Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Disability, Universalism, Social Rights, And Citizenship, Samuel R. Bagenstos
Disability, Universalism, Social Rights, And Citizenship, Samuel R. Bagenstos
Articles
The 2016 election has had significant consequences for American social welfare policy. Some of these consequences are direct. By giving unified control of the federal government to the Republican Party for the first time in a decade, the election has potentially empowered conservatives to ram through a bill to repeal the Affordable Care Act—the landmark “Obamacare” law that marked the most significant expansion of the social welfare state since the 1960s. Other consequences are more indirect. Both the election result itself, and Republicans’ actions since, have spurred a renewed debate within the left-liberal coalition regarding the politics of social welfare …
Whatever Happened To G.I. Jane?: Citizenship, Gender, And Social Policy In The Postwar Era, Melissa E. Murray
Whatever Happened To G.I. Jane?: Citizenship, Gender, And Social Policy In The Postwar Era, Melissa E. Murray
Michigan Journal of Gender & Law
In this Article, it is argued that the GI Bill is consistent with the social welfare policies of the New Deal period, in particular the Social Security Act of 1935, and so should be examined within the analytical framework established by scholars like Linda Gordon and Theda Skocpol in their studies of the Social Security Act's social welfare programs. Although the Bill is gender-neutral on its face, it was framed by normative assumptions about military participation and work that ensured that it was socially understood to benefit male veterans.
Dependency In The Welfare State: Beyond The Due Process Vision, Richard O. Lempert
Dependency In The Welfare State: Beyond The Due Process Vision, Richard O. Lempert
Reviews
The due process revolution has failed. Never mind that this verdict is an oversimplified exaggeration. It is closer to the truth than its opposite. Giving powerless, dependent, poor people property interests in their welfare benefits and the right to call those who exercise discretion over them legally into account does not magically cure the poverty, powerlessness, or dependency that motivated the extension of rights in the first instance. The optimistic view of legality that motivated much of the social activism of the late sixties and early seventies inevitably gives way before the reality of being poor.