Recent Supreme Court Rulings Research Articles

The Varied Challenges of Undoing Past Sentencing Injustices

The federal punishment scheme for crack and powder cocaine has engendered controversy and criticism for more than two decades. As discussed in an Issue of the Federal Sentencing Reporter last year, recent Supreme Court rulings and the ever-evolving politics of federal sentencing helped engender in 2007 the first meaningful reform of the federal guidelines for cocaine offenses since Congress first established the 100-to-1 ratio in the drug weights triggering certain sentences for crack and powder offenses.1 This Issue of FSR examines some fallout following the U.S. Sentencing Commission’s reduction in guideline sentence ranges for crack offenses, with particular emphasis on the Commission’s important and consequential decision to give its new crack guideline amendments retroactive effect.

The Generic Advertising Controversy: How Did We Get Here and Where Are We Going?

Since the 1980s, generic advertising programs for dozens of farm commodities have been entangled in a great deal of litigation. The author looks at the history of generic advertising policies, discusses why the litigation arose when it did, and argues that the current round of litigation is simply an inevitable outgrowth of fairly recent Supreme Court rulings on commercial speech. The author further examines some of the economic studies that have been performed. The author predicts an increase in generic advertising litigation based upon the degree of collectivization in an industry and urges economists to bring the controversy into their modeling.

Collaborative research and action to control the geographic placement of outdoor advertising of alcohol and tobacco products in Chicago.

Community activists in Chicago believed their neighborhoods were being targeted by alcohol and tobacco outdoor advertisers, despite the Outdoor Advertising Association of America's voluntary code of principles, which claims to restrict the placement of ads for age-restricted products and prevent billboard saturation of urban neighborhoods. A research and action plan resulted from a 10-year collaborative partnership among Loyola University Chicago, the American Lung Association of Metropolitan Chicago (ALAMC), and community activists from a predominately African American church, St. Sabina Parish. In 1997 Loyola University and ALAMC researchers conducted a cross-sectional prevalence survey of alcohol and tobacco outdoor advertising. Computer mapping was used to locate all 4,247 licensed billboards in Chicago that were within 500- and 1,000-foot radiuses of schools, parks, and playlots. A 50% sample of billboards was visually surveyed and coded for advertising content. The percentage of alcohol and tobacco billboards within the 500- and 1,000-foot zones ranged from 0% to 54%. African American and Hispanic neighborhoods were disproportionately targeted for outdoor advertising of alcohol and tobacco. Data were used to convince the Chicago City Council to pass one of the nation's toughest anti-alcohol and tobacco billboard ordinances, based on zoning rather than advertising content. The ordinance was challenged in court by advertisers. Recent Supreme Court rulings made enactment of local billboard ordinances problematic. Nevertheless, the research, which resulted in specific legislative action, demonstrated the importance of linkages among academic, practice, and grassroots community groups in working together to diminish one of the social causes of health disparities.

Two Faces of State University Employment: Ethics in Access to Federal Due Process

State universities have grown to become monumental enterprises generating revenues of more than $124 billion a year in the sale and delivery of education and other services. They compete in a marketplace composed of private secular, nonsecular and for-profit higher education institutions. In addition, state universities in their own right engage in a number of traditionally for-profit "business" enterprises competing with the private sector. However, as the enterprise aspect of state universities grows; so too does the impact of a unique competitive advantage enjoyed solely by state universities--that is, the ability of state universities to immune themselves from lawsuit in federal court under the guise of "sovereign immunity" for disputes arising under federal employment laws. Indeed, as a consequence of recent Supreme Court rulings, state agencies, including universities, are the only entities in the United States that are effectively exempt from the enforcement of federal employment laws in federal or state courts. This article reviews the condition of the "two faces" of the state university regarding federal employment law and the apparent new barriers to federal court access of employees to judicial review of employment disputes.

Sexual Harassment in the Public Accounting Profession

Federal discrimination laws have defined two distinct types of activity that constitute sexual harassment – "hostile environment" and "quid pro quo." The Civil Rights Act of 1991 and more recent Supreme Court rulings make it easier for workers to win lawsuits claiming they were sexually harassed in the work environment.

Public Opinion and School Desegregation

Media reports and social commentators often assume that whites, African Americans, and Latinos are now uniformly disenchanted with racial integration. Mean -while, recent Supreme Court rulings that allow for the termination of school desegregation plans may lead communities to consider entering a court battle to end such plans. It is therefore increasingly important that community leaders have the facts about what the public and parents and students affected by desegregation actually believe. Public opinion surveys reveal a reality of public opinion on desegregation far more nuanced and complicated and far more positive than media reports and common assumptions would have us believe.

The Constitution and the Patronage-Merit Debate: Implications for Personnel Managers

This article examines the effect of recent Supreme Court rulings concerning the First Amendment freedom of association rights of public employees. The question is framed under the rubric of partisan patronage cases related to personnel selection, dismissal and other actions. The Rutan v. Republican Party of Illinois case is highlighted in analyzing the key findings of the majority and minority opinions. Public managers are alerted to the practical implications of these judicial decisions so that legal challenges can be met. It is suggested that precision and clarity of job analysis, assessment methods, validity of interviewing and training in relevant understanding of constitutional decisions be implemented.

Public Funds for Private Schools: Political and First Amendment Considerations

This article analyzes the private school choice debate through a review of the political and judicial history of efforts to provide private schools and their patrons with various forms of public aid. It also examines recent Supreme Court rulings that would apply to a constitutional challenge of a federal tuition voucher or tax credit program and discusses the growing political support for such plans. Through this long-term analysis, the authors are able to make cautious predictions about the likelihood that a federal tuition voucher or tax credit plan will be passed by Congress or declared unconstitutional in the near future.

Recent Supreme Court Rulings on Child Testimony in Sexual Abuse Cases

Three recent United States Surpreme Court decisions concerning court testimony in cases involving sexually abused children are discussed. Two of the decisions establish criteria for allowing courtroom procedures (such as televised testimony) that enable a child witness to testify without a direct face-to-face encounter with the alleged abuser. The third decision establishes some criteria for the admissibility of incriminating hearsay statements made by very young children during the course of professional evaluation for reported sexual abuse. Implications of these criterai for decisions about courtroom procedures for obtaining children's testimony and for interviewing children in cases of alleged sexual abuse are also discussed.

The Laws that Affect Abortion in the United States and Their Impact on Women??s Health

Abortion has been a hotly contested political issue since the mid 1960s, when states began liberalizing their abortion laws. Recent Supreme Court rulings, such as Rust vs. Sullivan, the retirement of two liberal Supreme Court justices and the battle over Louisiana's abortion legislation have created new fervor on both fronts of the battle. All health care providers who care for women need to be cognizant of the current abortion laws and the factors that influence the abortion decision. These factors include the different levels of health risk and financial implications posed by continued pregnancy or abortion. Historically, numerous court cases have influenced women's health care, and reviews of several significant cases are provided. The Webster vs. Reproductive Health Services decision was the first case that directly challenged the Roe vs. Wade decision. The Webster decision enables states to have greater authority in writing their own abortion laws. Individual state laws can vary greatly, so it is vitally important for providers to know and understand the laws of their state.

Unisex pensions and retirement

How will workers alter their retirement decisions in response to recent Supreme Court rulings that outlaw gender-based pension contributions and benefits? Upper bounds for these retirement responses are established in this paper. These bounds are shown to depend on the age and sexual composition of the pension cohort. With respect to cohort age, we show that the retirement responses of older workers are larger than those of younger workers. With respect to the cohort's composition, we show that the retirement responses of men become more pronounced and those of women less pronounced as the proportion of women in the cohort increases.

Abortion debate continues

Although recent Supreme Court rulings clarified the constitutional issues concerning induced abortion in the U.S., the abortion debate is not over. The debate has simply moved out of the courtroom and into the country's state and federal legislative bodies. The 1973 Supreme Court rulings recognized that women have the constitutional right to decide whether to abort or continue a pregnancy while the 1980 Supreme Court ruling declared that state and federal governments are not obligated by the constitution to provide funds to insure that women can exercise their abortion rights. The court ruled that neither the due process nor the equal protection clauses applied to abortion funding. The court did, nowever, leave the way open for the battle to continue in legislative bodies. The legislative bodies were clearly assigned the task of deciding for themselves whether or not to fund abortions. Since the public has a variety of views on the subject, debate on the issue in legislatures throughout the country will be intense.

Religion and Public Schools: Emerging Legal Standards and Unresolved Issues

In the past several years, a number of public school issues have generated volatile church/state disputes. Silent and spoken prayer, student-initiated devotional meetings, and religious challenges to the secular curriculum are among the topics eliciting active involvement of all three branches of government. Martha McCarthy provides a historical analysis of the efforts to clarify church/state/school relations and an in-depth look at recent Supreme Court rulings on this subject. McCarthy's work illuminates the sensitive issues involved and the current Supreme Court's stand in applying First Amendment guarantees in public schools.

Recent articles on protection of computer related innovations

There have been a number of recent articles in the trade press regarding the protection of computer innovations which are not strictly hardware (such as firmware and software). An article by David Pressman in the August 5 issue of EDN (their A Question of Law column summarizes the five methods of safeguarding innovations, namely:Copyright -- protects any copy of a written work from use by others without permission. Recent changes to Federal law explicitly extend copyright protection to software.Trade Secrecy - By not disclosing information about a product, and requiring all users to sign a nondisclosure agreement, anyone stealing a copy of the product may be prosecuted for stealing a "trade secret". This method and copyright protection are mutually exclusive.Unfair Competition - If someone is trying to cash in on some aspect or your product without extending proper credit, you may be able to get relief under this doctrine.Patent - Recent Supreme Court rulings may be leading to liberalized interpretation of patent laws extending patent protection to firmware and software innovations. The key is to claim the innovation with hardware, even if that specific hardware is not required for the innovation to work. Further, the firmware or software must not be the primary item claimed. Trademarks - used to attract attention to your product, and make its piracy more obvious. [Presl].

Beyond EOE and Affirmative Action

Recent Supreme Court rulings and increased pressure by civil rights groups on the federal government have made equal employment and affirmative action pressing issues for business. Providing jobs and opportunities for minority group members may not be sufficient to bring about stable, integrated work settings. The quality of individual employee-manager relationships and the extent to which top management's practices, policies, and programs support the full integration of the work place are crucial determinants.

Mergers and the Market for Corporate Control

IN RECENT years many of the traditional economic justifications of our antitrust laws have been seriously questioned. A new sophistication has developed, and economic activities frequently held illegal by the courts are now thought by many to be consistent with our antitrust goals. The rules against tie-ins, vertical mergers, predatory competition, among others, have to a greater or lesser degree had their theoretical foundations considerably weakened. Recently even cartels, the most venerable victim of American antitrust laws, have found their near champion.2 One practice, however, remains generally condemned in both the economic literature and the most recent Supreme Court rulings. Mergers among competitors would seem to have no important saving grace. The position has gained considerable legal currency that any merger between competing firms is at least suspect and perhaps per se illegal. The latter result seems especially likely when one of the combining firms already occupies a substantial position in the relevant market. Antitrust problems in the merger field seem more and more to be confined to discussions of relevant product and geographic markets and perhaps to the issue of quantitative substantiality.3 Presumably there is still a so-called failing-company defense to an illegal merger charge. The announced justification for this doctrine was that, if indeed the merged company was failing, then it was not actually a competitor in the industry.4 But there are strong suggestions that even that defense may be unavailable when a large corporation is making the acquisition, or when there is any chance of absorption by a non-competing firm, or when the acquired company has not failed enough.5