Matching Items (99)
Filtering by
- Creators: Arizona State University
- Creators: Schweitzer, Nicholas
Description
The rights of American Indians occupy a unique position within the legal framework of water allocations in the western United States. However, in the formulation and execution of policies that controlled access to water in the desert Southwest, federal and local governments did not preserve the federal reserved water rights that attached to Indian reservations as part of their creation. Consequentially, Indian communities were unable to access the water supplies necessary to sustain the economic development of their reservations. This dissertation analyzes the legal and historical dimensions of the conflict over rights that occurred between Indian communities and non-Indian water users in Arizona during the second half of the twentieth century. Particular attention is paid to negotiations involving local, state, federal, and tribal parties, which led to the Congressional authorization of water rights settlements for several reservations in central Arizona. The historical, economic, and political forces that shaped the settlement process are analyzed in order to gain a better understanding of how water users managed uncertainty regarding their long-term water supplies. The Indian water rights settlement process was made possible through a reconfiguration of major institutional, legal, and policy arrangements that dictate the allocation of water supplies in Arizona.
ContributorsKilloren, Daniel (Author) / Hoerder, Dirk (Thesis advisor) / Hirt, Paul (Committee member) / Smith, Karen (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2011
Description
Over the past decades, Colombian society has endured the impact of a longstanding political conflict among different actors and outrageous expressions of violence, especially among left wing guerrillas, right wing paramilitary groups and the state government. Drawing on socio-legal studies in transitional justice and human rights, this research attempts to analyze the recent experience of transitional justice in Colombia. The main purpose of this research is to understand how political, institutional and social actors, especially the government, the courts, the human rights and transitional justice NGOs, and victims associations, frame the mechanisms of transitional justice and use legal instruments to transform the conflict and reach what they consider "justice." It also attempts to understand the relations between politics and law in the context of a hegemonic discourse of security and give account of the expressions of resistance of human rights networks. In doing so, this research advances theory on literature about law and society and transitional justice by means of applying and expanding the theoretical framework of socio-legal research via the process of transitional justice in Colombia. The dissertation presents information gathered in the field in Colombia between July 2009 and July 2010 through a qualitative research design based on document analysis and in-depth interviews with members of different international and domestic human rights organizations, victims' organizations and national institutions. The research explains how these organizations combined political and legal actions in order to contest a project of security, and more specifically a project of impunity that came from negotiations with the paramilitary groups. The research also explains how the human rights networks not only mobilized internationally to gain political support from the international community, but also how these organizations contributed to transform the political debate about victims' rights. The research also explains how the human rights organizations and victims' groups articulated the global discourse on human rights and the local and domestic meanings constructed by the emerging movements of victims. Finally, the research analyses the relevance of legal practices consisting on strategic use of law in order to protect the victims of human rights violations.
ContributorsGomez Sanchez, Gabriel (Author) / Lauderdale, Pat (Thesis advisor) / Vanna, Gonzales (Committee member) / Ladawn, Haglund (Committee member) / Jeffrey, Juris (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2011
Description
Psychology of justice research has demonstrated that individuals are concerned with both the process and the outcomes of a decision-making event. While the literature has demonstrated the importance of formal and informal aspects of procedural justice and the relevancy of moral values, the present study focuses on introducing a new form of justice: Substantive justice. Substantive justice focuses on how the legal system uses laws to constrain and direct human behavior, specifically focusing on the function and the structure of a law. The psychology of justice literature is missing the vital distinction between laws whose function is to create social opportunities versus threats and between laws structured concretely versus abstractly. In the present experiment, we found that participant evaluations of the fairness of the law, the outcome, and the decision-maker all varied depending on the function and structure of the law used as well as the outcome produced. Specifically, when considering adverse outcomes, individuals perceived laws whose function is to create liability (threats) as being fairer when structured as standards (abstract guidelines) rather than rules (concrete guidelines); however, the opposite is true when considering laws whose function is to create eligibility (opportunities). In juxtaposition, when receiving a favorable outcome, individuals perceived laws whose function is to create liability (threats) as being fairer when defined as rules (concrete guidelines) rather than standards (abstract guidelines).
ContributorsLovis-McMahon, David (Author) / Schweitzer, Nicholas J. (Thesis advisor) / Saks, Michael (Thesis advisor) / Kwan, Sau (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2011
Description
This thesis explores the implications that the outcome of a certain U.S. lawsuit involving antiquities could have on practices and programs in the United States, related to cultural heritage and history. This paper examines the Rubin et al case, which sought to attach a collection of ancient Persian artifacts (known as The Persepolis Tablets) as a source of legal compensation. Presented as a case study, and using primary and secondary research sources, this paper analyzes the Rubin et al lawsuit and the factors that led to its initiation, and seeks to determine how and why adverse consequences could result from its final ruling. This thesis demonstrates that the final decision in the lawsuit could leave a negative impact on a number of practices related to cultural heritage in the United States, especially with regards to cultural and academic institutions such as museums and universities.
ContributorsAhouraiyan, Taraneh (Author) / Warren-Findley, Jannelle (Thesis advisor) / Warrren-Findley, Jannelle (Committee member) / Thompson, Victoria (Committee member) / Smith, Louis (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2011
Description
From its founding, the United States has always claimed to be a nation of immigrants, yet in the past century the issue of immigration has become an even more contentious political issue surrounded by heated rhetoric filled with passion, but devoid of information. This thesis hopes to interrupt this rhetoric with a thorough analysis of immigration politics in Arizona through a legal lens, a theoretical lens and an empirical lens. While this thesis by no means looks at all facets of immigration politics, it informs in a manner that adds depth by providing information on the history behind, and legal arguments surrounding, the most contentious piece of immigration legislation in the United States at the moment. It then provides a theoretical analysis of how immigration legislation has created carceral networks and a panoptic gaze in Arizona specifically. It ends with a recommendation for further empirical research to partner with both the legal and theoretical frameworks. This thesis concludes that, fortified with over a century of case law, the plenary power doctrine is unwavering, and it makes federal immigration legislation an overly powerful tool in our political system from which the courts can offer little if any protection. Congress walks a fine line between preempting immigration regulation and devolving immigration regulation. SB 1070 and the 287(g) program are two contested areas of immigration regulation, which both exhibit and alter the power relationships of immigration politics in Arizona. Additionally, the application of the theories of Michel Foucault illuminates the power relationships at play in Arizona - from the power relationships among nation states in the broader political arena of geopolitics and colonialism to the face-to-face power relationship between a police officer and a stopped/detained/arrested person in a Foucauldian carceral network. This thesis ends with a call for empirical research that would yield an opportunity to analyze these relationships. This thesis discusses the importance of empirical study. It situates the study within the genre of surveillance studies and its theorists. It analyzes similar studies, and identifies the variables the most illuminating for this analysis. This thesis is written in the hope that a researcher will pick up where this thesis has left off.
ContributorsBycura, Marquette (Author) / Schweitzer, Nick (Thesis advisor) / Vargas, Perla (Committee member) / Simmons, William (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2011
Description
Power relations among cultural, socio-economic, and political groups have been dynamic forces shaping American history. Within that changing world, relations between indigenous and non-indigenous groups have been complicated by a fundamental difference often ascribed to Western philosophy versus Native American spiritual traditions. In 1990, Congress codified that difference when it passed the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) stipulating that Indian tribes and Native Hawaiians are unique among United States cultural groups. At the same time, NAGPRA began breaking down the Western vs. indigenous paradigm. The legislative process of NAGPRA strongly encouraged cooperation among indigenous peoples and the non-indigenous peoples who had collected their bones and belongings under earlier policies. NAGPRA required museums and other agencies accepting federal monies to inventory any collections of Native American items with the intent of giving control to tribes over the disposition of culturally affiliated human remains and certain classes of objects. In the rearranging power relations NAGPRA instigated, people maneuvered for power over the "truth," over whose memory, meaning, and spiritual worldview held authenticity. This dissertation considers cases that pushed or broke the limits of cooperation fostered by NAGPRA. Ignoring the bones and related funerary objects, Tangled Truths analyzes repatriation disputes over cultural artifacts to illuminate changing power relations among cultural groups in the United States. The repatriation negotiations in which people would not compromise were cases in which there existed strong differences in spiritual worldviews, cultural memories, or material interests. Congress could encourage cooperation, but it could not legislate acceptance of others' spiritual worldviews, nor could it persuade people to relinquish engrained cultural memories. And without solid enforcement, the NAGPRA process could be outmaneuvered by those intent on pursuing their own material interests.
ContributorsBiggs, Patricia Allyn (Author) / Fixico, Donald L (Thesis advisor) / Kintigh, Keith W. (Committee member) / Thoompson, Victoria E (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2011
Description
The sacred San Francisco Peaks in northern Arizona have been at the center of a series of land development controversies since the 1800s. Most recently, a controversy arose over a proposal by the ski area on the Peaks to use 100% reclaimed water to make artificial snow. The current state of the San Francisco Peaks controversy would benefit from a decision-making process that holds sustainability policy at its core. The first step towards a new sustainability-focused deliberative process regarding a complex issue like the San Francisco Peaks controversy requires understanding the issue's origins and the perspectives of the people involved in the issue. My thesis provides an historical analysis of the controversy and examines some of the laws and participatory mechanisms that have shaped the decision-making procedures and power structures from the 19th century to the early 21st century.
ContributorsMahoney, Maren (Author) / Hirt, Paul W. (Thesis advisor) / Tsosie, Rebecca (Committee member) / White, Dave (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2011
Description
This dissertation project is a legal and policy analysis of California's involuntary psychiatric commitment laws and policy as applied to American Indians (AI). Mental health-based civil commitment and conservatorships constitute some of the most severe intrusions into personal liberties and freedom outside of the criminal justice system. In the context of AI peoples and tribal Nations, however, these intrusions implicate not only individual freedoms and well-being but also larger notions of tribal sovereignty, self-determination, culture, and the dialectic relationship between individual identity and community knowledge related to definitions of health, illness and the social meaning of difference. Yet, in the context of involuntary psychiatric commitments, the law reflects a failure to understand this relationship, alternating between strategic use of the sovereignty doctrine to deny access to services or, alternatively, wholly absenting issues of sovereignty and Indigenous worldviews from legal discourse. This project explores the nuanced ways in which these issues are weaved into the fabric of mental health law and policy and how they function to codify, enact and maintain colonization for AI peoples and Nations.
ContributorsGough, Heather Robyn (Author) / Brayboy, Bryan Mck. J. (Thesis advisor) / Romero, Mary (Committee member) / Molidor, Christian (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2013
Description
Immigration courts fail to live up to courtroom ideals. Around 2009, proposals were offered to address the problems of these troubled courts. My study illustrates the inevitable linkage between court reform proposals and conceptions of fairness and efficiency, and ultimately justice. I ask: (1) From the perspective of attorneys defending immigrants' rights, what are the obstacles to justice? How should they be addressed? And (2) How do proposals speak to these attorneys' concerns and proposed resolutions? The proposals reviewed generally favor restructuring the court. On the other hand, immigration (cause) lawyers remain unconvinced that current proposals to reform the courts' structure would be successful at addressing the pivotal issues of these courts: confounding laws and problematic personnel. They are particularly concerned about the legal needs and rights of immigrants and how reforms may affect their current and potential clients. With this in mind, they prefer incremental changes - such as extending pro bono programs - to the system. These findings suggest the importance of professional location in conceptualizing justice through law. They offer rich ground for theorizing about courts and politics, and justice in immigration adjudication.
ContributorsAbbott, Katherine R (Author) / Provine, Doris M. (Thesis advisor) / Cruz, Evelyn H. (Committee member) / Johnson, John M. (Committee member) / Zatz, Marjorie S. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2013
Description
This project uses a functional approach to understand how members of stigmatized groups perceive emotional expressions on others' faces. The project starts from the premise that different groups are seen to pose different threats to others, and thus different groups face prejudices colored by different, specific negative emotions. For example, prejudice toward Black men is driven largely by fear, whereas prejudice toward obese people is driven largely by disgust. Members of these groups may thus come to be "expert" in perceiving fear or disgust in others' faces, depending on the specific emotional prejudices others feel toward their group. Alternatively, members of these groups may be biased to over- or under-perceive these emotional expressions on others' faces. I used a functional approach to predict that, if a Black man believes that seeing others' fear expressions will be useful to him, he will tend to overperceive fear on others' faces, whereas if an obese man believes that seeing others' disgust expressions will be useful to him, he will tend to overperceive disgust on others' faces. If, however, it is not considered useful to perceive these prejudicial emotions on others' faces, Black men and obese people will tend to underperceive these emotional expressions. This study recruited Black men, overweight men, and a group of comparison men. All participants completed an emotion detection task in which they rated faces on whether they expressed fear, disgust, or no emotion. Participants were randomly assigned to complete this emotion detection task either before or after a questionnaire designed to make salient, as well as to measure, participants' beliefs about others' prejudices and stereotypes of their group. Finally, participants completed a set of measures tapping predicted moderator variables. Results suggested that a) Black men tend to be less sensitive perceivers of both fear and disgust on others' faces than are other groups, unless prejudice is salient, and b) variables that would guide the functionality of perceiving others' prejudicial emotional expressions (e.g., belief that prejudice toward one's group is justified, belief that group status differences are legitimate, belief that one can manage stigmatizing interactions, stigma consciousness, and emotion-specific metastereotypes of one's group) do predict differences among Black men in perceiving these emotions on others' faces. Most results for overweight participants were null findings. The results' implications for the psychology of detecting prejudice, and emotional expressions more broadly, are discussed.
ContributorsNeel, Rebecca (Author) / Neuberg, Steven L. (Thesis advisor) / Shiota, Michelle N. (Committee member) / Becker, D. Vaughn (Committee member) / Kenrick, Douglas T. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2013