Guest  

 
Search: 
Search By: SubjectAbstractAuthorTitleFull-Text

 

Showing 1 through 5 of 548 records.
Pages: Previous - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 110 - Next  Jump:
2018 - MPSA Annual Conference Words: 10 words || 
Info
1. Seo, Min Hee. "To whom are Local Officials Responsive to: Examining Discrepancies in Responsiveness of Local Officials using Randomized Audit Experiment" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the MPSA Annual Conference, Palmer House Hilton, Chicago, IL, <Not Available>. 2019-05-19 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p1356000_index.html>
Publication Type: Panel Paper
Abstract: Do public officials prioritize certain constituents when providing government services?

2005 - Southern Political Science Association Pages: 21 pages || Words: 7333 words || 
Info
2. Martorano, Nancy. "Misplaced Rewards or Unfair Punishments: Do State Government Officials Benefit or Suffer from the Public's Perception of Federal Officials?" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Southern Political Science Association, Inter-Continental Hotel, New Orleans, LA, Jan 06, 2005 <Not Available>. 2019-05-19 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p67361_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Trust in the national government has declined greatly over the last fifty years, and over the past decade citizens have taken direct action to limit the actions of their politicians at both the national and state levels. Might negative feelings about national-level political actors be driving some of the punitive actions taken against state politicians? Research has long shown that governors benefit from a popular President of their party, and recent preliminary research suggests that state legislators may be rewarded when feelings about the U.S. Congress improve.

This paper extends earlier research investigating whether the public’s punitive actions against state legislatures are the result of actual state-level conditions or whether the public’s negative feelings about Congress are driving these actions. Here we investigate another possible connection between attitudes about national and state actors.

Using an augmented set of available public opinion, policy, and institutional measures, we test to see whether gubernatorial approval is affected by feelings about a state’s U.S. Senators. Controlling for many factors known to impact gubernatorial ratings, we find that the public’s feelings about their U.S. Senators (junior Senators specifically) are linked to state governor approval. In addition, this study also uncovered some interesting findings concerning state level forces. One of the more interesting findings concerned lame duck governor status. This status alone leads to a substantial decrease in gubernatorial approval. However, when combined with incumbency this effect reverses.

2010 - The Law and Society Association Words: 388 words || 
Info
3. Keitner, Chimene. "Officially Immune? Liability of Former Officials for International Law Violations in National Courts" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the The Law and Society Association, Renaissance Chicago Hotel, Chicago, IL, May 27, 2010 <Not Available>. 2019-05-19 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p406565_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: A paradox lies at the heart of the doctrine governing the immunity of former government officials from suit for international law violations in national courts. National courts generally lack jurisdiction over former officials for conduct that falls within the scope of their official duties. This conduct-based immunity is not a personal right, but rather serves to protect the official acts of one sovereign from scrutiny by the courts of another sovereign. However, some of the most serious international crimes can only be perpetrated under color of law (such as torture) or pursuant to a state or organizational policy (such as crimes against humanity), and would therefore seem to be official acts by definition when committed by a state official. This would seem to preclude the enforcement of these core international law prohibitions by national courts in most instances. At the same time, legal and political developments in the post-Nuremberg era encourage and in some instances require the participation of national courts in enforcing international law. So far, national courts have failed to reach a consistent and coherent response to this dilemma. This paper examines courts’ reasoning in existing case law, as well as the historical evolution of conduct-based immunity, in an attempt to craft a more satisfying doctrinal response that also takes into account contemporary normative and practical concerns.

This issue is particularly timely given the United States’s argument in recent litigation that the scope of immunity for former foreign officials from suit in U.S. courts is a matter of common law, and is not governed by the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (a question the U.S. Supreme Court is set to consider in March 2010). It is also the subject of ongoing litigation in Europe, where a torture victim who was denied civil relief in U.K. courts on immunity grounds is currently seeking relief before the European Court of Human Rights. It is not just a question of immunity vs. accountability, but also of broader principles of state vs. individual responsibility, and the respective roles of the courts and the political branches in determining the availability of legal, rather than diplomatic, remedies for international law violations. This paper aims to move the conversation forward by more clearly framing the relevant questions, and offering some answers that incorporate insights from history and political theory, as well as international law.

2005 - The Law and Society Words: 113 words || 
Info
4. Park, Kwangbai. "The First Officially Simulated Jury Trial in Korea" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the The Law and Society, J.W. Marriott Resort, Las Vegas, NV, <Not Available>. 2019-05-19 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p18161_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: The Supreme Court of Korea conducted a simulated jury trial in August 2004 with a mock jury of 12 members and six groups of 12 shadow jurors for an adapted criminal murder case. The jurors were randomly selected from the residents in Seoul metropolitan area. The selected jurors were summoned by official notifications and screened through a thorough voir-dire procedure. The simulated trial was held in an actual court room that was renovated in a structural arrangement appropriate for a jury trial. After the 3-hours trial, the deliberation of the jury groups were video-taped. Some of the findings from content analyses of the jury deliberations will be reported.

Pages: Previous - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 110 - Next  Jump:

©2019 All Academic, Inc.   |   All Academic Privacy Policy