Fourteenth Amendment Commons^™

Private Problem, Public Solution: Affirmative Action In The 21st Century, Darlene C. Goring

Akron Law Review

This Article will explore the origins of the Court’s color-blind interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment, and the role that this interpretation plays in the development of new barriers against challenges to race-based affirmative action programs. Part II of this Article traces the development and application of the strict scrutiny test to evaluate the constitutionality of both invidious and benign racial classifications. Part III examines Justice Powell’s position that racial classifications used as remedial measures may overcome the presumption of constitutional invalidity associated with the use of race-based classifications. In this context, the Court recognizes that the continued impact of past …

Congressional Enforcement Of Civil Rights And John Bingham's Theory Of Citizenship, Rebecca E. Zietlow

Akron Law Review

In the Twentieth Century, Congress’ power to enact civil rights legislation, and make it privately enforceable against states and private parties, became widely recognized as one of the most important functions of the federal government. Yet in recent years, the Supreme Court has greatly restricted this function with its rulings restricting Congress’ commerce power and its power to enforce the Equal Protection Clause under Section five of the Fourteenth Amendment. Cases such as United States v. Morrison, Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama v. Garrett and Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents have left Congress in a vacuum, …

Preventing Balkanization Or Facilitating Racial Domination: A Critique Of The New Equal Protection, Darren L. Hutchinson

Faculty Articles

The Supreme Court requires that equal protection plaintiffs prove defendants acted with discriminatory intent. The intent rule has insulated from judicial invalidation numerous policies that harmfully impact racial and ethnic minorities. Court doctrine also mandates that state actors generally remain colorblind. The colorblindness doctrine has led to the judicial invalidation of policies designed to ameliorate the conditions of racial inequality. Taken together, these two equality doctrines facilitate racial domination. The Court justifies this outcome on the ground that the Constitution does not protect "group rights. "

Constitutional law theorists have criticized these aspects of equal protection doctrine. Recently, however, some …