Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (5)
- Constitutional Law (3)
- Education Law (2)
- Law and Race (2)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (2)
-
- Sociology (2)
- Courts (1)
- Criminal Law (1)
- Education Policy (1)
- Educational Sociology (1)
- Family Law (1)
- Fourteenth Amendment (1)
- Gender and Sexuality (1)
- Inequality and Stratification (1)
- Law and Gender (1)
- Law and Society (1)
- Legal History (1)
- Policy History, Theory, and Methods (1)
- Public Affairs, Public Policy and Public Administration (1)
- Public Law and Legal Theory (1)
- Public Policy (1)
- Race and Ethnicity (1)
- Sexuality and the Law (1)
- Supreme Court of the United States (1)
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Jurisprudence
Equal Protection; State Alimony Statutes; Sex Discrimination; Orr V. Orr, David A. Detec, Jane L. Thomas-Moore
Equal Protection; State Alimony Statutes; Sex Discrimination; Orr V. Orr, David A. Detec, Jane L. Thomas-Moore
Akron Law Review
In Orr v. Orr the United States Supreme Court held unconstitutional the Alabama alimony statutes which provided that husbands, but not wives, may be required to pay alimony upon divorce. The Court's principal reason for so holding was the statutes' violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the fourteenth amendment on the basis of sex discrimination.
Edmonson V. Leesville Concrete Co.: State Action Or Inaction - Does It Matter?, Chad Murdock
Edmonson V. Leesville Concrete Co.: State Action Or Inaction - Does It Matter?, Chad Murdock
Akron Law Review
This note first reviews the facts of Edmonson. Second, this note examines the history of judicial inquiry into the use of peremptory challenges. Third, this note reviews the application of Batson to civil cases. Finally, this note analyzes the extension of the state action doctrine in Edmonson and discusses an alternative to the Edmonson approach to state action
A Look At Civil Gideon: Is There A Constitutional Right To Counsel In Certain Civil Cases?, Jess H. Dickinson
A Look At Civil Gideon: Is There A Constitutional Right To Counsel In Certain Civil Cases?, Jess H. Dickinson
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review
No abstract provided.
Equal Educational Opportunity By The Numbers: The Warren Court's Empirical Legacy, Michael Heise
Equal Educational Opportunity By The Numbers: The Warren Court's Empirical Legacy, Michael Heise
Michael Heise
No abstract provided.
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 …
A Deer In Headlights: The Supreme Court, Lgbt Rights, And Equal Protection, Nan D. Hunter
A Deer In Headlights: The Supreme Court, Lgbt Rights, And Equal Protection, Nan D. Hunter
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
In this essay, I argue that the problems with how courts apply Equal Protection principles to classifications not already recognized as suspect reach beyond the most immediate example of sexual orientation. Three structural weaknesses drive the juridical reluctance to bring coherence to this body of law: two doctrinal and one theoretical. The first doctrinal problem is that the socio-political assumptions that the 1938 Supreme Court relied on in United States v. Carolene Products, Inc. to justify strict scrutiny for “discrete and insular minorities” have lost their validity. In part because of Roe v. Wade-induced PTSD, the courts have …