Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Affirmative Action (1)
- Brown v. Board of Education (1)
- Citizenship (1)
- Clemency criteria (1)
- College admissions (1)
-
- Commutation (1)
- Commutations (1)
- Courts (1)
- Discrimination (1)
- Education law (1)
- Equal protection (1)
- Equality (1)
- Executive clemency (1)
- Fourteenth Amendment (1)
- Immigration (1)
- Judges (1)
- Judicial politics and ideology (1)
- Law (1)
- Legal Theory (1)
- Lengthy sentences (1)
- Melting Pot (1)
- Nation of Immigrants (1)
- Naturalized Citizens (1)
- Nonviolent offenses (1)
- Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1 (1)
- Policymaking (1)
- Public Policy (1)
- SCOTUS (1)
- Scrutiny (1)
- Segregation (1)
- Publication Type
- File Type
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law and Race
All Americans Not Equal: Mistrust And Discrimination Against Naturalized Citizens In The U.S., Alev Dudek
All Americans Not Equal: Mistrust And Discrimination Against Naturalized Citizens In The U.S., Alev Dudek
Alev Dudek
Obama's Get-Out-Of-Jail-Free Decree, Paul H. Robinson
Obama's Get-Out-Of-Jail-Free Decree, Paul H. Robinson
All Faculty Scholarship
While agreeing that sentences for nonviolent drug offenses are too long, this Wall Street Journal op-ed piece argues that the large-scale clemency program planned by President Obama is misguided. It sets a dangerous precedent for using the clemency power beyond its traditional and intended purpose of providing a last-resort check on fairness and justice errors in individual cases, and instead uses the power to set sentencing policy. While many people will like the results of the current program, they will be less than happy when some future president uses it as precedent to promote a sentencing policy of which they …
Courtroom To Classroom: Judicial Policymaking And Affirmative Action, Dylan Britton Saul
Courtroom To Classroom: Judicial Policymaking And Affirmative Action, Dylan Britton Saul
Political Science Honors Projects
The judicial branch, by exercising judicial review, can replace public policies with ones of their own creation. To test the hypothesis that judicial policymaking is desirable only when courts possess high capacity and necessity, I propose an original model incorporating six variables: generalism, bi-polarity, minimalism, legitimization, structural impediments, and public support. Applying the model to a comparative case study of court-sanctioned affirmative action policies in higher education and K-12 public schools, I find that a lack of structural impediments and bi-polarity limits the desirability of judicial race-based remedies in education. Courts must restrain themselves when engaging in such policymaking.
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 …