Wednesday, June 23 at 12:00pm to 1:00pmVirtual Event
This roundtable workshop will provide a group of UCI Law faculty with an opportunity share their current projects, receive feedback, and generate discussion among colleagues. Zoom information is below.
Necessity, Legal Interpretation, and Value in the Islamic Legal Tradition: The Case of the Starving Person
In this article, I argue that historical juristic discourses on the hypothetical case of the starving person yield several insights into the dynamics of legal argument, practices of legal pedagogy, and relationship between law and ethics in the Islamic legal tradition. I provide a historically rooted account of the starving person paradigm by tracing the rise of the paradigm as a hallmark hypothetical and examining its change over time and across geographies. I explore the paradigm’s function(s) as a legal heuristic and pedagogy of law in the various contexts in which it was discussed, debated, and taught. Finally, I provide analysis of several core issues of necessity to show how the paradigm served as an important site for the development of legal reasoning and legal theory in the Islamic tradition.
Ji Seon Song
Patient or Prisoner: Hospitals as Carceral Settings
This Article argues that hospitals act as extensions of carceral settings in both pre-trial and post-sentencing phases of the criminal legal process. Hospitals act as temporary and portable police stations, jails and prisons. When police investigate suspects and when they bring in prisoners for medical treatment, police rules trump hospital regulations, rules, and policies regarding patient privacy and dignity. Hospital beds act as jail and prison cells demarcated by police presence, shackles, and other signs of carcerality. The problems of inequality in health and the criminal legal system have resulted in the expansion of the carceral system into another area of stratified social welfare, extending carceral treatment into hospitals and resulting in punitive healthcare.
Critically Examining and Countering Reliance on Criminal Convictions in Family Court and Domestic Violence Proceedings
The Black Lives Matter movement and COVID-19’s disproportionate impact on communities of color have heightened the need to expose racial injustice in areas that scholars often overlook. My article critically examines judicial reliance on convictions in family law and domestic violence proceedings, including when statutes explicitly allow for or require Family Court and Domestic Violence Unit judges to consider past criminal convictions and probation and parole status of litigants seeking to secure custody or visitation of their children, form a family through adoption, or receive protection from domestic violence. Given how the criminal legal system disproportionately arrests, charges, and sentences people of color and increasingly criminalizes domestic violence survivors, the convergence of heuristics and bias profoundly impacts litigants’ lives, relationships, families, and communities. While exploring these areas, my article identifies challenges related to judges’ implicit bias and discusses structural hurdles, with criminal and family courts having high-volume dockets that affect adjudication and place pressure on parties to accept plea offers or settlements. I also address survivors' advocates' potential objections to decreasing judicial reliance on criminal convictions in the family law context. The article concludes by offering formal and informal advocacy strategies for overcoming, reforming, and in some cases removing the role of criminal convictions in domestic violence and family court proceedings.
More information to come
You may login with your UCINetID. No account creation is necessary
ALL OTHER USERS:
When creating an account, please create it with your first and last name, otherwise it may be deleted
NOTE ON EVENT SUBMISSION:
In order to submit events, users must have an UCI email address (@uci.edu). All events submitted by non-UCI users WILL be deleted.