Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- ADEA (1)
- Abolish (1)
- Antidiscrimination law (1)
- At will employment (1)
- Breckenridge (1)
-
- Citizenship (1)
- Conspiracies (1)
- Deny (1)
- Discharge (1)
- Employee (1)
- Equal (1)
- Equality (1)
- Federal (1)
- Griffin (1)
- Immunities (1)
- LCPS_Disc (1)
- Legislation (1)
- People v. Briseno (1)
- Privileges (1)
- Prohibition (1)
- Protection (1)
- Protest (1)
- Recovery (1)
- Riot (1)
- Rodney King (1)
- Section 1985(3) (1)
- State (1)
- Substantial (1)
- Title VII (1)
- Victims (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Rethinking Civil Rights And Employment At Will: Toward A Coherent National Discharge Policy, Ann C. Mcginley
Rethinking Civil Rights And Employment At Will: Toward A Coherent National Discharge Policy, Ann C. Mcginley
Scholarly Works
America's employment discharge policy begs for reform. Although most states have created exceptions to the employment at will doctrine, the doctrine thrives. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), which bans discrimination in employment based on race, gender, color, religion, and national origin, has proved ineffective in combating employment discrimination. Despite the statutory and common law exceptions to the employment at will doctrine, today's employees may have less job security than in the past. Although I applaud the Commissioners' efforts toward achieving justice in the workplace, I believe that abolishing the employment at will doctrine through …
Whose Justice? Which Victims?, Lynne Henderson
Destructuring Disability: Rationing Of Health Care And Unfair Discrimination Against The Sick, David Orentlicher
Destructuring Disability: Rationing Of Health Care And Unfair Discrimination Against The Sick, David Orentlicher
Scholarly Works
No abstract provided.
Vindicating Rights In A Federal System: Rediscovering 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3)'S Equality Right, John Valery White
Vindicating Rights In A Federal System: Rediscovering 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3)'S Equality Right, John Valery White
Scholarly Works
Section 1985(3) is dead. The United States Supreme Court's refusal to apply § 1985(3) to the assault and intimidation of abortion seekers by abortion protesters in Bray v. Alexandria Women's Health Clinic confirmed the demise of the section, already significantly undercut by the Supreme Court's previous decisions in Great American Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Novotny and United Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners v. Scott. If Bray is troubling for the conceptual moves Justice Scalia employed to deny recovery under the section, it is more disconcerting for the apparently inconsequential resemblance of its facts to those of the case …