Law Commons^™

How Shall The Constitution Be Enforced? A Preview Of Minneci V. Pollard, John F. Preis

Law Faculty Publications

Professor Preis discusses Minneci v. Pollard, a case he argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on behalf of his client (Pollard), a federal prisoner who had brought a civil rights action for various forms of mistreatment in alleged violation of the Eighth Amendment. He outlines his and Pollard's contention that federal courts should enforce the civil rights of prisoners without regard to the availability of equivalent tort relief under state common law.

Illegal Aid: Legal Assistance To Immigrants In The United States, Geoffrey Heeren

Law Faculty Publications

There is an enormous unmet need for immigrant legal aid in the United States. This is partly due to regulations that bar federally funded legal services organizations from representing many types of immigrants. The possible repeal of these restrictions is rarely discussed as a means to expand immigrant access to counsel. Federal funding for immigrant legal aid appears to have become taboo, despite the fact that for much of its history, legal aid was deeply connected to immigration. This forgotten history reveals that there was once broad national consensus in favor of immigrant legal aid; it became contentious and faced …

Congress Needs To Repair The Court's Damage To § 1983, Ivan E. Bodensteiner

Law Faculty Publications

Today it is not unusual for a § 1983 plaintiff to establish a violation of the U.S. Constitution and resulting injuries, yet be denied damages because of the Supreme Court's misinterpretation of the 1871 statute. This anomaly is the result of several defenses created by the Court, including absolute and qualified immunity, the rejection of respondeat superior liability for municipalities, and the expansion of sovereign immunity, based, in part, on a misinterpretation of the Eleventh Amendment. Several other rulings of the Court narrow the circumstances under which private parties are subject to § 1983 liability, refuse to exempt § 1983 …

In Loco Parentis In The Public Schools: Abused, Confused, And In Need Of Change, Susan P. Stuart

Law Faculty Publications

In loco parentis is a common law doctrine that has been used to characterize the on-campus relationship between a school and its students, but its abuse has led to such absurd cases as Safford Unified School District No.1 v. Redding. Although waning in higher education, the doctrine is experiencing a resurgence in elementary and secondary schools. As originally conceived, the doctrine was used primarily to justify and defend student disciplinary actions: the school stood in the shoes of the parent and had authority to discipline, almost at will. The doctrine, however, never seemed to have a corollary in the …

Clear As Mud: How The Uncertain Precedential Status Of Unpublished Opinions Muddles Qualified Immunity Determinations, David R. Cleveland

Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Misinterpreting "Sounds Of Silence": Why Courts Should Not "Imply" Congressional Preclusion Of § 1983 Constitutional Claims, Rosalie Berger Levinson

Law Faculty Publications

Despite the clear text of 42 U.S.C. § 1983, its promise to protect constitutional rights has been obfuscated by the theory that Congress, by enacting civil rights laws, has “impliedly” foreclosed the historic use of § 1983 to vindicate constitutional wrongdoing. Increasingly, plaintiffs are being denied their right to vindicate constitutional wrongdoing, either because the new “preempting” federal statute does not trigger individual liability or because it makes institutional liability more difficult to establish.

It is counterintuitive to believe that Congress, in an attempt to expand equality or due process, intended to cut off existing remedies for constitutional violations. Nonetheless, …

Civil Rights Act Of 1964, Henry L. Chambers, Jr.

Law Faculty Publications

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S. C.A.) (the 19 Act) likely has had the greatest transformative effect on American society of any single law. By prohibiting discrimination based on race, color, sex, religion, a national origin in places of public accommodation, in federally assisted programs, in employment, in schools and with respect to voting rights, this massive law has had profound effects on almost every facet of American society.

Review Of David E. Bernstein's "You Can't Say That!--The Growing Threat To Civil Liberties From Antidiscrimination Laws", Ivan E. Bodensteiner

Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Jack And Jill Go To Court: Litigating A Peer Sexual Harassment Case Under Title Ix, Susan P. Stuart

Law Faculty Publications

Title IX peer sexual harassment cases present challenges to litigators because of the unique educational environment in which these cases arise. This Article attempts to educate litigators on the prima facie case, evidentiary issues, and the overall presentation of peer sexual harassment cases.

Mediation And The Americans With Disabilities Act, Ann C. Hodges

Law Faculty Publications

This Article will analyze the potential uses of mediation in ADA disputes, focusing primarily on employment issues. Part II of the Article provides a description and analysis of the mediation process. Part III provides an overview of the ADA. Part IV examines the dispute resolution provisions of the ADA and both the current and proposed uses of alternative dispute resolution. Finally, Part V analyzes the use of mediation in ADA cases and recommends appropriate uses of mediation that will effectuate the purpose of the statute.

Civil Rights Plaintiffs And The Proposed Revision Of Rule 11, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

The 1983 amendment of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 has been the most controversial revision of the Federal Rules in their fifty-five-year history, and Rule l l's implementation has been most controversial in civil rights cases. Rule ll's application has disadvantaged civil rights plaintiffs more than any other category of civil litigant. Courts have found civil rights plaintiffs in violation of Rule 11 at a higher rate than other types of plaintiffs and have imposed substantial sanctions on them. Civil rights plaintiffs have been required to participate in expensive, unnecessary satellite litigation involving this provision. Indeed, a new study …

Rule 11 And Civil Rights Litigation, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

The recent amendment of rule 11 may well have engendered more controversy than any other revision since the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure were first promulgated one-half century ago. The new version essentially requires that judges impose sanctions on lawyers and parties who fail to conduct reasonable inquiries before filing court papers. The amendment's adoption was prompted by increasing concern about abuse of the litigation process and about the "litigation explosion" -the perception that unprecedented numbers of civil cases were being filed and that too many lacked merit. Proponents have hailed the revised rule as the savior of the civil …