[Pages 975-1058]
TAKING PUBLIC RIGHTS PRIVATE: THE RHETORIC AND REALITY OF SOCIAL SECURITY PRIVATIZATION
Patricia E. Dilley*

Abstract: This Article explores the foundations of the Social Security privatization debate. What is frequently portrayed as a numbers problem to which a “correct” answer can be found is in fact an ideological and political argument about wealth building versus direct income support and about the reality and security of public entitlement as opposed to private property rights. Efforts to use the idea of private property as the basis of rights in the context of the Social Security system and other non-retirement social welfare programs have proven problematic. This Article suggests that Social Security, far from being a quaint, retrograde souvenir of the New Deal, was ahead of its time in creating economic rights based on effort rather than equity in support of the public institution of broad-based retirement.

[Pages 1059-1138]
PLAIN AMBIGUITIES IN THE CLEAR ARTICULATION REQUIREMENT FOR STATE ACTION ANTITRUST IMMUNITY: THE CASE OF STATE AGENCIES
C. Douglas Floyd*

Abstract:  This Article focuses on the application of the state action antitrust immunity doctrine of Parker v. Brown to the regulatory programs of state administrative agencies having statewide jurisdiction. It concludes that state agencies should be subject to significantly different requirements for antitrust immunity than are local governmental units. This Article also addresses unresolved issues that frequently recur in the context of state administrative action, such as the effect of retroactive interpretations of state policy by a state agency, whether the clear articulation and active supervision requirements for antitrust immunity play any separate role in the context of administrative policy making, and whether any distinctions should be drawn among the processes of rulemaking, adjudication, and tariff approval in applying the Parker doctrine.

[Pages 1139-1174]
HIGH-STAKES TESTS AND STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
Christopher M. Morrison

Abstract:  Federal statutes require states to establish high educational standards and to create and administer standards-based assessments for all students, including those with disabilities. Although states can include most students with disabilities in these tests by providing them with accommodations, including students for whom these adaptations are insufficient to allow for meaningful participation in the tests has been more difficult. When designing and administering these tests, policy-makers must guard against unfairly denying educational opportunities to any student in an effort to set higher standards for the general population. Alternate assessments must be based on the individualized goals and objectives of each student who requires such an assessment in order to comply with constitutional requirements and non-discrimination policies.

[Pages 1175-1216]
KILLING KIDS: THE IMPACT OF DOMINGUES V. NEVADA ON THE JUVENILE DEATH PENALTY AS A VIOLATION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW
Erica Templeton

Abstract: This Note examines the debate over the legality of the juvenile death penalty, and concludes that the use of the juvenile death penalty in the United States represents a flagrant transgression of international human rights law. Several forms of international law, including a number of multilateral human rights treaties, customary international law and jus cogens prohibit the execution of children below the age of eighteen. The existence of these contrary legal obligations demands that the United States abandon its vigilante stance and bring its practices into conformity with the greater international community.