Law Commons^™

Children Are Different: Jones V. Mississippi, Juvenile Life Without Parole, And Why Youthfulness Matters In Sentencing, Giulia Hintz Mcquirter

Mississippi College Law Review

“We are a country of mercy, and we are a country of vengeance, and we live with both at the same time.” This is how Robert Dunham, death penalty expert and Executive Director of the Death Penalty Information Center, describes the United States sentencing system. Battling inside each of us is the desire for people to pay for their wrongdoings, warring against the empathy of our human nature that wants to see the good in people, even criminals.

This internal conflict is rarely on better display than in cases involving child criminals. It is impossible to forget that these children …

A Call For Effective Leniency: How The Circuit Split Regarding The Prison Mailbox Rule Fails To Properly Alleviate Issues For Prisoners, Shelby E. Parks

Mississippi College Law Review

The prison population has long been an overlooked segment of society. This is particularly true when it comes to pro se litigants within the federal prison system. A pro so litigant is someone involved in litigation, whether civil or criminal, and is representing themselves instead of being represented by an attorney. In other words, pro se prisoners do not have the aid of counsel at their disposal. Although it is an individual’s constitutional right to represent themselves, it can come at a cost, especially when it comes to understanding the nuances of civil or criminal court procedure. For pro se …

Introduction, Stephanie Durr

Mississippi College Law Review

The 2022 Mississippi College Law Review Symposium celebrated the 50th Anniversary of the Passage of Title IX. With the benefit of hindsight, the Symposium critically examined Title IX and its progeny, analyzing the benefits and the downfalls over the past fifty years. The 2022 Symposium celebrated Title IX for its accomplishments in eliminating sex-based discrimination in educational institutions but refused to let previous accomplishments overshadow the still-existing gender inequality. While history allows celebration, advocacy demands a commitment to work toward solutions for the persisting inequality. Armed with this intention, the Mississippi College Law Review set out to provide a forum …

Title Ix 50 Years Later. . . Reflections From A Title Ix Coordinator, Dr. Kristena Gaylor

Mississippi College Law Review

On June 23, 1972, Congress enacted the Title IX Education Amendment of 1972. Title IX prohibits discrimination based on sex in education programs and activities operated by recipients of federal financial assistance. Title IX’s core is the concept that students may not be denied educational opportunities based on their sex. Title IX’s protections extend to school activities, including admissions, financial aid, student services, counseling services, athletics, and physical education. The Title IX legislation eliminates sex-based discrimination to ensure all students—both male and female––have access to and equality in education.

The enactment of Title IX led to an upward trajectory for …

A Third Way: Title Ix’S Potential Beyond Criminal And Civil Law Paradigms, Gabriella Kamran

Mississippi College Law Review

A single occurrence of sexual violence on a college campus can lead to any of three major legal outcomes. The first is a traditional criminal prosecution of the alleged perpetrator. The second is a civil lawsuit against the school under Title IX, in which the victim alleges that the school’s disciplinary procedures failed to deliver an adequate response according to the body of law developed by courts interpreting Title IX. The third, which has become increasingly important and visible after a decade of student activism and initiatives by the Department of Education, is an administrative enforcement action by the Department’s …

Masking God In Resurrection School V. Hertel: One School’S Efforts To Exercise Religion During An Ongoing Pandemic, Sean Turnipseed

Mississippi College Law Review

SARS-CoV-2, colloquially termed “COVID-19,” dramatically altered the world in which we live. But no one would have guessed the virus would spark a flurry of litigation under the U.S. Constitution’s Free Exercise Clause. Shortly after the virus began to spread, former President Donald Trump advised a twoweek plan with hopes to “flatten the curve” of COVID-19’s impact. The plan encouraged individuals to avoid gatherings with ten or more people, work and attend school from home, eat at home rather than in restaurants, and avoid discretionary travel and shopping, to name a few. But the two-week plan did not effectively thwart …