Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Minorities (2)
- Race and law (2)
- Racial discrimination (2)
- Stereotypes (2)
- Anti-Semitism (1)
-
- Assimilation (1)
- Civil Rights Act of 1866 (1)
- Civil Rights Act of 1964 (1)
- Coercion (1)
- Darwin (Charles) (1)
- Disparate impacts (1)
- Employees (1)
- Employers (1)
- Ethnicity (1)
- Eugenics (1)
- Evolution (1)
- Gender and law (1)
- Hasidic Jews (1)
- History (1)
- Identity (1)
- Islam (1)
- Jews (1)
- Literature reviews (1)
- Miscegenation (1)
- Racism (1)
- Religious discrimination (1)
- Scientific racism (1)
- Theology (1)
- Women (1)
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Religion Law
Coercive Assimilationism: The Perils Of Muslim Women's Identity Performance In The Workplace, Sahar F. Aziz
Coercive Assimilationism: The Perils Of Muslim Women's Identity Performance In The Workplace, Sahar F. Aziz
Michigan Journal of Race and Law
Should employees have the legal right to “be themselves” at work? Most Americans would answer in the negative because work is a privilege, not an entitlement. But what if being oneself entails behaviors, mannerisms, and values integrally linked to the employee’s gender, race, or religion? And what if the basis for the employer’s workplace rules and professionalism standards rely on negative racial, ethnic or gender stereotypes that disparately impact some employees over others? Currently, Title VII fails to take into account such forms of second-generation discrimination, thereby limiting statutory protections to phenotypical or morphological bases. Drawing on social psychology and …
We Need Inquire Further: Normative Sterotypes, Hasidic Jews, And The Civil Rights Act Of 1866, William Kaplowitz
We Need Inquire Further: Normative Sterotypes, Hasidic Jews, And The Civil Rights Act Of 1866, William Kaplowitz
Michigan Journal of Race and Law
According to modern Supreme Court opinions, The Civil Rights Act of 1866 prohibits only "discrimination [against members of protected groups] solely because of their ancestry or ethnic characteristics." The Court refers to this type of discrimination as 'racial animus.' In the 1987 case Shaare Tefila Congregation v. CobbJews were recognized as a protected ethnic group under these statutes, but the Supreme Court also reaffirmed that The Civil Rights Act only prohibits 'ethnic' or 'ancestral' discrimination. The Act does not encompass religious discrimination. Yet, despite the Supreme Court's rulings, the district courts held that both Rabbi LeBlanc-Sternberg's and Mr. Singers' allegations …
Blood Will Tell: Scientific Racism And The Legal Prohibitions Against Miscegenation, Keith E. Sealing
Blood Will Tell: Scientific Racism And The Legal Prohibitions Against Miscegenation, Keith E. Sealing
Michigan Journal of Race and Law
This article first examines the miscegenation paradigm in terms of a seven-point conceptual framework that not merely allowed but practically demanded anti-miscegenation laws, then looks at the legal arguments state courts used to justify the constitutionality of such laws through 1967. Next, it analyzes the Biblical argument, which in its own right justified miscegenation, but also had a major influence on the development of the three major strands of scientific racism: monogenism, polygenism and Darwinian theory. It then probes the concept upon which the entire edifice is constructed-race--and discusses the continuing vitality of this construct. Next, this article turns to …