Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Substantial burdens (2)
- Bush Administration (1)
- Culture (1)
- Department of Justice (1)
- Discrimination (1)
-
- Freedom of religion (1)
- Georgia v. Ashcroft (1)
- Gerrymandering (1)
- Judicial interpretation (1)
- Judicial review (1)
- Land use (1)
- Law reform (1)
- Legislative interpretation (1)
- Lyng v. Northwest Indian Cemetery (1)
- Native Americans (1)
- Ninth Circuit (1)
- Obama Administration (1)
- Oregon v. Smith (1)
- Race and law (1)
- Redistricting (1)
- Religious Freedom Restoration Act (1)
- Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (1)
- Religious exercise (1)
- Sacred sites (1)
- Strict scrutiny (1)
- Texas v. United States (1)
- United States Supreme Court (1)
- Voting (1)
- Voting Rights Act (1)
- Voting rights (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law and Race
Rluipa: What's The Use, Jason Z. Pesick
Rluipa: What's The Use, Jason Z. Pesick
Michigan Journal of Race and Law
After Congress passed the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (RLUIPA), which protects religious land use, many observers feared that the legislation would allow religious organizations to flout land-use regulations. Because RLUIPA defines "religious exercise" broadly, these observers feared the law would protect an array of nonworship uses, including commercial ventures, as long as a religious entity owned the land. More than a decade after RLUIPA's passage, this Note concludes that courts have not interpreted religious exercise as broadly as those observers feared. Courts have not, however, settled on a clear or consistent way of interpreting religious …
Towards A Balanced Approach For The Protection Of Native American Sacred Sites, Alex Tallchief Skibine
Towards A Balanced Approach For The Protection Of Native American Sacred Sites, Alex Tallchief Skibine
Michigan Journal of Race and Law
Protection of "sacred sites" is very important to Native American religious practitioners because it is intrinsically tied to the survival of their cultures, and therefore to their survival as distinct peoples. The Supreme Court in Oregon v. Smith held that rational basis review, and not strict scrutiny, was the appropriate level of judicial review when evaluating the constitutionality of neutral laws of general applicability even when these laws impacted one's ability to practice a religion. Reacting to the decision, Congress enacted the Relgious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), which reinstated the strict scrutiny test for challenges to neutral laws of general …
Democrats At Doj: Why Partisan Use Of The Voting Rights Act Might Not Be So Bad After All, Ellen D. Katz
Democrats At Doj: Why Partisan Use Of The Voting Rights Act Might Not Be So Bad After All, Ellen D. Katz
Articles
In notable ways, the ongoing dispute over redistricting in Texas offers a mirror image to one of the major redistricting battles of the last decade, only with Democratic and Republican roles reversed. In both Texas v. United States and Georgia v. Ashcroft, a state attorney general (AG) decided he would not ask the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) to approve new redistricting plans enacted in his state. In both cases, the state AGs were well aware that the Voting Rights Act (VRA) required them to obtain federal approval, known as preclearance, before changing any aspect of their state's election …