Law Commons^™

The Color Line: A Review And Reflection For Antiracist Scholars, Jasmine Gonzales Rose

Faculty Scholarship

In The Color Line: A Short Introduction, David Lyons provides a valuable service to students and academics in law, social sciences, and humanities by providing a concise history of the development and maintenance of race and racial order through law, policy, and discrimination in the United States. Lyons effectively outlines how race and racism were developed through these mechanisms in an effort to facilitate and maintain white supremacy.

Experimental Meets Intersectional: Visionary Black Feminist Pragmatism And Practicing Constitutional Democracy, Linda C. Mcclain

Faculty Scholarship

That pragmatism can do-and already is doing-real work to repair and improve constitutional democracy in the United States is a conviction voiced in the academy, in social movements, and in social media. But what does pragmatism mean, as used in these contexts? Sometimes, pragmatism seems to connote simply being practical (rather than idealistic) and focusing on results. But sometimes, commentators are saying more: pragmatism as a distinctive political philosophy has the power to fuel meaningful democratic change. This Article focuses on the creative and productive melding of classical American pragmatism (as exemplified by John Dewey and others) with feminism. In …

Deficit Frame Dangers, Jonathan Feingold

Faculty Scholarship

Civil rights advocates have long viewed litigation as an essential, if insufficient, catalyst of social change. In part, it is. But in critical respects that remain underexplored in legal scholarship, civil rights litigation can hinder short- and long-term projects of racial justice.

Specifically, certain civil rights doctrines reward plaintiffs for emphasizing community deficits—or what I term a “deficit frame.” Legal doctrine, in other words, invites legal narratives that track, activate, and reinforce pernicious racial stereotypes. This dynamic, even in the context of well-intended litigation, risks entrenching conditions that drive racial inequality—including the conditions that litigation is often intended to address. …

"All (Poor) Lives Matter": How Class-Not-Race Logic Reinscribes Race And Class Privilege, Jonathan Feingold

Faculty Scholarship

In An Intersectional Critique of Tiers of Scrutiny, Professors Devon Carbado and Kimberlé Crenshaw infuse affirmative action with an overdue dose of intersectionality theory. Their intervention, which highlights the disfavored remedial status of Black women, exposes equality law as an unmarked intersectional project that “privileges the intersectional identities of white antidiscrimination claimants.”

This latent racial privilege rests on two doctrinal pillars. First, single-axis tiers of scrutiny, which force claimants and courts to view discrimination in either/or terms (that is, race-based or gender-based or class-based), contravene intersectionality’s core insight that “people live their lives co-constitutively as ‘both/and,’ rather than fragmentarily …

Desnatada: Latina Illumination Of Breastfeeding, Race, And Injustice, Jasmine Gonzales Rose

Faculty Scholarship

In Skimmed: Breastfeeding, Race, and Injustice, Andrea Freeman brilliantly explains how racism results in lower breastfeeding rates by Black mothers,¹ which in turn results in poorer health outcomes--including higher mortality rates--for Black babies.² She provides four primary reasons for this phenomenon: (1) the history and legacy of slavery, (2) the imposition of racist gender stereotypes on Black women, (3) racially-targeted formula promotion by manufacturers and hospitals, and (4) government benefits and employment policies that obstruct poor people's ability to breastfeed. The first two of these reasons are particularly devastating: the legacy of slavery and misogynoiristic³ stereotypes …

What Becomes A Legendary Constitutional Campaign Most? Marking The Nineteenth Amendment At One Hundred, Linda C. Mcclain

Faculty Scholarship

What most becomes a landmark anniversary in the legendary campaign by women (and some men) for woman suffrage that, in 1920, led to Congress’s ratifying the Nineteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution? This framing of the question alludes to the famous, decades-long Blackglama advertising campaign, “What becomes a legend most?,” which (beginning in 1968) enlisted the charisma of famous women (and some men) to glamorize mink coats. This Essay also appeals to the dual meanings of legendary -- “of, relating to, or characteristic of legend” and “well-known, or famous” -- and argues that the campaign for woman suffrage is the …

The Limits Of Medical X-Pertise: Gender Markers In A Pandemic, Heron Greenesmith, Andy Izenson

Faculty Scholarship

The world changed drastically in 2020. The pandemic has far reaching consequences, and so too do the current civil rights movements and the struggle for gender justice and liberation. This Article seeks to describe a moment in time, a moment of doubt of how one 's gender and race will predict one 's ability to survive the pandemic-not simply COVID-19, but the pandemic writ-large and all the wrenches it has thrown into the health-care machine. How do those of us standing at the edge of a gender revolution navigate these waters? Will our health be the price we pay for …

Toward Establishing A Pre-Extinction Definition Of 'Nationwide Injunctions', Portia Pedro

Faculty Scholarship

Some define “nationwide injunctions” as injunctions with: (1) no geographic limitations and (2) benefits to people beyond named plaintiffs or plaintiff classes. In this Article, I pose several questions central to figuring out what these so-called “nationwide injunctions” are. I argue that continuing to debate about injunctions in isolation from any developed, conceptual framework leads to potentially misguided arguments. The balance of criticisms regarding the targeted injunctions involve issues that are structural, jurisprudential, prudential, and formalist in ways that would curtail “nationwide injunctions” to protect Article II actors, to the relative detriment of those injured by Article II actors. There …

When They Hear Us: Race, Algorithms And The Practice Of Criminal Law, Ngozi Okidegbe

Faculty Scholarship

We are in the midst of a fraught debate in criminal justice reform circles about the merits of using algorithms. Proponents claim that these algorithms offer an objective path towards substantially lowering high rates of incarceration and racial and socioeconomic disparities without endangering community safety. On the other hand, racial justice scholars argue that these algorithms threaten to entrench racial inequity within the system because they utilize risk factors that correlate with historic racial inequities, and in so doing, reproduce the same racial status quo, but under the guise of scientific objectivity.

This symposium keynote address discusses the challenge that …

Voting Matters, Wendy K. Mariner

Faculty Scholarship

Elections have consequences—especially for civil rights, social justice, and human rights.

The year 2020 brings another round of elections for president, legislators, governors, secretaries of state, attorneys general, district attorneys, mayors, city council members, school committee members, and even judges. Our elected officials and their appointees decide who pays how much in taxes, what our taxes pay for, what kind of education our children get, what counts as a crime, what agricultural products are subsidized, what the minimum wage shall be, how to conduct the census, who is eligible for Medicaid, SNAP, and WIC benefits, who is admitted into the …

Color-Blind But Not Color-Deaf: Accent Discrimination In Jury Selection, Jasmine Gonzales Rose

Faculty Scholarship

Every week brings a new story about racialized linguistic discrimination. It happens in restaurants, on public transportation, and in the street. It also happens behind closed courtroom doors during jury selection. While it is universally recognized that dismissing prospective jurors because they look like racial minorities is prohibited, it is too often deemed acceptable to exclude jurors because they sound like racial minorities. The fact that accent discrimination is commonly racial, ethnic, and national origin discrimination is overlooked. This Article critically examines sociolinguistic scholarship to explain the relationship between accent, race, and racism. It argues that accent discrimination in jury …

Brief Of Amici Curiae Legal Scholars In Support Of Equality In Support Of Respondents, Fulton V. City Of Philadelpha, Kyle Velte, David Cruz, Michael Higdon, Anthony Michael Kreis, Shirley Lin, Linda C. Mcclain

Faculty Scholarship

This Brief of Amici Curiae Legal Scholars in Support of Equality in Support of Respondents filed in Fulton v. City of Philadelphia addresses the propriety of an analogy to race discrimination in public accommodation cases involving sexual orientation discrimination. The race analogy in sexual orientation cases proceeds as follows: Advocates and judges widely agree that courts should, and would, reject a religious exemption claim by a public accommodation—such a foster care agency—seeking to turn away an African-American or interracial couple based on the public accommodation’s religious beliefs that Blacks are inferior to whites or that the races should not mix. …

Equality Is A Brokered Idea, Robert L. Tsai

Faculty Scholarship

This essay examines the Supreme Court's stunning decision in the census case, Department of Commerce v. New York. I characterize Chief Justice John Roberts' decision to side with the liberals as an example of pursuing the ends of equality by other means – this time, through the rule of reason. Although the appeal was limited in scope, the stakes for political and racial equality were sky high. In blocking the administration from adding a citizenship question to the 2020 Census, 5 members of the Court found the justification the administration gave to be a pretext. In this instance, that lie …

Brief Of Amici Curiae Scholars Of The Constitutional Rights And Interests Of Children In Support Of Respondents, Angela Onwuachi-Willig, Catherine E. Smith, Tanya Washington Hicks, Lauren Fontana, Jessica Dixon Weaver, Cary Martin Shelby

Faculty Scholarship

This Brief of Amici Curiae Scholars of the Constitutional Rights and Interests of Children in Support of Respondents filed in Fulton v. City of Philadelphia makes two points. First, a categorical exemption, based on religious beliefs rather than foster children’s needs, does not serve the best interests of children and violates the government’s duty to foster youth. Such an exemption needlessly restricts the pool of prospective foster parents, increasing the risk of a greater number of children being confined to long-term, institutional care. The reduction of same-sex foster parents would also have a disproportionate impact on “special needs” and LGBT …

The Unnecessary And Unfortunate Focus On “Animus,” “Bare Desire To Harm,” And “Bigotry” In Analyzing Opposition To Gay And Lesbian Rights, James E. Fleming

Faculty Scholarship

I am delighted to participate in this symposium on Professor Linda C. McClain’s wonderful new book, Who’s the Bigot? Learning from Conflicts over Marriage and Civil Rights Law. All of the other papers in this symposium focus on Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission (and thus connect with Chapter Eight of her book, on claims of religious exemptions from protections of gay and lesbian rights), while my piece will join issue with the related Chapter Seven, on bigotry, motives, and morality in the Supreme Court’s gay and lesbian rights cases. In this brief Essay, I cannot do justice …

Response To Commentaries On Who’S The Bigot?, Linda C. Mcclain

Faculty Scholarship

One of the joys of writing a book is the chance to have its arguments and observations evaluated by creative and engaged readers. I am very grateful that the scholars included in this book symposium provided such constructive commentary on the manuscript of my book, Who’s the Bigot? Learning from Conflicts over Marriage and Civil Rights Law. One of those commentators, Professor Imer Flores, also generously hosted a wonderful live conference at which I had the chance to hear and engage with early versions of several of these commentaries. The final book, I hope, reflects improvements that grew out of …

'‘Male Chauvinism’ Is Under Attack From All Sides At Present': Roberts V. United States Jaycees, Sex Discrimination, And The First Amendment, Linda C. Mcclain

Faculty Scholarship

Today, many take it for granted that discriminating against women in the marketplace is illegal and morally wrong. Roberts v. United States Jaycees (1984) remains a foundational case on government’s compelling interest in prohibiting sex (or gender) discrimination in public accommodations, even in the face of First Amendment claims of freedom of association and expression. Curiously, Jaycees seems comparatively neglected by legal scholars, if measured by the cases included in the various collections of “law stories” or “rewritten opinions” projects. Looking back at the Jaycees litigation reveals the parties wrestling over the reach of public accommodations law and the force …

Reconceptualizing The Harms Of Discrimination: How Brown V. Board Of Education Helped To Further White Supremacy, Angela Onwuachi-Willig

Faculty Scholarship

For decades, literature has played a vital role in revealing weaknesses in law. The classic novel To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee is no different. The long-revered work of fiction contains several key scenes that illuminate significant gaps in the analysis of one of our most celebrated decisions: Brown v. Board of Education, the case in which the U.S. Supreme Court held that state-mandated racial segregation in public schools violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution. In particular, the novel opens a pathway that enables its readers to visualize the full harms of white supremacy, which include …

Women's Rights, Human Rights And The Criminal Law Or, Feminist Debates And Responses To [De]Criminalization And Sexual And Reproductive Health, Aziza Ahmed

Faculty Scholarship

My comments today seek to highlight how social and economic rights advocates, particularly those concerned with the right to health, engage with ongoing debates about the role of criminal law in human rights. In particular, I emphasize how many “right to health” campaigns fight for the decriminalization of laws that result in the arrest of marginalized communities or health workers. This trend within right to health advocacy complicates what has been called the anti-impunity turn in human rights. In other words, although many scholars have correctly highlighted the rise of a carceral agenda in human rights, there is also ongoing, …

Immigration Unilateralism And American Ethnonationalism, Robert L. Tsai

Faculty Scholarship

This paper arose from an invited symposium on "Democracy in America: The Promise and the Perils," held at Loyola University Chicago School of Law in Spring 2019. The essay places the Trump administration’s immigration and refugee policy in the context of a resurgent ethnonationalist movement in America as well as the constitutional politics of the past. In particular, it argues that Trumpism’s suspicion of foreigners who are Hispanic or Muslim, its move toward indefinite detention and separation of families, and its disdain for so-called “chain migration” are best understood as part of an assault on the political settlement of the …

Affirmative Action, David Oppenheimer, Angela Onwuachi-Willig, Nancy Leong

Faculty Scholarship

There are consistent messages to people of color about their proper place in
society, which has always been a really important tool for maintaining and
advancing white supremacy. Referring back to what Professor Haney-Lopez
asserted earlier today, in today’s post-civil rights society, few people would
argue in favor of segregation in racial terms explicitly so. And few people would
assert that Blacks, for example, do not belong in certain places. However,
opponents of affirmative action have begun to articulate a form of these
arguments as an add-on to the mismatch theory. In the minds of these scholars,
affirmative action should …

The Rhetoric Of Bigotry And Conscience In Battles Over "Religious Liberty V. Lgbt Rights", Linda C. Mcclain

Faculty Scholarship

Charges, denials, and countercharges of “bigotry” are a familiar feature in debates over the evident conflict between LGBT rights and religious liberty. A frequent claim is that religious individuals who reject the extension of civil marriage to same-sex couples and seek conscience-based exemptions from state public accommodations law that protect against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation are being “branded” as bigots. The rhetoric of bigotry raises a number of puzzles. Is sincerity or the appeal to conscience a defense to charge of bigotry? Is a charge of bigotry inferred simply from asserting that society should learn lessons from …

Race And Assisted Reproduction: Implications For Population Health, Aziza Ahmed

Faculty Scholarship

This Article emerges from Fordham Law Review's Symposium on the fiftieth anniversary of Loving v. Virginia,¹ the case that found antimiscegenation laws unconstitutional. ² Inspired by the need to interrogate the regulation of race in the context of family, this Article examines the diffuse regulatory environment around assisted reproductive technology (ART) that shapes procreative decisions and the inequalities that these decisions may engender. ³ ART both centers biology and raises questions about how we imagine our racial futures in the context of family, community, and nation. ⁴ Importantly, ART demonstrates how both the state and private actors shape family …

Prejudice, Constitutional Moral Progress, And Being "On The Right Side Of History": Reflections On Loving V. Virginia At Fifty, Linda C. Mcclain

Faculty Scholarship

What does it mean to be on the “right” or “wrong” side of history? When Virginia’s Attorney General explained his decision not to defend Virginia’s “Defense of Marriage Law” prohibiting same-sex marriage, he asserted that it was time for Virginia to be on the “right” rather than “wrong” side of history and the law. He criticized his predecessors, who defended the discriminatory laws at issue in Brown v. Board of Education, Loving v. Virginia, and United States v. Virginia. Loving played a crucial role in the majority opinion in Obergefell v. Hodges, even as the dissenters disputed …

Excavating Race-Based Disadvantage Among Class-Privileged People Of Color, Khiara Bridges

Faculty Scholarship

The aim of this article is to begin to theorize the fraught space within which class-privileged racial minorities exist — the disadvantage within their privilege. The article posits that the invisibility of the racial subordination of wealthier people of color (that is, their marginalization on account of their race) is fertile soil for the germination of post-racialism — the sense that we, as a nation, have overcome our racial problems. The dramatic visibility of the minority poor’s suffering, combined with the relative invisibility of the suffering of those minorities who are not poor, breeds the belief that class is now …

From Loving V. Virginia To Washington V. Davis: The Erosion Of The Supreme Court's Equal Protection Intent Analysis, Angela Onwuachi-Willig

Faculty Scholarship

In 1967, the United States Supreme Court issued an opinion that contained its most searing and explicit condemnation of white supremacy: Loving v. Virginia. At issue in Loving was the constitutionality of a statutory scheme in the state of Virginia that prohibited marriages between individuals solely on the basis of race. Among other things, provisions in this statutory scheme punished intermarriage between a "white person" and a "colored person," meaning not only Blacks, but also Asian Americans and American Indians who did not fall under the Pocahontas Exception. The provisions also punished evasion of the state's interracial marriage ban by …

Racial Character Evidence In Police Killing Cases, Jasmine Gonzales Rose

Faculty Scholarship

The United States is facing a twofold crisis: police killings of people of color and unaccountability for these killings in the criminal justice system. In many instances, the officers’ use of deadly force is captured on video and often appears clearly unjustified, but grand and petit juries still fail to indict and convict, leaving many baffled. This Article provides an explanation for these failures: juror reliance on “racial character evidence.” Too often, jurors consider race as evidence in criminal trials, particularly in police killing cases where the victim was a person of color. Instead of focusing on admissible evidence, jurors …

Pov: Scotus Should Not Permit “Boycott Of Same-Sex Marriage”, Linda C. Mcclain

Faculty Scholarship

On December 5, 2017, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, in which baker (self-described cake artist) Jack Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, asked the court to decide “whether applying Colorado’s public accommodations law to compel artists to create expression that violates their sincerely held religious beliefs about marriage violates the Free Speech or Free Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment.”

Toward A Critical Race Theory Of Evidence, Jasmine Gonzales Rose

Faculty Scholarship

Scholars, judges, and lawyers have long believed that evidence rules apply equally to all persons regardless of race. This Article challenges this assumption and reveals how evidence law structurally disadvantages people of color. A critical race analysis of stand-your-ground defenses, cross-racial eyewitness misidentifications, and minority flight from racially-targeted police profiling and violence uncovers the existence of a dual-race evidentiary system. This system is reminiscent of nineteenth century race-based witness competency rules that barred people of color from testifying against white people. I deconstruct this problem and introduce the original concept of “racialized reality evidence.” This construct demonstrates how evidence of …

Will Focusing On Men's Moral Calculus Make Abortion Less "About" Gender?, Linda C. Mcclain

Faculty Scholarship

Decades ago, feminist leader Gloria Steinem quipped that, “if men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.” As President Trump reinstates restrictions on women’s reproductive rights that the Obama Administration lifted (such as the “global gag rule”), the visual imagery of Trump signing executive orders while surrounded by an audience of white men raises – once again – the question of how gender shapes the abortion issue. In the recent unsuccessful Republican effort to repeal “Obamacare,” when Kansas Senator Pat Roberts was asked whether he supported removing the mandate that insurance companies cover “essential health benefits” such as maternity …