Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Social sciences

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Social sciences

Life after Hardwick

Article Abstract:

The US Supreme Court's decision in Bowers v Hardwick came at a time when the meaning of sodomy in the law was changing, from the criminalization of specific acts linked to concepts regarding the immorality of non-procreative sex to the criminalization of homosexual acts. The court ruled that the right of privacy does not extinguish the state's interest in controlling what the state considers immoral behavior. The decision left questions regarding the Equal Protection status of homosexuals in states with anti-sodomy laws.

Author: Hunter, Nan D.
Publisher: Harvard Law School
Publication Name: Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review
Subject: Social sciences
ISSN: 0017-8039
Year: 1992
Analysis, Privacy, Right of, Right of privacy, Homosexuality, Sodomy

User Contributions:

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

CAPTCHA


Expanding the market for justice: arguments for extending in-person client solicitation

Article Abstract:

Laws limiting attorney solicitation of clients restrict the ability of low-income consumers to use legal services. Advertising by lawyers may result in better service for more people at less cost. In-person solicitation by attorneys, properly regulated, might also help low-income consumers by providing the opportunity to interact with attorneys on a personal level. The legal community's opposition to lawyer advertising and solicitation are paternalistic and restrict free speech.

Author: Busa, Amy, Sussman, Carl G.
Publisher: Harvard Law School
Publication Name: Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review
Subject: Social sciences
ISSN: 0017-8039
Year: 1999
States, Attorneys, Lawyers, Advertising, Commercial speech doctrine, Legal ethics, Ambulance chasing

User Contributions:

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

CAPTCHA


Expressive identity; recuperating dissent for equality

Article Abstract:

The author discusses the confusion which exists in the federal courts over laws protecting free expression versus laws protecting racial, sexual, and religious minorities from unequal treatment.

Author: Hunter, Nan D.
Publisher: Harvard Law School
Publication Name: Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review
Subject: Social sciences
ISSN: 0017-8039
Year: 2000
Equality before the law, Equal protection

User Contributions:

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

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: Laws, regulations and rules, United States, Freedom of speech
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: Mapping the frontiers: theoretical advances in consumer research on memory, affect, and persuation. When more may be less: the effects of regulatory focus on responses to different comparative frames
  • Abstracts: The predictive and interactive effects of equity sensitivity in teamwork-oriented organizations. Business strategy, work processes and human resource training: are they congruent?
  • Abstracts: Employees' reactions to problematic events: a circumplex structure of five categories of responses, and the role of job satisfaction
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.