Equality in the War on Terror

Today, much public attention and litigation in the wake of the government\u27s response to the September 11, 2001 attacks centers on one or another claims about the government\u27s substantive illegality (such as claims based on the Due Process Clause). This is a mistake. Instead of focusing on the ultimate individual liberty questions, challenges should first focus on equality. Since the terrorist attacks, the government has repeatedly singled out aliens for special disfavor. For example, the Military Commissions Act blatantly discriminates against aliens - shunting the 20 million green-card holders and 5 billion people across the planet into a different, and far inferior, trial procedure than what American citizens face. Since at least the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment\u27s equality guarantee, such legislation has never been placed in the United States Code. The equality challenges are the next big thing in the war on terror. While discrimination by the federal government against aliens might be justified when it is handing out government benefits, it is not appropriate when deciding whether someone can be put before a tribunal with the power to dispense the most awesome powers of government, such as life imprisonment and the death penalty. When legislation singles out only powerless aliens, moreover, the standard checks on government abuse, such as political accountability, fail to operate. The result is not only that the legislation runs afoul of the Constitution\u27s guarantee of equal protection, it also eliminates the legislation from the zone of deference traditionally due to the political branches

Identification and Distribution of Minnesota Leucorrhinia Species (Odonata, Libellulidae)

Minnesota Leucorrhinia species are contrasted with one another through the use of male and female characters . Included in the key lo species are two species (frigida and glacialis) not previously reported from Minnesota. All North American species are discussed

Towards a consolidation of worldwide journal rankings - A classification using random forests and aggregate rating via data envelopment analysis

AbstractThe question of how to assess research outputs published in journals is now a global concern for academics. Numerous journal ratings and rankings exist, some featuring perceptual and peer-review-based journal ranks, some focusing on objective information related to citations, some using a combination of the two. This research consolidates existing journal rankings into an up-to-date and comprehensive list. Existing approaches to determining journal rankings are significantly advanced with the application of a new classification approach, ‘random forests’, and data envelopment analysis. As a result, a fresh look at a publication׳s place in the global research community is offered. While our approach is applicable to all management and business journals, we specifically exemplify the relative position of ‘operations research, management science, production and operations management’ journals within the broader management field, as well as within their own subject domain

Some Recent Developments in Federal and State Labor and Employment Law

SomeRecentDevelopmentsinFederal.pdf: 1006 downloads, before Oct. 1, 2020

The International, May 17, 1978

Vol. 2, No. 18, 12 pages. Missing pages 5, 6, 7, and 8.https://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/student_newspaper/2122/thumbnail.jp