Law Commons^™

Federal Guilty Pleas: Inequities, Indigence And The Rule 11 Process, Julian A. Cook

Scholarly Works

In 2017 and 2018, the Supreme Court issued two little-noticed decisions—Lee v. United States and Class v. United States. While neither case captured the attention of the national media nor generated meaningful academic commentary, both cases are well deserving of critical examination for reasons independent of the issues presented to the Court. They deserve review because of a consequential shared fact; a fact representative of a commonplace, yet largely overlooked, federal court practice that routinely disadvantages the indigent (and disproportionately minority populations), and compromises the integrity of arguably the most consequential component of the federal criminal justice process. In each …

John Paul Stevens And Equally Impartial Government, Diane Marie Amann

Scholarly Works

This article is the second publication arising out of the author's ongoing research respecting Justice John Paul Stevens. It is one of several published by former law clerks and other legal experts in the UC Davis Law Review symposium edition, Volume 43, No. 3, February 2010, "The Honorable John Paul Stevens."

The article posits that Justice Stevens's embrace of race-conscious measures to ensure continued diversity stands in tension with his early rejections of affirmative action programs. The contrast suggests a linear movement toward a progressive interpretation of the Constitution’s equality guarantee; however, examination of Stevens's writings in biographical context reveal …

The Supreme Court’S Analysis Of Issues Raised By Death Penalty Litigants In The Court's 2004 Term, Richard Klein

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Does A Diverse Judiciary Attain A Rule Of Law That Is Inclusive? What Grutter V. Bollinger Has To Say About Diversity On The Bench, Sylvia R. Lazos

Scholarly Works

Race matters, but judges and courts have failed to fashion a rule of law that is inclusive of all racial perspectives and realities in the United States. The reason for this dismal performance lies in how predominantly White judges, and therefore courts, conceptualize race. This article illustrates this proposition by analyzing the Rehnquist Court's race relations jurisprudence in three Supreme Court decisions handed down in 2003: Grutter v. Bollinger,Gratz v. Bollinger,and Georgia v. Ashcroft.Even as the United States Supreme Court entered increasingly complex areas of race relations, the Court continued to apply a simplistic concept of how race functions. The …

Discrimination Cases Of The 2002 Term (Symposium: The Fifteenth Annual Supreme Court Review), Eileen Kaufman

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Race-Conscious Affirmative Action By Tax Exempt 501(C)(3) Corporations After Grutter And Gratz, David A. Brennen

Scholarly Works

Part I of this Article examines how the Equal Protection Clause limits the government's ability to engage in race-based affirmative action. Part I focuses on how constitutional law analysis has evolved in light of the Supreme Court's recent decisions in Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v. Bollinger. Part II provides a brief description of tax law's public policy limitation. This part shows how the IRS, though not required to do so, has generally followed Equal Protection Clause jurisprudence when applying the public policy limitation to race-based activity by private tax exempt 501(c)(3) institutions. Part III discusses how the Supreme …

Discrimination Cases In The 2001 Term Of The Supreme Court (Symposium: The Fourteenth Annual Supreme Court Review), Eileen Kaufman

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Discrimination Cases In The 2000 Term, Eileen Kaufman

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Affirmative Action Doctrine And The Conflicting Messages Of Croson, Doug D. Scherer

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Shelly V. Kraemer: Herald Of Social Progress And Of The Coming Debate Over The Limits Of Constitutional Change, Thomas B. Mcaffee

Scholarly Works

The Supreme Court's decision in Shelley v. Kraemer, the Supreme Court held unconstitutional judicial enforcement of racially restrictive covenants. If Shelley marks an important point in the progress of American race relations, it may be even more significant as a symbol of the vexing search for the boundaries between purely private and state action and, more specifically, the reach of the protections of the Fourteenth Amendment in a changing world. In this article, the author argues that Shelley can be read as a watershed decision that in a single stroke (1) eliminated the independent significance of the Supreme Court's long-adopted …

A Race By Any Other Name: The Interplay Between Ethnicity, National Origin And Race For Purposes Of Section 1981, Eileen R. Kaufman

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.