Matching Items (12)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Law
- All Subjects: Technology
- Creators: Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law
- Member of: Barrett, The Honors College Thesis/Creative Project Collection
- Resource Type: Text
Description
Through research, interviews, and analysis, our paper provides the local community with a resource that offers a comprehensive collection of insight into the Mirabella at ASU Life Plan Community and the projected impact it will have on the City of Tempe and Arizona State University.
ContributorsAnand, Rohan (Co-author) / Dicke, George (Co-author) / Stephens, Corey (Co-author) / Sadusky, Brian (Thesis director) / Schiller, Christoph (Committee member) / Dean, W.P. Carey School of Business (Contributor) / Department of Finance (Contributor) / Department of Supply Chain Management (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2021-05
Description
Through research, interviews, and analysis, our paper provides the local community with a resource that offers a comprehensive collection of insight into the Mirabella at ASU Life Plan Community and the projected impact it will have on the City of Tempe and Arizona State University.
ContributorsStephens, Corey Christopher (Co-author) / Dicke, George (Co-author) / Anand, Rohan (Co-author) / Sadusky, Brian (Thesis director) / Schiller, Christoph (Committee member) / Dean, W.P. Carey School of Business (Contributor) / Department of Finance (Contributor) / Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2021-05
Description
Bad Samaritans are bystanders who omit from preventing some foreseeable harm when doing so could have been accomplished with little risk. Although failing to intervene to prevent a harm often renders Bad Samaritans morally culpable, under current common law in the United States they could not be held criminally liable for any harm that resulted to the victims of that harm. In this paper I argue for the criminalization of individuals who fall under this label; I argue for the adoption of Bad Samaritan laws. To accomplish this, I first argue for the conclusion that omissions can causally contribute to harm. From here I am able to reach three further conclusions relative to Bad Samaritan legislation. These three conclusions are that Bad Samaritan laws are justified, that the punishment for the violation of a Bad Samaritan law should be proportional to the degree culpability for the harm caused, and that if "commission by omission" statutes are justified, then so too are Bad Samaritan laws.
ContributorsCallahan, Ty William (Author) / Sigler, Mary (Thesis director) / Murphy, Jeffrie (Committee member) / Botham, Thad (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / Chemical Engineering Program (Contributor) / Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law (Contributor) / School of Historical, Philosophical and Religious Studies (Contributor)
Created2013-05
Description
Protection orders are a common remedy for victims of domestic violence in Arizona, but problems of access and unnecessary complexity can prevent these orders from achieving their full potential impact. Through interviews with court officials and advocates, data collected from survivors of domestic violence and observation of court proceedings, this study takes a comprehensive look at how to make protection orders as effective and accessible as possible. This analysis concludes with a series of recommendations to improve the protection order process and guidelines for the information to be included in a comprehensive resource to help plaintiffs through the process.
ContributorsDavis, Lauren Elise (Author) / Durfee, Alesha (Thesis director) / Messing, Jill (Committee member) / Buel, Sarah (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Social Transformation (Contributor) / Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law (Contributor) / School of Historical, Philosophical and Religious Studies (Contributor)
Created2013-05
Description
Certain laws relating to self-defense were created known as "Stand Your Ground" laws. The public has interpreted these laws in ways that expand them beyond their original scope. To gain an understanding of self-defense laws, a look at the origins of self-defense is needed. Following the historical background, several cases will be examined that illustrate how the public has interpreted "Stand Your Ground" laws, and how these interpretations clash with elements of self-defense. Several philosophical principles including natural rights, the social contract, and some form of utilitarianism, will be discussed in relation to "Stand Your Ground" laws. A possible conclusion can be drawn that by misinterpreting "Stand Your Ground" laws, people compromise the philosophical ideals they hold, and infringe on other people's natural rights, break the social contract, and create societal unhappiness. Finally, some people are calling for reform of "Stand Your Ground" laws. These reforms focus on correcting public perception of "Stand Your Ground" laws.
ContributorsSmith, Geramya Joseph (Author) / Sigler, Mary (Thesis director) / Stanford, Michael (Committee member) / Kader, David (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law (Contributor) / W. P. Carey School of Business (Contributor)
Created2013-05
Description
This paper looks at case studies, legal journals, and legal commentaries to examine the history of plea bargains and determine how such a practice slowly crept its way into the American judicial system. Next, I discern both the two specific benefits and three disadvantages of utilizing plea bargains in a system that was traditionally renowned for its unique form of adversarial / trial based justice. By analyzing case studies and legal texts, I find that the administrative advantages and cost benefits used to rationalize continued usage of plea deals does not outweigh its extremely negative effects on significant aspects of law and the American legal system. These significant negative effects as a product of the plea bargain are a definitive hindrance to justice and further characterize the system as no longer fair and certainly not equitable. Consequently, I assert that in order to maintain the ethics of the system, plea bargains should be removed. I also generally outline the Philadelphia Bench Trial as a prospective and viable alternative to plea bargains that could act as an intriguing substitute. The Philadelphia Bench Trial represents a highly viable alternative to the plea bargain and consequently preserves many of the advantages plea bargains offer the system without sacrificing the adversarial element necessary to receive correct and accurate verdicts.
ContributorsRimsza, Alex Gill (Author) / Stanford, Michael (Thesis director) / Forst, Brad (Committee member) / Dean, W.P. Carey School of Business (Contributor) / Department of English (Contributor) / Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2019-05
Description
The United States is in a period of political turmoil and polarization. New technologies have matured over the last ten years, which have transformed an individual’s relationship with society and government. The emergence of these technologies has revolutionized access to both information and misinformation. Skills such as bias recognition and critical thinking are more imperative than in any other time to separate truth from false or misleading information. Meanwhile, education has not evolved with these changes. The average individual is more likely to come to uninformed conclusions and less likely to listen to differing perspectives. Moreover, technology is further complicating and compounding other issues in the political process. All of this is manifesting in division among the American people who elect more polarized politicians who increasingly fail to find avenues for compromise.
In an effort to address these trends, we founded a student organization, The Political Literates, to fight political apathy by delivering political news in an easy to understand and unbiased manner. Inspired by our experience with this organization, we combine our insights with research to paint a new perspective on the state of the American political system.
This thesis analyzes various issues identified through our observations and research, with a heavy emphasis on using examples from the 2016 election. Our focus is how new technologies like data analytics, the Internet, smartphones, and social media are changing politics by driving political and social transformation. We identify and analyze five core issues that have been amplified by new technology, hindering the effectiveness of elections and further increasing political polarization:
● Gerrymandering which skews partisan debate by forcing politicians to pander to ideologically skewed districts.
● Consolidation of media companies which affects the diversity of how news is shared.
● Repeal of the Fairness Doctrine which allowed media to become more partisan.
● The Citizens United Ruling which skews power away from average voters in elections.
● A Failing Education System which does not prepare Americans to be civically engaged and to avoid being swayed by biased or untrue media.
Based on our experiment with the Political Literates and our research, we call for improving how critical thinking and civics is taught in the American education system. Critical thought and civics must be developed pervasively. With this, more people would be able to form more sophisticated views by listening to others to learn rather than win, listening less to irrelevant information, and forming a culture with more engagement in politics. Through this re-enlightenment, many of America’s other problems may evaporate or become more actionable.
In an effort to address these trends, we founded a student organization, The Political Literates, to fight political apathy by delivering political news in an easy to understand and unbiased manner. Inspired by our experience with this organization, we combine our insights with research to paint a new perspective on the state of the American political system.
This thesis analyzes various issues identified through our observations and research, with a heavy emphasis on using examples from the 2016 election. Our focus is how new technologies like data analytics, the Internet, smartphones, and social media are changing politics by driving political and social transformation. We identify and analyze five core issues that have been amplified by new technology, hindering the effectiveness of elections and further increasing political polarization:
● Gerrymandering which skews partisan debate by forcing politicians to pander to ideologically skewed districts.
● Consolidation of media companies which affects the diversity of how news is shared.
● Repeal of the Fairness Doctrine which allowed media to become more partisan.
● The Citizens United Ruling which skews power away from average voters in elections.
● A Failing Education System which does not prepare Americans to be civically engaged and to avoid being swayed by biased or untrue media.
Based on our experiment with the Political Literates and our research, we call for improving how critical thinking and civics is taught in the American education system. Critical thought and civics must be developed pervasively. With this, more people would be able to form more sophisticated views by listening to others to learn rather than win, listening less to irrelevant information, and forming a culture with more engagement in politics. Through this re-enlightenment, many of America’s other problems may evaporate or become more actionable.
ContributorsStenseth, Kyle (Co-author) / Tumas, Trevor (Co-author) / Mokwa, Michael (Thesis director) / Eaton, John (Committee member) / Department of Information Systems (Contributor) / Department of Supply Chain Management (Contributor) / Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law (Contributor) / Watts College of Public Service & Community Solut (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2019-05
Description
This paper will discuss how USA Gymnastics (USAG), Michigan State University (MSU), and the United States Olympic Committee (MSU) failed to properly investigate and take corrective action of former physician and now convicted serial pedophile, Larry Nassar. This includes a description of the powerful individuals who worked with or oversaw Nassar, how they received complaints of his sexual assault, and an explanation of the institutional environment that fostered a culture of silence and obedience. To provide a comparative analysis, this paper will analyze other athletic organizations (such as USA Swimming and USA Diving) which are also overseen by the USOC in order to compare their previous cases and reactions to sexual assault. This will be followed by recommended corrective policies for athletic organizations if claims of sexual assault arise. These policies and procedures will aim to prevent sexual assault in the future, reduce any culture of silence and vulnerability within similar organizations, and hopefully be implemented throughout athletic organizations everywhere.
ContributorsUdowitch, Heather Lynne (Co-author) / Udowitch, Heather (Co-author) / Lynk, Myles (Thesis director) / Hooper, Dana (Committee member) / Garner-Smith, Deana (Committee member) / Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law (Contributor) / Department of Marketing (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2019-12
Description
Hip-hop’s popularity has been steadily increasing since the late 1980s, with it becoming the most streamed genre of music in 2017. This rise in popularity is matched by an increase in the number of criminal court cases which implement one of hip-hop’s primary features, rap, as evidence. In order to build upon prior research regarding rap music’s implications in legal proceedings and begin to understand what impact this phenomenon might have, this study examines the function of rap music within a sample of court cases. The research was conducted using a qualitative content analysis. The sample consists of 184 criminal cases from a five-year-period selected from the LexisNexis®Academic database. From these cases, 7 principal patterns were established: (1) gang affiliation, (2) descriptions of criminal acts, (3) impermissible character evidence, (4) criminal intent, (5) threats, (6) artistic expression, and (7) inciting incidents. Each of these patterns was examined and analyzed with respect to the function of rap evidence within each case. Among these patterns, the most common was rap evidence bearing gang affiliation, and the least common was rap’s direct use in incidents which resulted in a criminal charge. Most cases, with its use as a threat being the major exception, appeared to implement rap as a supplementary piece of evidence. The analysis demonstrated that the increased usage of rap evidence in the criminal proceedings attests to the significant impact that the hip-hop genre can have a have on individual cases. This impact is defined by the function of rap evidence, and in this sense the contextual and historical significance of rap music becomes a factor in how it is utilized as a tool in the legal system.
ContributorsLutes, Erin (Author) / Fradella, Hank (Thesis director) / Fahmy, Chantal (Committee member) / School of Criminology and Criminal Justice (Contributor) / Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2018-05
Description
The Freedom of Information Act (1966), an amendment altering Section Three of the Administrative Procedure Act (1964), outlines the rules and regulations for United States citizens to obtain federal government records. The act, written with the guidance of journalists, was created for all members of the public, but with the intent that the press would be the primary users of the legislation. The authors of the act believed the press would utilize FOIA to enhance its ability to accomplish its duty of keeping the public informed. Now, 51 years after the act was passed into law, critics say FOIA has not satisfactorily allowed the press or the public in general to inform and be informed. Issues with demand rates, unorganized systems and subjective interpretations of the act have combined to lock information from public access through an act that was intended to be the key to it. The data from annual federal agency FOIA reports to the attorney general from 2008 to 2015 have indicated that, in multiple metrics, FOIA has increasingly struggled to fulfill and often has failed to provide records to requesting parties. These trends have inspired a discussion among journalists and right-to-information advocates about how to best resolve the issues that have contributed to them. Proposed solutions range from adjustments to requesters' approaches to the act, amendments to the act and even abandoning the act entirely in favor of constructing a new law.
ContributorsPrime, Tyler Scott (Author) / Russomanno, Joseph (Thesis director) / Douglas, Anderson (Committee member) / School of Community Resources and Development (Contributor) / Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication (Contributor) / Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law (Contributor) / Department of Information Systems (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2016-12