Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 11 of 11
Full-Text Articles in Law
Hair Me Out: Why Discrimination Against Black Hair Is Race Discrimination Under Title Vii, Alexis Boyd
Hair Me Out: Why Discrimination Against Black Hair Is Race Discrimination Under Title Vii, Alexis Boyd
American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law
In May 2010, Chastity Jones sought employment as a customer service representative at Catastrophe Management Solutions (“CMS”), a claims processing company located in Mobile, Alabama. When asked for an inperson interview, Jones, a Black woman, arrived in a suit and her hair in “short dreadlocks,” or locs, a type of natural hairstyle common in the Black community. Despite being qualified for the position, Jones would later have her offer rescinded because of her hair. CMS claimed that locs “tend to get messy” and violated the “neutral” dress code and hair policy requiring employees to be “professional and business-like.” Therefore, CMS …
Panel 2 - Unreported Shortcomings Of Title Ix, Lisa Taylor, Leslie Annexstein, Elizabeth Kristein, Natasha Martin, Elizabeth Kristen
Panel 2 - Unreported Shortcomings Of Title Ix, Lisa Taylor, Leslie Annexstein, Elizabeth Kristein, Natasha Martin, Elizabeth Kristen
American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law
MODERATOR: Hello, everyone, and welcome to our second panel, Unreported Shortcomings of Title IX. I’m going to start off with a quick introduction of our moderator. Today we have Dean Lisa Taylor who is our Dean for Diversity, Inclusion and Affinity Relations at WCL. She is much beloved by students of the Journal and students of WCL in general. And I know she is going to kick off a great panel. Dean Taylor, it’s all yours.
Exposing Sedated Legal Responses To Non-Consensual Pelvic Exams Under Anesthesia, Ashleigh Austel
Exposing Sedated Legal Responses To Non-Consensual Pelvic Exams Under Anesthesia, Ashleigh Austel
American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law
When Ashley Weitz, a woman from Utah, underwent sedation for treatment of vomiting, the last thing she expected was to wake up in the middle of an invasive pelvic exam that she did not consent to. The doctor informed her he was collecting a sample to test for sexually transmitted diseases, but the doctor had previously determined a pelvic exam was unnecessary. Reflecting on the experience, Ashley said, “in any other setting, someone putting their fingers into my vagina without my consent is assault. I did not consent to this exam, and he did it anyway.”
The Revolution Will Not Be Moderated: Examining Florida And Texas's Attempts To Prohibit Social Media Content Moderation, Caroline Jones
The Revolution Will Not Be Moderated: Examining Florida And Texas's Attempts To Prohibit Social Media Content Moderation, Caroline Jones
American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law
Today, around seventy percent of American citizens actively use social media for news content, entertainment, and social engagement. Since 2005, the number of Americans using social media in some capacity has increased 13 fold from five to sixty-five percent. Despite numerous studies demonstrating a correlation between social media rhetoric and real-world violence against women, racial and ethnic minority communities, and the LGBTQIA community, both Florida and Texas passed bills limiting the ways in which social media sites can moderate the content and users on their platforms in 2021. Florida’s Senate Bill 7072 requires social media platforms to allow political candidates …
The Battle Over Bostock: Dueling Presidential Administrations & The Need For Consistent And Reliable Lgbt Rights, Regina L. Hillman
The Battle Over Bostock: Dueling Presidential Administrations & The Need For Consistent And Reliable Lgbt Rights, Regina L. Hillman
American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law
In the summer of 2020, the Supreme Court released its opinion in the landmark civil rights case, Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia. In the Bostock decision, the Court held that protections from employment discrimination “because of sex” under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”) include discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. Prior to the Court’s decision, millions of LGBT employees had no protection from discriminatory treatment based on sexual orientation or gender identity, and discrimination was pervasive.
Principle Originalism--The Third Way: A Jurisprudential Response To Dobbs V. Jackson Women's Health Organization, Ryan Fortson
Principle Originalism--The Third Way: A Jurisprudential Response To Dobbs V. Jackson Women's Health Organization, Ryan Fortson
American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law
All judges attempt to decide cases for reasons other than politics or their own personal opinions. But finding a consistent judicial methodology is fraught with peril. Against what it sees as the hyper-textualism of strict constructionism and the unfettered discretion of living constitutionalism, originalism posits itself as the only viable way to achieve an objectively neutral interpretation of the law. This is certainly the stance taken by the majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which claims that the Constitution is silent on abortion and that therefore no corresponding right to abortion exists. But there can be different …
Civil Rights In The Workplace: It's Time To Cut The Excess And Get To The Truth, Hnin N. Khaing
Civil Rights In The Workplace: It's Time To Cut The Excess And Get To The Truth, Hnin N. Khaing
American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law
On February 8, 1964, during the last few hours before the enactment of the Civil Rights Act, thanks to an individual described as a “racist, male octogenarian,” Congress haphazardly added “sex” as a prohibited basis for discrimination alongside race, color, religion, and national origin under Title VII1 of the Act. It was not until two decades later, in 1986, that the Supreme Court recognized sexual harassment as a form of sex discrimination under Title VII. Five years later, Anita Hill’s riveting public testimony, during the nomination hearings for Justice Clarence Thomas, ignited a nationwide discussion on sexual harassment. A quarter …
Denouncing The Revival Of Pre-Roe V. Wade Abortion Bans In A Post-Dobbs World Through The Void Ab Initio And Presumption Of Validity Doctrines, Nora Greene
American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law
The United States Supreme Court voted to overturn Roe v. Wade in a leaked draft of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. Written by Justice Alito and joined by four of the other conservative justices, the decision describes Roe as “egregiously wrong from the start” and blatantly overrules the landmark holding and its prodigy, Planned Parenthood v. Casey. In their state codes, nine states—Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas Michigan, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Texas, West Virginia, and Wisconsin— have unrepealed criminal abortion bans enacted before Roe. These bans prohibit abortion at any point in pregnancy unless to preserve the life of the pregnant person …
Movie Review: Vincent Who?, Yeon Me Kim
Legal Inversions: Lesbians, Gay Men, And The Politics Of Law, Peter Kwan
Legal Inversions: Lesbians, Gay Men, And The Politics Of Law, Peter Kwan
American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law
No abstract provided.
Proving Discrimination After Price Waterhouse And Wards Cove, Candace Kovacic-Fleischer
Proving Discrimination After Price Waterhouse And Wards Cove, Candace Kovacic-Fleischer
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
INTRODUCTION Anyone involved in litigation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 19641 or similar state statutes may wonder what is entailed in proving or disproving discrimination after the United States Supreme Court's October 1988 Term. In fact, in the pending Civil Rights Act of 1990, Congress is considering reversing some of what the Supreme Court did during that Term. One of the issues that the Supreme Court addressed during the 1988 Term involved allocating burdens of proof in two major types of Title VII claims, dis- parate-treatment and disparate-impact. Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, dealt with a disparate-treatment …