Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Trump (Donald) (2)
- Voting Rights Act (2)
- Advocacy (1)
- African Americans (1)
- Alaska (1)
-
- Barriers (1)
- Biases (1)
- Cognitive bias (1)
- Disenfranchisement (1)
- Equal Protection Clause (1)
- Executive orders (1)
- False statements (1)
- Felons (1)
- Fourteenth Amendment (1)
- Free expression (1)
- Grassroots (1)
- Implicit bias (1)
- Information (1)
- Language (1)
- Marketplace of ideas (1)
- Muslim ban (1)
- Muslims (1)
- Natives (1)
- Nick v. Bethel (1)
- Noxious doctrine (1)
- Poverty (1)
- Racism (1)
- Stereotypes (1)
- Toyukak v. Treadwell (1)
- Voting rights (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Executive Disorder: The Muslim Ban, Emergency Advocacy, And The Fires Next Time, Abed Ayoub, Khaled Beydoun
Executive Disorder: The Muslim Ban, Emergency Advocacy, And The Fires Next Time, Abed Ayoub, Khaled Beydoun
Michigan Journal of Race and Law
On January 27, 2017, one week into his presidency, Donald Trump enacted Executive Order No. 13769, popularly known as the “Muslim Ban.” The Order named seven Muslim-majority nations and restricted, effective immediately, the reentry into the United States of visa and green card holders from these states. With the Muslim Ban, President Trump delivered on a central campaign promise, and as a result, injected Islamophobia into American immigration law and policy.
The Muslim Ban had an immediate impact on tens of thousands of Muslims, directly affecting U.S. visa and green card holders currently outside of the country, while exacerbating fear …
“Why Should I Go Vote Without Understanding What I Am Going To Vote For?” The Impact Of First Generation Voting Barriers On Alaska Natives, James Thomas Tucker, Natalie A. Landreth, Erin Dougherty Lynch
“Why Should I Go Vote Without Understanding What I Am Going To Vote For?” The Impact Of First Generation Voting Barriers On Alaska Natives, James Thomas Tucker, Natalie A. Landreth, Erin Dougherty Lynch
Michigan Journal of Race and Law
This article explores the many forms of discrimination that have persisted in Alaska, the resulting first generation voting barriers faced by Alaska Native voters, and the two contested lawsuits it took to attain a measure of equality for those voters in four regions of Alaska: Nick v. Bethel and Toyukak v. Treadwell. In the end, the court’s decision in Toyukak came down to a comparison of just two pieces of evidence: (1) the Official Election Pamphlet that English-speaking voters received that was often more than 100 pages long; and (2) the single sheet of paper that Alaska Native language …
Concealed Motives: Rethinking Fourteenth Amendment And Voting Rights Challenges To Felon Disenfranchisement, Lauren Latterell Powell
Concealed Motives: Rethinking Fourteenth Amendment And Voting Rights Challenges To Felon Disenfranchisement, Lauren Latterell Powell
Michigan Journal of Race and Law
Felon disenfranchisement provisions are justified by many Americans under the principle that voting is a privilege to be enjoyed only by upstanding citizens. The provisions are intimately tied, however, to the country’s legacy of racism and systemic disenfranchisement and are at odds with the values of American democracy. In virtually every state, felon disenfranchisement provisions affect the poor and communities of color on a grossly disproportionate scale. Yet to date, most challenges to the provisions under the Equal Protection Clause and Voting Rights Act have been unsuccessful, frustrating proponents of re-enfranchisement and the disenfranchised alike.
In light of those failures, …
The Resilience Of Noxious Doctrine: The 2016 Election, The Marketplace Of Ideas, And The Obstinacy Of Bias, Leonard M. Niehoff, Deeva Shah
The Resilience Of Noxious Doctrine: The 2016 Election, The Marketplace Of Ideas, And The Obstinacy Of Bias, Leonard M. Niehoff, Deeva Shah
Michigan Journal of Race and Law
The Supreme Court has recognized the central role that free expression plays in our democratic enterprise. In his dissenting opinion in United States v. Abrams, Justice Holmes offered a theory of how free expression advances our search for truth and our cultivation of an informed electorate. That model—often called the “marketplace of ideas,” based upon the metaphor used by Holmes—has proven to be one of the most persistent and influential concepts in First Amendment jurisprudence.
The marketplace of ideas model essentially holds that free expression serves our democratic goals by allowing differing proposed truths and versions of the facts …