Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- 2020 election (1)
- Black and Brown voters (1)
- Bostock v. Clayton County (1)
- Civic participation (1)
- Civil Rights (1)
-
- Civil Rights Act (1)
- Community supervision (1)
- Criminal Justice (1)
- Elections (1)
- Federal courts (1)
- First Amendment (1)
- Fourth Amendment (1)
- Free exercise of religion (1)
- Gender non-conforming behavior (1)
- Homosexual (1)
- Incarnation. Legal financial obligation. Suspended license (1)
- Intersex (1)
- Keyword warrant (1)
- Keyword warrants (1)
- LGBT (1)
- LGBTQ (1)
- LGBTQ+ (1)
- LGBTQ+ anti-discrimination laws (1)
- Police searches (1)
- Policing (1)
- Privacy rights (1)
- Prosecutorial decision-making. Pretrial release (1)
- Race (1)
- Reentry (1)
- Robocalls (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
Beware What You Google: Fourth Amendment Constitutionality Of Keyword Warrants, Chelsa Camille Edano
Beware What You Google: Fourth Amendment Constitutionality Of Keyword Warrants, Chelsa Camille Edano
Washington Law Review
Many Americans have potentially had their privacy rights invaded through invisible, widespread police searches. In recent years, local and federal governments have compelled Google and other search engine companies to produce the personal information of users who have conducted a search query related to a crime. By using keyword warrants, the government can conduct a dragnet search for suspects, imposing suspicion on users and exposing their personal information. The keyword warrant is a symptom of the erosion of the Fourth Amendment protection against suspicionless searches. Not only is scholarship scarce on keyword warrants, but also instances of these warrants are …
Sex Trait Discrimination: Intersex People And Title Vii After Bostock V. Clayton County, Sam Parry
Sex Trait Discrimination: Intersex People And Title Vii After Bostock V. Clayton County, Sam Parry
Washington Law Review
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects employees from workplace discrimination and harassment on account of sex. Courts have historically failed to extend Title VII protections to LGBTQ+ people. However, in 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Bostock v. Clayton County changed this. Bostock explicitly extended Title VII’s protections against workplace discrimination to “homosexual” and “transgender” people, reasoning that it is impossible to discriminate against an employee for being gay or transgender without taking the employee’s sex into account. While Bostock is a win for LGBTQ+ rights, the opinion leaves several questions unanswered. The reasoning in …
Queer And Convincing: Reviewing Freedom Of Religion And Lgbtq+ Protections Post-Fulton V. City Of Philadelphia, Arianna Nord
Queer And Convincing: Reviewing Freedom Of Religion And Lgbtq+ Protections Post-Fulton V. City Of Philadelphia, Arianna Nord
Washington Law Review
Recent increases in LGBTQ+ anti-discrimination laws have generated new conversations in the free exercise of religion debate. While federal courts have been wrestling with claims brought under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment since the nineteenth century, city and state efforts to codify legal protections for LGBTQ+ individuals in the mid-twentieth century birthed novel challenges. Private individuals who do not condone intimate same-sex relationships and/or gender non-conforming behavior, on religious grounds seek greater legal protection for the ability to refuse to offer goods and services to LGBTQ+ persons. Federal and state courts must determine how to resolve these …
Let Us Not Be Intimidated: Past And Present Applications Of Section 11(B) Of The Voting Rights Act, Carly E. Zipper
Let Us Not Be Intimidated: Past And Present Applications Of Section 11(B) Of The Voting Rights Act, Carly E. Zipper
Washington Law Review
As John Lewis said, “[the] vote is precious. Almost sacred. It is the most powerful non-violent tool we have to create a more perfect union.” The Voting Rights Act (VRA), likewise, is a powerful tool. This Comment seeks to empower voters and embolden their advocates to better use that tool with an improved understanding of its little-known protection against voter intimidation, section 11(b).
Although the term “voter intimidation” may connote armed confrontations at polling places, some forms of intimidation are much more subtle and insidious—dissuading voters from heading to the polls on election day rather than confronting them outright when …
Race And Washington’S Criminal Justice System: 2021 Report To The Washington Supreme Court, Task Force 2.0
Race And Washington’S Criminal Justice System: 2021 Report To The Washington Supreme Court, Task Force 2.0
Washington Law Review
RACE & WASHINGTON’S CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM:
EDITOR’S NOTE
As Editors-in-Chief of the Washington Law Review, Gonzaga Law Review, and Seattle University Law Review, we represent the flagship legal academic publications of each law school in Washington State. Our publications last joined together to publish the findings of the first Task Force on Race and the Criminal Justice System in 2011/12. A decade later, we are honored to join once again to present the findings of Task Force 2.0. Law journals have enabled generations of legal professionals to introduce, vet, and distribute new ideas, critiques of existing legal structures, and reflections …
Violence Everywhere: How The Current Spectacle Of Black Suffering, Police Violence, And The Violence Of Judicial Interpretation Undermine The Rule Of Law, David B. Owens
Articles
No abstract provided.