Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- And interpretation (1)
- Brown v. Board of Education (1)
- Civil rights (1)
- College admissions (1)
- Constitutional law (1)
-
- Constitutional meaning (1)
- Doctrine (1)
- Education law (1)
- Equal protection (1)
- Federalism (1)
- Fourteenth Amendment (1)
- Judicial politics and ideology (1)
- Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1 (1)
- SCOTUS (1)
- Scrutiny (1)
- Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment (1)
- Segregation (1)
- Supreme Court (1)
- Supreme Court of the United States (1)
- U.S. v. Morrison (1)
- Violence Against Women Act (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Jurisprudence
Bait And Switch: Why United States V. Morrison Is Wrong About Section Five, Kermit Roosevelt Iii
Bait And Switch: Why United States V. Morrison Is Wrong About Section Five, Kermit Roosevelt Iii
All Faculty Scholarship
As the title suggests, the article examines Morrison’s creation of the rule that the Section Five power cannot be used to regulate private individuals. This is one of the most meaningful and, thus far, durable constraints that the Court has placed on federal power. It is the more surprising, then, that it turns out to be based on essentially nothing at all. The Morrison Court asserted that its rule was derived by—indeed, “controlled by”—precedent, but a closer reading of the Reconstruction-era decisions it cites shows that this is simply not the case. An independent evaluation of the rule against regulation …
The Ironies Of Affirmative Action, Kermit Roosevelt Iii
The Ironies Of Affirmative Action, Kermit Roosevelt Iii
All Faculty Scholarship
The Supreme Court’s most recent confrontation with race-based affirmative action, Fisher v. University of Texas, did not live up to people’s expectations—or their fears. The Court did not explicitly change the current approach in any substantial way. It did, however, signal that it wants race-based affirmative action to be subject to real strict scrutiny, not the watered-down version featured in Grutter v. Bollinger. That is a significant signal, because under real strict scrutiny, almost all race-based affirmative action programs are likely unconstitutional. This is especially true given the conceptual framework the Court has created for such programs—the way …