Law Commons^™

Mitigating The Impact Of Title Vii's New Retaliation Standard: The Americans With Disabilities Act After University Of Texas Southwestern Medical Center V. Nassar, August T. Johannsen

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Is Guilt Dispositive? Federal Habeas After Martinez, Justin F. Marceau

William & Mary Law Review

Federal habeas review of criminal convictions is not supposed to be a second opportunity to adjudge guilt. Oliver Wendell Holmes, among others, has said that the sole question on federal habeas is whether the prisoner’s constitutional rights were violated. By the early 1970s, however, scholars criticized this rights-based view of habeas and sounded the alarm that postconviction review had become too far removed from questions of innocence. Most famously, in 1970 Judge Friendly criticized the breadth of habeas corpus by posing a single question: Is innocence irrelevant? In his view habeas review that focused exclusively on questions of rights in …

Windsor Beyond Marriage: Due Process, Equality & Undocumented Immigration, Anthony O'Rourke

William & Mary Law Review

The Supreme Court’s recent decision in United States v. Windsor, invalidating part of the federal Defense of Marriage Act, presents a significant interpretive challenge. Early commentators have criticized the majority opinion’s lack of analytical rigor, and expressed doubt that Windsor can serve as a meaningful precedent with respect to constitutional questions outside the area of same-sex marriage. This Article offers a more rehabilitative reading of Windsor and shows how the decision can be used to analyze a significant constitutional question concerning the use of state criminal procedure to regulate immigration.

From Windsor’s holding, the Article distills two concrete doctrinal propositions …

The Unwelcome Requirement In Sexual Harassment: Choosing A Perspective And Incorporating The Effect Of Supervisor-Subordinate Relations, Larsa K. Ramsini

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Unmuting The Volume: Fisher, Affirmative Action Jurisprudence, And The Legacy Of Racial Silence, Mae Kuykendall, Charles Adside Iii

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

As typified by its recent decisions in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin and Shelby County v. Holder, the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence concerning race has long imposed strict judicial oversight over any use of race for the formulation of public policy. This top-down approach has invited various undesirable outcomes, the most pernicious of which are the endorsement of silence on the subject of race and the delegitimizing of most public deliberations about race by non-Court actors. Consequently, speech within universities and other learning environments regarding race has become a psychologically challenging risk for both students and faculty, who justifiably …

Presidential Constitutionalism And Civil Rights, Joseph Landau

William & Mary Law Review

As the judicial and legislative branches have taken a more passive approach to civil rights enforcement, the President’s exercise of independent, extrajudicial constitutional judgment has become increasingly important. Modern U.S. presidents have advanced constitutional interpretations on matters of race, gender, HIV-status, self-incrimination, reproductive liberty, and gun rights, and President Obama has been especially active in promoting the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) persons—most famously by refusing to defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Commentators have criticized the President’s refusal to defend DOMA from numerous perspectives but have not considered how the President’s DOMA policy fits within …

Social Framework Studies Such As Women Don’T Ask And It Does Hurt To Ask Show Us The Next Step Toward Achieving Gender Equality—Eliminating The Long-Term Effects Of Implicit Bias—But Are Not Likely To Get Cases Past Summary Judgment, Andrea Doneff

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

Lawyers and judges long have relied on outside evidence—usually studies or empirical research—to help them better understand the impact or meaning of the facts in certain cases. In employment cases, lawyers have used studies that show statistical variance in hiring or promotion between men and women to prove discrimination. They have used studies that talk about implicit bias, the kind of bias that we apply without even knowing we are biased, perhaps the kind of bias we apply even when we are doing our best not to be biased, to understand that comments like “You should go to charm school” …