The English Bugaboo - Cruikshank to Talbot

This post examines some aspects of the British diachronic illustrative tradition in connection with Talbot's Alice in Sunderland (2007). In this post, James Baker argues how what binds together the bugaboos of Talbot, Tenniel and the Georgian satirists is..

The Covent Garden Old Price riots: protest and justice in late-Georgian London

This article explores perceptions of the law and of how agents of the law responded to events at Covent Garden Theatre during the bitter months between mid-October and late-November 1809, the height of the Covent Garden Old Price riots. It does so through the lens of the periodical press, a vital and voluminous source of not only what happened during the riots but also of opinions on what happened and of perceptions of what happened, opinions and perceptions that are the primary concern of this article. The article begins with a discussion of how the magistrates, 'police officers', justices, and lawyers who together encompassed the guardians of the legal system were seen, where they were seen, and what they did. It moves on to examine how the actions of those guardians and the legal system they represented were reported upon. And it concludes with a discussion of how theatregoers and Londoners were seen to have responded to those actions, moving a significant element of the conflict outside of Covent Garden Theatre and into the public press in a direct response to how they were policed as threats to public order and security. It argues that the Covent Garden Old Price riots was a significant urban act of multi-class protest because of the ways that it intersected with wider late-Georgian concerns, with discursive arenas where British liberty and the freedom of her subjects were contested and at stake

The Efflorescence of Caricature by Todd Porterfield (ed.)

'International, intergenerational, and interdisciplinary' (p. xv) is how Porterfield positions this ambitious collection which analyses caricature between 1759 and 1838. A product of a conference of the same name, the essays it contains fulfil this remit admirably whilst attempting to explain the rise of caricature. Moreover, as Porterfield writes in his introductory offering, these essays seek to loosen the study of caricature from the orthodoxies of satirical print scholarship, and one suspects from the canonical texts of the field familiar to scholars of the long 18th century. This is not to say that those canons are rejected, rather The Efflorescence of Caricature foregrounds the vibrancy and variety of current research in this area, not least by moving away from the anglocentric narratives of anglophonic scholarship and the assumptions they contain. Thus in this desire to ask new questions of this source material alone, the collection represents a far from insignificant success...

Is Military Justice Sentencing on the March? Should it be? And if so, Where should it Head? Court-Martial Sentencing Process, Practice, and Issues

This article starts with a sketch of the military justice system to orient readers. Understanding that structure, the article then describes the sentencing process for special and general courts-martial. The article follows by identifying two core military sentencing questions: First, should commanders have authority to grant clemency? Second, should the military justice system adopt sentencing guidelines? With respect to each topic presented, the article does not attempt to answer the questions nor offer prescriptions. Rather, it seeks to identify the principal fault lines around which debate should, or will likely, fall. The article next presents ‘‘nutshell’’ introductions to additional sentencing matters that may warrant review as applied in the military context, including the handling of collateral matters, and the relationship between age and culpability. However, for the reasons stated, these issues are not presented in detail here

The National Security Process and a Lawyer’s Duty: Remarks to the Senior Judge Advocate Symposium

September 11 changed so much about our lives and how we perceive national security. Harold Lasswell, in an earlier context, described the sharing of danger throughout society as the “socialization of danger,” which he wrote was a permanent characteristic of modern violence; but not for America until September 11. The socialization of danger has made ordinary citizens participants in the national security process in a way not previously experienced. In addition, it has brought relatively unknown federal agencies, like the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Centers for Disease Control, to the forefront of national security planning and response. And both of these occurrences have emphasized the importance of viewing terrorism and cyber security as problems requiring effective vertical and not just horizontal process. Where most national security problems require coordination amongst federal agencies, homeland security is equally about coordination between federal, state, and local actors down to the level of first responder and the technician who spots the first medical anomaly. This vertical process will test the manner in which information is shared, resources allocated, and perhaps the level at which decisions of life and death, heretofore made by the President, are taken. Constitutional democracy also means that all decisions are made according to law. And that means that sound Executive process must incorporate timely and competent legal advice. In some cases, legal review is dictated by statute, as in the case of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which requires the attorney general, or his designee, to approve requests for electronic surveillance or physical search before they are submitted to the FISA court. In other cases, the President has directed a specific process to ensure legal review in areas historically prone to peril, including certain intelligence activities. However, the majority of legal advice within the national security process is not directed, but is the product of practice, custom, and personal interchange between lawyer and client. That means that good process requires personal persuasion, presence, and value added, or the lawyer will find he or she is only contributing to decisions where legal review is mandated and then only as the last stop on the bus route. Constitutional democracy does not rest on such process

Eurycea troglodytes

Number of Pages: 2Integrative BiologyGeological Science

The National Security Presidency in Constitutional Context: Reflections on Terrorism and the Presidency from the Last Ten Years

In this time of terrorist threat, there is no more important institution to study than the national security presidency. That is because the president is singularly situated to command the instruments to counter terrorism. He is also singularly situated to ensure that such instruments are used effectively, lawfully, and in a manner consistent with constitutional values. I believe I have a duty, based on where I have been, to help others observe and understand the institution of the presidency. I do so because I want the national security presidency to succeed in providing for our physical security and in upholding our constitutional way of life; or, as the president’s constitutional oath states succinctly, “to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution.” Those who teach, interpret and study the presidency have an important duty to play in this process by testing the institution to ensure that these functions are successfully performed

The Master Mason: How Professor Baldus Built a Bridge from Learning to Law and the Legacy of Equal Justice He Leaves Behind

These are Chief Judge Baker’s remarks eulogizing the late Professor David Baldus. Chief Judge Baker observes that Professor Baldus was an extraordinary educator-lawyer who mastered the fields of social science and statistics. He adds that Professor Baldus was diligent in his research and strived to make the law accessible. Chief Judge Baker discusses how Professor Baldus’s research on the death penalty and proportionality review successfully bridged the law and learning, without ever losing sight of compassion

Ordered Liberty and the Homeland Security Mission

This paper will start with a brief discussion of the terrorism threat because the threat remains predicate for any serious discussion of where we draw our legal lines. I will then suggest a legal model for looking at questions of homeland security called ordered liberty. The model is simple. First, given the nature of the threat, the executive must have broad and flexible authority to detect and respond to terrorism-–to provide for our physical security. Second, the sine qua non for such authority is meaningful oversight. Oversight means the considered application of constitutional structure, executive process, legal substance, and relevant review to decision-making–-all of which depend on the integrity and judgment of government lawyers. Meaningful oversight protects our way of life. It also protects our security by helping decision-makers get it right on the front end of a decision, rather than investigating on the back end. This model does not detail whether civil service rules should apply to the Homeland Security Department, or whether military commissions are a good idea. The paper will suggest some principles and lessons learned that can be applied to such questions. In the process, two false dichotomies will hopefully be debunked: first, that security and liberty conflict; and, second that oversight and security conflict