Digital Commons Network^™

The Effects Of Intent: Do We Know How Legal Standards Work?, Theodore Eisenberg, Sheri Lynn Johnson

Sheri Lynn Johnson

No one knows how the intent standard works in racial discrimination cases, though many have speculated. To test the speculation, this study examines how the intent standard actually operates. Its findings cast doubt on whether we really know how any legal standard functions.

Post-Mccleskey Racial Discrimination Claims In Capital Cases, John H. Blume, Theodore Eisenberg, Sheri Lynn Johnson

Sheri Lynn Johnson

In federal habeas corpus proceedings, Earl Matthews, an African American, South Carolina death row inmate, alleged that his death sentence was the result of invidious racial discrimination that violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. To support his contention, Matthews presented statistical evidence showing that in Charleston County, where a jury convicted him and sentenced him to death, the prosecutor was far more likely to seek a death sentence for a Black defendant accused of killing a white person than for any other racial combination of victims and defendants, and also that such a Black defendant was more …

Post-Mccleskey Racial Discrimination Claims In Capital Cases, John H. Blume, Theodore Eisenberg, Sheri Lynn Johnson

John H. Blume

In federal habeas corpus proceedings, Earl Matthews, an African American, South Carolina death row inmate, alleged that his death sentence was the result of invidious racial discrimination that violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. To support his contention, Matthews presented statistical evidence showing that in Charleston County, where a jury convicted him and sentenced him to death, the prosecutor was far more likely to seek a death sentence for a Black defendant accused of killing a white person than for any other racial combination of victims and defendants, and also that such a Black defendant was more …

Deadly Force In Memphis: Tennessee V. Garner, John H. Blume

John H. Blume

On October 3, 1974, officers Hymon and Wright of the Memphis Police Department responded to a call about a burglary in progress. When they arrived at the address, a woman standing in the door told the officers that she had heard glass breaking and that someone was breaking into the house next door. Officer Hymon went around the near side of the house. When he reached the backyard, he saw someone run from the back of the house. With his flashlight, he found a person crouched next to a fence at the back of the yard, some thirty to forty …

Death Or Transformation? Educational Autonomy In The Roberts Court, Elizabeth Dale

Elizabeth Dale

In the aftermath of the Supreme Court's decisions in Grutter and Gratz a number of commentators argued that the Court had begun to embrace a new constitutional doctrine that required deference to the decisions of some institutions. Most notably they asserted that the Court would defer within the field of education. But even as they suggested that the Court was more willing to explore the doctrine, those two opinions left several large questions unanswered: Did the Court's embrace of institutional autonomy extend beyond higher education, into the K-12 realm? If so, what were its bounds? Was the doctrine only relevant …

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.

After Shelby County: Getting Section 2 Of The Vra To Do The Work Of Section 5, Christopher Elmendorf, Douglas Spencer

Christopher S. Elmendorf

Until the Supreme Court put an end to it in Shelby County v. Holder, Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act was widely regarded as an effective, low-cost tool for blocking potentially discriminatory changes to election laws and administrative practices. The provision the Supreme Court left standing, Section 2, is generally seen as expensive, cumbersome and almost wholly ineffective at blocking changes before they take effect. This paper argues that the courts, in partnership with the Department of Justice, could reform Section 2 so that it fills much of the gap left by the Supreme Court’s evisceration of Section …

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 …

Prisoner Disenfranchisement In The Uk Vs. The Us: Whom Does It Affect?, Rosi Lehr

Rosi Lehr

Prisoner disenfranchisement is the denial of a prisoner's right to vote. The UK and US both recognize and apply prisoner disenfranchisement in their countries. Both countries are viewed as the biggest advocates of disenfranchisement. The right to vote is viewed as a privilege by both, which may be revoked for antisocial behavior and for violating the laws of the land. There are some differences though between the two countries. The actual extent of the disenfranchisement, where it originates, who it affects, and how it is governed are just a few differences. We will first examine how the UK handles a …