Recent orders
First amendment and fairness doctrine
First amendment and fairness doctrine
Author
Institution
Introduction
Freedom of speech arguably is one of the most valued aspects of in any country irrespective of the setting. However, it also doubles up or comes as one of the most misused freedoms in any country. Unfortunately, many are times when misuse of this freedom leads to disastrous results. This, therefore, underlines the importance of putting restrictions on freedom of speech. This is especially in academic institutions. It goes without saying that recent times have seen an increase in the rate of violence in academic institutions. This violence may be aimed at one individual or a certain race or tribe. On the same note, there are instances where speech amounts to bullying, which is one of the key problems plaguing present-day academic institutions. This underlines the importance of the incorporation of a speech code. Unfortunately, it has become increasingly impossible to control the personal conduct of students especially as pertaining to speech, thanks to the entry of computers, internet and social networks. Nevertheless, it is imperative that rules are implemented pertaining to the speech of students in academic institutions in order to maintain law and order. The following rules would be applicable for students’ conduct online.
Students are not allowed to make hate speech against an individual, a group of people or even a race. Hate speech, in this case, is defined as any statement that creates a hostile, offensive or intimidating educational environment for a certain group of people. The predominant characteristic of this speech is that it causes emotional distress to a certain individual or group of people.
Students are also prohibited from making discriminatory or racist epithets or any other expressive behavior that is directed to an individual or group of individuals, or on separate instances at varied individuals, or even for physical conduct. This is in instances where such epithets, expressive behavior, physical conduct or comments intentionally demean the sex, race, color, creed, religion, sexual orientation, disability, age, ancestry or national origin of an individual or group of people. Such statements may also create an intimidating, demeaning or hostile environment, which is not conductive for education, university-authorized activities or university-related work.
Students are also prohibited from making statements that aim at inciting other students to commit violent activities. The term incitement is used to describe a speech that may lead individuals who are in agreement with it to carry out immediate violence. There is always danger that a certain speech or statement will convince some or all listeners to carry out an immediate, unlawful action.
Students are also prohibited from making any obscene expression revolving around hardcore depiction of sexual acts. They are prohibited from producing and transmitting obscene material online in the academic environment. Any statement would be categorized as obscene in situations where an average person would find such a statement as appealing to the prurient interest, even in application of contemporary community standards. The work may also be describing or depicting sexual conduct in a way or manner that is patently offensive. This is also the case where the statement, taken as a whole, is devoid of serious artistic, literary, scientific or political value.
As much as the university is the one place where freedom of expression should be guarded jealously, it is worth noting that it is composed of people with different likes, preferences, feelings, values and principles. The enjoyment of all freedoms rests on the ability to allow other people to live their lives without any interruption. The term university revolves around the universality of ideas. It is always imperative that students learn to argue their points in a manner that would not limit the freedom of other people to outline their ideas, as well. In addition, it is worth noting that universities have opened up their doors to people from different races, communities, religions, as well as sexual orientation. It is noteworthy that some of these people are likely to be intimidated, especially in cases where they come from minority groups. This underlines the importance of protecting the minorities and ensuring that they do not suffer simply because they come from minorities. In some cases, students may make inciting statements that may lead to the disruption of academic-work, destruction of property, as well as loss of life. This is even in cases where they have been provided with appropriate channels of airing their views and grievances. Prohibiting the making of inciting statements would go a long way in ensuring that students learn to solve disputes amicably and ensure the protection of property, human lives and ensure peaceful coexistence.
Part Two
Do you think the Fairness Doctrine should be revived, revised, or left dead? Why?
Fairness Doctrine
The media has been one of the most fundamental aspects of any society. This is right from newspapers or print media to the radios and televisions. However, there exists a wide difference between print media and electronic media. Electronic media, unlike the publishing or print media, had an endless supply of tools of the trade. This is because the finite number of available frequencies limited the broadcasting licenses. This led to the enactment of the Fairness Doctrine as the broadcast licenses were relatively fewer than the people who wanted to have them. Licensees, as the trustees of this limited public resource, accepted a certain obligation pertaining to the public interest in exchange for the restricted the scarce public airwaves. The Fairness Doctrine was mainly meant to ensure that the broadcasters would air different views beyond the ones the licensees favored. The Fairness Doctrine incorporated two fundamental elements. It required the broadcasters to allocate some of their airtime to the discussion of controversial matters that were of public interest, as well as air contrasting views pertaining to those matters. It is worth noting that the stations were offered wide latitude on how they could provide contrasting views. They could choose to do it via the editorials, news segments or even the public affairs shows. However, this doctrine was repealed in 1987 during President Reagan’s reign as it was seen as being in conflict with the first amendment. However, there have been questions as to whether the Fairness Doctrine should be reinstated, revised or eliminated entirely. In my opinion, the Fairness Doctrine should be reinstated.
First, I believe that the reinstatement of this doctrine would allow the public to have an enhanced access to information pertaining to controversial issues. The main point behind the enactment of the First Doctrine was to ensure that broadcasters gave airtime to both sides pertaining to controversial issues. It is worth noting that, the doctrine did not require them to offer the two sides equal time but to offer a balanced view pertaining to crucial issues. This prevented one-sided reporting especially considering that the airways and programs were limited. Unfortunately, this is something that is lacking in today’s media industry. This has led to a poorly informed people, something that affects their decisions especially pertaining to political matters. There are still some people who cannot access cable networks, in which case they can only get information from the same channels that have certain individuals presenting warped ideas and point of views. Unfortunately, the absence of this doctrine makes such people give incorrect information as they would not need to defend their views.
In addition, this comes as one of the ways of preventing personal attacks and disingenuous information from being broadcast, which has been the norm in the media. Research shows that there has been an increase in personal attacks and misinformation in mainstream radio since the repealing of this doctrine. It is worth noting that these have resulted in mass misinformation, as well as deaths of individuals against who the broadcasts had suggested action. The reinstatement of this doctrine would guard against broadcasts that may polarize the people.
Lastly, it is worth noting that the foundation of this doctrine was the notion of “spectrum scarcity”. The notion underlines the physical restriction of airwaves, which then leads to the restriction the number of stations that are available. It is worth noting that the maintenance of limited airwaves is done in the public interest. In essence, the doctrine underlined the fact that the airwaves are not private property but a public resource. It reaffirmed the congressional mandate that television and radio has to be maintained as the general public’s medium for free speech, rather than an outlet for serving the private or personal interests of its licensee. It is worth noting that licensees are trustees of limited public resources, in which case they accept a certain obligation pertaining to the public interest, in exchange for the restricted utilization of the limited public airwaves.
Federal Indian Law
Federal Indian Law
Name of Student.
Institution Affiliation.
Federal Indian Law
Challenges and Obstacles to Effective Law Enforcement
Many questions ask to know the effectiveness of the American Indian tribal governments that asks what it means to be a tribal police officer, the intricacies of this role, and how tribal police and community interact to solve issues facing the Country of India. Lawrence Greenfield and Steven Smith conducted a study in 1999 that showed a rot in the American Indian community. American Indian women were found out to be the highest victims of crime approximately 50% higher than for black males. The local jails were full of the American Indians and were incarcerated at 38% rate higher than that of the national rate CITATION Jef15 l 1033 (Ross, 2015). High statistics recorded for people arrested due to committing a crime under alcohol influence and putting that aside, the percentage recorded rose when they considered the number of violent crimes committed. Such kind of data posses a big alarm in the country of India because of tribal government and law enforcement agencies.
Cultural Conflict
There are some challenging sets of negotiations that face India and the interaction between American Indians, and the law enforcement is one of these challenges. The way law enforcement is carried out in the United States is of a higher ranking that the concept appears to be foreign to Native American communities. There is high professionalism regarding the police services offered as they constitute use of technology and some special activities that do not conform to the methods of peacekeeping used in traditional communities. Indians got to learn about this Western style of law reinforcement through plenary power doctrine CITATION Jef15 l 1033 (Ross, 2015). The relationship between the people of India and the Indian police has not been easy because of the imposed structure over the traditional system. Since the killing of the Sitting Bull in 1890, the people of India often view the police as a suspect and that the police is not of good intentions for the citizens of India.
Problems with Professionalized Policing in Indian Country
Professionalization of the police department is majorly exhibited in the United States as they have all developed standardized codes and training of the police is a satisfactory goal. Even though a big problem manifests at the event that the Indian police tries to mimic the type of professionalism as exhibited by the United State’s police. The type of setup that runs from the response to emergency calls from residents and hierarchical system of decision-making and management is something that cannot apply in the country of India CITATION Jef15 l 1033 (Ross, 2015). A bigger part of Indian’s population is rural, and the roads leading to their homes are often unpaved and rendered impassable by vehicles. It, therefore, shows that for this system of policing to take effect in India, many things have to be settled first, as accessibility to areas becoming a key concern.
There are also fewer police offices, and a recent survey shows that only half of these offices have 911 emergency response system. Out of this half, the police are very lazy to act upon emergency cases, and 90% arrive after the situation is worsened and cannot be saved. There is a public safety crisis in the country of India after law enforcement got fragmented through poor coordination.
The interrelationship between Tribal Sovereignty and Community Empowerment
The United States Supreme Court and the Congress have attacked the American Indian tribal sovereignty as establishment and implementation of tribal laws is difficult. If India as a country is to survive the harsh environment, there is a dire need for the development of a strategy that can further tribal sovereignty, community empowerment, and self-determination. One of the ways this strategy can develop is through a “de facto” sovereignty that naturally arises to undertake the provision of government services, which are essential whether given permission or not under the national laws CITATION Jef15 l 1033 (Ross, 2015). Even though there is a de jure tribal sovereignty that attacks the de facto sovereignty which entire comes from the legislation, the de facto sovereignty concept has been accepted, and the movement of tribal governments looks into ways of providing law enforcement to their members.
Fragmentation of Indian Law Enforcement
Local law enforcement in India faces complicated legal matters including state and tribe. Criminal conduct in India is determined by three ways; whether the incidents in question took place in India, whether the people behind the act are Indians, and the type of offense caused. And for this mater, an Indian is a person who is believed to have a tribe in India and is of Indian blood. The Major Crimes Act: When the criminal act is thought to have been undertaken by an Indian, then the federal government has a mandate over thirteen felonies through the powers of The Major Crimes act. Criminal Jurisdiction under Public Law 280: States do not have a mandate over Indians reservation under the principles of Indian federal law, unlike the Congress that has power in conjunction with the states to vest federal authority. The Congress under PL 280 did not grant the regulatory mandate over the county of India. Until date, public Law 280 is still of a great significance in India CITATION Jef15 l 1033 (Ross, 2015). Even though it is the role of the states to provide law enforcement in the community, tribes in these estates have their police departments that are hired and paid to enforce the law.
Varieties of Indian Law Enforcement
A national survey carried out during 1996-1998 showed that there are close to 170 reservations that have law enforcement. The following are some of the findings from the survey; Tribal Law Enforcement Structure: The agencies concerned with law enforcement in India are of five different types. They are known to operate as a unit in boundaries of particular reservations. Two of the law enforcement structures involve the Bureau of Indian Affairs whose role during the traditional times was to bear responsibility for all law enforcement that occurred on the Indian reservations CITATION Jef15 l 1033 (Ross, 2015). Situations have currently changed in India, and even the areas where PL 280 existed have employed tribal police officers who they control and fund. These kind of tribal police departments are under cover of other forms of law enforcement as they operate on reservations. It has been witnessed that through this system, there are problems that result from overlapping power and leads to conflicts of law.
BIA-ALES: With less accountability to the tribal government on given reservations, there are 64 reservations that the police are the BIA personnel and are directed and funded by the bureau. Questions that may pertain law enforcement and its conduct or procedures are addressed by the BIA administration. Public Law 93-638: 90 tribes have been confirmed to have exercised their rights under the PL 93-638 and through the BIA have taken over the roles of law enforcement. The tribe signs a contract with the bureau that officiates some law enforcement activities mandated by the act. Tribally Funded Police: a growing number of reservations close to 60 now have tribally funded police that is controlled and accountable to the various tribal governments. Self-Governance: There are 25 tribes that direct their law enforcement activities under the Self-Determination Act of 1994. State Law Enforcement Under Public Law 280: 39 reservations and 106 Rancherias that got a delegation of law enforcement authority under PL 280. The Bureau of India is therefore limited to act on these areas may be because of remote locations or just unwillingness CITATION Jef15 l 1033 (Ross, 2015). It has therefore forced many tribes to look for their methods of law enforcement or do without them.
Resources and Staffing Problems
American Indian tribal police departments face some significant problems in the line of adequate provision of law enforcement services. The problems range from constraints in the budget, inadequate proper personnel, and a diverse rural set up that lead to poor delivery of the law enforcement unit in India. A recent study on the American Indian tribal police departments showed that more than 50% of respondents have less than ten officers in their departments, which raise the alarm on the law enforcement in India with the big population CITATION Jef15 l 1033 (Ross, 2015). About 40% pay the patrol officers an hourly rate of $100 or even less and this is a contributing factor to poor policing in India. The lower the pay, the lesser the motivation to act no wonder during emergency issues they do not respond to an impulse. Even though the entry level for one to be sworn in only requires a high school degree, this should not justify the payment they get.
Reference
BIBLIOGRAPHY Ross, J. I. (2015). Native Americans and the Criminal Justice System: Theoretical and Policy Directions. Routledge.
Firms Competitive Environment
Firm’s Competitive Environment
Contents
TOC o “1-3” h z u HYPERLINK l “_Toc380421505” Introduction PAGEREF _Toc380421505 h 1
HYPERLINK l “_Toc380421506” Antitrust laws PAGEREF _Toc380421506 h 1
HYPERLINK l “_Toc380421507” Intended Purpose of economic regulation in monopolies and oligopolies PAGEREF _Toc380421507 h 2
HYPERLINK l “_Toc380421508” Key functions of federal commissions governing economic regulations PAGEREF _Toc380421508 h 3
HYPERLINK l “_Toc380421509” Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) PAGEREF _Toc380421509 h 4
HYPERLINK l “_Toc380421510” Food and Drug Administration PAGEREF _Toc380421510 h 5
HYPERLINK l “_Toc380421511” U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission PAGEREF _Toc380421511 h 5
HYPERLINK l “_Toc380421512” Occupational Safety and Health Administration PAGEREF _Toc380421512 h 5
HYPERLINK l “_Toc380421513” National Highway Traffic Safety Administration PAGEREF _Toc380421513 h 5
Introduction
A comprehensive understanding of the government regulations and the dynamics pertaining to the competitive environment of businesses comes is imperative not only for businesses but also for potential employees. Needless to say, the markets are made up of different structures, each of which is affected in a different way by the varied regulations. On the same note, a number of bodies and commissions are established in an effort to regulate the markets and ensure fairness not only among the business entities but also with regard to the customers.
Antitrust lawsAlso called competition laws, antitrust laws underline statutes aimed at protecting consumers from predatory or unfair business practices through safeguarding the existence of fair competition in open-market economy. The United States has four fundamental antitrust laws including the following.
Sherman Act – enacted in 1890, the Sherman Act prohibits any conspiracy, contract or combination between two or more business entities that imposes unreasonable restrictions on commerce and trade (Vogel, 1998). It prohibits monopolies, conspiracy or agreements that monopolize the market of a particular service or product.
Clayton Act- this Act, passed in 1914, aimed at addressing specific practices whose effect is the creation of a monopoly or substantially lessen competition. It covers mergers and acquisition, exclusive dealing agreements, tying arrangements, as well as interrelated boards of directors.
Robinson-Patman Act – coming into force in 1936, the Act addressed discrimination in prices that are charged to competing purchasers for goods that have similar quality and grade (Vogel, 1998). It aimed at protecting small businesses through restricting the capacity of larger companies to dictate discriminatory discounts via their purchasing power.
Federal trade Commission Act – the Act gave the Federal Trade Commission the authority to enforce the three other antitrust laws. It prohibited deceptive practices and unfair competition methods (Balleisen, 2011). It was designed to nip anticompetitive practices in the bud.
Intended Purpose of economic regulation in monopolies and oligopoliesOligopolies
These refer to market structures that are characterized by few firms dominating the market, selling differentiated or identical products with considerable barriers to entry in the industry. Economic regulations in this industry are aimed at ensuring economic efficiency. Oligopolies may try to fix prices, leading to high prices and reduced production unlike the case of perfect competition. In addition, economic regulations of oligopolies are aimed at enhancing the growth of the industry, especially considering that oligopolies can apply unethical practices so as to limit entry into the industry.
Monopolies
Economic regulation of monopolies aims at preventing excess price. Deficiency of government regulation may cause monopolies to put the prices up, resulting in allocative inefficiency and a reduction in consumer welfare. In addition, economic regulations safeguard the quality of services in monopolies (Baldwin et al, 2010). Monopolies often have no incentive to provide quality services as there is no competition. Economic regulations ensure that monopolies meet specific standards of service. Moreover, economic regulations promote competition and limit monopsony power (Baldwin et al, 2010). Firms that have monopolistic powers may choose to exploit monopsonic buying power.
Key functions of federal commissions governing economic regulations
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)
FERC controls oil pipeline rates, hydroelectric licensing, wholesale electric rates, natural gas pricing and interstate electricity sales.
Securities And Exchange Commission – SEC’
SEC was created with the aim of controlling securities markets, as well as protecting investors. It has statutes that encourage full public disclosure and protect investors from manipulative and fraudulent practices in security markets (Balleisen, 2011).
Federal Communications Commission
The FCC aims at making available worldwide, nationwide and radio communication services with sufficient facilities at reasonable cost to all United States people without discrimination (Balleisen, 2011). It also aims are promoting safety of property and life via radio and wire communications.
Intended purpose of social regulation in all market structures.Social regulation underlines a wide range of rules that govern the manner in which individuals or businesses undertake their activities with the aim of correcting varied market failures (Baldwin et al, 2010). It aims at serving two purposes. First, it prohibits business entities from producing goods with certain characteristics of in ways that would harm public interests like environment, health and safety (Baldwin et al, 2010).
Secondly, it aims are ensuring that business entities produce goods with certain characteristics and in ways that would benefit public interests.
Key functions of the five primary federal regulatory commissions that govern social regulation.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)EPA was established with the sole aim of protecting the environment and human health through the creation and enforcement of laws made by Congress. It is responsible for the maintenance and enforcement of national standards under varied environmental laws in consultation with local and state governments (Baldwin et al, 2010).
Food and Drug AdministrationFDA promotes and protects public health via supervision and regulation of dietary supplements, tobacco products, food safety, prescription, vaccines, blood transfusions, veterinary products, pharmaceutical drugs, biopharmaceuticals and ERED (Balleisen, 2011).
U.S. Consumer Product Safety CommissionCPSC controls the manufacture and sale of varied consumer products through banning dangerous consumer products, researching on their potential hazards, and issuing recalls if such products are already in the market (Balleisen, 2011).
Occupational Safety and Health AdministrationOSHA has the mission of safeguarding healthful and safe working conditions for workers through establishing and enforcing standards, as well as offering assistance, education, outreach and training (Baldwin et al, 2010).
National Highway Traffic Safety AdministrationThe NHTSA aims at saving lives, preventing injuries, as well as lowering vehicle-related crashes through the development of anthropomorphic dummies that are used in safety testing and the test protocols themselves (Balleisen, 2011).
References
Baldwin, R., Cave, M., & Lodge, M. (2010). The Oxford handbook of regulation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Vogel, S. K. (1998). Freer markets, more rules: Regulatory reform in advanced industrial countries. Ithaca, NY [u.a.: Cornell Univ. Press.
Balleisen, E. J. (2011). Government and markets: Toward a new theory of regulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.