Matching Items (16)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Law
- Creators: School of Politics and Global Studies
- Creators: School of Historical, Philosophical and Religious Studies
- Creators: Economics Program in CLAS
- Member of: Barrett, The Honors College Thesis/Creative Project Collection
Description
The purpose of this thesis is to examine the current atmosphere of genetic patent law and use economic theory to construct models which describe the consequences of the legal code. I intend to analyze the four specific cases of Diamond v. Chakrabarty, Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, the Alzheimer's Institute of America v. Jackson Laboratory, and the harm caused by PGx Health's monopoly over the LQTS gene.
ContributorsVolz, Caleb Richard (Author) / DeSerpa, Allan (Thesis director) / Silverman, Daniel (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences (Contributor) / Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry (Contributor) / Economics Program in CLAS (Contributor)
Created2014-05
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
The demographics of Arizona are changing as Hispanics children are passing through their youth and into adulthood. Yet, even with this changing population Arizona has demonstrated an unwillingness to provide adequate educational opportunities for Hispanic school children. The state has perpetuated fear throughout the Hispanic community in an attempt to marginalize and stigmatize the race. Such attempts have extended to youth in schools creating an environment of fear. This fear limits the academic potential of young Hispanics who are wary of government officials and institutions. Arizona has also failed to provide appropriate funding for programs used predominantly by Hispanic students leaving them unprepared for a workplace that desperately needs them. Finally, Arizona has refused to allow course content with a record of increasing academic achievement and graduation rates amongst Hispanics to be taught in schools. Taken as a whole Arizona's efforts are creating a cadre of unskilled and unprepared laborers who will be desperately needed to take jobs in the Arizona economy in the coming years. This blatant disregard for the educational needs of a large segment of the population will have a devastating impact on Arizona's future.
ContributorsSmith, Jason Ryan (Author) / Davis, T. J. (Thesis director) / Ovando, Carlos (Committee member) / Tsosie, Rebecca (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Historical, Philosophical and Religious Studies (Contributor)
Created2013-12
Description
Contributing to the small but growing body of research on linguistic discrimination in legal settings, this thesis conducts a sociolinguistic investigation of the impact of an individual's accent on juror perceptions of defendant favorability and innocence. The study used an online questionnaire in which sixty mock jurors were each asked to evaluate the audio testimony of a defendant representing one of three English ethnolects: African American, British South African, or Caucasian American. In addition to rating the defendant's persuasiveness, honesty, credibility, trustworthiness, and guilt, participants were also asked to determine an appropriate punishment (if any) for the defendant. Results indicate a preference of participants to issue an unsure or caveat opinion for the African American speaker but not to the British South African or Caucasian American speaker. The implications of these findings, as well as the correlations between each variable are discussed. The paper concludes with a recommendation for legal training and a revision of courtroom practices.
ContributorsMaerowitz, Max Robert (Author) / Prior, Matthew (Thesis director) / Adams, Karen (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Historical, Philosophical and Religious Studies (Contributor) / Department of English (Contributor)
Created2014-05
Description
This study analyzed currently existing statute at the state, federal, and international level to ultimately build a criteria of recommendations for policymakers to consider when building regulations for facial recognition technology usage by law enforcement agencies within the United States.
ContributorsHong, Susan Suggi (Author) / Royal, K (Thesis director) / Marchant, Gary (Committee member) / Historical, Philosophical & Religious Studies (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor, Contributor) / Historical, Philosophical & Religious Studies, Sch (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2021-05
Description
The United States Supreme Court decided Ramos v. Louisiana in 2020, requiring all states to convict criminal defendants by a unanimous jury. However, this case only applied to petitioners on direct, and not collateral, appeal. In this thesis, I argue that the Ramos precedent should apply to people on collateral appeal as well, exploring the implications of such a decision and the criteria that should be used to make the decision in the case before the court, Edwards v. Vannoy (2021). Ultimately, I find that because the criteria currently used to determine retroactivity of new criminal precedents does not provide a clear answer to the question posed in Edwards, the Court should give more weight to the defendant's freedoms pursuant to the presumption of innocence while considering the potential for any disastrous outcomes.
ContributorsCaldwell, Rachel Lillian (Author) / Hoekstra, Valerie (Thesis director) / Bender, Paul (Committee member) / Historical, Philosophical & Religious Studies (Contributor) / School of Social Transformation (Contributor, Contributor) / Historical, Philosophical & Religious Studies, Sch (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2021-05
Description
Over the past decade, the United States and the European Union have adopted major changes to asylum policy and enforcement, specifically the increase of deterrence policies contrary to international asylum norms. The goal of this has been to reduce the pull factors towards the US and EU. Deterrence policies have largely been characterized by two main strategies: (1) deterrence at the border through stricter regulations and detention policies, and (2) deterrence through the creation of formal buffer zone countries between the asylum seekers’ countries of origin and the ultimate country of destination. These policies have been instituted in response to the spike in Central American asylum seekers at the US/Mexico border and Syrian asylum seekers at the Greece/Turkey border at the entrance of the EU. This paper compares these two separate geographic areas––the US and EU––due to their roles in the development of international law, their roles in the development and management of these crises, and the similar increase of asylum seekers in 2014-15. This paper also details the severity of the conditions in the asylee-sending areas––Central America and Syria––which are major “push factors” driving the crises. Finally, this paper explores the novel use of Mexico and Turkey as formal buffer zones by the United Staes and the European Union, respectively. The increase of deterrence policies culminating in the creation of formal buffer zones countries violates key principles of international asylum law, namely non-refoulement. These buffer zones must be redesigned proactively to better suit the realities of asylum in the 21st century.
ContributorsDooling, Maria Hana (Author) / Sivak, Henry (Thesis director) / Calleros, Charles (Committee member) / School of Molecular Sciences (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor, Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2019-05
Description
This paper explores the relationship between social and cultural capital and the experience of Asian Americans in law school and after graduating from law school. Bourdieu’s (1986) conceptualizations of institutional cultural capital, embodied cultural capital, and social capital guide this analysis. Two electronic surveys resulted in participation by fourteen Asian American law students and nine Asian American law school graduates from American Bar Association-accredited law schools in the United States. The research design is qualitative, and a partial grounded theory approach based upon Charmaz’s (2006) work was utilized. Thematic coding, line-by-line coding, and focused coding were also used to analyze survey responses. Results demonstrate that there is a relationship between social and cultural capital and the experience of Asian Americans in law school and post-law school graduation. Institutional cultural capital, in the form of J.D. degrees, seems to influence the development of embodied cultural capital and social capital, particularly when considering membership in groups and forming personal and professional connections. When considering embodied cultural capital, family members appear to influence important personal characteristics that participants carry into law school and the workplace. These results may have implications for the larger trend of Asian Americans leaving large law firms; in addition, perceptions of embodied cultural capital may influence barriers to career advancement. Suggested areas for future research include the role of mentorship in Asian American career development, patterns within specific Asian American ethnic/cultural groups in the legal field, and the intersection of gender and Asian American identities in legal practice.
ContributorsSu, Yuhong (Author) / Nakagawa, Kathryn (Thesis director) / Broberg, Gregory (Committee member) / School of Social Transformation (Contributor, Contributor, Contributor) / Economics Program in CLAS (Contributor) / Dean, W.P. Carey School of Business (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2019-12
Description
The jury is a perfect example of American democracy in action. People convicted of crimes are put before a randomly-selected jury of their peers. This jury consists of people with a variety of backgrounds and experiences without any sort of specialized training. Ideally, this jury is representative of the population and does not have any biases towards the victim or the defendant. They view all evidence, hear all facts, and ultimately decide on a verdict. However, this system does not always create accurate outcomes. Often times and for a number of reasons, jurors are distracted in the courtroom. This can lead to incorrect verdicts, meaning that either guilty people walk free or innocent people are incarcerated. This paper will explore the idea of the distracted juror and ways to minimize these distractions so that the most accurate decision can be made during a trial. It will first examine the statistics behind jury inaccuracies as well as how other countries conduct their jury trials. It will then briefly explore grand juries and their differences between trial juries. This paper will analyze data from a survey conducted at the beginning of the project. It will then provide analyses of some possible reforms. This paper will conclude with how this research could be pursued further, why it should be pursued further, and how jury trials could look in the future.
ContributorsAnderson, Ethan David (Author) / Kirkpatrick, Jennet (Thesis director) / Valerie, Hoekstra (Committee member) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor, Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2018-12