Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies - New Dimensions since Darby

In this article, Professor Funk first summarizes the law of exhaustion of administrative remedies prior to the Supreme Court\u27s groundbreaking decision in Darby v. Cisneros and then describes that decision and the Court\u27s rationale for it. He notes that both litigants and agencies have been slow to recognize the effect of Darby, so that some agency regulations may still suffer the same flaws as those of the agency in Darby. Professor Funk next addresses the questions that Darby did not answer or which it raised and the responses of lower courts. Some of these questions have been resolved and some not, leaving the lower courts split or confused, but for the most part courts have not been applying the rationale of Darby beyond its particular holding

Composite Intersection Reinforcement

An assembly and method for manufacturing a composite reinforcement for unitizing a structure are provided. According to one embodiment, the assembly includes a base having a plurality of pins extending outwardly therefrom to define a structure about which a composite fiber is wound to define a composite reinforcement preform. The assembly also includes a plurality of mandrels positioned adjacent to the base and at least a portion of the composite reinforcement preform, and a cap that is positioned over at least a portion of the plurality of mandrels. The cap is configured to engage each of the mandrels to support the mandrels and the composite reinforcement preform during a curing process to form the composite reinforcement

Composite intersection reinforcement

An assembly and method for manufacturing a composite reinforcement for unitizing a structure are provided. According to one embodiment, the assembly includes a base having a plurality of pins extending outwardly therefrom to define a structure about which a composite fiber is wound to define a composite reinforcement preform. The assembly also includes a plurality of mandrels positioned adjacent to the base and at least a portion of the composite reinforcement preform, and a cap that is positioned over at least a portion of the plurality of mandrels. The cap is configured to engage each of the mandrels to support the mandrels and the composite reinforcement preform during a curing process to form the composite reinforcement

Dark Matter in the Coming Decade: Complementary Paths to Discovery and Beyond

In this report we summarize the many dark matter searches currently being pursued through four complementary approaches: direct detection, indirect detection, collider experiments, and astrophysical probes. The essential features of broad classes of experiments are described, each with their own strengths and weaknesses. The complementarity of the different dark matter searches is discussed qualitatively and illustrated quantitatively in two simple theoretical frameworks. Our primary conclusion is that the diversity of possible dark matter candidates requires a balanced program drawing from all four approaches.Comment: Report prepared for the Community Summer Study (Snowmass) 2013, on behalf of Cosmic Frontier Working Groups 1-4 (CF1: WIMP Dark Matter Direct Detection, CF2: WIMP Dark Matter Indirect Detection, CF3: Non-WIMP Dark Matter, and CF4: Dark Matter Complementarity); published versio

Deadly Drones, Due Process, and the Fourth Amendment

The use of drones to target individuals, especially American citizens, outside of the immediate zone of hostilities has been severely questioned in the media with assertions that it constitutes the executive acting as the prosecutor, the judge, the jury and the executioner without any of the protections afforded by constitutional law. A leaked “white paper” from the administration is the only unclassified legal justification for this practice. The “white paper” raises a number of legal issues. Among these are whether the President has the authority to order such killings, whether various criminal statutes or the executive order banning assassination would prohibit such operations, and whether the operations would violate international law. This article, however, only addresses the questions: whether, and if so how, the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment and the Fourth Amendment would constrain these operations. The article begins by describing the operations in question and the procedures the administration has put in place to authorize them and relates the arguments contained in the “white paper” regarding the requirements of due process and the Fourth Amendment. The article then critically assesses those arguments and raises some additional ones. In short, the article concludes that it is doubtful that the Due Process Clause is the appropriate constitutional provision applicable to drone strikes, although, if it is applicable, the current procedure, at least as outlined in the “white paper,” is constitutionally doubtful. Rather, the article asserts that it is the Fourth Amendment that is the appropriate lens under which to view drone strikes, and here the administration’s justifications have greater strength but still lack a vital element to ensure the reliability of the determinations it makes. The article suggests that extension of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court’s jurisdiction to drone strikes would satisfy any Due Process or Fourth Amendment concerns, and the use of that court would neither impede the effectiveness of the drone program nor raise other constitutional concerns

My Way or No Way: The American Reluctance for Trans-Territorial Public Law

One of the topics for this symposium is “trans-territorial administrative law.” It is said that public law is in the process of de-territorialization; that many of the phenomena discussed in the current context of modern administrative law (e.g., agency-networks, governance, privatization, globalization) have led to a lessening of the principle of territoriality in public law; and that, indeed, in a digital age, the principle of territoriality seems much less important to an increasing sector of regulation of activities (e.g., media, telecommunications, banking, insurance, internet, crime prevention, etc.). Deterritorialization is probably most evident in trade law, where the World Trade Organization (WTO)1 has become the de facto ruling body regarding national barriers to international trade. Nevertheless, de-territorialization is hardly limited to trade, as the International Criminal Court (ICC) reflects. While the United States has been a leader with regard to some aspects of this globalization of public law, such as in the formation of the WTO, it has also failed to participate in other aspects, such as in the creation of the ICC. What explains this American ambivalence