Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Supreme Court of the United States Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Supreme Court (5)
- Discrimination (4)
- Constitution (3)
- California (2)
- California Supreme Court (2)
-
- Fourth Amendment (2)
- Ninth Circuit (2)
- Police (2)
- Politics (2)
- 1983 (1)
- ADA (1)
- Accommodation (1)
- Americans with Disabilities Act (1)
- Antidiscrimination (1)
- Arrest (1)
- Arrests (1)
- Basis of sex (1)
- Bill of Rights (1)
- Buck v. Davis (1)
- Byrd v. United States (1)
- California Constitution (1)
- California Court of Appeal (1)
- Campaign Finance (1)
- Campaigns (1)
- Candidates (1)
- Carpenter (1)
- Citizens United (1)
- Civil Rights (1)
- Civil rights (1)
- Co-Occupant (1)
Articles 1 - 11 of 11
Full-Text Articles in Supreme Court of the United States
Immigration Politics: Shifting Norms, Policies And Practices, Felicia Escobar, Annie Lai, Hiroshi Motomura, Karen Tumlin, Kathleen Kim
Immigration Politics: Shifting Norms, Policies And Practices, Felicia Escobar, Annie Lai, Hiroshi Motomura, Karen Tumlin, Kathleen Kim
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
No abstract provided.
Property, Persons, And Institutionalized Police Interdiction In Byrd V. United States, Eric J. Miller
Property, Persons, And Institutionalized Police Interdiction In Byrd V. United States, Eric J. Miller
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
During a fairly routine traffic stop of a motorist driving a rental car, two State Troopers in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, discovered that the driver, Terrence Byrd, was not the listed renter. The Court ruled that Byrd nonetheless retained a Fourth Amendment right to object to the search. The Court did not address, however, why the Troopers stopped Byrd in the first place. A close examination of the case filings reveal suggests that Byrd was stopped on the basis of his race. The racial feature ofthe stop is obscured by the Court’s current property-basedinterpretation of the Fourth Amendment’s right to privacy.
Although …
Sexual Orientation Discrimination Under Title Vii: The Promising Road Ahead, Sydney Wright
Sexual Orientation Discrimination Under Title Vii: The Promising Road Ahead, Sydney Wright
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
No abstract provided.
Buck V. Davis: Anti-Discriminatory Principles In Habeas Corpus Cases, Daniella Rubin
Buck V. Davis: Anti-Discriminatory Principles In Habeas Corpus Cases, Daniella Rubin
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
No abstract provided.
Fairness Over Finality: Peña-Rodriguez V. Colorado And The Right To An Impartial Jury, Katherine Brosamle
Fairness Over Finality: Peña-Rodriguez V. Colorado And The Right To An Impartial Jury, Katherine Brosamle
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
No abstract provided.
Supreme Court Supremacy In A Time Of Turmoil: James V. City Of Boise, Richard Henry Seamon
Supreme Court Supremacy In A Time Of Turmoil: James V. City Of Boise, Richard Henry Seamon
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
Last Term’s decision in James v. City of Boise encapsulates the current civil rights turmoil and the legal system’s inadequate response to it. In James ̧ the U.S. Supreme Court reversed a decision in which the Idaho Supreme Court (1) awarded attorney’s fees against a civil rights plaintiff despite her credible claim of excessive police force and (2) denied that it was bound by U.S. Supreme Court decisions interpreting the federal statute authorizing the award. Although the Court in James reaffirmed the state courts’ well-settled duty to obey the Court’s decisions on federal law, this article shows that the duty …
For The Protection Of Society's Most Vulnerable, The Ada Should Apply To Arrests, Thomas J. Auner
For The Protection Of Society's Most Vulnerable, The Ada Should Apply To Arrests, Thomas J. Auner
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
No abstract provided.
Politics At Work After Citizens United, Ruben J. Garcia
Politics At Work After Citizens United, Ruben J. Garcia
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
There are seismic changes going on in the political system. The United States Supreme Court has constitutionalized the concentration of political power in the “one percent” in several recent decisions, including Citizens United v. FEC. At the same time, unions are representing a shrinking share of the workforce, and their political power is also being diminished. In order for unions to recalibrate the balance of political power at all, they must collaborate with grassroots community groups, as they have done in several recent campaigns. There are, however, various legal structures that make coordination between unions and nonunion groups difficult, …
Half-Baked: The Demand By For-Profit Businesses For Religious Exemptions From Selling To Same-Sex Couples, James M. Donovan
Half-Baked: The Demand By For-Profit Businesses For Religious Exemptions From Selling To Same-Sex Couples, James M. Donovan
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
Should bakers be required to make cakes for same-sex weddings? This Article unravels the eclectic arguments that are offered in support of a religious exemption from serving gay customers in the wake of Obergefell.
Preliminary issues first consider invocations of a libertarian right to exclude. Rather than being part of our concept of liberty, this right to exclude from commercial premises is a new rule devised to prevent African Americans from participating in free society. Instead of expanding this racist rule to likewise bar gays from the marketplace, it should be reset to the antebellum standard of free access …
Storming The Castle: Fernandez V. California And The Waning Warrant Requirement, Joshua Bornstein
Storming The Castle: Fernandez V. California And The Waning Warrant Requirement, Joshua Bornstein
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
No abstract provided.
Fixing Hollingsworth: Standing In Initiative Cases, Karl Manheim, John S. Caragozian, Donald Warner
Fixing Hollingsworth: Standing In Initiative Cases, Karl Manheim, John S. Caragozian, Donald Warner
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
In Hollingsworth v. Perry, the Supreme Court dismissed an appeal filed by the “Official Proponents” of California’s Proposition 8, which banned same-sex marriage in California. Chief Justice Roberts’ majority opinion held that initiative sponsors lack Article III standing to defend their ballot measures even when state officials refuse to defend against constitutional challenges. As a result, Hollingsworth provides state officers with the ability to overrule laws that were intended to bypass the government establishment—in effect, an “executive veto” of popularly-enacted initiatives.
The Article examines this new “executive veto” in depth. It places Hollingsworth in context, discussing the initiative process …