Law Commons^™

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 Despite being qualified for the position, Jones would later have her offer rescinded because of her hair.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 …

Bundle Of Joy: Why Same-Sex Married Couples Have A Constitutional Right To Enter Into Gestational Surrogacy Agreements, Benjamin H. Berman

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Obscenity - Liquor Regulations; California V. Larue, Richard Bernstein

Akron Law Review

The state has the power to regulate the distribution of liquor and enforce health and safety regulations, but the state may not broadly stifle First Amendment freedoms when doing so. "The breath of legislative abridgement must be viewed in the light of less drastic means for achieving the same basic purpose." s The Court has consistently held that only a compelling state interest in the regulation of a subject within the state's constitutional power to regulate can justify limiting First Amendment freedoms.

First Amendment; Freedom Of Speech; Obscenity; Pinkus V. United States, Cary Douglass Caesa

Akron Law Review

“In its latest attempt to define a workable standard for obscenity rulings, the United States Supreme Court has held that children may not be included in a court's instruction as to the social group to whom the material would or would not be obscene. However, the Court held that sensitive persons and deviant groups may be included without unduly lowering the threshold of a finding of obscenity. Thus, Pinkus v. United States clarified the "community" whose judgment should define obscenity.”

Privacy, Jed Rubenfeld

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Benign Sex Discrimination Revisited: Constitutional And Moral Issues In Banning Sex-Selection Abortion , George Schedler

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

National Report: Turkey, Başak Başoğlu, Candan Yasan

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

No abstract provided.

Resolving Conflicts Of Constitution: Inside The Dominican Republic's Constitutional Ban On Abortion, Mia So

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Lochner, Lawrence, And Liberty, Joseph F. Morrissey

Georgia State University Law Review

Many of the states of the United States have statutes, constitutional provisions, and court decisions that deny individuals the right to have a family, specifically a spouse and children, based on sexual orientation.

Advocates have made a wide variety of arguments attacking such restrictions. Scholars and litigants frequently argue that such acts violate constitutional guarantees of equal protection or invade a constitutional right to privacy. However, such arguments are often defeated by counter arguments presented with religious, moral, and even emotional fervor.

This article presents and defends a new analytical framework based on liberty of contract to advance gay rights. …

Ex Post Facto Laws: Supreme Court New York County People V. Griffin (Decided December 5, 1996

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Preventing Sexual Violence: Setting Principled Constitutional Boundaries On Sex Offender Commitments, Eric S. Janus

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.