Law Commons^™

Race Conscious Affirmative Action By Tax Exempt 501(C)(3) Corporations After Grutter And Gratz, David A. Brennen

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment generally acts as a legal limit on the permissible bounds of government action. Accordingly, public universities and other government entities are constitutionally prohibited from engaging in acts that violate equal protection of the laws. The Supreme Court recently reinforced this point when it ruled, in two related cases, that public universities may consider the race of applicants when making admissions decisions, so long as an applicant's race does not amount to a deciding factor when granting admission. By its very terms, the constitutional limitation imposed by the Equal Protection Clause only directly …

Supreme Court Section 1983 Decisions: (October 2001 Term), Martin A. Schwartz

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Narrowing The Nation's Power: The Supreme Court Sides With The States, By John T. Noonan, Jr., Matthew Fogelson

University of Maryland Law Journal of Race, Religion, Gender and Class

No abstract provided.

You Have A Right To Remain Silent, Michael Avery

Fordham Urban Law Journal

The Supreme Court will decide in the October 2002 term whether there is a cause of action under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 based on a coercive police interrogation of a suspect in custody who has not been given Miranda warnings. The Supreme Court cannot decide that there is no cause of action under section 1983 for damages caused by coercive interrogation practices without turning its back on a large body of its own jurisprudence and on the deeply rooted cultural and political expectations of American citizens who trust that they have a meaningfu lconstitutionally protected right to remain silent when …

Factless Jurisprudence, Darren Hutchinson

Darren L Hutchinson

No abstract provided.

Unexplainable On Grounds Other Than Race: The Inversion Of Privilege And Subordination In Equal Protection Jurisprudence, Darren Hutchinson

Darren L Hutchinson

In this article, Professor Darren Hutchinson contributes to the debate over the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause by arguing that the Supreme Court has inverted its purpose and effect. Professor Hutchinson contends that the Court, in its judicial capacity, provides protection and judicial solicitude for privileged and powerful groups in our country, while at the same time requires traditionally subordinated and oppressed groups to utilize the political process to seek redress for acts of oppression. According to Professor Hutchinson, this process allows social structures of oppression and subordination to remain intact.

First, Professor Hutchinson examines the various …