SAGE Journal Articles
Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.
Journal Article 1: Boots, D. P., Bihari, J., & Elliott, E. (2009). The state of the castle: An overview of recent trends in state castle doctrine legislation and public policy. Criminal Justice Review, 34, 515–535.
Abstract: Second Amendment issues regarding the right to bear arms in the home have come into focus recently with the U.S. Supreme Court landmark decision in District of Columbia v. Heller. Despite strong antigun sentiment in the wake of high-profile shootings, sweeping new castle doctrine legislation has passed in 23 states in the last 4 years. These laws effectively expand individuals’ right to defend their home and possessions with lethal force without the necessity to retreat. To date, there is little criminological research that examines the evolution of the modern castle doctrine legislation in the United States. The present article addresses this gap in the literature by offering a historical perspective on the legal etiology of the castle doctrine relating to self-defense and then analyzes existing and pending castle doctrine legislation through December 2008. A discussion of the legal and criminological implications of these statutes on public policy is offered.
Journal Article 2: Riccucci, N. M. (2007). Moving away from a strict scrutiny standard for affirmative action: Implications for public management. The American Review of Public Administration, 37, 123–141.
Abstract: This article addresses the concept of strict scrutiny, the burden of persuasion test used by the courts to determine the constitutionality of affirmative action. Through a systematic analysis of U.S. Supreme Court decisions, it illustrates that strict scrutiny has been applied in an inconsistent, arbitrary manner and, therefore, should not serve as the basis for judicial review of affirmative action programs. It shows that the rule of law established under the Civil Rights Act provides an equally if not more compelling basis for judging the legality of affirmative action programs. Relying on the legal standards advanced by the courts under civil rights statutes provides managers with greater flexibility in developing and implementing affirmative action programs. In effect, the ability of governments to promote diversity of their workforces is greatly enhanced.