SPINSTER: A Novel

Book review

Mapping Architecture as Archive: Stories in the Walls

My work explores the relationship between memory and architectural space, narrative and structure. It treats architecture as a physical archive, a record of the past and the present. I work with drawing, screen print, and sculpture to tease out and interpret these narratives. Connecting bodies, space, and time, I am inspired by the stories in the walls

In Vivo Light Microscopy of Organs

High resolution, brightfield and fluorescence, light microscopic methods have been developed for examining living organs in situ. The methods permit study of the rate, duration, magnitude and direction of dynamic histologic, pathologic, physiologic and pharmacologic events. In addition, morphometric analyses of such living preparations can provide basic information needed to evaluate alterations induced by fixation and processing of these organs for electron microscopy. Most organs are amenable to such investigations. In anesthetized animals, the selected organ is trans-and/or epi-illuminated with selected wavelengths of monochromatic light, imaged with water immersion objectives and the resulting monochromatic optical images televised using silicon or silicon intensified target (SIT) vidicon cameras. Quantitation is obtained by interfacing appropriate analog and/or digital instrumentation with the electro-optical system. Under optimal conditions the resolution is 0.3 μm, essentially the maximum obtainable by light microscopy. As a result, imaging is possible of most intra- and extravascular cell types, their nuclei, nucleoli as well as some cytoplasmic organelles and inclusions. The use of vital dyes and fluorescent tracers along or in combination with physiologic and pharmacologic stimuli provides information about structural-functional relationships in these intact living organs during both health and disease

The Body Politic: Federalism as Feminism in Health Reform

This essay illuminates how modern health law has been mainstreaming feminism under the auspices of health equity and social determinants research. Feminism shares with public health and health policy both the empirical impulse to identify inequality and the normative value of pursing equity in treatment. Using the Affordable Care Act’s federal health insurance reforms as a case study of health equity in action, the essay exposes the feminist undercurrents of health insurance reform and the impulse toward mutuality in a body politic. The essay concludes by revisiting—from a feminist perspective—scholars’ arguments that equity in health insurance is essential for human flourishing

Submerged Precedent

Numerous studies have pointed to the skewed picture of trial courts\u27 workload, management, and disposition of cases that exists from examining Westlaw and Lexis opinions alone, akin to navigating the iceberg from its tip.4 But submerged precedent pushes docketology in an uncharted direction by identifying a mass of reasoned opinions-putative precedent and not mere evidence of decision-making-that exist only on dockets. Submerged precedent thus raises the specter that docket-based research may be necessary in some areas to ascertain an accurate picture of the law itself not just trial courts\u27 administration of it. The existence of a submerged body of reasoned law carries the potential to destabilize our system of precedent and undermine the system\u27s animating pnnciples of fairness, efficiency, and legitimacy by obscuring decisional law. To investigate whether these threats to the precedential system from submergence have materialized, this article presents an analysis of a sample of opinions: remand decisions from two district courts over seven years, all adjudicating federal-question removals of state-law claims. The study found that 30 percent of all reasoned opinions are submerged on dockets (and 44 percent of all decisions contain no reasoning at all). Looking purely at outcome measures (whether to grant or deny remand), the existence of submerged precedent distorts the picture of remand rates. In this sample, for example, reasoned opinions concerned with Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) federal questions remanded the case 63.67 percent of the time. Looking only in Westlaw, the remand rate drops to 46.67 percent, while 100 percent of the submerged cases were remanded. Beyond just outcome measures, submerging reasoned opinions from public view carries the potential to skew the substantive law and permit inequitable adjudication. Although the small sample gathered here raises far more questions than it has the power to answer, several factors appear relevant to submergence: structure of legal tests, managerial discretion, party sophistication, and insulation from appeal. Given these observations, there may be an ideal role for submerged precedent to play. As technology democratizes access to court opinions and eliminates traditional justifications for selective publication in bound volumes, these reflections on the balance between submergence and availability acquire even greater urgency. The E-Government Act of 2002 mandated online public access to federal courts\u27 written opinions, 5 catalyzing the federal courts to digitize their dockets and build the Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER) database for public access.6 BloombergLaw has added a more facile docket search interface for a fee, and the United States Government Printing Office has just branched out into free online access to court opinions through an FDSys pilot project. Yet the march toward unfettered public access to court decisions thus far has sidestepped thoughtful consideration of the interplay between technology, access, and precedent theory, while tacitly permitting submergence of reasoned opinions. This article responds to this unique moment in the evolution of precedent and the recently-rekindled national debates over precedential values. The analysis proceeds in three parts. Part I surveys the existing empirical evidence about decision-making in district courts and describes the methods for collecting this data set. Part I then establishes the defining features of the submerged precedent identified in this data and compares the sample of district court decisions in Westlaw to those available only on dockets. By this comparison, the study reveals possible forces behind submergence and the potential for inequity and skew in the substantive law these opinions apply. Part II illustrates submerged precedent\u27s implications for precedent theory and for district courts\u27 role in shaping law. Part II first anchors submerged precedent in precedent doctrine, explaining how submerged precedent\u27s defining features reflect the doctrine\u27s broader systemic goals of efficiency, predictability, and legitimacy. Part II then theorizes the threats that submergence may pose to those goals and highlights the unique institutional roles that district court opinions play. Proceeding from Part I\u27s empirical observations and Part II\u27s theoretical foundations, Part III outlines submerged precedent\u27s ideal role. In considering the optimal level of submergence, Part III considers technology\u27s democratizing influence on the future composition of-and interface with-a civil justice system based in precedent. Ultimately, this project concludes that submerged precedent\u27s existence should inform procedural and practical choices affecting the body of decisional law available to the public that it is intended to serve, suggesting that submerged precedent\u27s debut here should presage its demise

The level of foster parent satisfaction with the Department of Children\u27s Services

This research project surveyed San Bernardino County non-relative licensed foster parents to assess their level of satisfaction with the Department of Children\u27s Services. This research also explored factors related to communication and feelings of support and determined their impact on over all feelings of satisfaction with the agency

Jackson v. Birmingham Board of Education: Title IX\u27s Implied Private Right of Action for Retaliation

The Supreme Court has penned countless words about the sound of statutory silence.\u27 On March 29, 2005, the Court once again grappled with the meaning of silence in a statute, splitting along familiar 5-4 lines in Jackson v. Birmingham Board of Education.2 When the dust cleared, a male coach of a high school girls\u27 basketball team, who was fired in retaliation for protecting his players\u27 Title IX3 rights, possessed a private right of action arising from the statute itself.4 Although the Court has retreated from its high-water mark of implying private rights of action,5 in the Jackson decision it advanced private rights that had been previously implied