Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Equal Protection Clause (2)
- Arizona (1)
- Brown v. Board of Education (1)
- Civil Rights Act of 1964 (1)
- Constitution (1)
-
- Criminal sanction (1)
- Defamation suit (1)
- Desegregation (1)
- Douglas v. California (1)
- Elfbrandt v. Russell (1)
- Employees (1)
- Employers (1)
- Enforcement; Conciliation (1)
- Executive Order on Equal Opportunity in Housing (1)
- Fair housing (1)
- Fine (1)
- Free choice plan (1)
- Freedom of association (1)
- Freedom of speech (1)
- Garner v. Board of Public Works (1)
- Gerende v. Board of Supervisors (1)
- Griffin v. Illinois (1)
- Housing Act of 1937 (1)
- Imprisonment (1)
- Legislation (1)
- Loyalty (1)
- Loyalty oaths (1)
- Minority (1)
- New York Law Against Discrimination (1)
- Nonpayment (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Public Housing Administration And Discrimination In Federally Assisted Low-Rent Housing, Jordan D. Luttrell
The Public Housing Administration And Discrimination In Federally Assisted Low-Rent Housing, Jordan D. Luttrell
Michigan Law Review
The Public Housing Administration is the federal agency primarily responsible for the administration of the federally assisted low-rent housing program. Since the expense of constructing low-rent housing unassisted by federal funds is prohibitive for state or local governments, this program accounts for practically all low-rent housing in the United States. Consequently, PHA has exercised, and continues to exercise, substantial influence on the development of the nation's low-rent housing.
Fair Housing Laws And Brokers' Defamation Suits: The New York Experience, Michigan Law Review
Fair Housing Laws And Brokers' Defamation Suits: The New York Experience, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
The New York Law Against Discrimination, originally enacted in 1945 to eliminate discrimination in employment because of race, creed, color, or national origin, has been steadily broadened to encompass discrimination in such areas as public accommodations and private housing. The law was amended in 1961 and 1963 to enable the State Commission for Human Rights to prevent. discrimination by either the owner or the real estate broker in the selling, renting, or leasing of any housing accommodation or commercial space. Despite the apparently broad protection established by the sweeping language of the statute, real estate brokers have discovered a novel …
The Equal Protection Clause And Imprisonment Of The Indigent For Nonpayment Of Fines, Michigan Law Review
The Equal Protection Clause And Imprisonment Of The Indigent For Nonpayment Of Fines, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
The practice of imprisonment for failure to pay a fine levied for a criminal violation originated in twelfth-century England; its subsequent unanimous acceptance in the United States is manifested in the provisions in the statutes of every state and of the federal government authorizing imprisonment for nonpayment of fines. A few states not only commit the defendant to jail for nonpayment of the fine, but impose hard labor as well. Some states, however, have mitigated to a degree the harshness of the practice. For example, Arizona restricts the total period of confinement for the crime and the default of the …
Discrimination In The Hiring And Assignment Of Teachers In Public School Systems, Michigan Law Review
Discrimination In The Hiring And Assignment Of Teachers In Public School Systems, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
In the Brown v. Board of Education decisions of 1954 and 1955, the United States Supreme Court made it clear that separate public school facilities for pupils of different races are inherently unequal and constitute a denial of the equal protection of the laws. While it was not altogether clear from the language of the opinions whether segregated faculties in public schools are also unconstitutional, subsequent lower court decisions have held that racial discrimination in the selection and assignment of teachers is forbidden.
Elfbrandt V. Russell: The Demise Of The Loyalty Oath, Jerold H. Israel
Elfbrandt V. Russell: The Demise Of The Loyalty Oath, Jerold H. Israel
Articles
In Elfbrandt v. Russell, the Supreme Court, in a 5-to-4 decision, declared unconstitutional Arizona's requirement of a loyalty oath from state employees. At first glance, Elfbrandt appears to be just another decision voiding a state loyalty oath on limited grounds relating to the specific language of the particular oath. Yet, several aspects of Mr. Justice Douglas' opinion for the majority suggest that Elfbrandt is really of far greater significance: it may sharply limit the scope and coverage of loyalty oaths generally and, indeed, may presage a ruling invalidating all such oaths. Of course, only the Supreme Court can determine this. …
Enforcement Procedure Of Oberlin, Ohio, Fair Housing Ordinance Held Unconstitutional--Porter V. City Of Oberlin, Michigan Law Review
Enforcement Procedure Of Oberlin, Ohio, Fair Housing Ordinance Held Unconstitutional--Porter V. City Of Oberlin, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
Plaintiff, a citizen of Oberlin, Ohio, brought an action for declaratory and injunctive relief to review the constitutionality of the city's fair housing ordinance, which makes it a misdemeanor to discriminate because of race, creed, or color in the sale or rental of housing. Under the procedure established by the ordinance, the Housing Renewal Commission is directed to make investigations of complaints filed with it. If violations are discovered, the commission must attempt to eliminate the discriminatory practices by conciliation and persuasion. If these efforts fail, the entire record of the matter must be forwarded to the city council, accompanied …