Past research indicates that created non-tidal wetlands in the mid-Atlantic region are considerably lower in soil organic matter than native forested hydric soils. However, optimal loading rates for created wetland soil reconstruction have not been rigorously established. Our objective was to determine appropriate organic amendment loading rates for a Coastal Plain mitigation wetland based on 1) soil properties reflective of hydric soil development, 2) the formation of redoximorphic features, and 3) the growth and vigor of hydrophytic vegetation. The study contained wet (CCW-Wet) and dry (CCW-Dry) experiments, each receiving 6 compost treatments (0 Mg/ha untilled and 0, 56, 112, 224, and 336 Mg/ha tilled). Over the 1.5-year monitoring period, redox potential decreased and redoximorphic feature formation increased with compost loadings up to 112 Mg/ha. Surface bulk density decreased with loadings up to 224 Mg/ha, while no treatment differences were noted in sub-surface bulk density. In the CCW-Dry experiment, soil moisture peaked in the 224 Mg/ha treatment, while soil moisture in CCW-Wet increased consistently across all loadings. Total biomass in CCW-Wet and Betula nigra L. growth in both experiments increased with loading rate. Total biomass in CCW-Dry and Quercus palustris Muench. growth in both experiments peaked at 112 Mg/ha, although differences were not significant. Collectively, these findings indicate that 112 Mg/ha of high quality organic amendment was optimal for inducing hydric soil conditions and positive hydrophytic vegetation response. Incorporating compost at rates exceeding 112 Mg/ha is challenging and leads to higher surface elevations and redox levels in the initial growing season. / Master of Science

The purpose of this study is to trace the judicial history of the disintegration of the traditional concept of "state action" and the consequent development of the new concept that the prohibitions of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments apply to private action among individuals.

Freedom and safety are two ideals that American citizens value greatly; however, the balance between privacy and security determines whether or not both can be achieved in a reasonable manner. Security and privacy are not mutually exclusive; however, they tend to exhibit an inverse correlation with regards to maintaining individual liberties. Security and privacy are highly beneficial, but when one is given too much weight, the other most often suffers. When the United States citizens are given too much privacy through regulations, the citizens risk their well-being by not allowing the government the ability to prevent dangerous activities being done by criminals. Citizens are unable to defend themselves against foreign and domestic threats of terrorism that affect large amounts of people such as bombings in public settings; however, the federal government can help to prevent such attacks in public settings through surveillance of public areas and monitoring of internet and intracellular communications. When the United States federal government is given too much discretion in security powers through legislation, citizens are at risk of losing their civil rights granted in the Bill of Rights and in Supreme Court cases. The United States of America has had a dangerous imbalance of power in favor of national security since the adoption of the USA PATRIOT Act in 2001, and the imbalance has continued to the present even after the passage of the USA FREEDOM Act in 2015. This thesis will be a comparative analysis of the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 to the USA FREEDOM Act of 2015. This thesis will show what specific powers are granted through provisions of the acts, whether or not the provisions are unconstitutional, how the privacy and security of American citizens will change due to the provisions in the USA FREEDOM Act, and suggestions for how the United States federal government can continue to tilt the balance between security and liberty to ensure more protection for civil liberties and a decrease in national security powers. The suggestions will include three options for gaining the protection of civil liberties and the elimination of certain national security powers and the options are through Supreme Court cases on national security laws pertaining to individual cases or states, Congress passing concurring minor bills with the proposed plan to fully repeal granted national security powers without disturbing congressional alliances on other measures, and Congress passing a single act called the State Surveillance Repeal Act in order to fully repeal the USA PATRIOT Act provisions that would still be in effect after the passage of the USA FREEDOM Act.

No description available.

The conflict between the First Amendment and the Sixth Amendment is not new nor is it easily decipherable. Both amendments appear to have absolute priority, yet they appear to conflict (Erickson, 1977). The First Amendment declares unequivocally, "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press[,]" while the Sixth Amendment states with equal force, "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed..." (U.S. Constitution, Amendment I, Amendment VI). Free speech and an unrestricted press can lead to a partial jury, but a jury unbiased by the media may mean restricted speech. In the judicial system the debate about how to balance these two competing constitutional rights has raged for decades, but one critical area—the nature and characteristics of requests for judicial "gag" orders—has been largely ignored. This thesis analyzed 103 cases from the Media Law Reporter volumes 19 through 33 (approximately 1991-2005) where gag orders were requested because of pretrial publicity. Those 103 cases were evaluated for the type of case, the reason for the case, when the gag order was requested, who requested the gag order, why they requested the gag order, who opposed the gag order, why they opposed the gag order, and why the gag order was granted or denied. It was found that although the issue of gag orders and their use in trials is not settled there is a general pattern to how they tend to be used. This study found that gag orders are most commonly used by judges in serious criminal trials, particularly at the federal level. Further, these cases usually involved juries, and the targets of the gag order were the parties involved in the trial, not the press.

This thesis provides a comprehensive history of Supreme Court Free Exercise Clause jurisprudence from 1879 until the present day. It describes how a jurisdictional approach to free exercise dominated the Court’s rulings from its first Free Exercise Clause case in 1879 until Sherbert v. Verner in 1963, and how Sherbert introduced an accommodationist precedent which was ineffectively, incompletely, and inconsistently defined by the Court. This thesis shows how proponents of accommodationism furthered a false narrative overstating the scope and consistency of Sherbert’s precedent following the Court’s repudiation of accommodationism and return to full jurisdictionalism with Employment Division v. Smith (1990). It then shows how this narrative inspired a massive bipartisan coalition in favor of codifying accommodationism, and how this coalition succeeded in passing the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) in 1993. The RFRA coalition eventually fractured, as RFRA’s implications began to conflict with principles and objectives of liberal interest groups and the Democratic Party. This thesis posits that the fracture of the RFRA coalition can be traced back directly to confusions over Sherbert’s precedent.

In this study, I examine the extent to which students’ rights to free speech and expression were violated in response to the nationwide school walkouts that took place during the spring of 2018. Students hold the right to political speech and expression under the landmark Supreme Court Case, Tinker v. Des Moines (1969). However, the rights students maintain to participate in protest during school hours is somewhat unclear. Using a two-pronged case study analysis, I explore the question of student rights and potential violations in the face of protest through examining school disciplinary responses alongside disciplinary policy and disciplinary policy in the context of Tinker. Findings highlight a widespread gap in school and district-level policy specific to protest or other types of political expression and the need for such policy when protecting the rights students hold under Tinker.

The purpose of the study was to determine how the Fourth Amendment is treated in the age of the internet. To determine the degree of the significance of this relationship a comparative approach is used. Court opinions from cases involving other technological innovations and the Fourth Amendment were examined and their reasoning was compared to that of cases involving the internet and the Fourth Amendment. The results indicated that contrary to some fears that the internet would require a different approach with respect to the law it actually did not present many novel barriers to its application. The principle conclusion was that the reasoning used in cases involving older technologies, namely the test outlined in Katz v. United States, was consistently applied even in the age of the internet.

The attacks of September 11, 2001 (9/11) caused thousands of deaths, national and global panic, and immediate action by the federal government to protect the borders of the United States of America (USA) from terrorism. In response to these attacks, the United States (U.S.) government enacted laws for law enforcement agencies to protect against terrorist activities. Law enforcement agencies are effective in combating terrorism, but their measures contain a major flaw - the improper use of race in profiling to address national security and public safety concerns. Racial profiling is an ineffective measure for preventing terrorism. There are solutions to correct this flaw through reconstructing training and implementing policies for all law enforcement agencies. The intent of this thesis is to discuss the history and the effectiveness of profiling in U.S. post-9/11 counterterrorism through theoretical research of peer-reviewed journals and articles, relevant laws, and United States Supreme Court cases to offer solutions to the problems racial profiling presents. The discussion will generate a search for new ways law enforcement agencies could conduct daily counterterrorism operations.

Chapter 16 of the Tax Administration Act (28 of 2011) (the TA Act) deals with understatement penalties, which replaced the penalty provisions included under section 76 of the Income Tax Act (58 of 1962) and section 60 of the Value-Added Tax Act (89 of 1991). In the event of an ‗understatement‘, in terms of Section 222 of the TA Act, a taxpayer must pay an understatement penalty as determined by the understatement penalty table which is contained in Section 223 of the TA Act, unless the understatement results from a bona fide inadvertent error. In the Draft Response Document presented by National Treasury and SARS to the Committee on Finance (SCOF) on 11 September 2013, it was stated that SARS would develop guidance in this regard for the use of taxpayers and SARS officials (SARS, 2013d:42). The determining of a bona fide inadvertent error on taxpayers‘ returns as stipulated in Section 222 of the TA Act, as amended in 2013, is a totally new concept in the tax fraternity. It is of utmost importance that this section is applied correctly based on sound evaluation principles and not on professional judgement when determining if the error was indeed the result of a bona fide inadvertent error. This research study focuses on exploring key considerations when determining bona fide inadvertent errors resulting in understatements. The role and importance of tax penalty provisions is explored and the meaning of the different components in the term ‗bona fide inadvertent error‘ critically analysed with the purpose to find a possible definition for the term ‗bona fide inadvertent error‘. The study also compares the provisions of other tax jurisdictions with regards to errors made resulting in tax understatements in order to find possible guidelines on the application of bona fide inadvertent errors as contained in Section 222 of the TA Act. The term ‗bona fide inadvertent error‘ is evaluated by comparing the term with the characteristics of a good tax system and improvements for the practical execution of the new amendment to the TA Act are suggested. A literature review is used to gain an in-depth understanding of the role and importance of tax penalty provisions. Doctrinal research is also carried out to perform a critical analysis on the meaning of the different components in the term ‗bona fide inadvertent error‘. A comparative analysis between different countries regarding errors being made when dealing with understatements is performed and a normative research approach is followed to critically evaluate the term ‗bona fide inadvertent error‘. The findings of the research study revealed that the term ‗bona fide inadvertent error‘ contained in Section 222 of the TA Act should be defined urgently and that guidelines must be provided by SARS on the application of the new amendment. SARS should also clarify the application of a bona fide inadvertent error in light of the behaviours contained in Section 223 of the TA Act to avoid any confusion. / MCom (South African and International Tax), North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2015