狭义的、语义学上的原点几乎是不可能的,为了特定的经济发展目的而动用土地征收权还是有相当市场的。如果将新立法中体现的优先权制度、额外补偿制度、综合规划制度、公益与私益权衡制度与特定的经济发展目的结合起来考量的话,土地征收权动用范围的适度扩大就多了更多的合理性基础。     

Constitutional limitations of the privacy framework advanced in Eisenstadt v. Baird and Roe v. Wade

This paper examines the role of framing in advancing a progressive sexual and reproductive rights agenda. U.S. Supreme Court decisions including Griswold v. Connecticu and Eisenstadt v. Baird helped establish legal precedent invoking a ＂privacy framework＂ for subsequent cases including Roe v. Wade （as well as Doe v. Bolton and, more recently, Lawrence v. Texas）. This paper highlights the limitations of the privacy framework while exploring more potentially efficacious frames.     

Taking Abortion Rights Seriously: Whole Woman's Health v Hellerstedt

In Whole Woman's Health v Hellerstedt the Supreme Court of the United States passed down its most important decision on abortion for just under a decade. By a majority of 5‐3, the Court ruled that two provisions in a Texas law regulating abortion on grounds of women's health were constitutionally invalid, placing a ‘substantial obstacle’ in the way of women seeking to exercise their right to abortion. This comment delineates the key ways in which the Court's application of the standard of constitutional review under Planned Parenthood v Casey (1992) to the Texas provisions marks a landmark development for the protection of the constitutional right to abortion established in Roe v Wade, not the least by making clear that state abortion regulations which cite ‘women's health’ justifications should not pass constitutional review where those justifications lack a credible factual basis.     

Barriers to the ballot: implications for the development of state and national crime policies

In 2013, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Shelby County v. Holder that Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act, which included the preclearance formula for determining which state and local jurisdictions needed to obtain federal approval before changing their election laws and voting procedures, was unconstitutional. By requiring federal approval, this provision prevented historically repressive jurisdictions from enacting covert policies to hinder non-whites from voting. The ruling in Shelby County is problematic because methods in use across the country prevent non-white citizens from casting their ballots, leaving their interests unaddressed. As people of color hold different attitudes and views than whites towards specific criminal justice measures, contemporary barriers to the ballot have potential implications for criminal law and policy. Consequently, analyses of two contemporary methods of denying non-whites a voice in government are warranted: felon disenfranchisement and voter identification laws. After considering the disproportionate effects of these laws on non-white voting, the paper reveals the potential harm that may result from Shelby County if similar laws spread to jurisdictions no longer covered by the Voting Rights Act.     

知识产权的观念：类型化及法律适用

以知识产权为主的无形财产日益重要是社会历史发展的结果,知识产权也是传统财产权的延续,但我们今天不仅面临着知识产权类型化困难问题,而且在自然权利、他人利益和社会正义之间存在着利益平衡的法律难题。因此更加需要强调知识产权的私权性质和观念,在司法过程中通过传统民事法律制度实现知识产权立法的目的。     

Corporate Ownership and News Bias Revisited: Newspaper Coverage of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United Ruling

The clear financial benefits accrued to owners of television stations as a result of the Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission (FEC) decision opens the door to an important question: Did the degree to which media corporations benefited from the changes in campaign finance law influence their news outlets’ coverage of the Citizens United decision? In other words, is it possible to identify variation in how media outlets covered the Supreme Court decision that correlates with the degree to which those outlets’ parent companies profited from the resulting increase in campaign spending? Answering this question will provide an important and much-too-uncommon opportunity to systematically test for bias in news coverage. Replicating the method used by Gilens and Hertzman (2000) in their own test of coverage of the 1996 Telecommunications Act, this analysis reveals that newspapers belonging to media corporations that own more television stations covered the Citizens United ruling systematically differently—and more favorably—than those with few or no television stations. This has important implications for the degree to which the news produced by increasingly conglomerated and corporatized media companies may eschew neutral or balanced coverage in favor of news frames that promote their own financial interests.     

Juvenile Competency and Pretrial Due Process: A Call for Greater Protections in Massachusetts for Juveniles Residing in Procedural Purgatory

While juvenile courts continue to balance and reevaluate the dual goals of community safety and rehabilitation of youth, juveniles who are not competent to stand trial have been left without sufficient procedural protections. This paper examines Massachusetts’ approach to juvenile competency, due process, and pretrial procedure, within a national context. The inadequacies of the Massachusetts juvenile competency laws are not unique. Currently there are nineteen states that either entirely lack juvenile‐specific competency legislation or merely incorporate inapposite adult criminal statutes and standards into the juvenile context—making it difficult or impossible for those juvenile courts to dismiss or divert a delinquency petition following an incompetency finding. Massachusetts and states similarly situated should adopt explicit statutory language to delineate the basis for a juvenile incompetency finding and the grounds for dismissing delinquency complaints pretrial after an incompetency finding has been made. This paper proposes that Massachusetts adopt a timeline for effecting such dismissals based in part on the amount of time a juvenile could face if committed to the juvenile correctional authority following an adjudication of delinquency. The paper also recommends best practices of states that are pioneering juvenile legislative reforms like dismissal timelines and incompetency presumptions. Finally, we suggest a more stringent regulatory framework be put in place governing the pretrial detention of youths who have been found not competent to stand trial—a framework that recognizes and preserves the juvenile's substantive rights to education, mental health and rehabilitative services. Without legislation, juveniles found not competent to stand trial remain subject to the prospect of indefinite locked detention, often without access to the necessary services that contribute to future success as well as attainment of competency. This lack of due process runs counter to the foundational goals of the juvenile justice system.     

马萨诸塞州诉美国联邦环保局案的述评

马萨诸塞州诉美国联邦环保局案是美国第一件具有里程碑意义的气候变化公益诉讼案件,该案体现了美国各州和民间力量通过公民诉讼方式促进政府采取温室气体减排行动的艰巨努力。该案从联邦上诉法院一审到联邦最高法院再审,始终存在较大争议,其中关于原告诉讼资格的争议更是人声鼎沸。在联邦最高法院判决中,原告仅以微弱优势胜诉。尽管关于原告胜诉的理由仍有颇多争议,但该案在明确温室气体属于《清洁空气法》的调整范围、拓展气候变化公民诉讼原告的诉讼资格以及确立公民诉讼可以促进政府采取减排行动等方面,都具有非常积极的意义。