The 1973 case Nelson v. Planned Parenthood Center of Tucson established the legality of abortion [3] in Arizona. The Arizona Court of Appeals ruled that the Arizona Revised Statutes 13-211, 13-212, and 13-213, collectively called the Arizona abortion [3] statutes, were unconstitutional. The statutes had made illegal receiving, providing, or advertising abortions. After the Arizona Appeals Court...

In this study, machinability tests on Assab Korkmaz Orvar Supreme (1.2344 ESR, AISI H13 Premium) hot work tool steel widely used in industry were carried out. Machinability tests were carried out through single point turning method at eight different cutting speeds (120, 160, 200, 240, 280, 320, 360 ve 400 m/dak), four different feed rates (0,05; 0,10; 0,15 and 0,20 mm/min) and 1 mm depth of cu...

Two important legal reforms in court procedure have taken place in Brazil recently: súmula vinculante (all courts now have to follow the reasoning of the Supreme Court in similar cases) and requisito da repercussão geral (the Supreme Court only hears cases that are of general importance). These two procedural rules respond to a long debate in the Brazilian legal community on how to address cour...

I argue the Supreme Court learns to craft legal rules by relying on the Courts of Appeals as laboratories of law, observing their decisions and reviewing those that best inform legal development. I develop a model that shows how the Supreme Court leverages multiple Courts of Appeals decisions to identify which will be most informative to review, and what decision to make upon review. Because an...

To understand policy-motivated behavior of Supreme Court justices it is necessary to measure their policy preferences. To date, most scholars have assumed the policy preferences of Supreme Court justices remain consistent throughout the course of their careers, and most measures of judicial ideology – such as Segal and Cover (1989) scores – are time invariant. This assumption is facially valid;...

U.S. v. Scheffer is a case that poses two questions. First, must a defendant who wishes to place polygraphic evidence before the court be allowed to do so for fear that refusal will create a Constitutional issue by depriving him of due process? Second, is polygraphic evidence admissible evidence at all, as defined by the Military Rule of Evidence or the Federal Rules of Evidence? The case, orig...

The 1973 case Nelson v. Planned Parenthood Center of Tucson established the legality of abortion [3] in Arizona. The Arizona Court of Appeals ruled that the Arizona Revised Statutes 13-211, 13-212, and 13-213, collectively called the Arizona abortion [3] statutes, were unconstitutional. The statutes had made illegal receiving, providing, or advertising abortions. After the Arizona Appeals Court...

In Bell v. Cheswick Generating Station, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit reversed a decision by the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, holding that state common law tort actions were not preempted by the federal Clean Air Act (“CAA”). The Third Circuit found that the savings clause of the CAA was nearly identical to that of the Clean Water Act (“CWA”), ...

In International Criminal Court (ICC), the prosecutorial discretion in nature is a hybrid of the common-law adversarial model and the inquisitorial approach of civil-law systems. This paper studies the ICC prosecutorial discretion from the perspectives of common law and civil law and draws the conclusion that the ICC needs some more time to carefully design the prosecutorial discretion to reach...