46,632 research outputs found

    Monitoring inspections of schools with no formal designation, with a focus on safeguarding and/or leadership and management : guidance for inspectors

    Get PDF

    Interpreting Begay After Sykes: Why Reckless Offenses Should Be Eligible To Qualify as Violent Felonies Under the ACCA’s Residual Clause

    Get PDF
    Passed as part of the Armed Career Criminal Act, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e) subjects felons in possession of firearms to a strict mandatory minimum sentence if the offenders have three prior state or federal convictions that qualify as serious drug offenses or violent felonies. A crime qualifies as a violent felony under the residual clause, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B)(ii), if it is one of the enumerated offenses of burglary, arson, or extortion, involves use of explosives, or otherwise involves conduct that presents a serious potential risk of physical injury to another. Current federal circuit court interpretations of the Supreme Court\u27s decisions in Begay v. United States and Sykes v. United States exclude both crimes with lesser mens rea—recklessness or negligence—and strict-liability crimes from qualifying under the residual clause. This Note proposes that some reckless crimes, like drive-by shooting, would qualify if compared to their closest analogs among the enumerated offenses for purposes of determining similarity in kind, a requirement under Sykes and Begay. This proposed solution would bring some reckless offenses within the scope of the residual clause, allowing for increased, though narrow, targeting of the most dangerous felons: the armed career criminals

    Restating the Original Source Exception to the False Claims Act\u27s “Public Disclosure Bar”

    Get PDF
    The False Claims Act (FCA) is the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) primary litigative tool to combat fraud under federal government programs, including as Medicare and the military. The FCA provides for triple damages and civil penalties. It also contains a unique qui tam provision, which allows a whistleblower, known as a “relator,” to file a FCA lawsuit on behalf of the government and receive a share of 15-25% in the recovery. The DOJ has recovered 20billionundertheFCAfromcompaniescheatingthegovernment,andhaspaidoutover20 billion under the FCA from companies cheating the government, and has paid out over 2 billion in citizen rewards. The FCA contains a “public disclosure bar,” which is triggered when the fraud allegations were in the public domain before a relator filed suit. If the bar applies, the relator must prove he meets the Act’s “original source exception” or be dismissed from the case. Due to a circuit split in interpreting the original source exception, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Rockwell v. United States, 127 S. Ct. 1397 (2007), to determine whether the Tenth Circuit misapplied the definition of an original source. This article restates the original source exception by outlining the law and proposing a test to the Supreme Court and lower courts. This article was cited five times in an Amicus brief in the Rockwell case. The author has written another law review article for publication in the Fall of 2008, discussing the Rockwell decision and providing guidance regarding the proper application of the original source exception post-Rockwell

    Semantic form as interface

    Get PDF
    The term interface had a remarkable career over the past several decades, motivated largely by its use in computer science. Although the concept of a "surface common to two areas" (Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary, 1980) is intuitively clear enough, the range of its application is not very sharp and well defined, a "common surface" is open to a wide range of interpretations

    Providers’ Perception of Alert Fatigue After Implementation of User-Filtered Warnings

    Get PDF
    Alert fatigue is a complex problem that many health institutions face when using an electronic health record (EHR). The addition of user-filtered warnings (UFW) is a physicians’ proposed intervention at Inova Health System (IHS), a large 5-hospital health system in Northern Virginia, that allows prescribers to filter out specific drug-drug interactions and pregnancy and lactation medication alerts for a 30-day period. This study aims to determine the impact of UFW on physicians’ perception of alert fatigue and to calculate the reduction of medication alerts. It was hypothesized that the reduction in alerts will significantly impact physicians’ perception of alert fatigue in a positive manner. Physician perception of alert fatigue was assessed using online surveys before and after the implementation of UFW. Data from Medications Warnings Statistics reports were used to assess the reduction of alerts fired post-implementation of UFW. For the primary outcome, there was no significant difference in the overall perception of alert fatigue before and after the implementation of UFW. For the secondary outcome, the number of medication alerts was decreased by 16.7% post UFW implementation. Overall, the data does not support UFW to reduce alert fatigue

    The Removability of Non-Citizen Parents and the Best Interests of Citizen Children: How to Balance Competing Imperatives in the Context of Removal Proceedings?

    Get PDF
    The massive influx of illegal immigrants over the preceding decades has combined with the United States’ jus soli citizenship regime to produce a growing class of removable aliens: non-citizen parents of United States citizen children. The removability of parents obviously places the citizen children in the unfortunate position of having to leave their country of citizenship behind to accompany the parents, or arrange for living situations within the United States, perhaps with a relative, but be separated from their parents. The compelling interests raised by the removability of parents in such circumstances have given rise to distinct forms of relief under domestic legal systems. The United Kingdom, in a recent decision by its Supreme Court, has held that the best interests of the child are a primary consideration in determining whether the removal of the parent would be proportionate. Likewise, the United States provides for certain types of relief from removal for the parents of United States citizen children. Yet neither regime is entirely satisfactory. The United Kingdom’s approach is unduly biased towards non-removability, whereas the standards for establishing relief from removal in the United States are onerous and will be rarely met in practice. The purpose of this article is to propose a balancing of the interests that takes a realistic look both at the compelling interest citizen children have to remain in their country as part of a family unit and the competing interests of the state in a fully and fairly functioning immigration system. Such balancing is liable to make all parties unhappy—not every non-citizen parent should be permitted to remain simply on the fact of that parentage, and, conversely, not every removable parent should be removed simply because they are present illegally—yet it is the only feasible option to a problem that is only likely to grow in the coming decades
    • …
    corecore