Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Promoting Change In The Face Of Retrenchment, Marcia Mccormick
Promoting Change In The Face Of Retrenchment, Marcia Mccormick
FIU Law Review
This article delves into the challenges of teaching antidiscrimination law and the complexities students face in reconciling legal doctrines with their expectations of justice. It explores the persistent inequalities embedded in wage gaps, labor market segregation, and more, highlighting the transformative potential of addressing stereotypes. Professor Kerry Stone's book, "Panes of the Glass Ceiling," is lauded for unveiling deeply ingrained cultural assumptions, offering tools to challenge them. The article reflects on hidden assumptions exposed in Stone's work and discusses the ideological pushback against education aimed at revealing and dismantling stereotypes. It concludes with a call for a nuanced understanding of …
Why Arkansas Act 710 Was Upheld, And Will Be Again, Mark Goldfeder
Why Arkansas Act 710 Was Upheld, And Will Be Again, Mark Goldfeder
Arkansas Law Review
A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes. - ironically, not Mark Twain The recent Eighth Circuit ruling in Arkansas Times LP v. Waldrip, the lawsuit revolving around an Arkansas antidiscrimination bill, has led to a lot of (at best) confusion or (at worst) purposeful obfuscation by people unwilling or unable to differentiate between procedural issues and the constitutional merits of a case. In other words, reports of the bill’s death have been very much exaggerated.
Lonely Libertarian: One Man's View Of Antidiscrimination Law, Lea Brilmayer
Lonely Libertarian: One Man's View Of Antidiscrimination Law, Lea Brilmayer
San Diego Law Review
In his book Forbidden Grounds: The Case Against Employment Discrimination Laws, Richard Epstein attacks antidiscrimination law from three different philosophical points of view: utilitarian, libertarian, and freedom of contract. The author of this Article addresses each of these philosophies, and argues that none of these arguments is compelling as applied to a legal regime as popular as Epstein admits core antidiscrimination law to be. This Article points out inconsistencies in Epstein's view of the public's acceptance of antidiscrimination laws as being silly.