Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons^™

Proposition 8 Is Unconstitutional, But Not Because The Ninth Circuit Said So: The Equal Protection Clause Does Not Support A Legal Distinction Between Denying The Right To Same-Sex Marriage And Not Providing It In The First Place, Nathan Rouse

Seattle University Law Review

In Perry v. Brown, the Ninth Circuit held that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional. But in doing so, the court stepped back from the breadth of the district court’s decision. The Ninth Circuit did not address whether same-sex marriage is a fundamental constitutional right. Nor did the Ninth Circuit address whether the Equal Protection Clause categorically prevents states from limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples. Instead, the Ninth Circuit reached the narrow conclusion that Proposition 8 violates the Equal Protection Clause because it withdrew a preexisting legal right from a marginalized group without any legitimate purpose. The Ninth Circuit should have held …

Is "Different But Equal" The New "Separate But Equal"? Nclb's Single-Sex Schooling Option Signals New Horizons For Some While Challenging Equal Education Convictions For Others , Elaine Ekpo

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Let Me Count The Ways: The Unconstitutionality Of Same-Sex-Marriage Bans, Mark Strasser

Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law

No abstract provided.

The Meaning And Good Of Equality: Toward Enhanced Constitutional Principles, Scott Fitzgibbon

Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Amici Curiae Professors Nan D. Hunter, Et Al., Addressing The Merits In Support Of Respondents, Nan D. Hunter, Suzanne B. Goldberg

U.S. Supreme Court Briefs

In this amicus brief filed in United States v. Windsor, pending before the Supreme Court, amici constitutional law professors argue that all classifications that carry the indicia of invidiousness should trigger a more searching inquiry than the traditional rational basis test under the Equal Protection Clause would suggest. Classifications that already receive heightened scrutiny, such as race or sex, fit easily into this approach. But the Court’s equal protection jurisprudence has become muddied in a series of cases in which it says rational basis review, but appears to do a more rigorous review. Sexual orientation classifications seemingly were analyzed …

Religions As Sovereigns: Why Religion Is "Special", Elizabeth Clark

Faculty Scholarship

Commentators increasingly challenge religion’s privileged legal status, arguing that it is not “special” or distinct from other associations or philosophical or conscientious claims. I propose that religion is “special” because it functions metaphorically as a legal sovereign, asserting supreme authority over a realm of human life. Under a religion-as-sovereign theory, religious freedom can be understood as at least partial deference to a religious sovereign in a system of shared or overlapping sovereignty. This Article suggests that federalism, which also involves shared sovereignty, can provide a useful heuristic device for examining religious freedom. Specifically, the Article examines a range of federalism …

Harris V. Mcrae: Whatever Happened To The Roe V. Wade Abortion Right?, Laura Crocker

Pepperdine Law Review

The controversial Roe v. Wade decision purportedly removed the abortion controversy from the political arena and set constitutional standards by which questions on the issue could be resolved. The enactment of the Hyde Amendment, a bill which generally forbids the use of Medicaid funds for abortions, was a recent political response to the abortion controversy. However, in the recent case of Harris v. McRae, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Hyde Amendment and thus injected the abortion controversy back into the political arena. The author exhaustively examines the abortion controversy from the time of the Roe decision up …

Wengler V. Druggists' Mutual Insurance Company: No More Skirting The Issue Of Sex Discrimination In Workers' Compensation Dependency Statutes, Teresa A. Saggese, Lawson A. Cox Ii

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Rostker V. Goldberg: A Step Backward In Equal Protection, Or A Justifiable Affirmation Of Congressional Power?, Gilbert L. Purcell, Janet Rappaport

Pepperdine Law Review

The Supreme Court in Rostker v. Goldberg upheld a Congressional decision which excluded women from registration for service in the Armed Forces of the United States. Although the case was brought based upon equal protection grounds, the majority took a separation of powers stance and based its decision upon the fact that the Court has traditionally granted deference to the decisions of Congress in the area of military affairs. The minority opinions disagreed with the majority's analysis and claimed that the central issue in Rostker was not military in nature, but was that Congress' plan to register males only, promoted …

Justice Stevens And The Emerging Law Of Sex Discrimination , John P. Wagner

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Supreme Court Continues Its Journey Down The Ever Narrowing Paths Of Section 1983 And The Due Process Clause: An Analysis Of Parratt V. Taylor, Robert E. Palmer

Pepperdine Law Review

After nearly a century of quiet slumber, the Supreme Court awoke the sleeping giant. In the past two decades, 42 U.S.C. §1983 has evolved into a judicial Frankenstein monster. Unable to control the beast, the Court has attempted to restrict the creature's movements by unnecessarily limiting its constitutional source. If followed to its logical conclusion, the Court's narrow reading of the Constitution may ultimately demote all due process violations to state tort remedies. This note traces the legislative and judicial evolution of section 1983 as well as the statute's present interaction with the due process clause. The vehicle for this …

Religion And First Amendment Prosecutions: An Analysis Of Justice Black's Constitutional Interpretation, Constance Mauney

Pepperdine Law Review

Justice Hugo L. Black served on the United States Supreme Court over a period of thirty-four years, encompassing Supreme Court terms from 1937 to 1971. During this period, the subject of the constitutional limitations of the freedom of religion was increasingly subjected to intense social pressures. Justice Black figured prominently in the development of constitutional law as the Supreme Court attempted to give meaning to the establishment and free exercise clause of the first amendment. He wrote the majority opinions which dealt with the establishment clause in the Everson, McCulloin, Engel and Torcaso cases. Yet, on later occasions, Justice Black …

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission V. Wyoming: Appomattox Courthouse Revisited , Richard M. Stephens

Pepperdine Law Review

A highly divided Court again addressed the relatively new doctrine in constitutional law: state exemption from federal regulations due to the concept of federalism. Although the Court applied the tests from National League of Cities v. Usury and its progeny, the Court reached a different result which, without expressly overruling that controversial case, severely limited National League of Cities to its facts. The hope of modern states' rights advocates proved to be short lived.

Reinforcement Of Middle Level Review Regarding Gender Classifications: Mississippi University For Women V. Hogan , Mary Ellen Shull

Pepperdine Law Review

In Mississippi University for Women v. Hogan, the United States Supreme Court was presented with an equal protection challenge initiated by a male who was denied admission to a state-supported all-female school of nursing. After a review of relevant decisions in this area, the author examines the Supreme Court's intermediate level of scrutiny analysis and argues that application of a higher level of scrutiny to gender-based classifications is a prerequisite to true equality between the sexes.

Civil Rights, Charter Schools, And Lessons To Be Learned, Derek W. Black

Florida Law Review

Two major structural shifts have occurred in education reform in the past two decades: the decline of civil rights reforms and the rise of charter schools. Courts and policy makers have relegated traditional civil rights reforms that address segregation, poverty, disability, and language barriers to near irrelevance, while charter schools and policies supporting their creation and expansion have rapidly increased and now dominate federal policy. Advocates of traditional civil rights reforms interpret the success of charter schools as a threat to their cause, and, consequently, have fought the expansion of charter schools. This Article argues that the civil rights community …

United States V. Kozminski: On The Threshold Of Involuntary Servitude , Kenneth T. Koonce Jr.

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Mandatory Drug Testing Of College Athletes: Are Athletes Being Denied Their Constitutional Rights? , Allison Rose

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Thornburgh V. Abbott: Slamming The Prison Gates On Constitutional Rights, Megan M. Mcdonald

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

National Treasury Employees Union V. Von Raab—Will The War Against Drugs Abrogate Constitutional Guarantees?, Alyssa C. Westover

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Texas V. Johnson: The Constitutional Protection Of Flag Desecration, Patricia Lofton

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Testament To Power: Mary Woolsey And Dolores Rodriguez As Trial Witnesses In Arizona's Early Statehood, Katrina Jagodinsky

Department of History: Faculty Publications

In 1913, two women made history when they testified before the all-white, all-male jury of the Superior Court of Yavapai County in the State of Arizona v. Juan Fernandez murder trial. Mary Woolsey, an elderly Yavapai widow, and Dolores Rodriguez, a Mexican single mother of three, established the legal precedent for allowing non-English-speaking, non-citizen women to testify in state courts in Arizona when many other western states still did not grant such privileges to indigenous residents. Woolsey and Rodriguez showed that Arizona's indigenous population were competent, if somewhat problematic, members of Arizona's body politic, and their historic involvement in the …

Shelby V. Holder: Brief Of Professor Patricia A. Broussard And Famu College Of Law Students As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondents, Patricia A. Broussard, Sabrina Collins, Stacy Hane, Akunna Olumba

Amicus Briefs

Shelby County, Alabama v. Eric H. Holder, Jr., In the Supreme Court of the United States, Brief of Professor Patricia A. Broussard, Sabrina Collins, Stacy Hane, Akunna Olumba and Named Students and Organizations of Florida A & M University College of Law as Amici Curiae in Support of Respondents

Section 1983 Is Born: The Interlocking Supreme Court Stories Of Tenney And Monroe, Sheldon Nahmod

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Just Another Brick In The Wall: The Establishment Clause As A Heckler's Veto, Richard F. Duncan

Nebraska College of Law: Faculty Publications

"When rights are incorporated against the States through the Fourteenth Amendment they should advance, not constrain, individual liberty."'

Although the First Amendment explicitly protects individuals against only laws made by "Congress," the Supreme Court has long held that, under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, the states are forbidden from "depriving" persons of the fundamental individual liberties protected by the First Amendment.' Thus, under the so-called doctrine of incorporation, a particular provision of the First Amendment (as well as of the rest of the Bill of Rights) "is made applicable to the states [only] if the Justices are …

Brief For Prof. Leslie C. Griffin As Amica Curiae In Support Of Appellant, Kant V. Lexington Theological Seminary, Leslie C. Griffin

Supreme Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

Justice Kennedy’S “Gay Agenda”: Romer, Lawrence, And The Struggle For Marriage Equality, Lawrence C. Levine

McGeorge Law Review

No abstract provided.

(Dis)Owning Religious Speech, B. Jessie Hill

Faculty Publications

To claims of a right to equal citizenship, one of the primary responses has long been to assert the right of private property. It is therefore troubling that, in two recent cases involving public displays of religious symbolism, the Supreme Court embraced property law and rhetoric when faced with the claims of minority religious speakers for inclusion and equality.

The first, Pleasant Grove City v. Summum, is a free speech case in which the defendant evaded a finding that it was discriminating against the plaintiff’s religious speech by claiming a government speech defense. In the process, it claimed as its …

Removing The Presumption Of Innocence: A Constitutional Analysis Of The Ogden Trece Gang Injunction, Megan K. Baker

Utah OnLaw: The Utah Law Review Online Supplement

Gang activity poses a substantial problem in many communities. The city of Ogden, Utah, is home to many gangs, and law enforcement is constantly looking for a way to decrease gang violence. In an attempt to reduce gang violence in Ogden, Judge Ernie Jones issued the Ogden Trece gang injunction on September 27, 2010, in Weber County, Utah. The injunction, based on several similar injunctions in California, affects hundreds of alleged Ogden Trece gang members and spans an area including virtually the entire city of Ogden. The injunction prohibits those enjoined from engaging in various illegal activities as well as …

What's Religion Got To Do With It? Virtually Nothing: Hosanna-Tabor And The Unbridled Power Of The Ministerial Exemption, Marsha B. Freeman

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Inevitable Irrelevance Of Affirmative Action, Leslie Y. Garfield

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

This article proceeds in three parts. In Part I of this article, I provide a narrative of affirmative action jurisprudence in higher education, with a particular focus on the meaning of viewpoint diversity in higher education. This section tracks the definitional shift in preference policies from their original design as remedial and compensatory programs for those suffering the effects of educational discrimination to interest convergence programs, which assure equal benefits irrespective of race. In Part II, I explore the circumstances giving rise to Fisher, including an overview of the lower court decisions. This section presents a discussion of the likely …