In Part One of this two-part episode of Reasonably Speaking, Sherrilyn Ifill, Barry Friedman, and John Malcolm explore the intersection of race and policing in the United States. Part One looks at the history of race and policing, training programs, and police as first responders.
First Thoughts About ‘Second Look’ and Other Sentence Reduction Provisions of the Model Penal Code: Sentencing RevisionMargaret Love and Cecelia M. Klingele
The financial cost of mass incarceration has prompted states to pass legislation providing for early release of prisoners. Although early release laws are frequently in tension with principles underlying sentencing systems, most have been passed without any discussion of how they might be justified in theory.
For most of the past century, those who followed foreign relations law believed that federal law, including that made by the federal courts in the absence of legislation and treaties, should govern the field. Anything else would burden political and economic ties with the rest of the world and stymie efforts to adapt the law to a rapidly changing international environment.
Below is the Black Letter from the Proposed Final Draft of Model Penal Code: Sentencing, which was approved at the 2017 Annual Meeting. The project Reporters are now preparing the Institute’s official text for publication. The Reporters are authorized to correct and update citations and other references, to make editorial and stylistic improvements, and to implement any remaining substantive changes agreed to during discussion with the membership or by motions approved at the Annual Meetings. When published the Sections are being reorganized, Section 305.6 will become Section 11.02, and it will appear in an Appendix titled, “Principles for Legislations.”
Empiricism and Privacy Policies in the Restatement of Consumer Contract Law and The Faulty Foundation of the Draft Restatement of Consumer ContractsSteven O. Weise
“Empiricism and Privacy Policies in the Restatement of Consumer Contract Law” (Empiricism) asks the wrong question and takes the wrong approach to answering that question. A second article in same issue of the Journal, “The Faulty Foundation of the Draft Restatement of Consumer Contracts” (Faulty Foundation) has similar flaws. Both articles misconceive and overstate the role of “counting” in the preparation of the Restatement, as the Reporters emphasize that the Restatement follows the traditional ALI approach, which is based on a broad review of court decisions.
In this episode of Reasonably Speaking, NYU Law’s Erin Murphy and UC Irvine Law’s Ken Simons explore the difference between criminal law and tort law in the United States and then focus on how “consent” is, and should be, defined in sexual assault allegations.