Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication
-
- University of San Diego Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series (2)
- Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals (1)
- George Mason University School of Law Working Papers Series (1)
- Rutgers Law School (Newark) Faculty Papers (1)
- The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law Working Paper Series (1)
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
Constitutional Adjudication, Civil Rights, And Social Change, Suzanne B. Goldberg
Constitutional Adjudication, Civil Rights, And Social Change, Suzanne B. Goldberg
Rutgers Law School (Newark) Faculty Papers
Judicial opinions typically rely on “facts” about a social group to justify or reject limitations on group members’ rights, especially when traditional views about the status or capacity of group members are in contest. Yet the fact-based approach to decision-making obscures the normative judgments that actually determine whether restrictions on individual rights are reasonable. This article offers an account of how and why courts intervene in social conflicts by focusing on facts rather than declaring norms. In part, it argues that this approach preserves judicial power to retain traditional justifications for restricting group members’ rights in some settings but not …
Bolling, Equal Protection, Due Process, And Lochnerphobia, David E. Bernstein
Bolling, Equal Protection, Due Process, And Lochnerphobia, David E. Bernstein
George Mason University School of Law Working Papers Series
In Brown v. Board of Education, the United States Supreme Court invalidated state and local school segregation laws as a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. That same day, in Bolling v. Sharpe, the Court held unconstitutional de jure segregation in Washington, D.C.'s public schools under the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause. Fifty years after it was decided, Bolling remains one of the Warren Court's most controversial decisions.
The controversy reflects the widespread belief that the outcome in Bolling reflected the Justices' political preferences and was not a sound interpretation of the Due Process Clause. The Bolling Court …
Dickerson V. United States: The Case That Disappointed Miranda's Critics--And Then Its Supporters, Yale Kamisar
Dickerson V. United States: The Case That Disappointed Miranda's Critics--And Then Its Supporters, Yale Kamisar
University of San Diego Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series
It is difficult, if not impossible, to discuss Dickerson v. United States intelligently without discussing Miranda, whose constitutional status Dickerson reaffirmed (or, one might say, resuscitated). It is also difficult, if not impossible, to discuss the Dickerson case intelligently without discussing cases the Court has handed down in the five years since Dickerson was decided. The hard truth is that in those five years the reaffirmation of Miranda’s constitutional status has become less and less meaningful.
In this paper I want to focus on the Court’s characterization of statements elicited in violation of the Miranda warnings as not actually “coerced” …
Pursuing Justice For The Mentally Disabled, Grant H. Morris
Pursuing Justice For The Mentally Disabled, Grant H. Morris
University of San Diego Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series
This article considers whether lawyers act as zealous advocates when they represent mentally disordered, involuntarily committed patients who wish to assert their right to refuse treatment with psychotropic medication. After discussing a study that clearly demonstrates that lawyers do not do so, the article explores the reasons for this inappropriate behavior. Michael Perlin characterizes the problem as “sanism,” which he describes as an irrational prejudice against mentally disabled persons of the same quality and character as other irrational prejudices that cause and are reflected in prevailing social attitudes of racism, sexism, homophobia, and ethnic bigotry. The article critiques Perlin’s characterization …
The Disability Integration Presumption: Thirty Years Later, Ruth Colker
The Disability Integration Presumption: Thirty Years Later, Ruth Colker
The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law Working Paper Series
The fiftieth anniversary of the Brown v. Board of Education decision has spurred a lively debate about the merits of “integration.” This article brings that debate to a new context – the integration presumption under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”). The IDEA has contained an “integration presumption” for more than thirty years under which school districts should presumptively educate disabled children with children who are not disabled in a fully inclusive educational environment. This article traces the history of this presumption and argues that it was borrowed from the racial civil rights movement without any empirical justification. In …
True Integration: Advancing Brown's Goal Of Educational Equity In The Wake Of Grutter, Lia Epperson
True Integration: Advancing Brown's Goal Of Educational Equity In The Wake Of Grutter, Lia Epperson
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
No abstract provided.