Digital Commons Network^™

Rolling John Bingham In His Grave: The Rehnquist Court Makes Sport With The 14th Amendment, Stephen E. Gottlieb

Akron Law Review

The Warren Court organized the concept of strict scrutiny in Shelton v. Tucker. Where the defendant was obligated to treat people without regard to membership in a suspect class and failed to do that, the Court would hold them liable for their behavior unless it was done for a compelling public reason and there was no less damaging alternative.

The concept of strict scrutiny had nothing to do with intentions. The issue for the Warren Court was whether one party had injured another because of a forbidden reason. That concept of causation was understood broadly. The Court was not looking …

Will Employment Discrimination Class Actions Survive?, Melissa Hart

Akron Law Review

This paper will argue that the changes wrought by the Civil Rights Act of 1991 do not in fact pose a barrier to resolution of employment discrimination claims through class litigation. The addition of compensatory and punitive damages and a jury-trial right in the Civil Rights Act of 1991 may increase the level of scrutiny and perhaps the level of judicial involvement necessary in an employment discrimination class action. But they do not render such a class action either impermissible under Rule 23 or violative of due process or Seventh Amendment jury trial rights. Courts and commentators who insist that …