Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Good Faith Discrimination, Girardeau A. Spann
Good Faith Discrimination, Girardeau A. Spann
Girardeau A Spann
Good Faith Discrimination Girardeau A. Spann Abstract The Supreme Court’s current doctrinal rules governing racial discrimination and affirmative action are unsatisfying. They often seem artificial, internally inconsistent, and even conceptually incoherent. Despite a long and continuing history of racial discrimination in the United States, many of the problems with the Supreme Court’s racial jurisprudence stem from the Court’s willingness to view the current distribution of societal resources as establishing a colorblind, race-neutral baseline that can be used to make equality determinations. As a result, the current rules are as likely to facilitate racial discrimination as to prevent it, or to …
What Impact The Supreme Court’S Recent Hobby Lobby Decision Might Have For Lgbt Civil Rights?, Vincent Samar
What Impact The Supreme Court’S Recent Hobby Lobby Decision Might Have For Lgbt Civil Rights?, Vincent Samar
Vincent J. Samar
Abstract
What Impact the Supreme Court’s Recent Hobby Lobby
Decision Might Have for LGBT Civil Rights?
Vincent J. Samar
The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in the Hobby Lobby case has created shockwaves of concern among civil rights groups questioning whether for-profit corporations can assert a religious exemption from civil rights legislation under a 1993 federal law, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The matter is of particular concern in the LGBT community given the possible impact it could have on services traditionally offered to those getting married as more and more states legalize same-sex marriage. Though the Court’s conservative majority …
Solving Batson, Tania Tetlow
Solving Batson, Tania Tetlow
Tania Tetlow
The Supreme Court faced an important ideological choice when it banned the racial use of peremptory challenges in Batson v. Kentucky. It could either ground the rule in equality rights designed to protect potential jurors from stereotyping, or it could base the rule on the defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to an “impartial jury” drawn from a fair cross-section of the community. By choosing Equal Protection analysis, the Court turned away from the defendant and the fair functioning of the criminal justice system and instead focused on protecting potential jurors. The Court thus built fatal error into the Batson rule, a …