Author Archives: Albite, Karla

The Problem with Capital Punishment: A Critical Assessment of the Ultimate Punitive Sanction

VINCENT R. JONES,* 69 U. Miami L. Rev. Caveat 27 (2015). In response to Vincent R. Jones & Bruce Wilson,Innocence and Its Impact on the Reassessment of the Utility of Capital Punishment: Has Time Come to Abolish the Ultimate Sanction?, 67 U. Miami L. Rev. 469 (2013). One of the most controversial issues in criminal law is capital punishment. Often called the […]

Griswold, Geduldig, and Hobby Lobby: The Sex Gap Continues

MAYA MANIAN,* 69 U. Miami L. Rev. Caveat 17 (2015). In response to Mary Ziegler, The (Non)-Right to Sex, 69 U. Miami L. Rev. 631 (2015). I. Introduction In her article, The (Non)-Right to Sex, Professor Mary Ziegler excavates the fascinating legal history of the “sex gap”—the historical failure to address sexual liberty—in the constitutional canon and offers an important cautionary tale for contemporary advocacy […]

Foreword: The Evolution of the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals: A New Era of Diversity on the Bench

BY HON. URSULA UNGARO, 69 U. Miami L. Rev. 929 (2015). Foreword: From a historical perspective, 2014 was a pivotal year for the youngest circuit court in the nation. Within a four-month period, three new judges were confirmed and sworn in to serve on the Eleventh Circuit—all having clerked for distinguished Eleventh Circuit judges and all of them women. […]

Because of Winn-Dixie: The Common Law of Exclusive Use Covenants

BY TANYA D. MARSH, 69 U. Miami L. Rev. 935 (2015). Introduction: As a condition of entering into a lease for space in a shopping center, tenants with significant bargaining power often require landlords to promise that no other occupant of the shopping center will sell certain goods or services. This promise, contained in the lease, is known as […]

Giving Judge Tjoflat’s Deference Analysis Its Due

BY JONATHAN D. COLAN, 69 U. Miami L. Rev. 973 (2015). Introduction: In United States v. Williams, Judge Gerald Bard Tjoflat sought to clarify the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 3742(e)’s “due deference” standard and to fix, what he considered to be, the Eleventh Circuit’s inconsistent application of this provision in federal criminal sentencing appeals. Judge Tjoflat’s mission failed. […]