|
Nora V. Demleitner
|
|||||||
|
Dean and Professor of Law
|
||||||
|
B.A., Bates College
J.D., Yale University LL.M., Georgetown University |
|||||||
|
|||||||
Publications
Sentencing Law and Policy: Cases, Statutes and Guidelines (with Professors Douglas Berman, Marc L. Miller & Ronald F. Wright) (Aspen 2nd ed. 2007), 1st ed. 2004 & 2005 Supplements.
Offenses Involving Immigration, Naturalization, and Passports: Model Sentencing Guidelines §§ 2I1, 2I2, 2I3, and 2I4, 18 Fed. Sentencing Rep. 351 (2006)
Where to Go From Here? The Roberts Court at the Crossroads of Sentencing, 18 Fed. Sentencing Rep. 221 (2006)
Smart Public Policy: Replacing Imprisonment with Targeted Nonprison Sentences and Collateral Sanctions, 58 Stanford L. Rev. 339 (2005)
Is There a Future for Leniency in the U.S. Criminal Justice System? (reviewing Harsh Justice: Criminal Punishment and the Widening Divide Between America and Europe by James Q. Whitman), 103 Michigan L. Rev. 1231 (2005) (cited by Justice Scalia in his concurrence in Kansas v. Marsh, 126 S. Ct. 2516 (2006))
Thwarting a New Start? Foreign Convictions, Sentencing and Collateral Sanctions, 36 Toledo L. Rev. 505 (2005)
Constitutional Challenges, Risk-based Analysis, and Criminal History Databases: More Demands on the U.S. Sentencing Commission, 17 Fed. Sentencing Rep. 159 (2005)
A Vicious Cycle: Re-Sanctioning Offenders, in Civil Penalties, Social Consequences 185 (Christopher Mele & Teresa Miller, eds.) (Routledge: 2005)
Misguided Prevention: The War on Terrorism as a War on Immigrant Offenders and Immigration Violators, 40 Crim. L. Forum 550 (2004)
Risk Assessment: Promises and Pitfalls, 16 Fed. Sentencing Rep. 161 (2004)
AALS Panel -- The Avena Case in the International Court of Justice (Mexico v. United States) -- Crime and Immigration: Domestic, Regional and International Consequences, 5(4) German L.J. (2004)(online at www.germanlawjournal.com)
How Much Do Western Democracies Value Family and Marriage?: Immigration Law’s Conflicted Answers, 32 Hofstra L. Rev. 273 (2003)
How Many Terrorists Are There? The Escalation in So-Called Terrorism Prosecutions, 16 Fed. Sentencing Rep. 28 (2003)
Abusing State Power or Controlling Risk?: Sex Offender Commitment and Sicherungsverwahrung, 30 Fordham Urban L.J. 1621 (2003)
Fifteen Years of Federal Guidelines Reviewed at the Yale Conference: What Would Success Mean?, 15 Fed. Sentencing Rep. 151 (Feb. 2003)
The Death Penalty in the United States: Following the European Lead?, 81 Oregon L. Rev. 131 (2002)
Immigration Threats and Rewards: Effective Law Enforcement Tools in the “War” on Terrorism?, 51 Emory L.J. 1059 (2002)
Non-Citizen Offenders and Immigration Crimes: New Challenges in the Federal System, 14 Fed. Sentencing Rep. 247 (Mar./Apr. 2002) (with Jon M. Sands)
“Collateral Damage”: No Re-entry for Drug Offenders, 47 Villanova L. Rev. 1027 (2002)
First Peoples, First Principles: The Sentencing Commission’s Obligation To Reject False Images of Criminal Offenders, 87 Iowa L. Rev. 563 (2002)
The Law at Crossroads: The Construction of Migrant Women Trafficked Into Prostitution, in Global Human Smuggling in Comparative Perspective (Rey Koslowski & David Kyle, eds.) (Johns Hopkins University Press: 2001)
Overlooked Areas of Federal Sentencing: Federal Enclaves, Indian Country, Transfer of U.S. Prisoners from Abroad, 13 Fed. Sentencing Rep. 67 (Sept./Oct. 2000) (with Jon M. Sands)
Continuing Payment on One’s Debt to Society: The German Model of Felon Disenfranchisement as an Alternative, 84 Minnesota L. Rev. 753 (2000)
Stopping a Vicious Cycle: Release, Restrictions, Re-Offending, 12 Fed. Sentencing Rep. 243 (Mar./Apr. 2000)
In Good Times and in Bad: Our Obligation to Protect “Mail-Order Brides”, in Women’s International Human Rights: A Reference Guide (3 vols., Dorean Koenig & Kelly Askin, eds.) (Transnational Press: 2000)
Preventing Internal Exile: The Need for Restrictions on Collateral Sentencing Consequences, 11 Stanford L. & Policy Rev. 153 (1999)
A New Start Calls for a Broadened Perspective, 12 Fed. Sentencing Rep. 92 (Sept./Oct. 1999)
Combating Legal Ethnocentrism: Comparative Law Sets Boundaries, 31 Arizona State L.J. 737 (1999)
Review Essay – More Than “Just” Evidence: Reviewing Mirjan Damaska’s Evidence Law Adrift, 47 American Journal of Comparative L. 515 (1999)
Reforming Juvenile Sentencing, 11 Fed. Sentencing Rep. 243 (Mar./Apr. 1999)
Challenge, Opportunity and Risk: An Era of Change in Comparative Law, 46 American Journal of Comparative L. 647 (1998)
The Federalization of Crime and Sentencing, 11 Fed. Sentencing Rep. 123 (Nov./Dec. 1998)
Power, Perceptions and the Politics of Immigration and Welfare, in Immigration, Citizenship, and the Welfare State: Germany and the United States in Comparison (Hermann Kurthen, Jürgen Fijalkowski & Gerd Wagner eds., 1998)
Witness Protection in Criminal Cases: Anonymity, Disguise or Other Options?, 46 American Journal of Comparative L. 641 (1998)
The Fallacy of Social "Citizenship," Or The Threat of Exclusion, 12 Georgetown Immigration L.J. 35 (1997)
Searching for a Solution: How to Punish, Restrain and Treat Sex Offenders, 10 Fed. Sentencing Rep. 59 (Sept./Oct. 1997)
Crime and Sentencing in Canada: Parallels and Differences, 9 Fed. Sentencing Rep. 232 (Mar./Apr. 1997)
A Response to Mathias Reimann: More, More, More But Real Comparative Law, 11 Tulane European & Civil Law Forum 73 (1996)
A Fresh Look at Offender Characteristics, 9 Fed. Sentencing Rep. 124 (Nov./Dec. 1996)
Forced Prostitution: Naming an International Offense, 18 Fordham Int'l L.J. 163 (1994)
Organized Crime and Prohibition: What Difference Does Legalization Make?, 15 Whittier L. Rev. 613 (1994)
The Federal Sentencing Reporter (FSR) is a peer-edited, professional journal published five times a year by the University of California Press. Many federal judges, probation offices, public defenders and United States Attorneys subscribe to FSR. Each issue presents the comments of scholars, judges and practitioners on a sentencing topic. While many of the issues have focused on the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, some have explored state sentencing regimes and sentencing abroad. The issues have ranged from an investigation of the gender impact of the guidelines to an ongoing analysis of the repercussions of the Supreme Court’s decisions in Booker and Blakely.