المؤلفون: Schweers, Dillon

المصدر: William & Mary Law Review

مصطلحات موضوعية: United States Constitution 14th Amendment, Prisoners' rights, Disclosure laws, Right of privacy, Constitutional Law, Privacy Law

الوصف: This Note is not the first to advocate for prisoners’ constitutional privacy rights concerning their HIV/AIDS status, but it is the first to focus on isolated incidents of disclosure rather than general policies that tend to lead to disclosure like mandatory testing or segregation based on HIV/AIDS status. This Note argues that the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause should protect prisoners from isolated disclosures, meaning prisoners should have a § 1983 cause of action against guards or other prison officials who disclose their HIV/AIDS status in a gratuitous manner. [.] The proceeding section of this Note, Part I, details the existing legal framework for constitutional privacy rights, from the seminal case Whalen v. Roe to the current circuit split. Part II explores the Payne decision in depth to explain why other circuits should not follow the Fourth Circuit’s holding concerning the privacy rights of incarcerated people. Part III explains why the Fourteenth Amendment is the proper source of privacy protection compared to the Eighth Amendment and state law remedies. Finally, Part IV addresses important questions pertaining to § 1983 litigation for gratuitous disclosure. This abstract has been taken from the author's introduction.

وصف الملف: application/pdf

العلاقة: https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmlr/vol65/iss2/6Test; https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/context/wmlr/article/4009/viewcontent/wmlr65_no2_p459_schweers.pdfTest

الإتاحة: https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmlr/vol65/iss2/6Test
https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/context/wmlr/article/4009/viewcontent/wmlr65_no2_p459_schweers.pdfTest

المؤلفون: Vandenbergh, Michael P.

المصدر: William & Mary Law Review

مصطلحات موضوعية: Climate Change, Climate Change Mitigation, Securities Disclosure Laws, Financial Disclosure, Financial Risk, Business Enterprises, Environmental Law, Securities Law

الوصف: This Article identifies a gap in the securities disclosure regime for climate change and demonstrates how filling the gap can improve financial disclosures and accelerate climate change mitigation. Private climate initiatives have proliferated in the last decade. Often led by advocacy groups, these private initiatives have used naming and shaming campaigns and other means to induce investors, lenders, insurers, retail customers, supply chain customers, and employees to pressure firms to engage in climate change mitigation. Based on an empirical assessment of the annual reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) by Fortune 100 firms and the largest firms in several fossil fuel-heavy sectors, this Article concludes that roughly a third of these firms disclose the risks and opportunities posed by private environmental governance (PEG) initiatives. The assessment also finds, however, that disclosures vary substantially among similar firms and among similar sectors. The Article argues that this heterogeneity in disclosure is not surprising given that the SEC’s 2010 climate guidance and other disclosure regimes do not call sufficient attention to PEG climate initiatives, and many lawyers think of environmental risks as synonymous with governmental regulatory risks. The legal literature on climate transition risk focuses principally on whether regulatory and market-based risks should be disclosed, but it overlooks the importance of the material risks posed by PEG climate initiatives. PEG climate initiatives pose a discrete form of climate transition risk for many firms, and revisions to the SEC guidance and other disclosure regimes to account for PEG climate initiatives can be adopted more quickly, produce more complete financial disclosures, and yield greater and more durable emissions reductions than many other approaches.

وصف الملف: application/pdf

العلاقة: https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmlr/vol63/iss5/6Test; https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/context/wmlr/article/3946/viewcontent/wmlr63_no5_p1695_vandenbergh.pdfTest

الإتاحة: https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmlr/vol63/iss5/6Test
https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/context/wmlr/article/3946/viewcontent/wmlr63_no5_p1695_vandenbergh.pdfTest

المؤلفون: TURNER, JENIA I.

المصدر: William & Mary Law Review; Mar2016, Vol. 57 Issue 4, p1549-1596, 48p

مصطلحات موضوعية: PLEA bargaining, CRIMINAL justice system, DISCLOSURE laws, CRIMINAL procedure, ADVERSARY system (Law), DEFENSE attorneys, LAW

مصطلحات جغرافية: GERMANY, UNITED States

مستخلص: This Article analyzes recent trends in plea bargaining and disclosure of evidence in Germany and the United States. Over the last two decades, a number of U.S. jurisdictions have adopted rules requiring broader and earlier discovery in criminal cases. This development reflects a growing consensus that, in a system that resolves most of its cases through guilty pleas, early and extensive disclosure is necessary to ensure fair and informed outcomes. The introduction of broader discovery in criminal cases in the United States aligns American rules more closely with longstanding German rules on access to the investigative file. At the same time, through its increasing reliance on negotiations to resolve criminal cases, the German criminal justice system has itself moved closer to the U.S. model of plea-based criminal justice. As the approaches of the two countries to disclosure and plea bargaining converge, it is worth reflecting on the German experience and examining which features of the German model have proven effective and which continue to pose challenges. The analysis of the German system offers some general ideas on regulating discovery and plea bargaining that could be of interest to U.S. scholars and policymakers, even if a number of the specific rules of German criminal procedure do not fit within the American adversarial tradition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

: Copyright of William & Mary Law Review is the property of William & Mary Law Review and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

المؤلفون: ROBERTS, JESSICA L.

المصدر: William & Mary Law Review; May2015, Vol. 56 Issue 6, p2097-2174, 78p

مصطلحات موضوعية: RIGHT of privacy, DISCRIMINATION prevention, GENETIC privacy, SEX discrimination, DISCLOSURE laws, RACE discrimination, ACCESS to information laws, AGE discrimination

مصطلحات جغرافية: UNITED States

مستخلص: A person cannot consider information that she does not have. Unlawful discrimination, therefore, frequently requires discriminators to have knowledge about protected status. This Article exploits that simple reality, arguing that protecting privacy can prevent discrimination by restricting access to the very information discriminators use to discriminate. Although information related to many antidiscrimination categories, like race and sex, may be immediately apparent upon meeting a person, privacy law can still do significant work to prevent discrimination on the basis of less visible traits such as genetic information, age, national origin, ethnicity, and religion, as well as in cases of racial or gender ambiguity. To that end, this Article explores the advantages and disadvantages of enacting privacy protections to thwart discrimination. It concludes that the weaknesses endemic to privacy law might be addressed by adopting an explicit antidiscrimination purpose. Hence, just as privacy law may further antidiscrimination, so may antidiscrimination enhance privacy law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

: Copyright of William & Mary Law Review is the property of William & Mary Law Review and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

المؤلفون: RICHARDS, NEIL M.

المصدر: William & Mary Law Review; Mar2015, Vol. 56 Issue 4, p1501-1533, 33p

مصطلحات موضوعية: ACQUISITION of data, CONSTITUTIONAL law, RIGHT of privacy, PERSONALLY identifiable information -- Law & legislation, SORRELL v. IMS Health Inc., DISCLOSURE laws, HEALTH Insurance Portability & Accountability Act, LAW, DATA privacy

مصطلحات جغرافية: UNITED States

الشركة/الكيان: UNITED States. Constitution. 1st Amendment

مستخلص: Laws regulating the collection, use, and disclosure of personal data are (mostly) constitutional, and critics who suggest otherwise are wrong. Since the New Deal, American law has rested on the wise judgment that, by and large, commercial regulation should be made on the basis of economic and social policy, rather than blunt constitutional rules. This has become one of the basic principles of American constitutional law. Although some observers have suggested that the United States Supreme Court's recent decision in Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc. changes this state of affairs, such readings are incorrect. Sorrell involved a challenge to a poorly drafted Vermont law that discriminated on the basis of both content and viewpoint. Such a law would have been unconstitutional if it had regulated even unprotected speech. As the Sorrell Court made clear, the real problem with the Vermont law at issue was that it did not regulate enough, unlike the "more coherent policy" of the undoubtedly constitutional federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996. Data privacy law should thus rarely be thought of as implicating serious constitutional difficulties, and this is a good thing. As we move into the digital age, in which more and more of our society is affected or constituted by data flows, we face a similar threat. If "data" were somehow "speech," virtually every economic law would become clouded by constitutional doubt. Economic or commercial policy affecting data flows--which is to say all economic or social policy--would become almost impossible. This might be a valid policy choice, but it is not one that the First Amendment commands. Any radical suggestions to the contrary are unsupported by our constitutional law. In a democratic society, the basic contours of information policy must ultimately be up to the people and their policy-making representatives, and not to unelected judges. We should decide policy on that basis, rather than on odd readings of the First Amendment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

: Copyright of William & Mary Law Review is the property of William & Mary Law Review and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

المؤلفون: SCHAUER, FREDERICK

المصدر: William & Mary Law Review; Mar2015, Vol. 56 Issue 4, p1613-1636, 24p

مصطلحات موضوعية: LAW & politics, FREEDOM of speech, CLAUSES (Law), ROTH v. United States (Supreme Court case), OBSCENITY (Law), FINANCIAL disclosure laws, ACTIONS & defenses (Law)

مصطلحات جغرافية: UNITED States

الشركة/الكيان: UNITED States. Constitution. 1st Amendment, UNITED States. Securities & Exchange Commission

مستخلص: The article discusses the politics and incentives of coverage involving the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (USC), and it mentions freedom of speech legal cases in relation to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and issues such as financial disclosure mandates. The scope of the USC's Free Speech Clause is addressed, as well as doctrinal distortion risks. Several U.S. Supreme Court cases are examined, including Roth v. United States which deals with obscenity.

المؤلفون: PAPANDREA, MARY-ROSE

المصدر: William & Mary Law Review; Mar2015, Vol. 56 Issue 4, p1381-1441, 61p

مصطلحات موضوعية: NATIONAL security laws, CONSENT (Law), DISCLOSURE laws, UNITED States. Espionage Act of 1917, CRIMINAL law, FREEDOM of speech, CRIMINAL intent

مصطلحات جغرافية: UNITED States

الشركة/الكيان: UNITED States. Constitution. 1st Amendment

مستخلص: The article discusses the legal aspects of consent in relation to national security information disclosures, freedom of speech protections, and the U.S. Espionage Act. American criminal law and several of the nation's statutes are addressed, along with the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Criminal intent and the legal rights of whistleblowers such as Edward Snowden and Chelsea (formerly Bradley) Manning are mentioned.

المؤلفون: GUBLER, ZACHARY J.

المصدر: William & Mary Law Review; Nov2014, Vol. 56 Issue 2, p409-465, 57p

مصطلحات موضوعية: SECURITIES industry laws, GOVERNMENT regulation & economics, STATUTORY interpretation, DISCLOSURE laws

الشركة/الكيان: UNITED States. Securities & Exchange Commission

مستخلص: The institutional design literature is interested in the optimality of particular legal institutions, for example, judicial review of agency actions, corporate federalism, and environmental policy. This Article brings such an analysis to bear on federal securities regulation and argues that we could improve upon the current institutional structure. In particular, the Article proposes that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) be given even more decision-making authority than it currently has under the statutory scheme, effectively authorizing the agency to create disclosure rules for any firm that operates in interstate commerce. At the same time, the Article proposes that we place greater controls on the risk of regulatory error at the SEC by creating a statutory scheme that would place limits on the level of regulatory costs that the agency is permitted to impose on the firms that it regulates. By granting the expert agency more decision-making authority, while at the same time controlling the risk of error inherent in the SEC's complicated regulatory task, the Article argues that we could create an institutional structure that generates disclosure rules that are both smarter and less error-prone. The Article also sketches a possible policy approach along these lines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

: Copyright of William & Mary Law Review is the property of William & Mary Law Review and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

المؤلفون: Zimmerman, Samuel L.

المصدر: William & Mary Law Review; Jan2012, Vol. 53 Issue 3, p1087-1114, 28p

مصطلحات موضوعية: CONFIDENTIAL communications in banking, LEGISLATION, FREEDOM of Information Act (U.S.), DISCLOSURE laws, GOVERNMENT lending, CORPORATE finance, LAW

مصطلحات جغرافية: UNITED States

الشركة/الكيان: BOARD of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.), CITIGROUP Inc.

مستخلص: The article discusses confidentiality in the legal system in relation to exemption number four to the U.S. Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) which deals with a prohibition on the disclosure of commercial or financial information which is considered to be privileged or confidential in nature. Several cases are presented involving the nation's Federal Reserve System (Fed) and their decision to block several FOIA requests regarding the Fed's lending practices towards banks such as Citigroup Inc.