Men's Modesty, Religion, and the State: Spaces of Collision

This article examines religious practices in the United States, which govern modesty and other dress norms for men. I focus both on the spaces within which they most collide with regulatory regimes of the state and the legal implications of these norms, particularly for observant Muslim men. Undergirding the research are those ‘‘gender equality’’ claims made by many religious adherents, that men are required to maintain proper modesty norms just as are women. Also undergirding the research is the extensive anti-Islam bias in American culture today. The spaces within which men’s religiously proscribed dress and grooming norms are most at issue—indicated by First Amendment legal challenges to rights of religious practice—are primarily those state-controlled, total institutions Goffman describes, such as in the military and prisons. The implications of gendered modesty norms are important, as state control over religious expression in prisons, for example, is much more difficult to contest than in other spaces, although this depends entirely on who is doing the contesting and within which religious context. In American society today—and particularly within the context of growing Islamaphobia following the 9/11 attacks—the implications are greatest for those men practicing ‘‘prison Islam.’’

Iowa State Daily (April 10, 2012)

ContentsState Gym cracks down on ID sharingPreacher takes advantage of First Amendment weekNew event major sees surge in enrollmentModels, designers prepare for showThe highly politicized high courtConference serves up changes

Communication in Cyberspace

This Article examines a problem in cybercrime law that is both persistent and pervasive. What counts as “communication” on the Internet? Defining the term is particularly important for crimes such as cyberstalking, cyberharassment, and cyberbullying, where most statutes require a showing that the alleged perpetrator “communicated” with the victim or impose a similar requirement through slightly different language. This Article takes up the important task of defining communication. As a foundation to our discussion, we provide the first comprehensive survey of state statutes and case law relating to cyberstalking, cyberharassment, and cyberbullying. We then examine the realities of the way people use the Internet to develop a definition of “communication” that reflects those realities. That is, we aim to provide effective tools by which prosecutors can address wrongful conduct without punishing innocuous behavior or chilling speech. We conclude by proposing a model statute that appropriately defines “communication.” We recommend that state legislatures adopt the statute or modify existing laws to match it in pertinent part and demonstrate how the statute would apply in a range of situations.

"Unfair'' Restaurant Reviews:To Sue Or Not To Sue

In their discussion entitled - “Unfair” Restaurant Reviews: To Sue Or Not To Sue - by John Schroeder and Bruce Lazarus, Assistant Professors, Department of Restaurant, Hotel and Institutional Management at Purdue University, the authors initially state: “Both advantages and disadvantages exist on bringing lawsuits against restaurant critics who write “unfair” reviews. The authors, both of whom have experience with restaurant criticism, offer practical advice on what realistically can be done by the restaurateur outside of the courtroom to combat unfair criticism.” Well, this is going to be a sticky wicket no matter how you try to defend it, reviews being what they are; very subjective pieces of opinionated journalism, especially in the food industry. And, of course, unless you can prove malicious intent there really is no a basis for a libel suit. So, a restaurateur is at the mercy of written opinion and the press. “Libel is the written or published form of slander which is the statement of false remarks that may damage the reputation of others. It also includes any false and malicious publication which may damage a person's business, trade, or employment,” is the defined form of the law provided by the authors. Anecdotally, Schroeder and Lazarus offer a few of the more scathing pieces reviewers have written about particular eating establishments. And, yes, they can be a bit comical, unless you are the owner of an establishment that appears in the crosshairs of such a reviewer. A bad review can kneecap even a popular eatery. “Because of the large readership of restaurant reviews in the publication (consumer dining out habits indicate that nearly 50 percent of consumers read a review before visiting a new restaurant) your business begins a very dangerous downward tailspin,” the authors reveal, with attribution. “Many restaurant operators contend that a bad review can cost them an immediate trade loss of upward of 50 percent,” Schroeder and Lazarus warn. “The United States Supreme Court has ruled that a restaurant owner can collect damages only if he proves that the statement or statements were made with “actual malice,” even if the statements were untrue,” the authors say by way of citation. And that last portion of the statement cannot be over-emphasized. The first amendment to the U.S. Constitution does wield a heavy hammer, indeed, and it should. So, what recourse does a restaurateur have? The authors cautiously give a guarded thumbs-up to a lawsuit, but you better be prepared to prove a misstatement of fact, as opposed to the distinguishable press protected right of opinion. For the restaurateur the pitfalls are many, the rewards few and far between, Schroeder and Lazarus will have you know. “…after weighing the advantages and disadvantages of a lawsuit against a critic...the disadvantages are overwhelming,” the authors say. “Chicago restaurant critic James Ward said that someone dumped a load of manure on his yard accompanied by a note that read - Stop writing that s--t! - after he wrote a review of a local restaurant.” Such is a novel if not legally measurable tack against an un-mutual review.

Inter-American Development Bank act amendment : hearings before the Committee on Foreign Relations, United States Senate, Eighty-ninth Congress, first session on S.805, to amend the Inter-American Development Bank act to authorize the United States to participate in an increase in the resources of the fund for special operations of the Inter-American Development Bank. February 5 and 8, 1965.

Mode of access: Internet.

Report of the National recovery administration on the operation of the basing point system in the iron and steel industry, November 30, 1934 [and Appendix A-E] Pursuant to the first statement in paragraph 3 of Executive order dated May 30, 1934, approving the amendment to the Code of fair competition for the iron and steel industry.

Mimeographed.

Report of a debate in the Senate of the United States, on a resolution for recommending to the legilatures [!] of the several states, an amendment to the third paragraph of the first section of the second article of the Constitution of the United States, relative to the mode of electing a president and vice president of the said states.

Mode of access: Internet.

Food and drug act amendment, relating to exports. Hearings, Eighty-first Congress, first session on H.R. 562. July 25 and August 8, 1950.

Mode of access: Internet.

Constitution of the International Labor Organization instrument of amendment. Hearing before a subcommittee of the Committee on Foreign Relations, United States Senate, Eightieth Congress, first session, on providing for acceptance by the United States of America of the Constitution of the International Labor Organization instrument of amendment, and further authorizing an appropriation for payment of the United States share of the expenses of membership and for expenses of participation by the United States. May 19, 1947.

Arthur H. Vandenberg, chairman.

To prohibit the advertising of alcoholic beverages by radio. Hearings before a subcommittee of the Committee on Interstate Commerce, United States Senate, Seventy-sixth Congress, first session, on an amendment in the nature of a substitute to S. 517, a bill to amend the Communications Act of 1934 to prohibit the advertising of alcholic beverages by radio, March 29, 31, 1939.

Mode of access: Internet.

Amendment to Section 15a, Interstate Commerce Act (rule of ratemaking) : hearings before the Committee on Commerce, United States Senate, Eighty-seventh Congress, first session on S. 1197.

Hearings held May 11 - August 11, 1961.

Amendment to Communications act of 1934, protest section : hearing before a subcommittee of the Commitee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, United States Senate, Eighty-fourth Congress, first session, on S. 1648, a bill to amend section 309 of the Communications act of 1934, in regard to protests of grants of instruments of authorization without hearing : July 7, 1955.

Mode of access: Internet.

Reserves under federal old-age benefit plan - Social Security Act : hearing before the Committee on Finance, United States Senate, Seventy-fifth Congress, first session, on S. Con. Res. 4, a concurrent resolution calling for plans and recommendations for the amendment of certain provisions of the Social Security Act, February 22, 1937 ...

Mode of access: Internet.

Equal rights : hearing before a subcommittee of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, Seventy-first Congress, third session, on S. J. Res. 52, a joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to equal rights for men and women. January 6, 1931 ..

Thaddeus H. Caraway, chairman of subcommittee.

Submission to the Legal Affairs and Community Safety Committee Youth Justice and Other Legislation Amendment Bill

This submission addresses the Youth Justice and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2014 the objectives of which are to: 1. Permit repeat offenders’ identifying information to be published and open the Children’s Court for youth justice matters involving repeat offenders; 2. Create a new offence where a child commits a further offence while on bail; 3. Permit childhood findings of guilt for which no conviction was recorded to be admissible in court when sentencing a person for an adult offence; 4. Provide for the automatic transfer from detention to adult corrective services facilities of 17 year olds who have six months or more left to serve in detention; 5. Provide that, in sentencing any adult or child for an offence punishable by imprisonment, the court must not have regard to any principle, whether under statute or at law, that a sentence of imprisonment (in the case of an adult) or detention (in the case of a child) should only be imposed as a last resort; 6. Allow children who have absconded from Sentenced Youth Boot Camps to be arrested and brought before a court for resentencing without first being given a warning; and 7. Make a technical amendment to the Youth Justice Act 1992.