due process
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

3233
(FIVE YEARS 558)

H-INDEX

29
(FIVE YEARS 3)

2022 ◽  
pp. 229-260
Author(s):  
John T. Whitehead ◽  
Steven P. Lab
Keyword(s):  

2022 ◽  
pp. 104420732110667
Author(s):  
Tiina Itkonen ◽  
Bryan Tomlin ◽  
Manuel G. Correia ◽  
Luis A. Sanchez ◽  
Tracie Schneider ◽  
...  

This research examined the associations between Schaffer v. Weast (2005) and special education due process hearing decisions in California. Using a database we coded from the state’s due process hearings for cases which reached a decision (years 1995–2019), this study analyzed (1) how legal representation and the filing party affected the probability of the student fully or partially prevailing in these cases, and (2) how Schaffer affected student representation and the prevailing party before and after this ruling. The results indicate that while students were statistically as likely to be plaintiffs and/or represented by an attorney before and after the 2005 time break in the study, the decision raised the bar for students as the likelihood of favorable outcomes for students fell significantly in the wake of the ruling.


Author(s):  
Christian Whalen

AbstractArticle 22 guarantees the substantive application of all Convention rights to the particular situation of asylum seeking and refugee children, and also guarantees them protection and assistance in advancing their immigration and residency status claims and in overcoming the hurdles posed by international migration channels, including guarantees of due process. The rights of refugee and asylum-seeking children can be analyzed in relation to four essential attributes. First of all, Article 22 insists upon appropriate protection and humanitarian assistance. Refugee children are not granted a special status under the Convention, but they are not given any lesser status. They are to be treated as children first and foremost and not as migrants per se, in the sense that national immigration policy cannot trump child rights. The basic rights to education, health, and child welfare of these children needs to be protected to the same extent, and as much as possible, as children who are nationals of the host country. The second attribute preserves the rights of refugee children not only under the Convention but under all other international human right treaties and humanitarian instruments binding on the relevant States Party. These may include, for many governments, the 1951 Refugee Convention, the Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness, the Geneva Conventions and the Hague Convention for the Protection of Minors, 1961, among others. A third attribute of Article 22 insists upon the duty to protect and assist refugee children. This entails a clear duty to provide children with appropriate due process rights throughout their asylum and refugee claims procedures, including the child’s right to be heard and participate in all the processes determining the child’s residence or immigration status, border admission, deportation, repatriation, detention, alternative measures, or placement, including best interest determination processes. The fourth and final attribute of Article 22 asserts that two basic principles should guide each activity with the refugee child: the best interests of the child and the principle of family unity.


Author(s):  
Christian Whalen

AbstractThe Travaux Préparatoires insist upon the close nexus between Articles 9, 10, and 11 along with the several other provisions of the UNCRC that protect the close bond between child and parent. This chapter analyses the content of Article 9 in relation to the general principles of Child rights, related provisions in other international human rights treaties and materials, and sets out four main attributes of the right, as a child, to not be separated from one’s parents against one’s will. These four attributes are: (1) no separation from parents unless necessary for the child’s best interests; (2) no separation from one’s parents without due process before competent authorities; (3) the right to maintain relations and personal contact with both parents, if separated; and (4) the right to be informed of the whereabouts of one’s parent or child, if detained.


Daedalus ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 151 (1) ◽  
pp. 135-152
Author(s):  
Nicole Gonzalez Van Cleve

Abstract Most theorists assume that the criminal courts are neutral arbiters of justice, protected by the Constitution, the rule of law, and court records. This essay challenges those assumptions and examines the courts as a place of punitive excess and the normalization of racial abuse and punishment. The essay explains the historic origins of these trends and examines how the categories of “hardened” and “marginal” defendants began to assume racialized meanings with the emergence of mass incarceration. This transformed the criminal courts into a type of public theater for racial degradation. These public performances or “racial degradation ceremonies” occur within the discretionary practices and cultural norms of mostly White courtroom professionals as they efficiently manage the disposition of cases in the everyday practice of law. I link these historical findings to a recent study of the largest unified criminal court system in the United States–Cook County, Chicago–and discuss court watching programs as an intervention for accountability and oversight of our courts and its legal professionals.


Signs ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 261-293
Author(s):  
Catharine R. Stimpson
Keyword(s):  
Title Ix ◽  

2022 ◽  
pp. 1388-1412
Author(s):  
Brendan Walker-Munro

This chapter provides a thematic analysis for the Australian context of the legality and challenges to the use of big data analytics to identify risk, conduct compliance action, and make decisions within the tax administration space. Recent federal court jurisprudence and research is discussed to identify common themes (i.e., privacy/opacity, inaccuracy/bias, and fairness/due process) currently influencing the legal treatment of big data analytics within the tax administration and compliance environment in Australia.


Author(s):  
Christian Whalen

AbstractArticle 37 is inspired by the provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). However, it extends the ICCPR’s provisions to the protection of the children by: (1) imposing the prohibition of life imprisonment for children without the possibility of release; (2) demanding that detention of a child shall be used as a measure of last resort and be imposed for the shortest period of time; and (3) providing to children deprived of liberty the right to maintain contacts with their family members. Article 37 imposes a child-centred understanding of its provisions and rights. These rights extend beyond the ambit of child justice administration to all situations where children may be deprived of liberty, including, for example, child protection settings, health care settings, and immigration settings. This chapter analyses Article 37 rights in accordance with four essential attributes, as enumerated in its four constituent paragraphs: (1) the prohibition in paragraph (a) on torture or ill-treatment, specifically ruling out capital punishment and life imprisonment without parole for minors; (2) the prohibition in paragraph (b) of unlawful and arbitrary deprivations of liberty, insisting that such sanctions are a measure of last resort that must only be imposed for the shortest appropriate period; (3) the limitations on the deprivation of liberty, including the core commitment in paragraph (c) to upholding the child’s inherent dignity and right to be treated with humanity in such circumstances; and (4) the right, in paragraph (d), to minimal due process guarantees which must accompany any child’s deprivation of liberty. While youth criminal justice practice varies greatly from state to state, Articles 37 and 40 have emerged as a codification of global standards set out in the Beijing Rules and a summary prompt to the adoption of guidelines and minimum rules for the protection of children deprived of liberty and the prevention of youth crime. Article 37 should therefore be applied consistently with the recent General Comment no. 24 (2019) on Children’s Rights in the Child Justice System.


2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brandon L. Garrett ◽  
Gregory Mitchell
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document