Panel 4: Civil Liberties,
2015
University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law
Panel 4: Civil Liberties, Nathalie Desrosiers, Fay Faraday, Sonia Lawrence, James Stribopoulos
Sonia Lawrence
PANEL IV: CIVIL LIBERTIES: Moderator:James Stribopoulos, Professor, Osgoode HallLaw School; Speaker: Nathalie Desrosiers, General Counsel, Canadian Civil Liberties Association & Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Ottawa, "The Advocacy Function in Canada and the Role of Non-Government Organizations"; Speaker: Fay Faraday, McMurtry Clinical Visiting Fellow, Osgoode Hall Law School, "Civil Society and Rights Litigation: Grassroots Nourishing the Charter Tree"; Discussant: Sonia Lawrence, Professor, Osgoode Hall Law School.
Law & Politics After September 11th: Civil Rights & The Rule Of Law,
2015
Osgoode Hall Law School of York University
Law & Politics After September 11th: Civil Rights & The Rule Of Law, Trevor Farrow
Trevor C. W. Farrow
No abstract provided.
Barriers To The Ballot Box: Implicit Bias And Voting Rights In The 21st Century,
2015
Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law
Barriers To The Ballot Box: Implicit Bias And Voting Rights In The 21st Century, Arusha Gordon, Ezra D. Rosenberg
Michigan Journal of Race and Law
While much has been written regarding unconscious or “implicit bias” in other areas of law, there is a scarcity of scholarship examining how implicit bias impacts voting rights and how advocates can move courts to recognize evidence of implicit bias within the context of a voting rights claim. This Article aims to address that scarcity. After reviewing research on implicit bias, this Article examines how implicit bias might impact different stages of the electoral process. It then argues that “results test” claims under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) present an opportunity for plaintiffs to introduce evidence regarding …
Presidential Control Across Policymaking Tools,
2015
University of North Carolina School of Law
Presidential Control Across Policymaking Tools, Catherine Y. Kim
Florida State University Law Review
Over the past quarter century, administrative law scholars have observed the President’s growing control over agency policymaking and the separation-of-powers concerns implicated by such unilateral exercises of power. The paradigmatic form of agency policymaking—notice-and-comment rulemaking—mitigates these concerns by ensuring considerable oversight by the courts, Congress, and the public at large. Agencies, however, typically have at their disposal a variety of policymaking tools with which to implement White House goals, including the issuance of guidance documents and the strategic exercise of enforcement discretion. While commentators have drawn attention to the risk that agencies will circumvent the extensive checks associated with rulemaking …
Jennifer Reis,
2015
Morehead State University
Kim Davis Part 1,
2015
Morehead State University
Kim Davis Part 1, Robert Sammons
Audio & Video History Collection
No abstract provided.
Melinda Andrews,
2015
Morehead State University
Melinda Andrews, Robert Sammons
Audio & Video History Collection
No abstract provided.
Mary Hargis,
2015
Morehead State University
Michael Biel,
2015
Morehead State University
Bernadette Barton,
2015
Morehead State University
Bernadette Barton, Robert Sammons
Audio & Video History Collection
No abstract provided.
Carmen Wampler-Collins,
2015
Morehead State University
Carmen Wampler-Collins, Robert Sammons
Audio & Video History Collection
No abstract provided.
Carla Rucker,
2015
Morehead State University
David Bryant,
2015
Morehead State University
Julie Sloan,
2015
Morehead State University
Kim Davis Part 2,
2015
Morehead State University
Kim Davis Part 2, Robert Sammons
Audio & Video History Collection
No abstract provided.
Suzanne Tallichet,
2015
Morehead State University
Suzanne Tallichet, Robert Sammons
Audio & Video History Collection
No abstract provided.
Robyn Cline,
2015
Morehead State University
Toni Hobbs,
2015
Morehead State University
Torch (October 2015),
2015
University of Southern Maine
Torch (October 2015), Brandon Baldwin, Civil Rights Team Project
Torch: The Civil Rights Team Project Newsletter
No abstract provided.
Strip Searching In The Age Of Colorblind Racism: The Disparate Impact Of Florence V. Board Of Chosen Freeholders Of The County Of Burlington,
2015
LaGuardia Community College-City University of New York
Strip Searching In The Age Of Colorblind Racism: The Disparate Impact Of Florence V. Board Of Chosen Freeholders Of The County Of Burlington, André Keeton
Michigan Journal of Race and Law
In 2012, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Burlington. The Court held that full strip searches, including cavity searches, are permissible regardless of the existence of basic reasonable suspicion that the arrestee is in possession of contraband. Further, the Court held that law enforcement may conduct full strip searches after arresting an individual for a minor offense and irrespective of the circumstances surrounding the arrest. These holdings upended typical search jurisprudence. Florence sanctions the overreach of state power and extends to law enforcement and corrections officers the unfettered …
