A Scoping Review of Financial Elder Exploitation Interventions

Elder financial exploitation (EFE), defined by the National Center for Elder Abuse (2021) as “the misappropriation of an older person’s money or property,” is a continuing public health crisis shown to cost individuals at least $2.9 billion a year (MetLife Mature Market Institute, 2011). Many believe this impact will increase exponentially due to the effects of COVID-19. In fact, a recent study conducted by Chang & Levy (2021) found that the prevalence of elder abuse as a whole increased from 1 in 10 older adults to 1 in 5 in the past year. Although increased collaboration between state attorneys general, Adult Protective Services, and financial institutions has driven progress in the field; there is still little known regarding EFE interventions. To address this issue, this study conducts a scoping review of the EFE intervention literature. This approach was chosen over a systematic review primarily due to the lack of a universal definition of EFE, as well as the limited number of studies available delineating between EFE and elder abuse as a whole. The main findings of the review reveal that current EFE intervention practices are focused on preventing abuse before it occurs by addressing risk factors for abuse in older adults; and are largely reliant on Adult Protective Services and the legal system. This finding is significant because state policies differ in their qualifications of EFE, thus leaving many older adults vulnerable and unprotected. Further interventions that address EFE while it is occurring and alignment across governing bodies are needed.

One Chief Executive or Many?

This chapter compares the unitary executive at the federal level with the plural executive at the state level. The fifty state constitutions and the United States Constitution share a “surface similarity” in describing the authority of their chief executives: They both vest executive power in a governor or president. But in practice, there are many differences. At the national level, the US Constitution places all executive authority in one president who controls the executive-branch officers through the singular authority to choose all cabinet members. What’s called a unitary executive largely is one, given the president’s authority to hire and fire these executive branch officers. Contrast the state side. In response to the states’ colonial experiences with a monarch, many of the first state constitutions created weak executive branches. All but one of the original state constitutions also mandated that the governor work alongside an executive council. In many states, constitutional executive offices—secretary, treasurer, auditor—are often chosen by the legislature. The rise of the state attorneys general as a source of local and national power offers one illustration of the salience of the plural executive.

Guarantor Institutions

The last few decades have seen a proliferation of constitutional institutions, especially in the Global South, that do not neatly fit within any of three traditional branches of the state. These supposedly ‘fourth branch’ institutions may include electoral commissions, human rights commissions, central banks, probity bodies such as anti-corruption watchdogs, knowledge institutions such as statistics bureaus and census boards, information commissioners, auditors general, attorneys general and so on. In this paper, I will argue that some of these new institutions are best understood as “guarantor institutions”. I will show that in a given political context, a guarantor institution is a tailor-made constitutional institution, vested with material as well as expressive capacities, whose function is to provide a credible and enduring guarantee to a specific non-self-enforcing constitutional norm (or any aspect thereof). Section I explains why polities need credible and enduring guarantees for specific norms, and claims that the expertise, independence, and accountability of guarantor institutions are likely to be key ingredients that determine their effectiveness in serving that purpose. It also argues that constitutional entrenchment of the guarantor institution is entailed in the independence requirement. Section II shows that in order to credibly and enduringly guarantee a norm, certain primary and secondary duties need to be discharged by relevant actors in relation to the norm's content as well as its impact. It further argues that while some of these duties may be performed by institutions that possess expressive capacity alone (roughly, the capacity to speak, express, communicate), others require material capacity (i.e. the physical capacity to effect material changes in the world). Guarantor institutions, unlike integrity institutions, can shoulder primary as well as secondary duties. Furthermore, they are typically vested with expressive as well as material capacities, which is key to their classification-defying hybridity. Section III argues that guarantor institutions are constitutionalised in two respects: the norm they seek to guarantee is constitutional, and the institution itself has constitutional status. What matters for a norm or institution to be constitutional is that it is entrenched, i.e. protected from change from the ordinary political and legal processes of the polity to some extent. It is their doubly constitutional character that distinguishes guarantor institutions from ordinary regulators. Section IV explains how some constitutional norms are non-self-enforcing, in the sense that powerful actors are likely to have the will as well as the capacity to frustrate or erase them. It also shows that the three traditional branches, whether acting severally or jointly, cannot provide a credible and enduring guarantee to all non-self-enforcing constitutional norms. Hence the need for constitutional guarantor institutions. Section V highlights that guarantor institutions are typically tailor-made to guarantee specific constitutional norms. Their specificity has important consequences for their internal design and their mode of functioning, which distinguish them from key institutions in the three traditional generalist branches. Section VI concludes. Attention to guarantor institutions by constitutional scholars may help the discipline escape its blinkered worldview, which sees judicial review as the only game in constitution-town.

Immunity of States and International Organizations in the Court of Justice of the European Union Practice and its Significance in the Implementation of Megascience Projects

In recent years, Russia has invested significant assets in unique scientific facility of the “Megascience” class that are being built or are already operating on the territory of foreign countries, mainly member states of the European Union: the International Thermonuclear Research Reactor-ITER (France), the European X-ray Free Electron Laser-European XFEL, the Large Hadron Collider (Switzerland and France), etc.How reliable and safe are such investments in the context of the sanctions policy of the West, including the EU, against our country? To what extent are they protected by the principle of immunity of states and international organizations, which is generally recognized, but is not interpreted and applied in different legal systems? The paper considers these issues in the context of the development of the judicial practice of the supranational institution of the judicial power of the EU, namely the Court of Justice of the European Union and the concept of relative immunity (immunité relative) formulated herein.Having conducted a comparative legal review of the current state of the sources of law and doctrine on the issues of immunity of states and international organizations, the author analyses and evaluates the decisions of the EU Court of Justice and the legal positions of its attorneys General: — Mahamdia v. Algeria, 2012: for the first time ECJ formulates the concept of relative immunity in relation to states;— "Rina" and "Suprim" cases, 2020: EU Court clarifies the interpretation of the concept of acta iure imperii (acts of public authority), in respect of which states retain immunity in the EU, and extends its concept of relative immunity to international intergovernmental organizations.The final section deals with legal issues that yet to get a clear answer in the practice of the EU Court of Justice. In this regard, the author highlights possible directions of its evolution, and studies other recent decisions of the EU Court of Justice that may affect Russia’s national interests in the context of cooperation with EU member states in the scientific and technical sphere, including megascience, and in other areas.

False Advertising Law

This chapter explores false advertising law. In the United States, false advertising law lives in statutes and regulations; it is enforced by federal agencies and state attorneys general; and its rules can seem designed more to promote consumer welfare and market efficiency than to enforce interpersonal obligations or compensate for wrongful losses. If one views the divide between public and private law as a fixed border between independent regions, false advertising law appears to fall in the domain of public law. The chapter’s working hypothesis is that that picture is a false one. Although it can be helpful to distinguish private from public law, the line between them is not so sharp. Laws that fall on the private side of the divide can be designed in light of purposes and principles commonly associated with public law, and vice versa. U.S. false advertising law provides an example. Despite the fact that it is commonly classified as public law, one can find in it structures, functions, and values commonly associated with private law. The structural features include horizontal duties, transfer remedies, private enforcement, and judge-made rules. False advertising law is unusual in that it imposes on advertisers one duty owed to two distinct categories of persons. The duty not to engage in deceptive advertising is owed both to consumers, who might be deceived by an advertisement, and to honest competitors, who might lose sales as a result of consumer deception.

Teaming Up for Consumers

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau partnered with other federal and state officials to increase consumer protections. It worked with the Department of Defense and the Judge Advocate General’s Corps to investigate and stop predatory lenders from targeting servicemembers. It worked with the Department of Education and state attorneys general to halt fraudulent practices at for-profit colleges and cancel hundreds of millions of dollars in debts where students were defrauded. It worked with the Education and Treasury Departments to rein in student loan servicers using sloppy and abusive practices. This chapter describes those efforts, as well as other partnerships—with the Federal Communications Commission to crack down on companies cramming bogus charges on mobile phone bills and to simplify mobile phone and internet bills, with banks to make credit scores available to customers for free, and with financial technology companies seeking to extend credit and financial services to people who lack access to them.

ACA Litigation: Politics Pursued through Other Means

Despite its passage a decade ago, the Affordable Care Act (ACA) remains a politically divisive law. These political divisions have long been on display in Congress, in the White House, and in states. A long-standing stalemate in Congress—where Republicans cannot repeal the law and Democrats cannot improve it—has emboldened efforts by the executive branch to act unilaterally to implement, or undermine, the ACA. In turn, the law's opponents and supporters have turned to the courts to promote their favored policy agendas through both broadside attacks on the law and targeted challenges to its implementation. Litigation has become politics pursued through other means. These challenges have often been brought, or opposed, by state attorneys general and governors, with red-state coalitions facing off against blue-state coalitions. ACA litigation has also been characterized by forum shopping, nationwide injunctions, and questions about the court as a truly adversarial forum. This article briefly reviews the history of ACA litigation, discusses these legal norms in the context of the historic health reform law, and considers the implications of this history and the changing judiciary for future health reform efforts.

Assurances of Voluntary Compliance: A Regulatory Mechanism to Reduce Youth Access to E-Cigarettes and Limit Retail Tobacco Marketing

Objectives. To evaluate assurances of voluntary compliance (AVCs) between state attorneys general and retail chains by assessing e-cigarette sales to underage decoys and tobacco marketing violations in corporate-owned stores (that sign AVCs) and franchise stores (that do not sign AVCs). Methods. Decoys 18 to 19 years of age attempted to purchase e-cigarettes without presenting ID in California convenience stores (n = 540). Auditors characterized the presence and content of age-of-sale signage and advertising for tobacco products. Data were collected and analyzed in 2018. Results. Corporate-owned stores were less likely than were franchise stores to violate ID requests (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.29; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.12, 0.71) and to sell e-cigarettes illegally (AOR = 0.37; 95% CI = 0.15, 0.88). Regardless of AVC category, advertising violations were common in stores (vaping products, 26.3%; other tobacco products, 74.3%). Conclusions. The differences in violation rates found in corporate and franchise stores imply that AVCs could reduce youth access to e-cigarettes. However, merchant education and routine enforcement are needed to better leverage restrictions on retail tobacco marketing in AVCs. Public Health Implications. Strengthening compliance with existing AVCs and establishing new agreements with retailers shown to be in violation through federal or state inspections could reduce youth access to e-cigarettes and exposure to tobacco marketing.