Political Sciencehttp://hdl.handle.net/10211.3/10211.4_172024-03-29T10:06:47Z2024-03-29T10:06:47ZCalifornia Assembly Bill 109 - a comparative analysis of Butte and Merced countiesHaynes, Kevinhttp://hdl.handle.net/10211.3/2133632019-10-11T22:11:20Z2019-09-17T00:00:00ZCalifornia Assembly Bill 109 - a comparative analysis of Butte and Merced counties
Haynes, Kevin
The purpose of this thesis is to provide a comparative analysis of Butte and Merced counties pertaining to the implementation of Assembly Bill 109. This assessment of each county will include the type of spending each county implements in terms of the allocation of funding provided to them through Assembly Bill 109. This analysis will also consider themes found in news media from each county that are relative to the implementation of Assembly Bill 109 and official county records of both counties. For the purposes of this study, this comparative analysis will provide insight into the type of post-release programs that have been implemented in both Butte and Merced counties, the success of those programs, and how that may relate to public opinion.
2019-09-17T00:00:00ZPredicting the unpredictable: how will the Supreme Court settle partisan gerrymandering?Davis, Amberhttp://hdl.handle.net/10211.3/2132632019-12-13T18:29:08Z2019-09-13T00:00:00ZPredicting the unpredictable: how will the Supreme Court settle partisan gerrymandering?
Davis, Amber
Introduces a new model to predict Supreme Court outcomes by combining the Segal-Cover Score and career voting percentage on specific constitutional violations, could indicate which way the justices will rule on the current partisan gerrymandering cases. To achieve this outcome, the literature review sets the foundation for the attitudinal model which past scholars have used to build their predictions models. The relationship between partisan gerrymandering and the Supreme Court is woven into the case study. While, the institution as a whole does not believe it is the judiciary’s responsibility to intervene, yet it is not stopping challengers from challenging the practice. After the retirement of Justice Kennedy, there is no clear swing vote. Therefore, practice of partisan gerrymandering is predicted to continue with Rucho and Lemone in a 5-4 decision in favor of no action.
2019-09-13T00:00:00ZScalia's ironic swan song: D.C. v. Heller as faint-hearted originalismSuhrie, Robert J.http://hdl.handle.net/10211.3/2059052019-10-11T22:11:19Z2018-08-30T00:00:00ZScalia's ironic swan song: D.C. v. Heller as faint-hearted originalism
Suhrie, Robert J.
The 2008 Supreme Court decision in D.C. v. Heller declared, for the first time
in the Court’s history, that the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution guarantees an
individual right to own a firearm regardless of one’s affiliation with a militia. In another
first for the Court, Justice Antonin Scalia’s majority opinion has been called the most
originalist decision in the Court’s history. This thesis finds that the Court in Heller
rewrote the 2nd Amendment using contemporary benchmarks and assumptions about its
scope and purpose. This has led some scholars to suggest that Justice Scalia engaged in
judicial activism and based his interpretation on the idea of a “living Constitution.” Such
allegations, this thesis argues, are, in fact, true.
One of the most enduring aspects of Scalia’s legacy will be his advocacy of
originalism and his belief that the text in question should be interpreted according to the
public understanding of its meaning at the time of its adoption. But when Heller is examined according to this dictum Scalia’s findings have much more in common with
present-day beliefs about the 2nd Amendment. While Heller has the accouterments of an
originalist inquiry, it also has many of the trappings of the judicial activism that Scalia
has railed against throughout his tenure on the bench. The long-term effect will almost
certainly be that originalism is further impugned. And as the politicization of judicial
appointments increases, gun rights may one day be at the peril of the political makeup of
the courts.
2018-08-30T00:00:00ZClimate change: the influence of international agreements on state level policy makingMcKee, Jennifer Ledoyenhttp://hdl.handle.net/10211.3/2058912019-10-11T22:11:19Z2018-08-29T00:00:00ZClimate change: the influence of international agreements on state level policy making
McKee, Jennifer Ledoyen
Climate change may be one of the most important issues facing all of
humanity. It is also one of the most complex and challenging topics as the actors are
plentiful and the arguments multifaceted. International agreements, federal leadership,
and state policy making all play a role in combating the impacts of rising emission levels,
global temperature increases, and severe weather related events. Collaborative efforts are
necessary to make significant change, and this study aims to understand the history of
international climate change agreements, the response of the United States federal
government, and the impact of both on state policy making. This thesis examines
international climate change agreements and the conditions necessary for a state to
respond with state-level climate change policy. A case study of California is used to
review the variables at the state level to determine the impact on state policy making in
the context of climate change. Since California cannot enter into treaties with other
countries, the use of international agreements provides a framework to review the federal
policy response and then subsequent impacts on state policy making.
2018-08-29T00:00:00Z