Linas, Alison B.

English

University of Richmond

Richmond Public Interest Law ReviewVolume 16 | Issue 1 Article 21-1-2012Letter from the EditorAlison B. LinasFollow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.richmond.edu/pilrThis Prefatory Matter is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School Journals at UR Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted forinclusion in Richmond Public Interest Law Review by an authorized administrator of UR Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contactscholarshiprepository@richmond.edu.Recommended CitationAlison B. Linas, Letter from the Editor, 16 Rich. J.L. & Pub. Int. xi (2012).Available at: http://scholarship.richmond.edu/pilr/vol16/iss1/2LETTER FROM THE EDITORDear Readers:I am proud to present you all with the 2012 edition of the GeneralAssembly in Review. This issue has been several months in the making andis the product of the very hard work and dedication of the Editors and Staffof the Richmond Journal of Law and the Public Interest (JOLPI). In par-ticular, I would like to thank Rachel Logan, who went above and beyondher regular Editor-in-Chief duties to make this edition come to fruition. Iwould also like to thank Amy Weiss and Mary Garber, the editors of lastyear's General Assembly issue for their hard work in selecting articles andtheir guidance in preparing me to take the reigns as the General Assemblyeditor.The articles in this year's edition of the General Assembly in Reviewfocus on topics of legislative debate during the 2012 sessions of the Virgin-ia General Assembly. We hope that this edition will give you, our readers,insight into some of the important topics of the 2012 General Assembly andwe hope that you will find this issue to be a valuable source in running a le-gal practice, evaluating the Virginia political system, and helping create ahealthy dialogue in our beloved Commonwealth.In The Virginia Rules of Evidence, University of Richmond profes-sor Ronald Bacigal provides a brief insight into the history and applicationof the new Virginia Rules of Evidence.In Virginia's Expanded Nutrient Trading Law: Will It Help Restorethe Chesapeake Bay While Allowing for Growth?, Margaret (Peggy) Sannerof the Chesapeake Bay Foundation discusses the impact of the newly ex-panded nutrient trading program signed into law in the 2012 legislative ses-sion. This article contemplates how the law, in conjunction with new EPAregulations, will help Virginia reach its pollution reduction goals by the2025 target date without closing off needed economic growth.In Giving Voices to the Underserved: A Review of How Lower-Income Virginians Fared in the 2012 Virginia General Assembly, ChristieMarra of the Virginia Poverty Law Center and H. Timothy Perry, a law stu-dent at the University of Richmond discuss the impact of new and proposedlegislation on Virginia's poor. They break down "the good, the bad, and theugly" of the legislations' impact on legal immigrant children and pregnantxi1Linas: Letter from the EditorPublished by UR Scholarship Repository, 2012xii RICHMOND JOURNAL OF LAW AND THE PUBLIC INTEREST [Vol. XVI:iwomen, kinship care families, and Temporary Assistance to Needy Fami-lies (TANF) families.In Reproductive Freedom and Virginia's 2012 General AssemblySession, Katherine Greenier from the American Civil Liberties Union ofVirginia discusses the wide range of reproductive health bills that werepassed and proposed in the General Assembly in the 2012 session. This ar-ticle looks at the bills' impact on Virginia women and analyzes the partisannature behind the bills.In Virginia's "War on Women:" How Forcing Women to Have AnUltrasound Before Abortion is Unconstitutional, I specifically analyze theconstitutionality of Virginia's new ultrasound law from two angles. First,the article concludes that the law is unconstitutional under PlannedParenthood v. Casey's undue burden standard. Second, it violates a citizen'srecognized right to refuse medical care.In Dispatch From the Culture War: Virginia's Failed HPV Vaccina-tion Mandate, law student and former editor-in-chief Rachel Reynolds dis-cusses Virginia legislators' attempts to repeal the HPV vaccination mandatein Virginia. She also analyzes how Virginia and other states' mandates haveactually affected the vaccination's coverage.As in past issues, this edition of the General Assembly in Reviewconcludes with a list of summaries of the major legislation considered andpassed in the 2012 Virginia General Assembly. We thank the students whowrote these summaries for their work, and hope they will serve as a valua-ble resource to all those interested in Virginia lawmaking.We sincerely hope that our articles, comments, summaries, and in-dex will provide you with a valuable tool to help in your practice areas. Weencourage you to use this issue as a starting point for discussion as well as acatalyst to encourage you to become involved in the political process in theCommonwealth of Virginia.Sincerely,Alison B. LinasGeneral Assembly Editor 2012-20132Richmond Public Interest Law Review, Vol. 16 [2012], Iss. 1, Art. 2http://scholarship.richmond.edu/pilr/vol16/iss1/2

Letter from the Editor

https://scholarship.richmond.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1272&context=pilr

Letter from the Editor

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

University of Richmond