Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Federal courts (2)
- 1981 (1)
- Appelate (1)
- But-for cause (1)
- Causal doctrines (1)
-
- Cause of action (1)
- Civil Rights (1)
- Civil procedure (1)
- Congress (1)
- Disbelief Doctrines (1)
- Discrimination (1)
- Employment contracts (1)
- Employment discrimination (1)
- Honest belief rule (1)
- Judge (1)
- Judicial review (1)
- Juries (1)
- Motivating factor (1)
- Race discrimination (1)
- Same actor (1)
- Same protected class inferences (1)
- Standards (1)
- Stray remarks (1)
- Super-personnel department (1)
- Three-judge district courts (1)
- Tort (1)
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Civil Rights and Discrimination
The Strange Career Of The Three-Judge District Court: Federalism And Civil Rights, 1954-76, Michael E. Solimine
The Strange Career Of The Three-Judge District Court: Federalism And Civil Rights, 1954-76, Michael E. Solimine
Faculty Articles and Other Publications
The three-judge district court has had a long and strange career in the history of the federal court system. Congress created the court in 1910 as a response to the canonical decision of Ex parte Young two years earlier, which permitted federal court suits against state officials to facilitate constitutional challenges to state laws. The three-judge court statute was a reaction by Progressive Era politicians to such perceived judicial overreach, and required any such challenges to be brought before a specially convened trial court of three judges, with a direct appeal to the Supreme Court available. First established as a …
Brief Of Amici Curiae Employment Law Professors In Support Of Respondents, Sandra F. Sperino
Brief Of Amici Curiae Employment Law Professors In Support Of Respondents, Sandra F. Sperino
Faculty Articles and Other Publications
This Court should not interpret section 1981 to require proof of but-for causation, given that statute’s text, history, and purpose. Although Comcast invokes the canon of statutory construction that Congress intends statutory terms to have their settled common-law meaning, that canon does not apply here. Section 1981 has no statutory text that reflects a common-law understanding of causation. Indeed, in 1866, when Congress enacted the predecessor to section 1981, there was no well-settled common law of tort at all. Rather, just as courts have read 42 U.S.C. § 1982, which shares common text, history and purpose, this Court should read …
Disbelief Doctrines, Sandra F. Sperino
Disbelief Doctrines, Sandra F. Sperino
Faculty Articles and Other Publications
Employment discrimination law is riddled with doctrines that tell courts to believe employers and not workers. Judges often use these disbelief doctrines to dismiss cases at the summary judgment stage. At times, judges even use them after a jury trial to justify nullifying jury verdicts in favor of workers.
This article brings together many disparate discrimination doctrines and shows how they function as disbelief doctrines, causing courts to believe employers and not workers. The strongest disbelief doctrines include the stray comments doctrine, the same decisionmaker inference, and the same protected class inference. However, these are not the only ones. Even …