fwd:LSN: Thomas Jefferson School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series, Vol. 16 No. 6, 12/18/2014

[Stefaan Smis]

might be relevant for Derek and others working on indigenous peoples.

Best,

Stefaan



Forwarded message:

>From: L...@publish.ssrn.com
>To: ss...@vub.ac.be
>Cc:
>Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 12:24:27 -0500 (EST)
>Subject: LSN: Thomas Jefferson School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series, Vol. 16 No. 6, 12/18/2014
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>
> SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH NETWORK
>
> LEGAL SCHOLARSHIP NETWORK: LEGAL STUDIES RESEARCH PAPER SERIES
> THOMAS JEFFERSON SCHOOL OF LAW
> Vol. 16, No. 6: December 18, 2014
>
>Editor: BRYAN H. WILDENTHAL
> Professor of Law, Thomas Jefferson School of Law
> BRY...@GMAIL.COM
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>
>BROWSE all abstracts in this subject:
>http://www.ssrn.com/link/thomas-jefferson-legal-studies.html
>
>SEARCH entire eLibrary at: http://ssrn.com/search
>
>If this document is misaligned, please set type face to a
> non-proportional font such as Courier 10.
>_________________________________________________________________
>
>T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S
>
>"Economic Windfalls and Child Support: How Should Gifts,
> Inheritances, and Prizes Be Treated?"
> STEVEN K. BERENSON
> Thomas Jefferson School of Law
>
>"The Impact of States Parties' Reservations to the Convention on
> the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women"
> LINDA M. KELLER
> Thomas Jefferson School of Law
>
>"An Inside Account of a Very Canadian Revolution"
> BRYAN H. WILDENTHAL
> Thomas Jefferson School of Law
>
>"The Truth About the Supreme Court's Recess-Appointments Ruling:
> A Debate"
> BRYAN H. WILDENTHAL
> Thomas Jefferson School of Law
> STEVEN SEMERARO
> Thomas Jefferson School of Law
>_________________________________________________________________
>
>"Economic Windfalls and Child Support: How Should Gifts,
> Inheritances, and Prizes Be Treated?"
> Suffolk University Law Review, Vol. 47, p. 701, 2014
> Thomas Jefferson School of Law Research Paper No. 2538749
>
> Contact: STEVEN K. BERENSON
> Thomas Jefferson School of Law
> Email: sber...@tjsl.edu
>Auth-Page: http://ssrn.com/author=263635
>
>Full Text: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2538749
>
>ABSTRACT: In the spring of 2013, it was reported that Pedro
>Quezada of New Jersey was the sole winner of a Powerball lottery
>prize. Quezada opted to take a $211 million lump-sum payment,
>rather than receiving the full amount of the $338 million prize
>in installments. However, New Jersey authorities made clear that
>the $29,000 Quezada owed in child support arrears would be
>deducted before any payments were made to him. Other than perhaps
>Quezada himself, few people would have any quibble with this
>relatively small deduction from his jackpot winnings.
>
>The issues arising from Quezada?s situation become more
>challenging, however, if we imagine a more modest $50,000 prize.
>Furthermore, what if Quezada was not behind in his child support
>payments, but rather was current with this obligation? Still
>further, consider a situation where Quezada was having difficulty
>making his mortgage payments and in danger of home foreclosure.
>Finally, if the $50,000 prize was adequate to remove the risk of
>foreclosure, the question of what Quezada should do with his
>winnings is even more difficult. In these varied circumstances,
>should Quezada still be compelled to use at least some of the
>$50,000 winnings as increased child support payments? Still more
>variations on such difficult scenarios can be envisioned.
>
>The purpose of this Article is to come up with an ideal manner in
>which gifts, inheritances, and prizes (referred to collectively
>from this point forward as GIPs), should be treated under child
>support law. The Article begins with an analysis of existing law
>regarding the treatment of these categories of resources for
>child support purposes. After demonstrating the confused,
>conflicting, and contradictory state of the existing law in this
>area, it goes on to examine the goals and purposes of child
>support law. It is only in relation to such goals and purposes
>that a recommendation can be made for the ideal treatment of
>GIPs. Thus, the third section examines GIPs in relation to the
>previously discussed goals and purposes of child support law. The
>Article concludes with a recommendation to policymakers regarding
>the ideal treatment of GIPs in child support law.
>______________________________
>
>"The Impact of States Parties' Reservations to the Convention on
> the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women"
> Michigan State Law Review, Vol. 2014, p. 309, 2014
> Thomas Jefferson School of Law Research Paper No. 2505454
>
> Contact: LINDA M. KELLER
> Thomas Jefferson School of Law
> Email: lke...@tjsl.edu
>Auth-Page: http://ssrn.com/author=352672
>
>Full Text: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2505454
>
>ABSTRACT: This article examines the prevalence of reservations to
>the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination
>against Women (CEDAW) and how they may impact the implementation
>of the treaty. Many states have become parties to the treaty
>without truly obligating themselves to achieving the goal of
>equality for women. Rather, reservations purport to allow states
>to become parties in name only, while not requiring crucial
>changes in the country?s laws or society?s practices.
>
>The article briefly explains the concept of reservations under
>treaty law as applied to CEDAW. It then examines how states use
>reservations to CEDAW for various ends. The article uses
>Singapore to illustrate multiple possibilities: first, as a state
>that entered a broad reservation, showing how states may
>drastically limit the requirement to make true progress in
>women?s rights; second, as a state that partially withdrew its
>reservation, demonstrating the potential impact of pressure from
>the Committee on Elimination of Discrimination against Women (the
>Committee) and advocacy groups that rely on CEDAW to push for
>reforms; and finally, as a state that nonetheless maintained a
>not-insignificant reservation, perhaps exemplifying the use of
>CEDAW reservations for political ends. The complex history of
>Singapore?s reservation practice allows for multiple
>interpretations, making it a useful example.
>
>The article is based on the author's presentation at the
>Symposium on Whether the U.S. Should Become a Party to the U.N.
>Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination
>Against Women (November 7-8, 2013), sponsored by the Michigan
>State University College of Law Lori E. Talsky Center for Human
>Rights of Women and Children and the Michigan State Law Review.
>______________________________
>
>"An Inside Account of a Very Canadian Revolution"
> H-Law, H-Net Reviews in the Humanities & Social
> Sciences, 2014
> Thomas Jefferson School of Law Research Paper No. 2538225
>
> Contact: BRYAN H. WILDENTHAL
> Thomas Jefferson School of Law
> Email: bry...@gmail.com
>Auth-Page: http://ssrn.com/author=181791
>
>Full Text: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2538225
>
>ABSTRACT: In this book review, posted in November 2014 on H-Law
>(H-Net Reviews in the Humanities & Social Sciences), Professor
>Wildenthal reviews Barry L. Strayer's 2013 book, Canada's
>Constitutional Revolution (University of Alberta Press). Judge
>Strayer wrote his book mainly as an inside account of the process
>leading up to Canada's patriation of its national constitution
>from the United Kingdom in 1982. Strayer also touches on various
>related aspects of his distinguished career as a law professor,
>provincial and federal government attorney (he became a top
>member of Prime Minister Trudeau's legal team), and Canadian
>federal judge.
>
>This review praises the erudition and lively, entertaining style
>of Strayer's book, which makes an important contribution to
>understanding Canada's constitutional history and specifically,
>the origins and importance of the Canadian Charter of Rights and
>Freedoms adopted in 1982.
>
>Strayer recounts some fascinating history, for example, about the
>battle to include some protections for aboriginal (i.e.,
>indigenous, Native, "First Nations") rights in the
>Canadian Constitution.
>
>Among other points, though somewhat aside from the main theme of
>the book, the review praises the interest and relevance for
>Americans of Strayer's recounting of the episode (early in his
>career) by which his native province, Saskatchewan, adopted
>universal public health insurance during the 1960s, leading to
>the national adoption of Canada's famous "single-payer"
>public health insurance system.
>______________________________
>
>"The Truth About the Supreme Court's Recess-Appointments Ruling:
> A Debate"
> The Originalism Blog (Center for the Study of
> Constitutional Originalism, University of San Diego School
> of Law), 2014
> Thomas Jefferson School of Law Research Paper No. 2538257
>
> Contact: BRYAN H. WILDENTHAL
> Thomas Jefferson School of Law
> Email: bry...@gmail.com
>Auth-Page: http://ssrn.com/author=181791
>
>Co-Author: STEVEN SEMERARO
> Thomas Jefferson School of Law
> Email: ssem...@tjsl.edu
>Auth-Page: http://ssrn.com/author=113257
>
>Full Text: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2538257
>
>ABSTRACT: In this 4-part debate, first posted August 7-8, 2014,
>on the Blog of the Center for the Study of Constitutional
>Originalism at the University of San Diego School of Law,
>Professors Wildenthal and Semeraro discuss the Supreme Court's
>2014 decision in National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) v. Noel
>Canning, concerning the scope of the president's power to make
>appointments without Senate confirmation during recesses of the
>Senate, as provided in the Constitution's Recess-Appointments
>Clause.
>
>They discuss the competing views of constitutional history and
>interpretation set forth by the Court's opinion written by
>Justice Stephen Breyer (for five Justices, placing some limits on
>the president's recess-appointment powers but upholding a
>relatively broad scope for the clause), and the concurrence
>(dissenting in substantial effect) by Justice Antonin Scalia (for
>four Justices, arguing that a very narrow scope for the clause is
>dictated by constitutional text and history).
>
>Professor Wildenthal praises Justice Scalia's opinion and its
>criticisms of the Court's approach.
>
>Professor Semeraro defends Justice Breyer's opinion for the Court
>and questions the premises of the originalist and textualist
>approach taken by Justice Scalia and defended by Professor
>Wildenthal.
>__________________________________________________________________
>
>S O L I C I T A T I O N O F A B S T R A C T S
>
> The Thomas Jefferson School of Law Legal Studies journal
> contains abstracts and papers from this institution focused
> on this area of scholarly research. To access all the papers
> in this series, please use the following URL:
> http://www.ssrn.com/link/thomas-jefferson-legal-studies.html
>
> To submit your research to SSRN, sign in to the SSRN User
> HeadQuarters, http://hq.ssrn.com, click the My Papers link on
> left menu and then the Start New Submission button at top of
> page.
>_________________________________________________________________
>
>D I S T R I B U T I O N S E R V I C E S
>
> If your organization is interested in increasing
> readership for its research by starting a Research Paper
> Series, or sponsoring a Subject Matter eJournal, please
> email: R...@SSRN.com
>_________________________________________________________________
>
>D I S T R I B U T E D B Y
>
>Legal Scholarship Network (LSN), a division of Social Science
>Electronic Publishing, Inc. (SSEP) and Social Science Research
>Network (SSRN)
>
>
>D I R E C T O R S
>
>LAW SCHOOL RESEARCH PAPERS - LEGAL STUDIES
>
>BERNARD S. BLACK
> Northwestern University - School of Law, Northwestern
> University - Kellogg School of Management, European Corporate
> Governance Institute (ECGI)
> Email: bbl...@northwestern.edu
>
>RONALD J. GILSON
> Stanford Law School, Columbia Law School, European Corporate
> Governance Institute (ECGI)
> Email: rgi...@leland.stanford.edu
>
>Please contact us at the above addresses with your comments,
>questions or suggestions for LSN-LEG.
>
>
>S U B S C R I P T I O N M A N A G E M E N T
>
>You can change your journal subscriptions by logging into SSRN
>User HQ: http://hq.ssrn.com. If you have questions or problems
>with this
>process, please email Sup...@SSRN.com or call 877-SSRNHelp
>(877.777.6435 or 585.442.8170). Outside of the United
>States, call 00+1+585+4428170.
>
>SITE SUBSCRIPTION MEMBERSHIP
>
>Many university departments and other institutions have purchased
>site subscriptions covering all of the eJournals in a particular
>network. If you want to subscribe to any of the SSRN eJournals,
>you may be able to do so without charge by first checking to see
>if your institution currently has a site subscription.
>
>To do this please click on any of the following URLs.
>Instructions for joining the site are included on these pages.
>
> Accounting Research Network
> http://www.ssrn.com/update/arn/arn_site-licenses.html
>
> Cognitive Science Network
> http://www.ssrn.com/update/csn/csn_site-licenses.html
>
> Corporate Governance Network
> http://www.ssrn.com/update/cgn/cgn_site-licenses.html
>
> Economics Research Network
> http://www.ssrn.com/update/ern/ern_site-licenses.html
>
> Entrepreneurship Research & Policy Network
> http://www.ssrn.com/update/erpn/erpn_site-licenses.html
>
> Financial Economics Network
> http://www.ssrn.com/update/fen/fen_site-licenses.html
>
> Health Economics Network
> http://www.ssrn.com/update/hen/hen_site-licenses.html
>
> Information Systems & eBusiness Network
> http://www.ssrn.com/update/isn/isn_site-licenses.html
>
> Legal Scholarship Network
> http://www.ssrn.com/update/lsn/lsn_site-licenses.html
>
> Management Research Network
> http://www.ssrn.com/update/mrn/mrn_site-licenses.html
>
> Political Science Network
> http://www.ssrn.com/update/psn/psn_site-licenses.html
>
> Social Insurance Research Network
> http://www.ssrn.com/update/sirn/sirn_site-licenses.html
>
> Classics Research Network
> http://www.ssrn.com/update/crn/crn_site-licenses.html
>
> English & American Literature Research Network
> http://www.ssrn.com/update/lit/lit_site-licenses.html
>
> Philosophy Research Network
> http://www.ssrn.com/update/prn-/prn_site-licenses.html
>
>If your institution or department is not listed as a site, we
>would be happy to work with you to set one up. Please email
>Si...@SSRN.com for more information.
>
>INDIVIDUAL MEMBERSHIP (for those not covered by a site subscription)
>
> Join a site subscription, request a trial subscription, or
> purchase a subscription within the SSRN User HeadQuarters:
> http://www.ssrn.com/subscribe
>
>FINANCIAL HARDSHIP
>
>If you are undergoing financial hardship and believe you cannot
>pay for an eJournal, please send a detailed explanation to
>Subs...@SSRN.com
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>
>To ensure delivery of this eJournal, please add
>L...@publish.ssrn.com (Legal Scholarship Network) to your email
>contact list. If you are missing an issue or are having any
>problems with your subscription, please Email Sup...@ssrn.com or
>call 877-SSRNHELP (877.777.6435 or 585.442.8170).
>
>FORWARDING & REDISTRIBUTION
>
>Subscriptions to the journal are for single users. You may
>forward a particular eJournal issue, or an excerpt from an issue,
>to an individual or individuals who might be interested in it. It
>is a violation of copyright to redistribute this eJournal on a
>recurring basis to another person or persons, without the
>permission of Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. For
>information about individual subscriptions and site licenses,
>please contact us at Si...@SSRN.com
>_________________________________________________________________
>
> Copyright 2014
> SSEP, Inc., all rights reserved.
>
>
>