Law Commons^™

On V. Stiviano, Donald Sterling's Companion: Exploring Whiteness As Property, Imani Jackson

Florida A & M University Law Review

Much maligned billionaire and former Clippers owner Donald Sterling ignited national race relations discourse after his companion, V. Stiviano, was connected to the leak of a conversation in which Sterling made anti-black comments. This author posits that Sterling's command that his companion Stiviano disassociate with people of color, particularly black people, is covertly and overtly racist. Covert racism is implicit in the nature of their conversation.

This paper will focus on Stiviano's identity and the violence white men inflicted upon her because of her race and the circumstances surrounding her relationship with Sterling. This author contends that Stiviano attempted to …

Dr. Seuss’S (Un)Civil Imaginaries, Donald E. Pease

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Forms Of Affiliation: Family, Democracy, And Civil Society In Horton Hears A Who!, Naomi Mezey, Gabe Lezra

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Horton Hears A Twerp: Myth, Law, And Children’S Rights In Horton Hears A Who!, Anne Mcgillivray

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

International Law, Armed Conflict, And The Construction Of Otherness: A Critical Reading Of Dr. Seuss’S The Butter Battle Book And A Renewed Call For Global Citizenship, John Hursh

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Transgender Youth In Public Schools: Why Identity Matters In The Restroom, Jennifer Johnson

William Mitchell Law Review

No abstract provided.

“Doomed Social Engineering?” Ethics And Professionalism Related To Sexual Orientation: The Florida Experience, Robert W. Lee

Barry Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Usual Suspects: Judicial Review Of State Laws That Target Undocumented Immigrants, 47 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1127 (2014), Jonathan Svitak

UIC Law Review

This Comment will attempt to balance the interests of Arizona and Alabama in combating the growing problem of undocumented immigration against the interest of the documented and undocumented aliens and U.S. citizens protected by the Equal Protection Clause.

Will The South Rise Again And, If So, In What Form?: Lessons From Latcrit About Resisting The Fear Of Cultural Understanding, 47 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1211 (2014), Angela Mae Kupenda

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Is The Butter Battle Book’S Bitsy Big-Boy Boomeroo Banned? What Has International Law To Say About Weapons Of Mass Destruction?, Roger S. Clark

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Seventh Circuit Got It Wrong: Supervisors Should Not Face Individual Liability Under Section 1981, Emily Aleisa

Chicago-Kent Law Review

In Smith v. Bray, the Seventh Circuit, on a case of first impression, determined that supervisors with retaliatory motives can and should be individually liable under section 1981 when they cause the employer to retaliate against an employee. This article argues against the Seventh Circuit’s holding for four reasons. First, courts are required to analyze section 1981 the same way they analyze Title VII, and Title VII does not allow for individual supervisor liability. Second, the Seventh Circuit justified its decision based on a flawed comparison between section 1981 and section 1983, a similar but distinct civil rights statute. Third, …

The End Of Indeterminacy In Affirmative Action, Carla D. Pratt

Valparaiso University Law Review

No abstract provided.

An Evaluation Of The Prospects For Successful Implementation Of The Convention On The Rights Of Persons With Disabilities In The Islamic World, Brenton Kinker

Michigan Journal of International Law

This note will examine the CRPD’s aspirations in light of Islamic law, comparing whether the two are—or can be—consistent. Part I will provide background on the CRPD, including the intent of the treaty, the negotiations leading to the final wording, and the solid obligations it contains for state parties. Part II examines the background of Shari’a and its provisions regarding disability. Part III compares the treatment of the disabled under Islamic law with that required by the CRPD in order to gage consistency. Where tensions exist, alternative interpretations of both Islamic law and the CPRD are proposed that might facilitate …

Weather Permitting: Incrementalism, Animus, And The Art Of Forecasting Marriage Equality After U.S. V. Windsor, Jeremiah A. Ho

Cleveland State Law Review

Within LGBT rights, the law is abandoning essentialist approaches toward sexual orientation by incrementally de-regulating restrictions on identity expression of sexual minorities. Simultaneously, same-sex marriages are become increasingly recognized on both state and federal levels. This Article examines the Supreme Court’s recent decision, U.S. v. Windsor, as the latest example of these parallel journeys. By overturning DOMA, Windsor normatively revises the previous incrementalist theory for forecasting marriage equality’s progress studied by William Eskridge, Kees Waaldijk, and Yuval Merin. Windsor also represents a moment where the law is abandoning antigay essentialism by using animusfocused jurisprudence for lifting the discrimination against the …

The Trayvon Martin Trial - Two Comments And An Observation, 47 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1371 (2014), Richard Delgado

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Hours Equity Is The New Pay Equity, Nantiya Ruan, Nancy Reichman

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Life In The Law: An Interview With Drew Days, Rodger D. Citron

Touro Law Review

Drew S. Days, III, has lived an extraordinary life in the law. Born in the segregated South, Days graduated from Yale Law School in 1966 and pursued a career as a civil rights lawyer. In 1977, he was appointed Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights. After his stint in the administration of President Jimmy Carter, Days became a professor at Yale Law School. Then, in 1993, he was appointed So-licitor General of the United States, serving in that position until 1996. He now holds the position of Alfred M. Rankin Professor Emeritus of Law and Professorial Lecturer in Law at …

Beyond A Reasonable Doubt: The Constitutionality Of Georgia's Burden Of Proof In Executing The Mentally Retarded, Veronica M. O'Grady

Georgia Law Review

In 2002, the Supreme Court in Atkins v. Virginia announced that executing mentally retarded defendants violates the Constitution. Georgia's standard for determining whether a criminal defendant is mentally retarded-and therefore ineligible for the death penalty- is the highest in the nation, requiring defendants to prove mental retardation to a jury, during the guilt and innocence phase, beyond a reasonable doubt. As in the case of Warren Lee Hill, Jr., this high burden necessarily results in Georgia executing defendants who are almost certainly mentally retarded,arguably violating the Atkins directive. Though once the first state to create a ban on executing the …

Employment Discrimination Against Ex-Offenders: The Promise And Limits Of Title Vii Disparate Impact Theory, Tammy R. Pettinato

Marquette Law Review

none

Ice's New Policy On Segregation And The Continuing Use Of Solitary Confinement Within The Context Of International Human Rights, 47 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1433 (2014), Sarah Dávila A.

UIC Law Review

The purpose of this essay is to discuss ICE Policy 11065.1 on segregation, its deficiencies and its unlikely full implementation, and emphasize that the current use of solitary confinement in immigration detention is in contravention of international human rights principles.

Delimiting Title Vii: Reverse Religious Discrimination And Proxy Claims In Employment Discrimination Litigation, Andrea J. Sinclair

Vanderbilt Law Review

In July 2012, Chick-fil-A President and Chief Operating Officer Dan Cathy remarked to a religious publication that he and his company supported the "biblical definition of the family unit."' Chick- fil-A is popularly known as a Christian company that promotes conservative, biblical values. Mr. Cathy's statement was largely interpreted by the media as an "anti-gay" sentiment rooted in religious beliefs. In response to Mr. Cathy's remark, government officials from Boston and Chicago refused to allow the restaurant chain to open new locations in their cities, citing the organization's official policy of "discrimination." The Chick-fil-A controversy demonstrates how the intersection of …

No Matter How Small... Property, Autonomy, And State In Horton Hears A Who!, Jorge L. Contreras

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Sneetches As An Allegory For The Gay Rights Struggle: Three Prisms, Peter Nicolas

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Toward A Definitive History Of Griggs V. Duke Power Co., David J. Garrow

Vanderbilt Law Review

When Griggs v. Duke Power Co. was unanimously handed down by the U.S. Supreme Court on March 8, 1971, the decision did not draw prominent headlines. The New York Times accorded the ruling only a two-sentence summary on page twenty-one, and the Wall Street Journal gave it modest attention on page four. The Washington Post did give the decision front-page coverage, but Gillette v. United States, a Selective Service Act case, was awarded a prominent, top-of-the-page, two-column headline while Griggs received secondary attention. Notwithstanding how modest the contemporaneous news coverage was, knowledgeable judges, scholars, and litigators quickly acknowledged how Griggs …

Unions And Democracy: When Do Nonmembers Have Voting Rights?, Melanie Stallings Williams, Dennis A. Halcoussis

Journal of Business & Technology Law

No abstract provided.