Digital Commons Network^™

Racial Indirection, Yuvraj Joshi

Yuvraj Joshi

School Discipline 101: Students' Due Process Rights In Expulsion Hearings, Melissa Frydman, Shani M. King

Shani M. King

Upholding the principle that school districts, as state actors, shall not deprive a student of liberty or property without due process of law, courts have expanded for more than four decades the Fourteenth Amendment's due process protection of public school students. Understanding this principle is essential to representing children in school discipline proceedings. Before presenting a practical guide to representing students in these proceedings, we offer a brief history of due process protection for children.

Prisoners And Habeas Privileges Under The Fourteenth Amendment, Lee B. Kovarsky

Lee Kovarsky

The U.S. Reports contain no answer to a million-dollar question: are state prisoners constitutionally entitled to a federal habeas forum? The Supreme Court has consistently ducked the basic constitutional issue, and academic work on the question idles on familiar themes. The strongest existing argument that state prisoners are constitutionally entitled to a federal habeas forum involves a theory of incorporation under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. I provide a new and different account: specifically, that the Fourteenth Amendment’s Privileges and Immunities Clause (“PI Clause”) guarantees a habeas privilege as a feature of national citizenship, and that the corresponding habeas …

Preventing Balkanization Or Facilitating Racial Domination: A Critique Of The New Equal Protection, Darren L. Hutchinson

Darren L Hutchinson

Abstract

Preventing Balkanization or Facilitating Racial Domination: A Critique of the

New Equal Protection

The Supreme Court requires that equal protection plaintiffs prove defendants acted with discriminatory intent. The intent rule has insulated from judicial invalidation numerous policies that harmfully impact racial and ethnic minorities. Court doctrine also mandates that state actors remain colorblind. The colorblindness doctrine has caused the Court to invalidate many policies that were designed to ameliorate the conditions of racial inequality. Taken together, these two equality doctrines facilitate racial domination. The Court justifies this outcome on the ground that the Constitution does not protect “group rights.” …

"Not Without Political Power": Gays And Lesbians, Equal Protection, And The Suspect Class Doctrine, Darren Hutchinson

Darren L Hutchinson

The Supreme Court purportedly utilizes the suspect class doctrine in order to balance institutional concerns with the protection of important constitutional rights. The Court, however, inconsistently applies this doctrine, and it has not precisely defined its contours. The political powerlessness factor is especially undertheorized and contradictorily applied. Nevertheless, this factor has become salient in recent equal protection cases brought by gay and lesbian plaintiffs.

A growing body of and federal and state-court precedent addresses the flaws of the Court’s suspect class doctrine. This Article discusses the inadequacies of the suspect class doctrine and highlights problems within the emerging scholarship and …

The Conflict Between Stare Decisis And Overruling In Constitutional Adjudication, Steven J. Burton

steven J. burton

There is a near-consensus among Supreme Court Justices and constitutional scholars that there is no significant law, and need not be a law, constraining the Court's power to overrule its constitutional precedents. This Essay/Article argues, to the contrary, that the Court's overruling power should be constitutionally constrained for essentially the same reasons that virtually every other federal government power is constrained. It proposes and defends a constitutional law of overruling.

Municipal Liability And Liability Of Supervisors: Litigation Significance Of Recent Trends And Developments, Karen Blum, Celeste Koeleveld, Joel B. Rudin, Martin A. Schwartz

Martin A. Schwartz

"The purpose of this presentation is to examine two recent Supreme Court decisions, Connick v. Thompson and Ashcroft v. Iqbal with an eye to their impact on how lower federal courts will assess such claims in the wake of new constraints imposed by these cases. The focus of the discussion will be on developments in single-incident liability cases after Connick and supervisory liability claims after Iqbal."

Article: No Child Left Behind: Why Race-Based Achievement Goals Violate The Equal Protection Clause, Ayriel Bland

Ayriel Bland

In 2002, No Child Left Behind (NCLB) was passed under President George W. Bush with the goal of increasing academic proficiency for all children in the United States by 2014. Yet, many states struggled to meet this goal and the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education allowed states to apply for waivers and bypass the 2014 deadline. Some states implemented waivers though race-based achievement standards. For example, Florida in October 2012, established that by 2018, 74 percent of African American and 81 percent of Hispanic students had to be proficient in math and reading, in comparison to 88 percent …

The Geography Of Racial Stereotyping: Evidence And Implications For Vra Preclearance After Shelby County, Christopher Elmendorf, Douglas Spencer

Christopher S. Elmendorf

The Supreme Court in Shelby County v. Holder (2013) effectively enjoined the preclearance regime of the Voting Rights Act. The Court deemed the coverage formula, which determines the jurisdictions subject to preclearance, insufficiently grounded in current conditions. This paper proposes a new, legally defensible approach to coverage based on between-state differences in the proportion of voting age citizens who subscribe to negative stereotypes about racial minorities and vote accordingly. The new coverage formula could also account for racially polarized voting and minority population size, but, for constitutional reasons, subjective discrimination by voters is the essential criterion. We demonstrate that the …

Antidiscrimination Law And The Multiracial Experience: A Reply To Nancy Leong, Tina F. Botts

Tina F Botts

Misunderstanding the concept of race as based in biology is the root error of Professor Nancy Leong's recommendation of a switch to "perceived race" in antidiscrimination law in order to protect multiracial persons from illegal racial discrimination. Once race is understood as socio-historically constructed and context-dependent rather than as rooted in biology, antidiscrimination law need only add multiracial persons to the categories of specially protected groups in order to protect multiracial persons from illegal discrimination.

Subtraction By Addition?: The Thirteenth And Fourteenth Amendments, Mark A. Graber

Mark Graber

The celebration of the Thirteenth Amendment in many Essays prepared for this Symposium may be premature. That the Thirteenth Amendment arguably protects a different and, perhaps, wider array of rights than the Fourteenth Amendment may be less important than the less controversial claim that the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified after the Thirteenth Amendment. If the Fourteenth Amendment covers similar ground as the Thirteenth Amendment, but protects a narrower set of rights than the Thirteenth Amendment, then the proper inference may be that the Fourteenth Amendment repealed or modified crucial rights originally protected by the Thirteenth Amendment. The broad interpretation of …

Equal Protection, Immigrants And Access To Health Care And Welfare Benefits, Mel Cousins

Mel Cousins

The New Originalism Meets The Fourteenth Amendment: Original Public Meaning And The Problem Of Incorporation, Lawrence Rosenthal

Lawrence Rosenthal

This paper, prepared for a symposium on the Bill of Rights and the Fourteenth Amendment at the University of San Diego's Institute for Constitutional Originalism, examines the historical case for incorporation within the Fourteenth Amendment of the rights in first eight amendments to the Constitution in light of the recent turn in thinking about originalist methods of constitutional interpretation. In recent decades, the historical case for incorporation has made something of a comeback, resting on strong evidence that many of the key framers of the Fourteenth Amendment considered the first eight amendments to be among the privileges and immunities of …