Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Race and law (2)
- Racial discrimination (2)
- African Americans (1)
- Behavior (1)
- Bias (1)
-
- Congress (1)
- Constitutional violations (1)
- Discrimination (1)
- Electoral participation (1)
- Fourteenth Amendment (1)
- Implicit bias (1)
- Labor activism (1)
- Legal history (1)
- Minorities (1)
- Preclearance (1)
- Remedial regimes (1)
- Shelby County v. Holder (1)
- United States Supreme Court (1)
- Voting (1)
- Voting Rights Act (1)
- Voting rights (1)
- Women’s rights (1)
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Law & Laundry: White Laundresses, Chinese Laundrymen, And The Origins Of Muller V. Oregon, Emily Prifogle
Law & Laundry: White Laundresses, Chinese Laundrymen, And The Origins Of Muller V. Oregon, Emily Prifogle
Articles
This article uses the historian’s method of micro-history to rethink the significance of the Supreme Court decision Muller v. Oregon (1908). Typically considered a labor law decision permitting the regulation of women’s work hours, the article argues that through particular attention to the specific context in which the labor dispute took place — the laundry industry in Portland, Oregon — the Muller decision and underlying conflict should be understood as not only about sex-based labor rights but also about how the labor of laundry specifically involved race-based discrimination. The article investigates the most important conflicts behind the Muller decision, namely …
Implicit Bias's Failure, Samuel Bagenstos
Implicit Bias's Failure, Samuel Bagenstos
Articles
The 2016 presidential election was a coming-out party of sorts for the concept of implicit bias-and not necessarily in a good way. In answering a question about race relations and the police during the vice-presidential debate, Mike Pence introduced the topic. Offering his explanation for why the Fraternal Order of Police had endorsed the Trump-Pence ticket, Pence said:
Section 2 After Section 5: Voting Rights And The Race To The Bottom, Ellen D. Katz
Section 2 After Section 5: Voting Rights And The Race To The Bottom, Ellen D. Katz
Articles
Five years ago, Shelby County v. Holder released nine states and fifty-five smaller jurisdictions from the preclearance obligation set forth in section 5 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA). This obligation mandated that places with a history of discrimination in voting obtain federal approval—known as preclearance—before changing any electoral rule or procedure. Within hours of the Shelby County decision, jurisdictions began moving to reenact measures section 5 had specifically blocked. Others pressed forward with new rules that the VRA would have barred prior to Shelby County.