Letter from the Editor

The Richmond Journal of Law and the Public Interest is proud to present our final issue of Volume XIV. We have enjoyed a successful year filled with compelling topics and impressive authorship. In the fall, we began Volume XIV with our publication of The General Assembly in Review, followed by an annual symposium, which focused on state legislative and judicial initiatives for establishing mental health courts in Virginia. Our subsequent issue covered an array of contemporary topics in the areas of litigation, federal procurement, and child protection programs. Our third issue centered solely on the Bill of Rights under the U.S. Constitution and became the first issue widely available to the general public. We conclude our year with our fourth issue presented here, which discusses a variety of issues that are particularly in contention among legal commentators. This issue examines: the personal and philosophical undertones possibly affecting judicial opinions; the problems posed by modem federalism markets; the potential unconstitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act; and finally, the ethical adversities faced by attorneys who engage in online social networking

Letter from the Editor

The Richmond Journal of Law and the Public Interest is proud to present our third issue of Volume XIV. Viewed through the lens of today\u27s cultural climate, the legal scholarship presented in this quarterly issue examines the profound effects of modern social conditions on individual liberties under Bill of Rights

On the J-test for nonnested hypotheses and Bayesian extension

Abstract Davidson and MacKinnon’s J-test was developed to test non-nested model specification. In empirical applications, however, when the alternate specifications fit the data well the J test may fail to distinguish between the true and false models: the J test will either reject, or fail to reject both specifications. In such cases we show that it is possible to use the information generated in the process of applying the J-test to implement a Bayesian approach that provides an unequivocal and acceptable solution. Jeffreys’ Bayes factors offer ways of obtaining the posterior probabilities of the competing models and relative ranking of the competing hypotheses. We further show that by using approximations of Schwarz Information Criterion and Bayesian Information Criterion we can use the classical estimates of the log of the maximum likelihood which are available from the estimation procedures used to implement the J test to obtain Bayesian posterior odds and posterior probabilities of the competing nested and non- nested specifications without having to specify prior distributions and going through the rigorous Bayesian computations.specification testing, non-nested hypotheses, Bayes factor, Bayesian Information Criteria, Marginal likelihood

Table of Contents

The General Assembly in Review: This annual edition of the General Assembly in Review is the product of great patience and unwavering commitment by the Editors of the Richmond Journal of Law and the Public Interest (JOLPI). As this is the first issue of Volume X1V, we hope you will find that this is only the beginning in a series of quality issues that we look forward to publishing for you this year. With articles solicited by Clay Landa, General Assembly Editor of Volume XIII, this issue focuses on topics of legislative debate during the 2010 session, while also exploring public scrutiny of the ethical challenges raised within the Commonwealth\u27s political arena

Letter from the Editor

The Richmond Journal of Law and the Public Interest is proud to present our annual fall issue. Marking our second publication of the year, we offer an impressive array of authorship discussing contemporary litigation matters, as well as the need for legislative overhaul in the areas of federal procurement and child protection programs. This issue combines diverse topics with quality writing to impart current reflections about ever-changing areas of the law

The Invincibility Fable

Mayan El-Sayed is an Egyptian actress as well as a Theatre and Film student at The American University in Cairo. She began her acting journey during her senior year in high school and has managed to make a name for herself in the entertainment industry over the past few years. In this audio documentary, she discusses the impact her career has had on her personal and academic life. The Invincibility Fable is an audio feature centered around the life of Egyptian actress and college student Mayan El-Sayed. She discusses some of the challenges she faced balancing the two aspects of her life, and the dangers she has been exposed to as a result of being part of the entertainment industry. She finishes with the sentiment that despite the downsides of her job, it remains the one thing she is truly passionate about, which gives her the incentive to keep going

Letter from the Editor

The Richmond Journal of Law and the Public Interest is proud to present our third issue of Volume XIV. Viewed through the lens of today\u27s cultural climate, the legal scholarship presented in this quarterly issue examines the profound effects of modern social conditions on individual liberties under Bill of Rights

Table of Contents

The General Assembly in Review: This annual edition of the General Assembly in Review is the product of great patience and unwavering commitment by the Editors of the Richmond Journal of Law and the Public Interest (JOLPI). As this is the first issue of Volume X1V, we hope you will find that this is only the beginning in a series of quality issues that we look forward to publishing for you this year. With articles solicited by Clay Landa, General Assembly Editor of Volume XIII, this issue focuses on topics of legislative debate during the 2010 session, while also exploring public scrutiny of the ethical challenges raised within the Commonwealth\u27s political arena

Letter from the Editor

The Richmond Journal of Law and the Public Interest is proud to present our annual fall issue. Marking our second publication of the year, we offer an impressive array of authorship discussing contemporary litigation matters, as well as the need for legislative overhaul in the areas of federal procurement and child protection programs. This issue combines diverse topics with quality writing to impart current reflections about ever-changing areas of the law

Jamming the Revolving Door: Legislative Setbacks for Mental Health Court Systems in Virginia

Proponents of MHCs assert that alternative court systems will provide efficient jail diversion programs and reduce the number of individuals with mental illness in the criminal justice system by directing them to appropriate community treatment facilities. At the same time, MHCs must serve as only one branch of a larger, cohesive community effort to deter individuals with mental illness from incarceration, if not from conviction. Both advocates and adversaries of MHCs remain wary of the potential misuse of mental health courts, which may subject people with mental illness to greater criminalization or lead to greater fragmentation of the mental health system. Part II of this comment will discuss the existing issues that effectuate the tension between the criminal justice system and mentally ill offenders, which provides important context to the debate surrounding the establishment of MHCs. Part III will examine the recent federal support for alternative approaches to handling mentally ill offenders and the different operational tactics implemented by existing MHC programs. Finally, Part IV will study the launch of Virginia\u27s first MHC in Norfolk, while exploring the latest legislative defeat in Virginia, Senate Bill 158 of the 2010 General Assembly, which sought to establish MHCs statewide. The recent bill proposed to allow general district courts and circuit courts to voluntarily undertake separate mental health dockets. However, the Senate and the House were unable to agree on the methodology purported by the bill