Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Series

2003

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

Congressional intent

Articles 1 - 2 of 2

Full-Text Articles in Law

Suing Under §1983: The Future After Gonzaga V. Doe, Bradford Mank Jan 2003

Suing Under §1983: The Future After Gonzaga V. Doe, Bradford Mank

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

In 2002, the Supreme Court in Gonzaga University v. Doe held that the nondisclosure provisions of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) did not establish an individual right enforceable through 42 U.S.C. §1983. Chief Justice Rehnquist's requirement of clear and unambiguous proof that Congress intended to establish an individual right on behalf of a class including the plaintiff placed an additional burden on plaintiffs by effectively demanding proof that Congress would have wanted thousands of private suits. The requirement eroded the Court's precedent emphasizing the presumptive enforcement of federal statutory rights through §1983. This Article will focus on …


Are Title Vi's Disparate Impact Regulations Valid?, Bradford Mank Jan 2003

Are Title Vi's Disparate Impact Regulations Valid?, Bradford Mank

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

This Essay, however, contends that section 602 disparate impact regulations in Tide VI are valid because Congress has implicitly sanctioned their creation, and explicitly approved them in subsequent related statutes.

Part II of this Essay discusses the legislative history of Tide VI, which suggests that Congress intended to give administrative agencies discretion to define "discrimination" in their Tide VI regulations as prohibiting either intentional conduct or actions having disparate impacts against racial minorities as long as the President approved such rules.

Part III illustrates that five different Congresses have enacted four subsequent related statutes that explicitly incorporate Tide VI disparate …