Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
The Ninth Circuit’S Treatment Of Sexual Orientation: Defining “Rational Basis Review With Bite”, Ian C. Bartrum
The Ninth Circuit’S Treatment Of Sexual Orientation: Defining “Rational Basis Review With Bite”, Ian C. Bartrum
Scholarly Works
When the Ninth Circuit handed down Witt v. Department of the Air Force, President Obama and then-Solicitor General Kagan declined to take an appeal to the Supreme Court. At the time, it seemed that most advocates of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” believed that the administration made that decision because it was afraid the Supreme Court would reverse the Ninth Circuit. If that fear was perhaps well-founded in 2009, it is certainly less so now. In the wake of SmithKline Beecham Corp. v. Abbott Laboratories, as well as recent District Court decisions, opponents of federal constitutional protection for gay people …
Promoting Distributional Equality For Women: Some Thoughts On Gender And Global Corporate Citizenship In Foreign Direct Investment, Rachel J. Anderson
Promoting Distributional Equality For Women: Some Thoughts On Gender And Global Corporate Citizenship In Foreign Direct Investment, Rachel J. Anderson
Scholarly Works
This essay applies a legal theory of global corporate citizenship to the question of women’s distributional equality in foreign direct investment. It proposes ways that a legal theory of mandatory global corporate citizenship can expand the ways we think about regulating transnational corporations and promoting gender equality.
Protecting Basic Rights Of Citizens, Ellen Catsman Freidin, Ann C. Mcginley
Protecting Basic Rights Of Citizens, Ellen Catsman Freidin, Ann C. Mcginley
Scholarly Works
Revision 9 suggests three important changes to the basic rights provision of the Florida Constitution. First, it would add “female and male alike” to define “natural persons who are equal before the law.” This change expressly recognizes equality of the sexes. Second, it would prohibit the government from depriving a person of any right because of the person’s national origin. Finally, the revision prohibits the government from depriving a person of any right because of “physical disability,” replacing the currently existing protection for “physical handicap.”