Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Constitutional Law-Blockbusting-Antiblockbusting Section Of The Civil Rights Act Of 1968 Held Not Violative Of First Amendment. Finding Of "Group Pattern Or Practice" Does Not Require A Showing Of Conspiracy Or Concerted Action
Fordham Urban Law Journal
An action was brought by the Attorney General against the president of a realty group and four other real estate brokers to enjoin alleged violations of anti-blockbusting provisions of the Fair Housing Act of 1968. Defendants were accused of individually and collectively engaging in a practice to prevent the enjoyment of rights granted by the Fair Housing Act and that a group of persons was denied rights as a result. It was alleged the defendant's agents made unlawful representations to white homeowners concerning changes in the racial composition of their neighborhood in order to induce sales. The trial court found …
Constitutional Law-Sixth Amendment-Exclusion From Jury Selection Of Residents Of The Judicial District Where A Crime Is Committed Held Unconstitutional As A Denial Of The Right To A Jury From The Vicinage.
Fordham Urban Law Journal
When defendant Leon Jones was arrested, he moved to be transferred to the district where the crimes occured. He asserted that the fourteenth and sixth amendments entitled him to be tried by a jury drawn from this district. Mr. Jones' request was denied and he was convicted. The intermediate appellate court held that a jury drawn from any district within the county satisfied the constitutional requirements but on appeal, the California Supreme Court reversed and held Jones was entitled to a jury from the district where the crime was committed. The court based its opinion on the principle that a …
Constitutional Law-Equal Protection-Relatives' Responsibility Statutes Do Not Create A "Suspect" Classification Based On Wealth
Fordham Urban Law Journal
This note discusses Swoap v. Superior Court - a case brought by two recipients of aid to the aged and their adult children who challenged the constitutionality of two state statutes. One imposed a general duty of support on the children of parents unable to support themselves. The other gave county officials a cause of action against the children to compel contribution to the public assistance given by the state to the needy parents. The plaintiffs argued this was discrimination based on wealth class. The court concluded that it wasn't discrimination based on wealth but on percentage but why discrimination …