Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorRomero, Leo M.
dc.date.accessioned2010-06-14T20:47:33Z
dc.date.available2010-06-14T20:47:33Z
dc.date.issued2009
dc.identifier.citation7 U. St. Thomas L.J. 154 (2009)en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1928/10783
dc.description.abstractThis article addresses the means of punishing conduct that causes serious environmental harm like the Exxon Valdez oil spill. In particular, it considers the appropriateness and effectiveness of both punitive damages and criminal sanctions as remedies in such cases in light of the U.S. Supreme Court's approaches to reviewing both punitive damages awards and criminal sentences for excessiveness. This article recommends, first, that state legislatures should authorize and regulate punitive damages so that appellate courts will not interfere with punitive damages awards, as happened in the Exxon case. Second, states should enforce criminal provisions in environmental statutes against both corporate and individual offenders in order to enhance the deterrent effect that such laws have on corporations and their policies, and to express the moral outrage occasioned by culpable conduct harming the environment.en_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherUniversity of St. Thomas Law Journalen_US
dc.titlePunishment for Ecological Disasters: Punitive Damages and/or Criminal Sanctionsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record