Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 10 of 10
Full-Text Articles in Law
A Battle Of The Amendments: Why Ending Discrimination In The Courtroom May Inhibit A Criminal Defendant’S Right To An Impartial Jury, Gina M. Chiappetta
A Battle Of The Amendments: Why Ending Discrimination In The Courtroom May Inhibit A Criminal Defendant’S Right To An Impartial Jury, Gina M. Chiappetta
Fordham Law Review
Since the U.S. Supreme Court began limiting the exercise of peremptory challenges to safeguard potential jurors from discrimination, it has faced a nearly impossible task. The Court has attempted to safeguard a juror’s equal protection rights without eradicating the peremptory challenge’s ability to preserve a criminal defendant’s right to an impartial jury. Under the current legal framework, it is not certain whether either constitutional right is adequately protected. This Note examines the history of the Supreme Court’s limitation on peremptory challenges. It then discusses the current federal circuit split over whether peremptory challenges should be further limited. Finally, this Note …
The Regulation Of Race In Science, Kimani Paul-Emile
The Regulation Of Race In Science, Kimani Paul-Emile
Faculty Scholarship
The overwhelming majority of biological scientists agree that there is no such thing as race among modern humans. Yet, scientists regularly deploy race in their studies, and federal laws and regulations currently mandate the use of racial categories in biomedical research. Legal commentators have tried to make sense of this paradox primarily by looking to equal protection strict scrutiny analysis. However, the colorblind approach that attends this doctrine — which many regard as synonymous with invalidation — does not offer a particularly useful way to think about the use of race in research. It offers no way to address how …
Problem Of Equality In Takings, The , Nestor M. Davidson
Problem Of Equality In Takings, The , Nestor M. Davidson
Faculty Scholarship
The Supreme Court is finally beginning to bring clarity to the law of regulatory takings and in the process is bringing to the fore a previously submerged theme in the jurisprudence: regulatory takings as a question of distributional justice and horizontal equity. This Article argues that this equality dimension is fundamentally problematic. On a theoretical level, privileging norms of equality engrafts political process rationales for heightened scrutiny onto groups defined solely by the differential burden of a regulation, an exercise in circularity. Equally troubling is the inverted political economy of regulatory takings claims that is likely to result: the greatest …
Does A Marriage Really Need Sex?: A Critical Analysis Of The Gender Restriction On Marriage, Randi E. Frankle
Does A Marriage Really Need Sex?: A Critical Analysis Of The Gender Restriction On Marriage, Randi E. Frankle
Fordham Urban Law Journal
This Note discusses the issues surrounding intersex persons and the right to marry. The Comment first discusses the constitutional protection of the right to marry, intersex conditions, and case law regarding intersex, transsexual, and same-sex marriage. It further addresses the consequences for marriage when it is narrowly defined. Further, the Comment proposes an alternative solution to the one many courts have used. This solution allows an intersex person to self-designate her gender and be able to marry either a man or a woman. Finally, this Comment argues that if an intersex person can marry either a man or a woman, …
Intent And Incoherence, Sheila R. Foster
Intent And Incoherence, Sheila R. Foster
Faculty Scholarship
In this Article, Professor Sheila Foster dissects the intent standard in equal protection jurisprudence, filtering it through the lens of democratic process theory. Most legal scholars and commentators writing in this area continuously restate, and critique, the "rule" of intent as a uniform standard in constitutional law. However, it is clear from the Supreme Court's jurisprudence (and that of the lower federal courts) that different levels of consciousness can satisfy the discriminatory intent standard, and hence violate the Equal Protection Clause. Exactly what explains these disparate, and seemingly incoherent, levels of intent is the subject of this Article. Professor Foster …
Intent And Incoherence, Sheila R. Foster
Intent And Incoherence, Sheila R. Foster
Faculty Scholarship
In this Article, Professor Sheila Foster dissects the intent standard in equal protection jurisprudence, filtering it through the lens of democratic process theory. Most legal scholars and commentators writing in this area continuously restate, and critique, the "rule" of intent as a uniform standard in constitutional law. However, it is clear from the Supreme Court's jurisprudence (and that of the lower federal courts) that different levels of consciousness can satisfy the discriminatory intent standard, and hence violate the Equal Protection Clause. Exactly what explains these disparate, and seemingly incoherent, levels of intent is the subject of this Article. Professor Foster …
State Prohibitions On Employment Opportunities For Resident Aliens: Legislative Recommendations , Joy B. Peltz
State Prohibitions On Employment Opportunities For Resident Aliens: Legislative Recommendations , Joy B. Peltz
Fordham Urban Law Journal
Resident aliens in the United States are afforded important privileges, such as residing in the United States indefinitely, and seeking employment here. Nevertheless, resident aliens are denied certain job opportunities in states that require United States citizenship as a prerequisite to public employment, or professional or occupational licenses. The Constitutionality of this exclusion has been challenged on equal protection grounds, most recently, by the Supreme Court in Cabell v. Chavez-Salido. In this case, the Court upheld the constitutionality of a California statute, restricting a deputy probation officer position to United States citizens. This case has been hailed as precedent for …
Unwed Fathers - Adoption - Foster Care Agency Seeking Permission To Consent To Child's Adoption Need Not Always Grant Child's Unwed Father Notice And Opportunity To Be Heard, Michael A. Vaccari
Unwed Fathers - Adoption - Foster Care Agency Seeking Permission To Consent To Child's Adoption Need Not Always Grant Child's Unwed Father Notice And Opportunity To Be Heard, Michael A. Vaccari
Fordham Urban Law Journal
This case note examines the family court's decision in In re Kenneth M., 87 Misc. 2d 295, 383 N.Y.S.2d 1005 (Family Ct. 1976) where the unwed father received neither notice of the pending adoption proceeding nor an opportunity to be heard concerning his child's best interest. The case note discusses the changes in the law as to unwed fathers, through the United States Supreme Court's decision in Stanley v. Illinois, 405 U.S. 645 (1972), holding that all parents were entitled to a hearing on their fitness before their children are removed from their custody and calling for an individualized approach. …
Pre-Trial Detainees Must Be Held Under The Least Restrictive Means Possible To Assure The Detainees' Presence At Trial. Rhem V. Malcolm, 371 F. Supp. 594, Opinion Supplemented, 377 F. Supp. 995 (S.D.N.Y.), Aff'd, 507 F.2d 333 (2d Cir. 1974)., Todd L. Klipp
Fordham Urban Law Journal
Plaintiffs, detainees at the Manhattan House of Detention for Men (MHD), more commonly known as the "Tombs," brought suit for declaratory and injunctive relief against the Commissioner of Corrections of the City of New York, the warden, the mayor, and various state officials. Plaintiffs alleged that the conditions of their detention constituted a denial of their rights under the first, fifth, sixth, eighth, and fourteenth amendments. The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York found unconstitutional conditions did exist and ordered the city to submit a plan within thirty days to remedy the constitutional infirmities. Six …
Constitutional Law-Equal Protection-Relatives' Responsibility Statutes Do Not Create A "Suspect" Classification Based On Wealth
Fordham Urban Law Journal
This note discusses Swoap v. Superior Court - a case brought by two recipients of aid to the aged and their adult children who challenged the constitutionality of two state statutes. One imposed a general duty of support on the children of parents unable to support themselves. The other gave county officials a cause of action against the children to compel contribution to the public assistance given by the state to the needy parents. The plaintiffs argued this was discrimination based on wealth class. The court concluded that it wasn't discrimination based on wealth but on percentage but why discrimination …