Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law and Race Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 12 of 12

Full-Text Articles in Law and Race

Batson V. Kentucky Guidelines And The Use Of Peremptory Challenges In Arkansas Courts: A Case Study, Abigail Lindsey May 2023

Batson V. Kentucky Guidelines And The Use Of Peremptory Challenges In Arkansas Courts: A Case Study, Abigail Lindsey

Political Science Undergraduate Honors Theses

The peremptory challenge is a method by which attorneys can strike a potential juror from the jury pool without a valid reason. With Batson v. Kentucky (1986), the Supreme Court ruled that peremptory challenges cannot be issued on the basis of race, however, there are many problems with the way this precedent has been followed in various states. The goal of this research is to analyze how Arkansas courts implement the Batson precedent. This research also studies whether the way in which Arkansas courts utilize the peremptory challenge creates ideologically imbalanced juries.


Black-Owned Beef: Should Black Beef Producers Stake Space In Food Justice?, Shirah Dedman Sep 2022

Black-Owned Beef: Should Black Beef Producers Stake Space In Food Justice?, Shirah Dedman

Journal of Food Law & Policy

While there is growing interest in Black cowboys, the narrative is largely tethered to parades and urban and suburban saddle clubs, much like the fictional movie on Netflix, Concrete Cowboy. Missing from the narrative are today’s real Black cowboys: rural ranchers and farmers raising cattle for beef production and consumption.


Importing Indian Intolerance: How Title Vii Can Prevent Caste Discrimination In The American Workplace, Brett Whitley Apr 2022

Importing Indian Intolerance: How Title Vii Can Prevent Caste Discrimination In The American Workplace, Brett Whitley

Arkansas Law Review

"If Hindus migrate to other regions on [E]arth, [Indian] Caste would become a world problem." - Dr. B.R. Ambedkar (1916) Imagine it is the year 2020. You are one of the more than 160 million people across India that are labeled as Dalits, formerly known as the “Untouchables." Most Hindus view Dalits as belonging to the lowest rung in the ancient system of social stratification that impacts individuals across the globe called the caste system. Your people have endured human rights abuses for centuries, but luckily, neither you nor a loved one have ever been the victim of one of …


Korematsu’S Ancestors, Mark A. Graber Dec 2021

Korematsu’S Ancestors, Mark A. Graber

Arkansas Law Review

Mark Killenbeck’s Korematsu v. United States has important affinities with Dred Scott v. Sandford. Both decisions by promoting and justifying white supremacy far beyond what was absolutely mandated by the constitutional text merit their uncontroversial inclusion in the anticanon of American constitutional law.3 Dred Scott held that former slaves and their descendants could not be citizens of the United States and that Congress could not ban slavery in American territories acquired after the Constitution was ratified.5 Korematsu held that the military could exclude all Japanese Americans from portions of the West Coast during World War II.6 Both decisions nevertheless provided …


Disestablishing "The Last Plantation": The Need For Accountability In The United States Department Of Agriculture, Seth L. Ellis Aug 2021

Disestablishing "The Last Plantation": The Need For Accountability In The United States Department Of Agriculture, Seth L. Ellis

Journal of Food Law & Policy

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) was signed into law by President Abraham Lincoln in 1862. At the signing ceremony, President Lincoln declared the Department of Agriculture to be the "people's Department" because he said it governed an industry "in which [citizens felt] more directly concerned than in any other. .. ." Today, many American citizens do not share Abraham Lincoln's view of the USDA as being the "people's Department"; rather, they identify it as being "the last plantation" due to its long history of open discrimination against African-American farmers. While this discrimination has occurred throughout America's history, perhaps …


A Government Of Laws That Is A Government Of Men And Women, Mark Tushnet Jun 2021

A Government Of Laws That Is A Government Of Men And Women, Mark Tushnet

Arkansas Law Review

I take Mark Killenbeck’s “provocative” article as an occasion for some informal comments about what Korematsu and Trump v. Hawaii tell us about the saying, “a government of laws, not a government of men and women.” My basic thought is that the “not” in the saying has to be replaced “but also.” And, in some sense we have always had to have known that the saying was wrong as stated. Whatever the laws are, they don’t make themselves. Nor do they administer themselves, nor interpret themselves. Men and women appear at the stages of enactment, application, and adjudication. So, for …


A Proper Burial, Robert L. Tsai Jun 2021

A Proper Burial, Robert L. Tsai

Arkansas Law Review

In his article, Professor Mark Killenbeck defends both Korematsu v. United States and Trump v. Hawaii on their own terms, albeit on narrow grounds. He goes on to conclude that comparisons of the two decisions don’t hold up. Killenbeck has authored a thoughtful and contrarian paper, but I’m not sold. In my view, Korematsu simply isn’t worth saving; in fact, a more complete repudiation of the internment decisions is overdue. Trump v. Hawaii, too, must also be revisited at the earliest opportunity and its more alarming features that abet presidential discrimination against non-citizens rejected. Moreover, I believe that comparisons between …


Tainted Precedent, Darrell A.H. Miller Jun 2021

Tainted Precedent, Darrell A.H. Miller

Arkansas Law Review

We have a common law system of constitutional adjudication, at least in the sense that constitutional practice in the United States relies on prior rulings rather than reasoning from first principles in each case. If there’s controlling precedent on point, it’s binding. Neither “inferior courts” in the federal system, nor state courts adjudicating federal law, are permitted to start anew with the “original public meaning” of the First Amendment or pronounce a fresh Dworkinian “moral reading” of the Fourth. Even the highest court in the land, the Supreme Court of the United States, for reasons of reputation, stability, and rule …


There Was Nothing "Neutral" About Executive Order 9066, Eric L. Muller Jun 2021

There Was Nothing "Neutral" About Executive Order 9066, Eric L. Muller

Arkansas Law Review

There is no more appropriate place to discuss the Japanese American cases of World War II than in the pages of the Arkansas Law Review. This is not only because Arkansas was the only state outside the Western Defense Command to host not one but two of the War Relocation Authority’s (WRA) concentration camps for Japanese Americans. It is because one of the most important lawyers to oversee the development and administration of all the WRA camps was the dean under whose leadership this law review was founded: Robert A. Leflar. Leflar’s is not a name that constitutional lawyers are …


Korematsu, Hawaii, And Pedagogy, Sanford Levinson Jun 2021

Korematsu, Hawaii, And Pedagogy, Sanford Levinson

Arkansas Law Review

I begin with some reflections on my own career in teaching—or, perhaps, attempting to teach—American constitutional law to generations of students from 1975 to the present. Or, more accurately, until about three years ago, when I taught introductory constitutional law for the last time. I am quite happy to no longer be teaching that course, whatever joys it did provide me in the past, for a very simple reason: I became more and more frustrated by the demands of coverage, i.e., the duty to take up a variety of topics—including attendant cases and collateral materials—and the unfortunate certainty that what …


Korematsu As The Tribute That Vice Pays To Virtue, Jack M. Balkin Jun 2021

Korematsu As The Tribute That Vice Pays To Virtue, Jack M. Balkin

Arkansas Law Review

Mark Killenbeck wants to (partially) rehabilitate the reputation of one of the Supreme Court’s most despised legal decisions, Korematsu v. United States. He argues that “[w]e should accept and teach Korematsu as an exemplar of what thelaw regarding invidious discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, and national origin should be.” In both Korematsu (and Hirabayashi v. United States) the Court asserted that classifications based on race were subject to strict scrutiny. But “[t]he majority,” Killenbeck explains, “refused to heed their own mandate. In Hirabayashi they held that the government policy was ‘reasonable.’ In Korematsu, . . . they failed …


Sober Second Thought? Korematsu Reconsidered, Mark R. Killenbeck Jun 2021

Sober Second Thought? Korematsu Reconsidered, Mark R. Killenbeck

Arkansas Law Review

How to best describe and treat Korematsu v. United States? A self-inflicted wound? It is certainly an exemplar of a case that in key respects tracks Justice Stephen Breyer’s caution about decisions that have “harm[ed] not just the Court, but the Nation.” Part of an “Anticanon,” resting on “little more than naked racism and associated hokum” and “embod[ying] a set of propositions that all legitimate constitutional decisions must be prepared to refute”? Perhaps. Or is it simply an opinion and result that “has long stood out as a stain that is almost universally recognized as a shameful mistake”?