High School Students as Mentors: Findings From the Big Brothers Big Sisters School-Based Mentoring Impact Study Executive Summary

Recently, high schools have become a popular source of mentors for school-based mentoring (SBM) programs. This executive summary outlines key findings and recommendations from our High School Students as Mentors report, which drew on data from our large-scale random assignment impact study of Big Brothers Big Sisters SBM (Herrera, et al. 2007). Our research indicated that, on average, high school students were much less effective than adults at yielding impacts for the youth they mentor, but it also identified several program practices that were linked with longer, stronger and more effective high school mentor relationships

Omnicare v. Indiana State District Council and Its Rational Basis Test for Allowing for Opinion Statements to Be a Misleading Fact or Omission Under Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933

This article examines when statements in a registration statement, couched as opinion, can and cannot be considered to be misstatements of material fact that could lead to liability under Section 11 (and potentially other sections) of the Securities Act. The rest of this paper is formatted as follows. We review the Omnicare case, followed by the key cases in the Second, Third, Ninth, and Sixth Circuit Courts of Appeals. The Second, Third, and Ninth Circuits have all required that, in order for there to be an actionable claim under Section 11, the plaintiff must plead not only that the statement or omission was false, but also that the defendant had subjective knowledge that its opinion was false. The Sixth Circuit, although later reversed by the Supreme Court, applied a strict liability interpretation of Section 11 and required only that the fact or omission be false or misleading. The split decisions among the circuits may be the reason that the Supreme Court granted certiorari. Then, we explain the implications of these decisions to future registrants and to professionals preparing opinions that are to be included in registration statements. This article is important to future registrants and opining professionals because of their liability implications. We conclude with the assumption that future cases will decide how to apply the new rational basis test created by the Supreme Court in interpreting when an opinion statement becomes a misstatement of material fact, or leads to an omission that renders a registration statement false or misleading in violation of Section 11

Vimy: The Battle and the Legend (Book Review) by Tim Cook

Review of Vimy: The Battle and the Legend by Tim Cook

All at sea in a barbed wire canoe: Professor Cohen's transatlantic voyage in IPE

The following article is written as a sympathetic critique of Benjamin Cohen's recent identification in RIPE of incommensurable traditions of American and British IPE. It is also designed to engender further debate within the subject field on this most central of issues. Our argument is that scholars should beware the rigid terms in which Cohen identifies IPE's transatlantic divide, because simply by naming his two camps as polar opposites the invitation is open to others to entrench such an opposition in their own work. This would be regrettable enough had IPE already lapsed into the geographical division that Cohen describes. It is made more regrettable still by the fact that this is in any case an inaccurate account of the field which serves to marginalise much of the work that is currently at its cutting edge

‘Not in My Name’ Claims of Constitutional Right

We have a constitutional right against the state forcing us to be associated with expression with which we do not wish to be associated. The freedom of expressive association is not stated in our Constitution’s text. Rather, it is derived from various provisions of the First Amendment. As the freedom of speech protects, among other things, our right to shape how we present ourselves to the world, so does the freedom of expressive association protect us from the state shaping us by connecting us to ideas not of our choosing. Our freedom of expressive association allows us to claim an idea as our own, and to say “that idea is not mine . . . and you may not say it in my name.” This “not in my name” conception of constitutional right has iterations in several areas of First Amendment law: compelled speech, compelled subsidies for speech, and the Establishment Clause. Compelled support for government speech, though, is valid, because the state speaks in the name of its citizens. The understanding of expressive association as undergirding “not in my name” claims of constitutional right allows us to solve two lingering problems of misattribution in the compelled subsidies for speech and Establishment Clause case law. But whether or not misattribution is present, we maintain a broad presumptive right against the state’s advancing ideas in our name

The Crescent Student Newspaper, March 8, 1978

Student newspaper of Pacific College (later George Fox University). 12 pages, black and white.https://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/the_crescent/1934/thumbnail.jp

The Constitution of North Korea: Its Changes and Implications

Though a departure from mainstream socialist States, a glimpse of North Korea\u27s Constitution can still provide observers with an understanding of how North Korea has undergone and responded to social changes and vicissitudes. Hence, this Essay sets out to do a number of things. First, this study succinctly examines the nature and status of law in North Korea. Second, it reviews the country\u27s constitutional history in sequence, and then, provides a more in depth look into the characteristics of the current Constitution. Conclusions are then drawn from this examination. The goal of this Essay is not to describe the principles or contents of North Korean Constitutions per se, but rather to look at how North Korea has responded to change from a constitutional perspective. However, our discussion will be mostly limited to the texts of the constitutions since there is no case known to outsiders that would afford us an understanding of its real operation in daily life. At the same time, constitutional processes including the North Korean amendment process does not deserve our attention either, as all constitutional processes in North Korea are, by design, endorsed without opposition and manipulated by the country\u27s top leadership --an undisputable reality of the totalitarianism housed within the country\u27s borders