Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Law

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Law

Feminists back anti-porn bill; critics say holding pornographers liable for rape chills protected speech

Article Abstract:

The Pornography Victims' Compensation Act of 1991, awaiting action as of mid-Apr 1992 by the Senate Judiciary Committee, would afford sex crime victims who maintain their attackers were incited by obscene materials the remedy of suing the marketers of the pornography in federal court. The bill, which at first applied to all sexually explicit material, was limited to material obscene according to the law and to child pornography after objections by critics. Critics fear the bill would limit freedom of speech.

Author: Reske, Henry J.
Publisher: American Bar Association
Publication Name: ABA Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0747-0088
Year: 1992
Laws, regulations and rules, Freedom of speech, Pornography, Rape victims

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Critics claiming race affects verdicts: statistics show higher acquittal rates for primarily black juries in some areas

Article Abstract:

Experts split over whether the composition of a jury affects its likelihood of convicting a defendant of a given race. Public defender A.J. Kramer says black juries do not acquit black defendants in greater numbers, but an Oct 4 Wall St Journal story suggests just that, at least in several predominantly black urban areas. Other experts note that blacks often have different attitudes making them more critical of evidence and more willing to acquit based on police impropriety.

Author: Reske, Henry J.
Publisher: American Bar Association
Publication Name: ABA Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0747-0088
Year: 1996
Analysis, Demographic aspects, Discrimination in criminal justice administration, Criminal justice discrimination, Jury members

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Speech without fees not free: court strikes down ban on honoraria for federal workers

Article Abstract:

The Supreme Court in Feb struck down broad portions of the Ethics Reform Act of 1989 that banned federal employees from being paid for outside writing or speeches. Ruling in US v National Treasury Employees Union, the majority held that such a stricture violated the First Amendment. However, it left the ban intact for workers as level GS-16 and above. The case was on behalf of Jan Adams-Grant, an IRS worker who lectures on geophysics.

Author: Reske, Henry J.
Publisher: American Bar Association
Publication Name: ABA Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0747-0088
Year: 1995
Cases, Compensation and benefits, Public employees, Government employees, Honoraria

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: United States
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: Choosing sides; California court says employer is not liable if it acts in good faith to fire an accused sexual harasser
  • Abstracts: Constitutional law - substantive due process - Fourth Circuit holds police officer not liable for exposing children to harm that culminated in their murder
  • Abstracts: Financial networks avoid antitrust ills. High court sheds light on state action. Justices assess repair-market monopoly
  • Abstracts: Securities law changes debated: supporters say bill restores fairness; critics claim it cuts investor protections
  • Abstracts: DNA, changed testimony gain acquittal; special prosecutor, FBI investigating controversial Illinois murder prosecution
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.