Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Rise And Fall Of Affirmative Action Injury Selection, Avern Cohn, David R. Sherwood
The Rise And Fall Of Affirmative Action Injury Selection, Avern Cohn, David R. Sherwood
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan has historically experienced difficulty in achieving jury compositions that truly represented the surrounding community. In response, the Authors share their insight as to how the court instituted a "balancing" program. By reducing the number of white names in the jury wheel, the balancing program successfully incorporated more minorities into the jury system. The Authors further discuss the Sixth Circuit decision, United States v. Ovalle, which marked the end of the balancing program.
What Will Diversity On The Bench Mean For Justice?, Theresa M. Beiner
What Will Diversity On The Bench Mean For Justice?, Theresa M. Beiner
Michigan Journal of Gender & Law
This article is aimed at the general question: whether having a woman judge would make a difference in sexual harassment cases. This article is aimed at this general question, the response to which has been elusive: Does the race, gender, or other background characteristics of a judge make a difference in the outcome of cases? The effects of diversity on the bench are just becoming measurable. Many legal scholars have assumed diversity will make a difference. While this conclusion may seem commonsensical, it is important to be able to support such assertions with actual data. The supposition has been that …
The Triumph Of Hate Speech Regulation: Why Gender Wins But Race Loses In America, Jon Gould
The Triumph Of Hate Speech Regulation: Why Gender Wins But Race Loses In America, Jon Gould
Michigan Journal of Gender & Law
On March 30, 1995, newspaper headlines declared that hate speech regulations were dead. After six years of litigating over university hate speech codes, Stanford University's rule, one of the most modest and cautiously drafted, had been declared unconstitutional by a California Superior Court. Hate speech regulation is far from over. To the contrary, hate speech rules not only continue to exist, but the courts regularly enforce their provisions. The difference is that these cases are largely restricted to a single category-sexual harassment. Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and with the regulatory support of the Equal …
Beyond The Hero Judge: Institutional Reform Litigation As Litigation, Margo Schlanger
Beyond The Hero Judge: Institutional Reform Litigation As Litigation, Margo Schlanger
Reviews
In 1955, in its second decision in Brown v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court suggested that federal courts might be called upon to engage in long-term oversight of once-segregated schools. Through the 1960s, southern resistance pushed federal district and appellate judges to turn that possibility into a reality. The impact of this saga on litigation practice extended beyond school desegregation, and even beyond the struggle for African-American equality; through implementation of Brown, the nation’s litigants, lawyers, and judges grew accustomed both to issuance of permanent injunctions against state and local public institutions, and to extended court oversight of compliance. …
Turning The Tide In The Civil Rights Revolution: Elbert Tuttle And The Desegregation Of The University Of Georgia, Anne S. Emanuel
Turning The Tide In The Civil Rights Revolution: Elbert Tuttle And The Desegregation Of The University Of Georgia, Anne S. Emanuel
Michigan Journal of Race and Law
Truth is sometimes stranger than fiction. So it was in 1960 when Elbert Tuttle became the Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, the federal appellate court with jurisdiction over most of the Deep South. Part of the genius of the Republic lies in the carefully calibrated structure of the federal courts of appeal. One assumption underlying the structure is that judges from a particular state might bear an allegiance to the interests of that state, which would be reflected in their opinions. Forming panels of judges from each of several states is supposed …