Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
A Philosophical Ground For Gays' Rights: "We Must Learn What Is True In Order To Do What Is Right", James M. Donovan
A Philosophical Ground For Gays' Rights: "We Must Learn What Is True In Order To Do What Is Right", James M. Donovan
James M. Donovan
A major platform of gays' rights seems to be that gays are entitled to social and political rights because, in fact, they are not different from the heterosexual majority when one looks past the definitional criterion of sleeping with the same sex. Any other differences, they claim, are "myths" and do not exist. From this perspective, without investigating bedroom behavior, one could never tell who is gay and who is not: Gays are just like "regular" people, the line goes, so they should be treated like them. "The best hope for acceptance," writes one Ann Landers reader, "is to show …
A Section 1983 Civil Rights Anthology , Sheldon Nahmod
A Section 1983 Civil Rights Anthology , Sheldon Nahmod
Sheldon Nahmod
No abstract provided.
Comparing Similarly Situated People In Disparate Treatment Cases, David G. Karro
Comparing Similarly Situated People In Disparate Treatment Cases, David G. Karro
David G. Karro
I wrote this in 1993 for paralegals and new attorneys who were having trouble understanding the concept of comparing similarly situated people in order to prove motive. Many lawyers and paralegals approach the topic mechanically, without any real conception of what makes a comparison of the treatment of people probative, or not probative, of intentional discrimination. Although fifteen years old as of the time of this writing (2008), I believe the approach remains valid and still has significant pedagogical value for newcomer to the area. The citations are also useful for lawyers under who need a quick way of getting …
The Constitutional Ghetto, Robert L. Hayman, Nancy Levit
The Constitutional Ghetto, Robert L. Hayman, Nancy Levit
Nancy Levit
The goal of this Article is to assess two Supreme Court desegregation decisions. It is our view that Board of Education v. Dowell and Freeman v. Pitts are, by almost every measure, seriously flawed decisions. The opinions of the Court rest on epistemic premises - reductionist views of race and racism, and an absurdly formalistic conception of equality - that are by turns either anachronistic, cramped and inauthentic, or demonstrably wrong. Worse, they promote a vision of American society - fragmented, hierarchical, and shamelessly individualistic - that is fundamentally inconsistent both with the egalitarian norms embodied in the Fourteenth Amendment …
Natural Right And The Constitution: Principle As Purpose And Limit, Andrew C. Spiropoulos
Natural Right And The Constitution: Principle As Purpose And Limit, Andrew C. Spiropoulos
Andrew C. Spiropoulos
No abstract provided.