Capital Punishment and the Contemporary Cinema

American cinema of the last century includes a large number of films with major characters on death row.  James Hogan’s silent film “Capital Punishment,” for example, screened in 1925.  During the 1950s, the death penalty was at the forefront in such respected films as Fritz Lang’s “Beyond a Reasonable Doubt” (1956), Robert Wise’s “I Want to Live” (1958), and Howard Koch’s “The Last Mile” (1959).  The late 1990s and the first decade of the twenty-first century saw an even greater number of films inviting contemplation of the death penalty.

The latter flurry of films perhaps relates to the period’s especially pronounced campaign to end capital punishment.  In keeping with the often-heard assertion that Hollywood leans to the left politically, most of these films seem opposed to the death penalty.  Some express their opposition in the fashion of a “message film,” while others proffer more subtle dramatic narratives.

Continue ReadingCapital Punishment and the Contemporary Cinema

When Battered Women Kill . . .

Do feminist concerns regarding violence against women justify expanding the self-protection defense in criminal law?  This was the topic of the second annual George and Margaret Barrock Lecture on Criminal Law, which was delivered Thursday afternoon by Professor Joshua Dressler of Ohio State.  Dressler left no doubt about where he stands on the issue: whether motivated by domestic-violence concerns or otherwise, recent proposals to expand the right to use deadly force are inconsistent with a due regard for the value of human life.  To be clear, Dressler would not deny the right to use deadly force when a woman is actually being attacked or threatened — his focus is more on cases in which a sleeping or otherwise nonthreatening batterer is killed. 

The webcast of Dressler’s provocative lecture is available here.   The lecture will also be published later this year in the Marquette Law Review.

Continue ReadingWhen Battered Women Kill . . .

How Has the United States Avoided Wars of Religion?

Among western nations, the United States is unusual for its levels of religious belief and participation.  The United States is also unusual for its cultural diversity, including its diversity of religious affiliations.  So, given this potentially combustible mix of strong beliefs and diversity of beliefs, how has the United States managed to avoid sustained, large-scale religious violence? 

That is the question that motivates Scott Idleman’s newest paper on SSRN, entitled “A Legal Perspective on Conflicts Involving Religious Communities.”  More specifically, Scott is interested in the ways that the legal culture of the United States has helped to “prevent conflicts involving religious and other communities and even foster healthy relations among these communities.”  Here is the abstract:

Within any given state or society, numerous factors can influence both relations among religious communities and relations between these communities and other institutions or value systems, including scientific communities, schools of economic or legal thought, and various ideological or political movements. Though some of these factors obviously arise from within the beliefs and structures of the religions themselves, many arise from the history, political culture, and legal framework of the state or society in which a given religious community is situated. This paper discusses the potential role of law and the legal system in influencing these relations and addressing conflicts among these communities and institutions. After explaining in general terms the relevance of a legal perspective to the assessment and resolution of such disagreements, the paper specifically examines characteristics of the constitutional framework and political culture of the United States that appear to prevent or minimize conflicts involving religious communities.

Continue ReadingHow Has the United States Avoided Wars of Religion?