Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Ohio V. Clark: Testimonial Statements Under The Confrontation Clause, Mesha Sloss
Ohio V. Clark: Testimonial Statements Under The Confrontation Clause, Mesha Sloss
Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar
In Crawford v. Washington, the Supreme Court declared that an accused right under the Constitution to confront the witnesses against him applied only to “testimonial statements.” That decision, however, did not attempt to fully define the scope of testimonial statements. This commentary analyzes Ohio v. Clark, a case which will decide the question of whether statements made by a child to a person with a duty to report allegations of child abuse are testimonial statements. In this case a young child was questioned at school by a teaching assistant about his injuries. This statement was then offered in …
Keeping Civil Rights Debates Civil: Removing Opportunities For Prejudice, Steven Saracco
Keeping Civil Rights Debates Civil: Removing Opportunities For Prejudice, Steven Saracco
Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination on the basis of religion in employment decisions made by private employers. This commentary analyzes Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch, a case before the Supreme Court on the issue of whether a job applicant bears the burden of expressly notifying an employer of a conflict between the applicant’s religious beliefs and the employer’s policies before the employer must offer a reasonable accommodation. This case deals with a Muslim woman who was denied employment at a clothing store because her headdress was deemed to be a …
Up In The Air: Department Of Homeland Security V. Maclean And The Whistleblower Protection Act, Mike Brett
Up In The Air: Department Of Homeland Security V. Maclean And The Whistleblower Protection Act, Mike Brett
Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar
This commentary analyzes the Supreme Court case Department of Homeland Security v. MacLean deciding whether an employee of the Department of Homeland Security comes under the protection of the Whistleblower Protection Act when they release potentially sensitive information to the media. Generally, the Act protects whistleblowers unless the information they release is not allowed "as specified by law." The particular statutory question in this case is whether the "law" prohibiting release must be contained in a statute, or can include the Department of Homeland Security's own promulgated regulation. The Author profiles the background of the case, applicable legal precedent, and …