SUMMARY
CORRECTING PROPERTY TAX ASSESSMENTS IN COMMUNITIES PLAGUED BY MORTGAGE FRAUD
By Brittany N. Jones, University of Georgia School of Law
With a deficit in the trillions, America is increasingly becoming a debtor nation. Americans are saving less than ever; the savings rate in America has dropped to levels not seen since the Great Depression. Even those who manage their debt continue to fall into the cycle of financially overextending themselves. Here lies the domain of the payday loans.
Marketed to consumers as a "quick fix" for temporary cash shortages, payday loans have become a billion dollar industry. As with any "quick fix" there is the potential for abuse that may subject consumers to a never-ending spiral of high interest debt.
Payday lending is regulated by states with no national law regulating the industry. As a whole, payday lending is generally an excepted practice in the south. Currently, Louisiana, South Carolina, Kentucky, Tennessee, Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida have laws that allow payday lending. While North Carolina's payday lending statute expired and has yet to be renewed, Georgia passed the Payday Loan Act that made payday lending illegal. This note will discuss not only what exactly defines payday lending, but also the varying degrees of regulation within the states to get a full understanding of payday lending in the south.
PAYDAY LOANS: PREDATORY LENDING OR A HELPFUL RESOURCE FOR FINANCIAL PROBLEMS?
By Joycelyn Curry, Georgia State University College of Law
With a deficit in the trillions, America is increasingly becoming a debtor nation. Americans are saving less than ever; the savings rate in America has dropped to levels not seen since the Great Depression. Even those who manage their debt continue to fall into the cycle of financially overextending themselves. Here lies the domain of the payday loans.
Marketed to consumers as a "quick fix" for temporary cash shortages, payday loans have become a billion dollar industry. As with any "quick fix" there is the potential for abuse that may subject consumers to a never-ending spiral of high interest debt.
Payday lending is regulated by states with no national law regulating the industry. As a whole, payday lending is generally an excepted practice in the south. Currently, Louisiana, South Carolina, Kentucky, Tennessee, Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida have laws that allow payday lending. While North Carolina's payday lending statute expired and has yet to be renewed, Georgia passed the Payday Loan Act that made payday lending illegal. This note will discuss not only what exactly defines payday lending, but also the varying degrees of regulation within the states to get a full understanding of payday lending in the south.
IS THE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM IMMUNE TO CULTURAL INEQUITIES THAT EXIST IN AMERICAN SOCIETY?
By Teah Glenn, University of Georgia School of Law
Racial and ethnic disparities in health care have received greater attention in the last decade than ever before in our country's history. In 1999, Congress provided funding to the Office of Minority Health for the purpose of conducting a study to assess the extent of racial and ethnic disparities within the health care system, and to explore potential contributing factors to the inequities in medical services. On March 20, 2002, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) released the research findings in its report entitled Unequal Treatment: Confronting Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Health Care.
The IOM report concluded that "[a]lthough myriad sources contribute to these disparities, some evidence suggests that bias, prejudice, and stereotyping on the part of health care providers may contribute to differences in care." While the report attracted worldwide attention, the findings simply confirmed what minority communities have known for many years-race and ethnicity substantially impact the accessibility and quality of the health care services rendered.
Studies have revealed that "despite steady improvement in the overall health of the U.S. population, racial and ethnic minorities, with few exceptions, experience higher rates of morbidity and mortality than non-minorities." The reasons for these health status disparities are various, complicated, and poorly understood, yet they may nonetheless largely reflect socioeconomic differences, differences in health-related risk factors, environmental degradation, and direct and indirect consequences of discrimination. Research demonstrates the role of health care system factors- including differences in insurance coverage and other determinants of health care access- in producing disparities. Research also shows, however, that even when insurance status and other measures of access are controlled for by statistical methods, racial and ethnic disparities persist.
SECOND AMENDMENT THROUGH THE EYES OF THE IMPOVERISHED
By Joseph Giannell, St. Thomas University School of Law Imagine-
You live below the poverty line and live in a substandard housing development, located in a high-crime area. You are a single parent of two children. Your apartment has been broken into countless times, and you are afraid that the next time it happens one of your children may be killed. With these concerns in mind, you purchase a handgun for the protection of your family. You are aware that the housing development has banned guns in the building. After coming home from your night job, you find the police in your home because of yet another break-in. Carelessly left on your bureau, in plain view, is your handgun. You admit that the gun belongs to you and are immediately arrested for violating the firearm ban. As a result, your family is evicted and you are sentenced to 5-years probation.
This scenario exists because of the lack of clarity in the true meaning of the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Some jurisdictions hold that the Second Amendment gives individuals an unrestricted constitutional right that cannot be extinguished. While other jurisdictions hold that a person's Second Amendment right can be waived by laws and restrictions passed only as a crime-prevention method. The federal circuit courts are split on this issue and the U.S. Supreme Court has failed to resolve this problem. This comment analyzes the destruction that occurred in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in the city of New Orleans as an example of the police's inability to protect the poor and the need that arose for individuals to protect their families and themselves. The reader will be challenged to conclude as to whether a legitimate solution to protecting the constitutional rights of the poor is to interpret the Second Amendment of the Constitution as an individual rights interpretation.
THE PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE: A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVICTION OF DERRICK CLEMENTS
By Joshua J. Campbell, Samford University Cumberland School of Law
One of the most fundamental components of our justice system is the principle that all accused persons are presumed innocent until they are proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt on every element of the crime with which they are charged. Similarly, the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees the accused a fair trial before an impartial jury. This fundamental principle and guarantee make the United States justice system one of the fairest. Even in such a system, however, failures occur. Mr. Derrick Clements' case may be one such failure.
The jury has the role of judging the law and the facts in legal proceedings. When regarding the potential for jury failure in the case of Mr. Clements, perhaps the following statement by a leading Constitutional scholar will remind the reader of the human error possible, even in determinations of the United States Supreme Court:
"I do not regard the rulings of the Supreme Court as synonymous with constitutional truth. As Justice Robert Jackson once observed of the Court, 'We are not final because we are infallible, but we are infallible because we are final.' And the Courts that held slaves to be non-persons, separate to be equal, and pregnancy to be non sex-related can hardly be deemed either final or infallible." - Lawrence H. Tribe
If the Supreme Court of the United States, having the greatest opportunity to review its own rulings, has later corrected its own errors, then how much more might a lower court and jury, such as the one that sent Mr. Clements to prison, need a thorough review?
