Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Restricting The Rights Of Poor Mothers: An International Human Rights Critique Of "Workfare", Shruti Rana
Restricting The Rights Of Poor Mothers: An International Human Rights Critique Of "Workfare", Shruti Rana
Faculty Scholarship
In every society, the work that women do is undervalued and unrecognized. Political and social tensions behind conceptions of work, motherhood, and equality can ignite movements that threaten the human rights of women. One such movement is underway in the United States where recent “Workfare” provisions specifically target and punish the most vulnerable members of society under the guise of reform and morality. This critique of Workfare aims to demonstrate some of the dynamism and power of a human rights framework, and to lay the groundwork for effective action to improve the plight of the single mothers who rely on …
Customary International Law And Private Rights Of Action, Curtis A. Bradley
Customary International Law And Private Rights Of Action, Curtis A. Bradley
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Treaties, Human Rights, And Conditional Consent, Curtis A. Bradley, Jack L. Goldsmith
Treaties, Human Rights, And Conditional Consent, Curtis A. Bradley, Jack L. Goldsmith
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Rights, Rules And The Structure Of Constitutional Adjudication: A Response To Professor Fallon, Matthew D. Adler
Rights, Rules And The Structure Of Constitutional Adjudication: A Response To Professor Fallon, Matthew D. Adler
Faculty Scholarship
Constitutional doctrine is typically rule-dependent. A viable constitutional challenge typically hinges upon the existence of a discriminatory, overbroad, improperly motivated, or otherwise invalid rule, to which the claimant has some nexus. In a prior article, Prof. Adler proposed one model of constitutional adjudication that tries to make sense of rule-dependence. He argued that reviewing courts are not vindicating the personal rights of claimants, but rather are repealing or amending invalid rules. IN a Commentary in this issue, Professor Fallon now puts forward a different model of constitutional adjudication, equally consistent with rule-dependence. Fallon proposes that a reviewing court should overturn …
Personal Rights And Rule Dependence: Can The Two Co-Exist?, Matthew D. Adler
Personal Rights And Rule Dependence: Can The Two Co-Exist?, Matthew D. Adler
Faculty Scholarship
Constitutional doctrine is typically "rule-dependent." Typically, a constitutional litigant will not prevail unless she can show that a particular kind of legal rule is in force, e.g., a rule that discriminates against "suspect classes" in violation of the Equal Protection Clause, or that targets speech in violation of the First Amendment, or that is motivated by a religious purpose in violation of the Establishment Clause. Further, the litigant must typically establish a violation of her "personal rights." The Supreme Court has consistently stated that a reviewing court should not invalidate an unconstitutional governmental action at the instance of a claimant …