No description available.

Following the precedent decision to expand the power of immigration enforcement set by the Immigration and Nationality Act Section 287(g), the Department of Homeland Security developed its own partnership agreement with local police to increase detection and deportation efforts through its 2008 policy, Secure Communities (S-Comm). S-Comm represents the nation’s “largest expansion of local involvement in immigration enforcement in the nation’s history” (Cox & Miles 2013, pg. 93). Although slated to enhance public safety by removing “criminal aliens” convicted of serious offenses, S-Comm has broaden its scope to achieve attrition in the undocumented immigrant population more generally by also focusing on the removal of those who violate low-level and immigration laws, as well as those who have recently entered the U.S. illegally. Its implementation and enforcement procedures, however, have been found to disproportionately target foreign-born Mexican residents relative to other undocumented individuals, which may lead to negative consequences for S-Comm’s efficacy. Has S-Comm effectively reduced the size of the Mexican immigrant population in the U.S.? Exploiting the variation in the timing of its implementation as well as the disparate levels of its enforcement, my research extends a quasi-experimental design to investigate S-Comm’s effect on the size of local Mexican immigrant populations. Testing the influence of S-Comm’s implementation and enforcement will reveal the salience of passing laws that target unauthorized migration—an empirical contribution to previous work that has only assessed state and local policies. Moreover, such results may also enhance theoretical knowledge of punitive practices formulated to produce deterrence. / text

The vast majority of children and young people appearing in criminal courts in England and Wales are sentenced through a youth court by lay magistrates. The magistrates court deals with 96% of all criminal cases in England and Wales and it is lay magistrates who decide on questions of fact, and sentence those convicted in 91% of these cases. Therefore, how Youth Offending Teams (YOTs) and magistrates work together is a matter of interest. This research explores the extent to which magistrates' confidence in the YOT's service provision can make a difference to the decisions made with regards to bail/remand, sentencing, enforcement and revocation on grounds of good progress. Furthermore, the research considers how YOTs might improve the confidence of magistrates in their service provision and makes recommendations for practice in this regard.

New Labour's youth justice legislation and the "Every Child Matters" programme contained contradictory imperatives. This research examines how Police Officers and Police Community Support Officers (PCSOs) in a community policing setting operationalised those imperatives in order to reach decisions when dealing with children and young people. The review of literature focusses firstly on New Labour policy relating to children and young people, and secondly describes previous research into the practice of policing juveniles, the resilience of police culture and the key factors identified relating to police officer decision making. No recent British research in this area was located. Four overlapping hypotheses were identified, which were: officers will be more responsive to the "Every Child Matters" policy imperatives; officers will be more responsive to the criminal justice imperatives; managerialism will trump both sets of policy imperatives because it is in the officer‟s interests to respond to the demands of management; and both sets of policy imperatives and managerialism notwithstanding, officers will resort to "common sense" responses informed by their own lay criminologies, scales of values, police culture, and police "practice wisdom". These hypotheses were tested using quantitative and qualitative data from 198 self-reporting postal questionnaires and eight follow-up interviews. The research population comprised Police Officers and Police Community Support Officers engaged in Neighbourhood Policing. The research found that the majority of officers operated according to their own lay methodologies (hypothesis four) within the constraints of managerialism (hypothesis three), which led to officers and PCSOs taking actions which they did not always believe to be the most appropriate. Additionally, ambiguities in the legislation and lack of guidance led to the space for the exercise of officer discretion expanding when they were dealing with children and young people, whilst at the same time there was a lack of training on how they should best engage with this age group.

The replacement of traditional seriatim opinions with an "Opinion of the Court," offers what initially appears to be an interesting but seemingly trivial characteristic of American law. In fact, this departure from convention represents an exceptional shift in the behavioral actions and expectations of American appellate judges. This switch in the method of judicial communication is an exemplar for the belief that institutions, and the rules that regulate them, matter seriously. Failure to appreciate and insist upon "sincerity" as a distinctive judicial trait has impoverished historical and structural approaches to constitutional argument and has aided in the conflation of judges and legislators. Moreover, the initial demotion of sincerity as a cardinal value of American judicial power was an amendment of constitutional structure of rather dubious motive and utter lack of process. Anglo-American history reveals that judges performing their appellate functions consciously and consistently attended to a sincere, individual execution of their duty. Furthermore, an exploration of important Anglo-American jurisprudence reveals that sincerity is a presupposed though often neglected judicial virtue. This tripartite argument also includes a review of important constitutional theory and legal commentary regarding judicial communication. In the broadest sense, I endeavor to explain that the nature of law is inextricably related to its delivery and that the Constitution admits of a conversing, plurally-voiced dynamic of communication. These sorts of inquiries are true to American founding beliefs that a new science of politics can apply to old problems of governance. These arguments also highlight a guiding principle for any judiciary functioning in a constitutional democracy: public communication is critical for any consenting polity to discern the worth and import of the rule of law.

No description available.

No description available.

This thesis examines and critiques the concept of 'legal knowledge-based’ systems. Work on legal knowledge-based systems is dominated by work in 'artificial intelligence and law’. It seeks to automate the application of law and to automate the solution of legal problems. Automation however, has proved elusive. In contrast to such automation, this thesis proposes the creation of legal knowledge-based systems based on the concept of augmentation of legal work. Focusing on systems that augment legal work opens new possibilities for system creation and use. To inform how systems might augment legal work, this thesis examines philosophy, psychology and legal theory for information they provide on how processes of legal reasoning operate. It is argued that, in contrast to conceptions of law adopted in artificial intelligence and law, 'sensemaking' provides a useful perspective with which to create systems. It is argued that visualisation, and particularly diagrams, are an important and under considered element of reasoning and that producing systems that support diagramming of processes of legal reasoning would provide useful support for legal work. This thesis reviews techniques for diagramming aspects of sensemaking. In particular this thesis examines standard methods for diagramming arguments and methods for diagramming reasoning. These techniques are applied in the diagramming of legal judgments. A review is conducted of systems that have been constructed to support the construction of diagrams of argument and reasoning. Drawing upon these examinations, this thesis highlights the necessity of appropriate representations for supporting reasoning. The literature examining diagramming for reasoning support provides little discussion of appropriate representations. This thesis examines theories of representation for insight they can provide into the design of appropriate representations. It is concluded that while the theories of representation that are examined do not determine what amounts to a good representation, guidelines for the design and choice of representations can be distilled. These guidelines cannot map the class of legal knowledge-based systems that augment legal sensemaking, they can however, be used to explore this class and to inform construction of systems.

No description available.

In contemporary legal writing and discourse, Lord Atkin’s neighbour principle is unloved. The now dominant view is that the neighbour principle performs no practical function since it is a mere descriptive label of the very different factual circumstances in which a duty to take reasonable care exists. It is the central contention of this paper that the neighbour principle is – in fact – invaluable as aid for the principled development of the tort of negligence. As this paper will show, the neighbour principle furnishes a common perspective that renders possible uniform determinations of analogical similarity and difference between novel categories of relations and established forms of negligent liability. The principle thus works in tandem with analogical reasoning to ensure objectivity in the delineation of the proper ambit of negligence law’s protection. Accordingly, the principle is an essential in ensuring a principled law of negligence whereby like cases are treated alike.