Law Graduates Roesti and Phipps Receive Carr Writing Awards
July 11, 2016
This year, two recent graduates of the University of Toledo College of Law were awarded the Judge James G. Carr Writing Award. This award recognizes excellence in faculty-supervised research papers written by upper-level law students.
Papers are nominated by Toledo Law professors and selection criteria include the importance of the topic, the significance of the student’s discussion, and the quality of the student’s research. The winning entries are then selected by Judge Carr, a Senior United States District Judge for the Northern District of Ohio.
Each of this year’s winning papers “goes well beyond an overview and brief concluding section with some suggestions,” wrote Judge Carr. “Each, I firmly believe is worthy of publication, and I hope the instructors work to make that possible.”
Brian Roesti (’16) authored a paper entitled Excessive Use of Force and Racial Bias: Can State and Municipal Law Enforcement Agencies Survive the United Nations and Department of Justice Scrutiny? Roesti’s work was supervised by Professor Benjamin Davis.
“What was truly remarkable about Brian’s paper was that he examined the issues of excessive use of force from the several legal perspectives of local, state, and national law as well as under United States international human rights treaty obligations,” said Professor Davis. “His legal analysis took advantage of his expertise in police officer training to provide an informed evaluation of the complex tensions in topics of great importance - excessive use of force by police and racial bias,” continued Davis.
Roesti’s work delves into the various obligations imposed on the United States by the United Nations, as well as the recommendations of the United Nations Human Rights Committees and Department of Justice regarding the excessive use of force in the U.S. He suggests that the United Nations has the ability to help organize non-governmental organizations, which may influence U.S. law enforcement practices, procedures, and policies.
Sarah Phipps’ (‘16) work was entitled Fundamentally ART: Why the Supreme Court Should Recognize Access to Artificial Reproductive Technology as a Logical Expansion to the Fundamental Right to Procreation. Her project was supervised by Professor Jessica Knouse.
“Sarah's paper explores the important and timely question of how assisted reproductive technology fits into existing reproductive rights jurisprudence,” said Professor Knouse.
Phipps’ article focuses on the fundamental right to procreate and explores whether unrestricted access to assisted reproductive technologies should be included in this right. “The fundamental right does not just apply to those individuals who can create life without medical assistance – the desire to procreate, to bear and beget a child, is so inherently engrained in many individuals that the possibility of not having a child is devastating,” writes Phipps.