Law Commons^™

Once We’Re Done Honeymooning: Marriage Equality, Incrementalism, And Advances For Sexual Orientation Antidiscrimination, Jeremiah A. Ho

Jeremiah A Ho

Once We’re Done Honeymooning: Marriage Equality, Incrementalism, and Advances for Sexual Orientation Antidiscrimination

Abstract

Following the Supreme Court’s decision in U.S. v. Windsor, each recent victory in the federal courts has evidenced that the legal recognition of same-sex marriages in the U.S. is becoming increasingly secure. Yet, can marriage equality be the last stop in the pro-LGBT movement, or should we expect sexual minorities to advance in other legal arenas? Should we expect that the recent strides in marriage equality can somehow leverage broader protections of LGBT individuals beyond their marital relationships?

This article begins from the perspective that …

"That Gear Stick Is Not Your Husband's P----." Why The Dissent In Vance V. Ball State University Got It Right, And A Comparison Of The Law Of Employer Vicarious Liability For Sexual Harassment In The United States And South Africa, Justin A. Behravesh

Justin A. Behravesh

This article provides unique critical analysis of the United States Supreme Court's June 2013 decision of Vance v. Ball State University, by comparing that decision to recent South African common law and statutory developments. I argue that Vance's redefinition of what constitutes a "supervisor" for purposes of vicarious liability will have devastating effect on working women in the United States. Ultimately using South African law as a model framework, I conclude that the factors that should trigger vicarious liability should be based on policy concerns, not arbitrary definitions of what constitutes a "supervisor."

Antidiscrimination Law And The Multiracial Experience: A Reply To Nancy Leong, Tina F. Botts J.D., Ph.D.

Tina F Botts J.D., Ph.D.

Nancy Leong’s thesis, in “Judicial Erasure of Mixed-Race Discrimination,” is that antidiscrimination law should make a switch from defining race “categorically” to defining it in terms of the perception of the would-be discriminator so as to better accommodate claims of multiracial discrimination and so as to better achieve what Leong sees as the goals of antidiscrimination law, i.e., the promotion of racial understanding, and the elimination of racism and racial discrimination. But, while Leong’s goals are admirable, the method she proposes for achieving these goals will not succeed. Antidiscrimination law cannot operate to promote racial understanding, or to eliminate racism …

Reasonable Men, Ann Mcginley

Ann McGinley

Abstract

REASONABLE MEN

Ann C. McGinley

After the Supreme Court recognized sexual harassment as a form of sex discrimination under Title VII in Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson, lower courts used the reasonable person standard to measure whether the behavior was sufficiently severe or pervasive to constitute a hostile working environment. Cultural and radical feminists objected to the reasonable person measure, and many supported a reasonable woman standard, which the Ninth Circuit adopted in Ellison v. Brady. Because of its tendency to essentialize how women would react, many feminists soon abandoned their support for the standard. A number of circuits, …

Reasonable Men, Ann Mcginley

Ann McGinley

Abstract

REASONABLE MEN

Ann C. McGinley

After the Supreme Court recognized sexual harassment as a form of sex discrimination under Title VII in Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson, lower courts used the reasonable person standard to measure whether the behavior was sufficiently severe or pervasive to constitute a hostile working environment. Cultural and radical feminists objected to the reasonable person measure, and many supported a reasonable woman standard, which the Ninth Circuit adopted in Ellison v. Brady. Because of its tendency to essentialize how women would react, many feminists soon abandoned their support for the standard. A number of circuits, …

The Sex Stereotyping Prohibition At Work, Kimberly A. Yuracko

Kimberly Yuracko

In 1989 the Supreme Court in Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins declared that sex stereotyping was a prohibited from of sex discrimination at work. This seemingly simple declaration has been the most important development in sex discrimination jurisprudence since the passage of Title VII. It has been used to extend the Act’s coverage and protect groups that were previously excluded. Astonishingly, however, the contours, dimensions and requirements of the prohibition have never been clearly articulated by courts or scholars. In this paper I evaluate four interpretations of what the sex stereotyping prohibition might mean in order to determine what it actually …

Multi-National Corporations Closing The Borders For Female Professionals: Should Gender Discrimination Be Allowed For Expatriation Assignments Under Title Vii Law?, Allie C. Tucker

Allie C Tucker

While women currently make up significant proportions of the work force in many occupations, their presence remains lacking in upper management. In today’s globalizing economy international experience has become increasingly important for promotions in multi-national corporations but is simultaneously being denied to women due to speculations about gender discrimination in other nations. Evidence suggests that women are being sent on expatriation assignments far less than men, but Title VII case law has yet to directly address the issue. In the absence of such direction, MNCs should proceed with a fact-dependent analysis that balances the interests of the corporation with gender …

Hostile Educational Environments: On The Apparent First Amendment Barrier To Cyberbullying Punishments, Ari E. Waldman

Ari E Waldman

This Article is one in a series about bullying and cyberbullying in schools. I argue that the proper analysis for a First Amendment challenge to school discipline for off-campus misuse of the Internet to harm or offend a member of the school community depends on the nature of the offending behavior. For students who are punished for a single incident – what I will call cyberattacking – a Tinker analysis makes sense. Except in extraordinary circumstances, the First Amendment should immunize these single-incident attackers from punishment. For students who engage in a pattern of repeated incidents of cyberattacking – what …