Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Law
Curriculum Censorship Of Lgbtq+ Identity: Modern Adaptation Of Vintage "Save Our Children" Rhetoric Is Still Just Discrimination, Cathryn M. Oakley
Curriculum Censorship Of Lgbtq+ Identity: Modern Adaptation Of Vintage "Save Our Children" Rhetoric Is Still Just Discrimination, Cathryn M. Oakley
Loyola University Chicago Law Journal
Underpinning Florida’s 2022 “Don’t Say Gay or Trans” law is the same vintage, discriminatory rhetoric that has been invoked to harm LGBTQ+ people for decades: that LGBTQ+ people are deviant and fundamentally sexual, therefore even the most chaste acknowledgement of the existence of LGBTQ+ people is inherently inappropriate for children. LGBTQ+ students, students with LGBTQ+ family members, and LGBTQ+ school employees are protected by the constitution, including the First and Fourteenth amendments as well as federal civil rights law. Whether censorship of LGBTQ+ identities is effectuated directly, as in Florida, or indirectly through opt-outs, the dignitary harm is done. Curriculum …
When Claims Collide: Students For Fair Admissions V. Harvard And The Meaning Of Discrimination, Cara Mcclellan
When Claims Collide: Students For Fair Admissions V. Harvard And The Meaning Of Discrimination, Cara Mcclellan
Loyola University Chicago Law Journal
This term, the Supreme Court will decide Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College (SFFA v. Harvard), a challenge to Harvard College’s race-conscious admissions program. While litigation challenging the use of race in higher education admissions spans over five decades, previous attacks on race-conscious admissions systems were brought by white plaintiffs alleging “reverse discrimination” based on the theory that a university discriminated against them by assigning a plus factor to underrepresented minority applicants. SFFA v. Harvard is distinct from these cases because the plaintiff organization, SFFA, brought a claim alleg-ing that Harvard engages in intentional discrimination …
The Establishment Clause, Civil Rights, And The Accomodationist Path Forward, Lisa Shaw Roy
The Establishment Clause, Civil Rights, And The Accomodationist Path Forward, Lisa Shaw Roy
Loyola University Chicago Law Journal
The U.S. Supreme Court’s First Amendment Religion Clause doctrine is undergoing a transition between the Court’s older, strict separationist decisions and its current accommodationist approach. This shift can be seen in the Court’s most recent Establishment and Free Exercise Clause decisions, and in particular, in its unanimous Free Speech Clause decision in Shurtleff v. City of Boston, a case which found that the challenger, Harold Shurtleff, had a First Amendment right to raise a flag with a cross on a city flagpole. In many ways, Shurtleff exemplifies the Court’s incremental movement toward an accommodationist Establishment Clause doctrine, and this …
Introduction To Issue Three, Paul W. Kucinski
Introduction To Issue Three, Paul W. Kucinski
Loyola University Chicago Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Arbitration Under Union-Negotiated Collective-Bargaining Agreements: The Need For Perspicuity When Employees Waive The Right To Pursue Discrimination Claims In Federal Court, Travis Thickstun
Loyola University Chicago Law Journal
How clear and unmistakable should arbitration clauses be when employees waive their right to pursue discrimination claims in federal court under union-negotiated collective-bargaining agreements? The United States courts of appeals have been split on this question since the Supreme Court handed down its decisions in Wright v. Universal Maritime Service Corp. and 14 Penn Plaza LLC v. Pyett. In Wright, the Court held that waiver in union-negotiated collective-bargaining agreements must be “clear and unmistakable.” Eleven years later, in Pyett, the Court affirmed its clear-and-unmistakable standard for waiver of a union member’s right to pursue her statutory claim through litigation. Since …
United States V. Vaello-Madero: The Impact Of Varying Rights To Citizens Of The United States, Ana Siracusa
United States V. Vaello-Madero: The Impact Of Varying Rights To Citizens Of The United States, Ana Siracusa
Loyola University Chicago Law Journal
Since 1917, residents of Puerto Rico have been citizens of the United States. However, because of Puerto Rico’s status as a United States territory, residents of Puerto Rico are not automatically guaranteed the same constitutional rights as other citizens of the United States. When faced with the question of what constitutional rights residents of Puerto Rico are entitled to, the Supreme Court has continued to perpetuate the otherness of United States territories. This disposition results from the United States’ colonial mindset in the acquisition and government of its territories. The discrimination against United States territories, namely Puerto Rico, has bled …
Ignored, Harassed, And Endangered: States Must Provide Gender-Affirming Healthcare To Transgender Youth In Juvenile Detention, Jake Gnolfo
Loyola University Chicago Law Journal
In 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Edmo v. Corizon, Inc. held a prison’s denial of gender-affirming care to a transgender adult prisoner constituted cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment. However, the reality for incarcerated transgender juveniles is much different. It is incredibly hard, if not impossible, for transgender juveniles to obtain access to gender-affirming care while detained. Furthermore, states have begun banning gender-affirming healthcare for all transgender youth. Preliminary injunctions of these laws have been swift and successful; however, transgender juveniles remain left out of the conversation. While being restrained of their …