Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Access to the courts (2)
- Discrimination (2)
- Federal courts (2)
- Grievance procedures (2)
- Injunctions (2)
-
- Lawsuits (2)
- Prison Litigation Reform Act (2)
- Prison conditions (2)
- Prisoners (2)
- Prisons (2)
- Statistics (2)
- Americans with Disabilities Act (1)
- Burdens (1)
- Capital punishment (1)
- Congress (1)
- Constitutional violations (1)
- Deference to states (1)
- Disabilities (1)
- Electoral restrictions (1)
- Judicial review (1)
- Lawyers (1)
- Legislative intent (1)
- Marriage equality (1)
- Pennsylvania (1)
- Plaintiffs (1)
- Postconviction proceedings (1)
- Postconviction relief (1)
- Public defenders (1)
- Racial disparities (1)
- Remediation (1)
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Officiating Removal, Leah Litman
Officiating Removal, Leah Litman
Articles
For the last several years, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has quietly attempted to curtail capital defendants' representation in state postconviction proceedings. In 2011, various justices on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court began to call for federally funded community defender organizations to stop representing capital defendants in state postconviction proceedings. The justices argued, among other things, that the organizations' representation of capital defendants constituted impermissible federal interference with state governmental processes and burdened state judicial resources. The court also alleged the community defender organizations were in violation of federal statutes, which only authorized the organizations to assist state prisoners in federal, but …
What The Marriage Equality Cases Tell Us About Voter Id, Ellen D. Katz
What The Marriage Equality Cases Tell Us About Voter Id, Ellen D. Katz
Articles
Two years ago, United States u. Windsor tossed out the Defense of Marriage Act ("DOMA"). Thereafter, proponents of marriage equality secured dozens of notable victories in the lower courts, a smattering of setbacks, and last June, the victory they sought in Obergefell v. Hodges. During this same period, opponents of electoral restrictions such as voter identification have seen far less sustained success. Decided the day before Windsor, Shelby County v. Holder scrapped a key provision of the Voting Rights Act ("VRA") while making clear that plaintiffs might still challenge disputed voting regulations under Section 2 of the VRA and the …
Prisoners' Rights Lawyers' Strategies For Preserving The Role Of The Courts, Margo Schlanger
Prisoners' Rights Lawyers' Strategies For Preserving The Role Of The Courts, Margo Schlanger
Articles
This Article is part of the University of Miami Law Review’s Leading from Below Symposium. It canvasses prisoners’ lawyers’ strategies prompted by the 1996 Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”). The strategies comply with the statute’s limits yet also allow U.S. district courts to remain a forum for the vindication of the constitutional rights of at least some of the nation’s millions of prisoners. After Part I’s introduction, Part II summarizes in several charts the PLRA’s sharp impact on the prevalence and outcomes of prison litigation, but demonstrates that there are still many cases and situations in which courts continue to …
Trends In Prisoner Litigation, As The Plra Enters Adulthood, Margo Schlanger
Trends In Prisoner Litigation, As The Plra Enters Adulthood, Margo Schlanger
Articles
The Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA), enacted in 1996 as part of the Newt Gingrich "Contract with America," is now as old as some prisoners. In the year after the statute's passage, some commenters labeled it merely "symbolic." In fact, as was evident nearly immediately, the PLRA undermined prisoners' ability to bring, settle, and win lawsuits. The PLRA conditioned court access on prisoners' meticulously correct prior use of onerous and error-inviting prison grievance procedures. It increased filing fees, decreased attorneys' fees, and limited damages. It subjected injunctive settlements to the scope limitations usually applicable only to litigated injunctions. It made …
The Ada And The Supreme Court: A Mixed Record, Samuel R. Bagenstos
The Ada And The Supreme Court: A Mixed Record, Samuel R. Bagenstos
Articles
According to conventional wisdom, the Supreme Court has resisted the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) at every turn. The Court, the story goes, has read the statute extremely narrowly and, as a result, stripped away key protections that Congress intended to provide. Its departure from congressional intent, indeed, was so extreme that Congress passed a statute that overturned several key decisions and codified broad statutory protections. That statute, the ADA Amendments Act of 2008 (ADAAA). passed with widespread bipartisan support, and President George W. Bush signed it into law. The conventional wisdom leaves out a major part of the story. …