Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Abolition (1)
- Badges and incidents of slavery (1)
- Black codes (1)
- Brown v. Board of Education (1)
- Civil rights (1)
-
- Civil war (1)
- Colorblindness doctrine (1)
- Congress (1)
- Constitutional law (1)
- Equal Protection Clause (1)
- First Amendment (1)
- Fourteenth Amendment (1)
- Government speech doctrine (1)
- Harm (1)
- Jones v. Alfred H. Mayer Co. (1)
- Jurisprudence (1)
- Legal remedies (1)
- Race (1)
- Race-consciousness (1)
- Racial profiling (1)
- Reconstruction (1)
- Slave codes (1)
- Slavery (1)
- Thirteenth Amendment (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
The Thirteenth Amendment And Interest Convergence, William M. Carter Jr.
The Thirteenth Amendment And Interest Convergence, William M. Carter Jr.
Articles
The Thirteenth Amendment was intended to eliminate the institution of slavery and to eliminate the legacy of slavery. Having accomplished the former, the Amendment has only rarely been extended to the latter. The Thirteenth Amendment’s great promise therefore remains unrealized.
This Article explores the gap between the Thirteenth Amendment’s promise and its implementation. Drawing on Critical Race Theory, this Article argues that the relative underdevelopment of Thirteenth Amendment doctrine is due in part to a lack of perceived interest convergence in eliminating what the Amendment’s Framers called the “badges and incidents of slavery.” The theory of interest convergence, in its …
Affirmative Action As Government Speech, William M. Carter Jr.
Affirmative Action As Government Speech, William M. Carter Jr.
Articles
This article seeks to transform how we think about “affirmative action.” The Supreme Court’s affirmative action jurisprudence appears to be a seamless whole, but closer examination reveals important differences. Government race-consciousness sometimes grants a benefit to members of a minority group for remedial or diversifying purposes. But the government may also undertake remedial or diversifying race-conscious action without it resulting in unequal treatment or disadvantage to non-minorities. Under the Court’s current equal protection doctrine, both categories of cases are treated as presumptively unconstitutional. Race-consciousness itself has become a constitutional harm, regardless of tangible effects.
Prior scholarship has suggested that the …