The Problem with Naked Statistical Evidence

There has been much debate over the value of naked statistical evidence (NSE). However, while most scholars agree that it is problematic to base a verdict on NSE, they disagree on why it is problematic, pointing to different characteristics of NSE as the root of the problem. In the last decade, the debate has been energized by publications that propose a number of new approaches. This chapter joins the most recent debates on NSE—in particular, the objections to naked statistics based upon sensitivity, normalcy, incentives for lawful conduct, and free will. The authors argue that the problem of NSE is not an epistemic one, as some assume, but is actually a moral problem.

On the educational function of administrative responsibility

The subject of this research is the views of the scholars on classification of administrative responsibility functions and substantiation of the existence and implementation of its educational function. The research methodology employs formal legal and dialectical methods. The authors examine various classifications of the functions of administrative responsibility, analyze the role of educational function therein, and trace its correlation with the general legal functions. It is indicated that namely the educational function does not receive due attention in modern research, and its potential is underestimated. It is proven that the absence of legislative consolidation of educational purpose in the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses is not the reason to deny the educational function of administrative responsibility. The conclusion is made that the achievement of educational goal of the administrative function of administrative responsibility is the result of a comprehensive impact of the broadest range of legal, political, economic, moral-ethical, and other means. Thorough legislative mediation of the measures of administrative responsibility, their effective application, all-round encouragement of active lawful conduct, timely informing legal entities about the capacity of administrative responsibility, and consequences of implementation of its measures, ultimately realigns legal consciousness and “removes” unlawful attitudes. The article substantiates that law-abidance is the initial goal of educational function of administrative responsibility. Legal-abidance is formed not only due to realization of the capacity of law in regulating social relations, but also the concern to suffer deprivations as a result of implementation of administrative responsibility.

About Some Specifics in Appeals of Acts of the Municipal Election Commission

The subject of this article is the procedure for appealing the decisions of the Municipal Election Commission. The article provides a brief overview of the legal regulations, concerning this procedure. The MEC is seen as a state body (public authority) that is directly responsible for the lawful conduct of local elections. That is why the issue of protection against MEC decisions is extremely important. The article pays special attention to the question of the acts of the MEC, that can be appeals and the notion of “legal interest” and “interested party” in appealing of the Commission acts. A brief overview is made of some of the main specifics of this appeal and the problems associated with it.

Some considerations on the application of measures of influence for offenses in the informational field

Problem setting. The article is devoted to the study of general theoretical issues on the peculiarities of the application of measures of influence for offenses in the informational sphere, identifies the types of liability for offenses in the informational sphere. Target of research. The purpose of this article is to analyze the measures of legal influence for violations of the law in the informational sphere. Analysis of recent researches and publications. Issues related to the study of the peculiarities of the application of measures of influence for offenses in the informational sphere, were the subject of research by such scientists as: V. V. Belevtseva, A. O. Volkova, I. F. Korzh, V. Ya. Nastyuk, G. M. Pisarenko and others. However, given the rapid development of informational relations, existing approaches to their regulation, including relations on the application of measures of influence in the informational sphere, need to be reconsidered and updated. Article’s main body. Considering the category of “measures of influence”, it should be emphasized that measures of legal responsibility are only part of the whole system of measures of influence that can be applied to the offender. It should be emphasized that the measures of legal responsibility for their intended purpose are punishable, ie the purpose of their application is to punish the subject for deviation from the lawful conduct provided by law. At the same time, the purpose of applying measures of influence is not only to punish the offender. Measures of influence can be used to restore the violated rights, to ensure the existing state of legal relations before their commission, the cessation of offenses, etc. In fact, the category of “measures of influence” in its content is broader than “legal liability”. Conclusions and prospects for the development. Тhe intersectoral nature of the current information legislation of Ukraine necessitates further in-depth analysis of measures of influence for offenses in the informational sphere in order to ensure informational security of man, state and society. Specific examples indicate that measures of influence for informational offenses can be divided on the following grounds: a) purpose (security, suspending and punitive); b) values - basic and additional (within a specific coercive measure); c) variability - non-alternative (only a specific measure of influence is envisaged for the relevant offense) and alternative (several coercive measures are envisaged for the commission of a specific offense, the person authorized to apply coercive measures has the opportunity to choose); d) the procedure for application - judicial and extrajudicial.

Uncontrollable Blackness

Early twentieth-century African American men in northern urban centers like New York faced economic isolation, segregation, a biased criminal justice system, and overt racial attacks by police and citizens. In this book, Douglas J. Flowe interrogates the meaning of crime and violence in the lives of these men, whose lawful conduct itself was often surveilled and criminalized, by focusing on what their actions and behaviors represented to them. He narrates the stories of men who sought profits in underground markets, protected themselves when law enforcement failed to do so, and exerted control over public, commercial, and domestic spaces through force in a city that denied their claims to citizenship and manhood. Flowe furthermore traces how the features of urban Jim Crow and the efforts of civic and progressive leaders to restrict their autonomy ultimately produced the circumstances under which illegality became a form of resistance.Drawing from voluminous prison and arrest records, trial transcripts, personal letters and documents, and investigative reports, Flowe opens up new ways of understanding the black struggle for freedom in the twentieth century. By uncovering the relationship between the fight for civil rights, black constructions of masculinity, and lawlessness, he offers a stirring account of how working-class black men employed extralegal methods to address racial injustice.

Naked statistical evidence and incentives for lawful conduct

The problem of ‘naked statistical evidence’ is one of the most debated issues in evidence theory. Most evidence scholars agree that it is deeply problematic to base a verdict on naked statistical evidence, but they disagree on why it is problematic, and point to different characteristics of naked statistical evidence as the root of the problem. In this article, the author discusses the merits of different solutions to the problem of naked statistical evidence, and argues for the incentive-solution: verdicts based on naked statistical evidence are unacceptable as they do not contribute in a positive way to the incentive structure for lawful behaviour.

Trump’s Dilemma

One of the most striking characteristics of the Trump administration in the United States is the frequency and vehemence with which the President has sought to undermine the competence of his own intermediaries: federal departments and agencies. In some cases, such as the Environmental Protection Agency and Department of State, Trump has sought to undermine the civil service through cuts in staff and budget and a depletion of morale that drove long-time professionals out of government. In other cases, such as the intelligence agencies and Department of Justice, the President has publicly attacked the credibility and legitimacy of intermediaries whose actions might endanger the President. “Trump’s Dilemma,” this chapter argues, derives from the fact that the President came to office with views far outside the mainstream of American public policy. Trump thus feared that “Deep State” departments and agencies would, in the normal and lawful conduct of their duties, threaten not only the President’s policy goals but also the President himself. Faced with a stark control–competence tradeoff, Trump moved forcefully to undermine the competence of many of his own departments and agencies.

What Would the Defendant have Done but for the Wrong?

Suppose a defendant owed the claimant a duty that the defendant could have discharged by taking any one of several different measures. The defendant took none, violating the duty. When assessing damages, how should the court determine which measure the defendant would have taken had the defendant not committed the wrong? I explain how this peculiar counterfactual inquiry should proceed. I examine the role of counterfactual analysis in the assessment of damages generally, before exploring the special difficulty it raises in cases involving disjunctive duties (duties capable of being variously satisfied). By virtue of certain doctrinal assumptions, it is a difficulty that courts have mostly avoided. I argue that these assumptions are unjustifiable and should be jettisoned. The problem of how to determine the counterfactual, lawful conduct of a defendant who violated a disjunctive duty cannot be avoided. I propose a principled solution to the problem that can be straightforwardly applied by judges.