The Bee, A Natural History, by Noah Wilson-Rich (2014, Princeton University Press. ISBN: 9780691161358. US$27.95)

(excerpt) Upon receiving “The Bee, A Natural History”, by Noah Wilson Rich, I was drawn in by the title and the beautiful rust and grey front cover featuring a nearly 3-D photo of a honey bee. I immediately felt twinges of excitement—this is the book I have always wanted to have available for my university course, Apiculture and Honey Bee Biology—and disappointment—I did not write it! The “bee”— singular—accompanied by the high-resolution photo, suggested that this book focused on the world’s best understood insect that my course is centered around, Apis mellifera

Aging and Work in Canada: Firm Policies

Few Canadian firms have explicit policies dealing with the aging of their workforces, other than pension policies geared to a conventional retirement age. However, other firm policies have unanticipated consequences that apply differentially to older and younger workers. This paper reviews several relevant firm practices used in Canada, including pension and benefits practices, training policies and programs, and work and family practices. The most dramatic firm practice that has an impact on the older worker is restructuring through downsizing the workforce by means of retirement incentives and layoffs. We introduce the issue by considering available national-level Canadian data, and then consider five case studies representing different configurations of firm practices. These cases are: Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada, NOVA Corporation, Slater Steels, Bell Canada, and the garment industry in Montreal. Both management and employee level data are presented. We argue the importance of organizational latitude in establishing firm-based policies that dramatically change the nature of the life course in Canada.aging workforce; firm policies

Book Review

The author reviews Defending My Enemy: American Nazis, the Skokie Case, and the Risks of Freedom by Aryeh Neier

Bearing False Witness: Perjured Affidavits and the Fourth Amendment

The purpose of this Article is to articulate appropriate legal doctrine to govern the problem of false statements of fact by law enforcement officers in warrant affidavits. This Article addresses the issue in the context of actions brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 to redress such Fourth Amendment violations. This perspective promises to be interesting and unique for two reasons. First, the fact that the guilty are ordinarily the direct beneficiaries of the Fourth Amendment has long been a matter of grave concern. In contrast, rarely, if ever, will anyone except an innocent victim of a search based on a perjured warrant affidavit be able to maintain a successful action asserting this particular Fourth Amendment violation. Second, a police officer who files a false affidavit in support of a warrant application, unlike any other defendant in a § 1983 case, is not entitled to the protection of any of the immunity doctrines which protect police officers in most cases from legal liability

Book Review

The author reviews Justice Hugo Black and the First Amendment, edited by Everette E. Dennis, Donald M. Gillmor and David L. Grey

The Flag Salute Cases and the First Amendment

The doctrinal importance of the opinions of Justices Jackson and Frankfurter in the flag salute cases as contrasting statements on the interpretation of the freedom of speech guarantee of the first amendment and the function of the judiciary in preserving our most precious civil liberty has been almost wholly ignored. There are several reasons why an examination of the cases from this perspective is especially important. First, the major casebooks almost uniformly treat Barnette and Gobitis as freedom of religion cases and ignore Justice Jackson\u27s significant contribution to free speech theory. Second, the flag salute controversy has been revived recently in several cases where the individual\u27s motive for refusal to participate was not religiously based. Third, a proper appreciation of Barnette as an important free speech precedent is necessary to a proper understanding of the constitutionality of analogous governmental regulations, such as the requirement that individuals, litigants and spectators alike, stand in a courtroom at specified times as a gesture of respect. Finally, the United States Supreme Court has rediscovered Barnette, after years of desuetude, as a major doctrinal freedom of expression precedent

The Flag Salute Cases and the First Amendment

The doctrinal importance of the opinions of Justices Jackson and Frankfurter in the flag salute cases as contrasting statements on the interpretation of the freedom of speech guarantee of the first amendment and the function of the judiciary in preserving our most precious civil liberty has been almost wholly ignored. There are several reasons why an examination of the cases from this perspective is especially important. First, the major casebooks almost uniformly treat Barnette and Gobitis as freedom of religion cases and ignore Justice Jackson\u27s significant contribution to free speech theory. Second, the flag salute controversy has been revived recently in several cases where the individual\u27s motive for refusal to participate was not religiously based. Third, a proper appreciation of Barnette as an important free speech precedent is necessary to a proper understanding of the constitutionality of analogous governmental regulations, such as the requirement that individuals, litigants and spectators alike, stand in a courtroom at specified times as a gesture of respect. Finally, the United States Supreme Court has rediscovered Barnette, after years of desuetude, as a major doctrinal freedom of expression precedent

The Impact of Pacifica Foundation on Two Traditions of Freedom of Expression (with Endress)

The purpose of this article is not to debate the wisdom of the use of sensitive language on the electronic media or elsewhere. The admonition that the perceived wisdom of governmental regulations should never be confused with the issue of their constitutionality remains appropriate. Nor is it our purpose to debate the substantive question of whether the Court reached the proper result in Pacifica, although we will necessarily have much to say by implication on this issue. The purpose of this article is rather to assess the impact of Pacifica on the two traditions of freedom of expression which continue to coexist ueasily in our nation. An assessment of the impact of Pacifica is of particular importance because [i]t is characteristic of the freedoms of expression in general that they are vulnerable to gravely damaging yet barely visible encroachments