Analyze

The methods/Theories used to produce claims of violations of First amendment and Due Process from the Revised statute are taken from Modern First Amendment Doctrines and approaches. The article as well utilizes previous court cases and their decisions to guide the analysis.

In terms of the Due Process Clause violation, the article states that any statue is in violation of the Due Process Clause if the statute is so standardless that is encourages or authorizes discriminatory enforcement. 

In terms of the First Amendment, the article estabilishes first how the United States Supreme Court analyzes cases that contest the First Amendment. Their are three theories introduced that support the first amendment, if a law is found to be prohibiting these theories, a case can be made that it violates the First Amendment. These theories include: "self-realization", "marketplace of ideas", and "democratic value". To determine wether the regulation effects a speaker or the marketplace two models are used: "speaker based" and "audience based". These are used to determine wether the statute will effect the public discourse or the individual. In the end, the article argues how each of these three theories are violated and therefore the statute is in violation of the First Amendment. 

The article as well looks at how the Supreme Court uses a "tiered-scrutiny" approach when analyzing the constitutionality of statutes. This allows the court to apply a different standard based on if the statute is content neutral or content based. Any content based statue is unconstitutional as it prohbits a certain type of speech. When a statute is content neutral, the court must provided evidence that the statute was content motivated. 

This text builds from earlier conceptions of the term “land dispossession” and “land grab”. As defined by the 2011 International Land Coalition, land grabbing specifically refers to large scale land acquisitions that are “ in violation of human rights, without prior consent of the preexisting land users, and with no consideration of social and environmental impacts”. Characterization of land grabs and their resulting harms most commonly considers the effect of physical displacement and harms within the articulated “grabbed” area (Nyantakyi-Frimpong, 2017;Ogwand, 2018;  huaserman, 2018). Li and Pan seek to expand the frame of analysis for land grabs beyond the site of grabbed land to consider the full extent of harms associated with land grabs both geographically (via pollution spillover to areas outside of “grabbed land”) and temporally (via latent “expulsion by pollution). 

The authors engaged in multi-sited ethnographic fieldwork that took place in and around Fukushima but also in other geografical sites like Tochigi, Miyagi, Aichi, Tokyo and Kyoto. There, they conduct semi-structured interviews with various organisations that are all somehow involved with citizen science or radiation measurement.  To learn about the citizens that measure radioactivity and create their own data on radiation because of a lack of provided data by the government, a literature review of policy documents and workshops with those citizen scientists is performed. 

Historical research and analysis of primary resourses and international policy was used to produce claims and arguments in this article.

A method used to support the claim is to relate the potential future disasters in the nuclear industry to historical examples which gives credence to the claims in the article and provide relatable evidence to the reader as to the risks associated with not only the nuclear industry but also a lack of preparedness for nuclear disasters. Data used to support the claim includes case studies that the author analyzed as a part of the article, and several other works were cited. 

Methods, tools/data used to produce the arguments made in the article was information or nuclear summits in the past (various countries), first hand news tv experience. Also past knowledge of the author. Review of past nuclear disasters and the affects globally-discussions made internationally.

The author mainly draws from experience in organizational theory & disaster social issues as well as citing many specialists in the nuclear world as well as those who have hands on experience in disaster response.

Sonja D. Schmid uses data pertaining international response to the disaster that occurred in Fukushima. She uses references and information gathered that has to do with the reactions of various leaders. She uses past situations and opinions in order to formulate her conclusion and claim that there is a need for an international nuclear emergency response plan. She pulls from examples that show that many organizations that tried in the past to create a plan failed due to the lack of international authority. 

The author uses data from the chain of events and steps taken in response to the disaster in Fukushima along with recollection of the event. She analyzes and collects data about how previous situations similar to the one in Japan and involving nuclear fallout were handled and compared those reactions of Chernobyl and Three Mile Island to the reactions that followed Japan's disaster. She also analyzes responses that leaders had in those nations as well as the public and the new policies that arose from those different situations. She pooled data about the reactions of the public, leaders, law and policies and responses. She then uses that data to develop a plan for possible emergency responses as well as support her argument.

Many other research papers, articles, books, and sources of research were referencd in the article. The author read and studied a lot of research in various areas and covering all of the topics discussed in this paper, then strengthened ideas and concepts with enough support from hard research to write this article.