Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility
The Women's Convention And The Equal Protection Clause Symposium - Human Rights In The Americas., Michael J. Corbera
The Women's Convention And The Equal Protection Clause Symposium - Human Rights In The Americas., Michael J. Corbera
St. Mary's Law Journal
This Article addresses whether the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (Women’s Convention) violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Because international treaties such as the Women’s Convention carry the same weight and are subject to the same treatment as U.S. federal law, the constitutionality of the Convention is dictated by U.S. jurisprudence. Part II of this Article outlines and discusses the origin and content of the Women’s Convention. Part III contains a historical review of gender jurisprudence in the United States, with particular emphasis on …
In Re Oluloro: Risk Of Female Genital Mutilation As Extreme Hardship In Immigration Proceedings Symposium - Human Rights In The Americas - Recent Development., Patricia Dysart Rudloff
In Re Oluloro: Risk Of Female Genital Mutilation As Extreme Hardship In Immigration Proceedings Symposium - Human Rights In The Americas - Recent Development., Patricia Dysart Rudloff
St. Mary's Law Journal
On March 23, 1994, in In re Oluloro, Immigration Judge Kendall Warren’s decision indicated the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) should consider human rights abuses directed at women. The overriding concern was the possibility that two young U.S. girls would suffer female genital mutilation (FGM) if the INS deported their mother to Nigeria. In reaching the decision to suspend the mother’s deportation, Judge Warren condemned FGM as “cruel and serv[ing] no known medical purpose.” Judge Warren ruled the practice presented an extreme hardship for the girls. Unfortunately, the court’s ruling has no precedential value because the INS did …