Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
To Count And Be Counted: A Response To Professor Levinson, Marcia L. Mccormick
To Count And Be Counted: A Response To Professor Levinson, Marcia L. Mccormick
All Faculty Scholarship
This Essay deepens the discussion Professor Levinson began in his lecture for the Richard J. Childress Memorial Lecture at SLU Law, Who Counts?. Professor Levinson explored the question of who counts as a member of the US community, and who gets to decide who counts. Inevitably, given our history of exclusion on the basis of race and sex, questions about belonging and race and sex form a central part of the current debate. Labeling a person with a race and sex presupposes the questions of what makes a person a certain race or sex? This essay explores what identity …
The New Jim Crow? Recovering The Progressive Origins Of Mass Incarceration, Anders Walker
The New Jim Crow? Recovering The Progressive Origins Of Mass Incarceration, Anders Walker
All Faculty Scholarship
This article revisits the claim that mass incarceration constitutes a new form of racial segregation, or JimCrow. Drawing from historical sources, it demonstrates that proponents of the analogy miss an important commonality between the two phenomena, namely the debt that each owe to progressive and/or liberal politics. Though generally associated with repression and discrimination, both Jim Crow and massincarceration owe their existence in part to enlightened reforms aimed at promoting black interests; albeit with perverse results. Recognizing the aspirational origins of systematic discrimination marks an important facet of comprehending the persistence of racial inequality in the United States.
“To Corral And Control”: Stop, Frisk, And The Geography Of Freedom, Anders Walker
“To Corral And Control”: Stop, Frisk, And The Geography Of Freedom, Anders Walker
All Faculty Scholarship
This article revisits the emergence of stop and frisk law in the 1960s to make three points. One, the impetus for formalizing police stops arose midst confusion generated by Mapp v. Ohio, the landmark Warren Court opinion incorporating the exclusionary rule to the states. Two, police over-reactions to Mapp intersected with fears of urban riots, leading to a formalization of stop and frisk rules that aimed at better containing inner city minority populations. Three, the heightened control of urban streets coupled with the heightened protection of the private home bore geographic implications, interiorizing liberty in ways that perpetuated a national …