Skip to main content

Media

June 28, 2017
Upon return from the Law and Society Review Conference in Mexico City, Mark Massoud pens this op-ed for the San Francisco Chronicle recounting the vibrant culture he observed.  
June 5, 2017
Jeannine Bell discusses hate crimes on the NPR program On Point as well as the the The Kojo Nnamdi Show


April 10, 2017
Anna-Maria Marshall offers insight into why women frequently struggle to assert their rights in cases of workplace sexual harassment in this New York Times article.  A small percentage of women who have experienced harassment in the workplace file a formal complains, and this is sometimes taken as evidence that there is not a problem.  However, women often do not report harassment for fear of retaliation or to avoid a company's grievance procedures that do more to protect the company than to protect women in the workplace. 

March 20, 2017

Police accountability for tragic shootings is hard to accomplish.  Thanks to Jeannine Bell, who argues in the March 20 USA Today that implicit bias influences jurors charged with deciding upon the guilt or innocence of police officers in the United States charged with shooting African American men.  Without considering implicit bias, jurors can ask themselves whether a police officer could have been afraid of an African American man, even when unarmed.  The answer is too often yes, and under the instructions judges use, that can be enough to acquit.  We can disrupt implicit bias: we have to remind ourselves of it, and ask different questions, in this case whether a police officer could have had a good reason to be afraid, or whether a white person would have occasioned so much fear.  She also argues that since trust in the police varies by race, juries in these cases must be racially diverse, and they often are not.  



Popular posts from this blog

What Courts do with Executive Privilege Claims

By Gbemende Johnson, Hamilton College

“Because Congress requires this material in order to perform our constitutionally-mandated responsibilities, I will issue a subpoena for the full report and the underlying materials.” This was the response of House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) after receiving the redacted 448-page Report on the Investigation Into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election.The battle over the Mueller Report is just one example of conflicts between Congress and the executive branch over executive privilege, where agency officials claim they can withhold documents. Many disputes land in federal court. The Obama Administration Department of Justice spent years in court defending its claim of executive privilege over documents related to the ATF’s “Fast and Furious” gunwalking operation. Federal courts have proven less likely to let cabinet level agencies like the Department of Justice withhold documents than they are with independent agencies li…

Switching Up the Metaphor: from Baseball to Knitting

Susan M. Sterett, University of Maryland, Baltimore County



Metaphors guide what we see. In studying law and courts, metaphors for the law have come from baseball: Justice Roberts famously said in his confirmation hearing that judges call balls and strikes. Justice Kavanaugh followed his lead. Although umpires argued the analogy misunderstands the creativity the job requires, it remains a common metaphor for judging. The valuable website Oyez asks on each Supreme Court justice’s biography which baseball player is most like the justice’s contribution to the law. It’s an incomprehensible question for those who don’t follow men’s professional baseball closely. It also points to justices, and individual achievement, as the key players in law. Others are spectators.

What would show up if instead an activity often dismissed as trivial, mechanistic and feminine—knitting (and I want to include crochet; for brevity I’ll sum up both with knitting)—were the metaphor for the law instead? 
Bas…

How do text messages complicate contemporary sexual assault adjudication?

By Heather Hlavka and Sameena Mulla 
Department of Social and Cultural Sciences, Marquette University


“There’s no video, no injury. It’s purely one hundred percent ‘he said, she said.’ They had a terrible relationship. They were nasty to each other and they don’t get along well, probably never will. But there is no evidence to support the state’s case, other than their words.” Our article, “’That’s How She Talks’: Animating Text Message Evidence in the Sexual Assault Trial,” begins with these familiar words offered by a defense attorney during a sexual assault trial in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The oft-invoked trope of “he said, she said” in cases of sexual violence suggests that without third-party eye witness testimony or material evidence, sexual assault allegations rest on conflicting reports provided by victims, the accused, and other witnesses. But how do trial attorneys reinvent this trope when the words of the witnesses are preserved as text messages?

Text messages are recorded co…