Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
![Digital Commons Network](http://assets.bepress.com/20200205/img/dcn/DCsunburst.png)
Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Civil Rights and Discrimination
Comment In Response To Proposed Rulemaking: Inadmissibility On Public Charge Grounds, Brittany Thomas, Nahal Zamani, Joann Kamuf Ward
Comment In Response To Proposed Rulemaking: Inadmissibility On Public Charge Grounds, Brittany Thomas, Nahal Zamani, Joann Kamuf Ward
Human Rights Institute
The proposed rule on “Inadmissibility on Public Charge Grounds” would cause irreparable harm to communities across the United States, and immigrants and their families, in particular. The proposed change contravenes globally accepted human rights norms, which aim to ensure an adequate standard of living and prohibit discrimination, including specific human rights obligations and commitments of the United States.
As legal organizations devoted to ensuring justice and human rights accountability in the United States, we submit this joint comment in opposition to the proposed rule, which threatens to destabilize communities, and undermine public health and safety by penalizing individuals who seek …
Are Rights A Reality? Evaluating Federal Civil Rights Enforcement, International Association Of Official Human Rights Agencies (Iaohra), Human Rights Institute
Are Rights A Reality? Evaluating Federal Civil Rights Enforcement, International Association Of Official Human Rights Agencies (Iaohra), Human Rights Institute
Human Rights Institute
This comment draws upon prior submissions to UN human rights experts, and past resources and scholarship, as well as independent research conducted by the Columbia Law School Human Rights Institute, in partnership with state and local actors, including a 2018 survey of IAOHRA member agencies.
Rights As Trumps?, Jamal Greene
Rights As Trumps?, Jamal Greene
Faculty Scholarship
Rights are more than mere interests, but they are not absolute. And so two competing frames have emerged for adjudicating conflicts over rights. Under the first frame, rights are absolute but for the exceptional circumstances in which they may be limited. Constitutional adjudication within this frame is primarily an interpretive exercise fixed on identifying the substance and reach of any constitutional rights at issue. Under the second frame, rights are limited but for the exceptional circumstances in which they are absolute. Adjudication within this frame is primarily an empirical exercise fixed on testing the government’s justification for its action. In …