Executive orders are legally-binding proclamations issued by Presidents in their own independent capacity as executor of the nation's laws. Despite there being no mention of these orders in the Constitution, they have been implemented since Washington's presidency, with some Presidents issuing over a thousand. Many contemporary legal scholars fear that this practice has gotten out of control over the past 80 years or so, resulting in an inappropriate usurping of Congress' legislative power by the executive branch. In this essay, I will use a chronology of executive orders from across the relevant time period to assess the historical validity of this claim. Additionally, I will use federal court decisions that have overturned executive orders to examine whether anything unconstitutional or otherwise legally improper has taken place over the time period in question. Ultimately, I will conclude that while the legislative authority wielded by the executive branch has grown, this expansion has adequate legal justification and political safeguards until such time that the judiciary provides more robust guidelines.

In critical conversation about the political theory of Game of Thrones, academics are often quick to compare the series with Machiavellian ideals and therefore assert that The Prince can be used as a tool to evaluate the effectiveness of the way that Game of Thrones characters cope with political intrigue. Those who compare Game of Thrones and The Prince argue that because of the political realism and similar notions of human nature in Game of Thrones, the series perpetuates Machiavelli's idea that goodness and morality are not sufficient means by which to gain and sustain political power. When Game of Thrones began, many speculated that it adopted Machiavelli's deeply pragmatic paradigm of a successful ruler, but as the series progressed it seemed to reveal a more idealistic theory of leadership. This paper explores the relationship between these two works to determine if Game of Thrones ultimately perpetuates Machiavelli's philosophies about how to successfully acquire and maintain political power. After comparing the political tactics set forth in The Prince to the actions of the characters considered most idealistic and most Machiavellian in Game of Thrones, it is determined that Game of Thrones conclusively embraces Machiavelli's attitude toward successful political leadership, as the characters who seem to be most idealistic ultimately act in alignment with the theories set forth in The Prince.

Too often are American superhero comics dismissed as childish or simplistic. However, American superhero comics have evolved alongside American society throughout history, and have, in many cases, made a conscious effort to represent progressive movements that have arisen within various respective decades. This thesis will analyze the progression of American superhero comics as they have evolved throughout the decades, this essay will focus primarily on the comic book storylines of DC's, The Green Lantern, throughout the Golden, Silver, Bronze and Modern Ages of comic book history. The Golden Age was defined by war efforts and support for World War II. The Silver Age was under heavy regulation by the Comic Code Authority and had to water down content from serious topics. Despite this regulation, Silver Age comics were able to symbolize and support or oppose social movements during their respective decade. However, the Bronze Age acted as a turning point for comic book plotlines and characterization. After the Bronze Age, censorship of comic book content was nonexistent and more complex plotlines were developed. From then on the Modern Age of comics would continue to openly explore societal movements and serve as a social commentary. To explore this change, the contents of this essay will usher a discourse on how the American superhero was used to first express American propaganda, and how, throughout the twentieth century and even to this day, the superhero was transformed into a medium that examines social phenomena such as political causes and discrimination. To further analyze and compare social movements to American comics, this will focus primarily on DC's The Green Lantern comic books and how the superhero changed throughout comic book history.

Father Daniel Berrigan once said that "writing about prisoners is a little like writing about the dead." I think what he meant is that we treat prisoners as ghosts. They're unseen and unheard. It's easy to simply ignore them and it's even easier when the government goes to great lengths to keep them hidden.
Supermax prisons are used to hold those prisoners whom prison authorities regard as the most problematic in the prison system. These facilities merge the 19th-century practice of long-term solitary confinement with 21st-century technology in ways that subject prisoners to unparalleled levels of isolation, surveillance, and control, usually for long duration, with the potential to inflict significant amounts of psychological harm. Despite a range of academic studies documenting the serious and potentially long-lasting psychological harm it may inflict, and several judicial opinions criticizing the risks it entails and significantly limiting its use, supermax prisons are still in full effect today.
Although there have been no successful cases brought to the Supreme Court alleging the use of supermax prisons being in violation of the inmate’s Eighth Amendment right, one can look at isolated factors that distinguish supermax prisons in which judges at the Supreme Court level have shown to be unconstitutional in general population prisons. This thesis examines the Eighth Amendment implications of cruel and unusual punishment within supermax prisons, through isolated factors through judicial intervention.

Certain laws relating to self-defense were created known as "Stand Your Ground" laws. The public has interpreted these laws in ways that expand them beyond their original scope. To gain an understanding of self-defense laws, a look at the origins of self-defense is needed. Following the historical background, several cases will be examined that illustrate how the public has interpreted "Stand Your Ground" laws, and how these interpretations clash with elements of self-defense. Several philosophical principles including natural rights, the social contract, and some form of utilitarianism, will be discussed in relation to "Stand Your Ground" laws. A possible conclusion can be drawn that by misinterpreting "Stand Your Ground" laws, people compromise the philosophical ideals they hold, and infringe on other people's natural rights, break the social contract, and create societal unhappiness. Finally, some people are calling for reform of "Stand Your Ground" laws. These reforms focus on correcting public perception of "Stand Your Ground" laws.

An important question that needs to be discussed is whether drug detection dogs can be used the same way as machines in assisting drug detection and how these drug detection dogs should be used under the Fourth Amendment. In answering these questions, the history, training, certifications, and case law relating to drug detection dogs should be reviewed. The dogs are powerful tools in the detection of narcotics, but it is critical to remember that they are only animals and far from flawless. They can make mistakes because of lapses in training, due to irregular training and certification standards, or cues, intentional or not, from their handlers. Under current precedent, walking around something, like a car, is not a search and does not require reasonable suspicion. A dog alert during this non-intrusive, superficial contact can give rise to probable cause to search. If the dog alert is not reliable, it can lead to many unnecessary searches that violate people's privacy. In order to protect Fourth Amendment rights from the, drug detection dogs need to be used carefully and with limitations. A dog's ability to smell is impressive and humans' ability to train them is vast, but a dog is just a dog. The limited accuracy of a dog sniff is not an issue when they are used to search for people in landslides or avalanches, because even 10% accuracy is helpful when trying to save someone's life. However, when a drug detection dog is used to establish probable cause for a search, accuracy becomes an issue. United States v. Place was based on faulty scientific evidence on the accuracy of dogs, and it set the standard for future drug detection dog cases. The courts need to revisit this issue in light of more recent information. Except in certain locations where Fourth Amendment rights are limited, drug detection dogs should only be used when reasonable suspicion of criminal conduct exists. This limitation, as well as enhanced training and certification standards, strikes the appropriate balance between living in a civilized society and living in a secure society.

This paper explores the issues regarding disparities in sentencing of men and women to death. Research conducted includes both primary and secondary. A variety of sources were used to gain insight into societal gender differences and stereotypes. Theories were investigated for causes in gender discrepancies. Specific standards and factors were found to be relevant for men and others for women. The methods used to implement the death penalty, the constitutionality of the death penalty, and other various death penalty issues were studied to see if they had implications for the minimal number of women sentenced to death. Research indicated that the media had a significant influence in these cases, particularly in the cases where a female committed brutal murder. This paper examines these different elements, using Arizona as a test case, with four separate female case examples in order to determine what causes disparities in sentencing men and women to death. The case facts and analysis are given in each example. The conclusion is that the discrepancies found in sentencing men and women to death are ultimately based on cultural gender stereotypes that have been in place for some time, and are often exploited in the media.