Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons^™

Another Of Roger William's Gifts: Women's Right To Liberty Of Conscience: Joshua Verin V. Providence Plantations, Edward J. Eberle

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Lawrence V. Texas: Evolution Of Constitutional Doctrine, Diana Hassel

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

What's Really Wrong With Compelled Association?, Seana V. Shiffrin

ExpressO

What's Really Wrong With Compelled Association?

The article presents an original account of the value of freedom of association, one more intimately tied to freedom of speech values than the models of association implicit in much commentary and in such U.S. Supreme Court cases as Boy Scouts v. Dale and Roberts v. U.S. Jaycees. Standard models view the relationship between associations and free speech as instrumental. On these accounts, voluntary associations serve as sites for individuals with a defined point of view to congregate together and make their communication louder and more effective. While voluntary associations may sometimes serve this …

Gay And Lesbian Rights To Procreate And Access To Assisted Reproductive Technology, John A. Robertson

ExpressO

No abstract provided.

The Needle And The Damage Done: How Hoffman Plastics Promotes Sweatshops And Illegal Immigration And What To Do About It , Jennifer S. Berman

ExpressO

This paper examines the intersection of immigration and labor law as developed in federal law, culminating in the recent Supreme Court case, Hoffman Plastics. Arguing that Hoffman was wrongly decided, the paper further demonstrates that stronger penalties are necessary under the NLRA to deter employer wrongdoing, protect workers’ rights, and slow the proliferation of sweatshops.

Citizens Of An Enemy Land: Enemy Combatants, Aliens, And The Constitutional Rights Of The Pseudo-Citizen, Juliet P. Stumpf

ExpressO

No abstract provided.

Beyond Reparations: An American Indian Theory Of Justice, William C. Bradford

ExpressO

The number of states, corporations, and religious groups formally disowning past records of egregious human injustice is mushrooming. Although the Age of Apology is a global phenomenon, the question of reparations—a tort-based mode of redress whereby a wrongdoing group accepts legal responsibility and compensates victims for the damage it inflicted upon them—likely consumes more energy, emotion, and resources in the U.S. than in any other jurisdiction. Since the final year of the Cold War, the U.S. and its political subdivisions have apologized or paid compensation to Japanese-American internees, native Hawaiians, civilians killed in the Korean War, and African American victims …

Boy Scouts & Burning Crosses: Bringing Balance To The Court’S Lopsided Approach To The Intersection Of Equality And Speech, Russell K. Robinson

ExpressO

This article identifies a previously-ignored pattern of Supreme Court decisions that privilege one competing constitutional value, either speech or equality, and subordinate the other—with little or no reasoning explaining its choice. In adjudicating such cases, including two cases decided last term, the Supreme Court has steadfastly treated these disputes as either a basic equality case or a simple speech case. This dichotomy is a problem because once the Court places a case within either a speech or equality paradigm, it is constrained by certain rigid analytical presumptions. These presumptions threaten to stunt the analysis and to deprive the Court of …

When Equality Leaves Everyone Worse Off: The Problem Of Leveling Down In Equality Law, Deborah L. Brake

ExpressO

Existing case law and legal scholarship assume that inequality may be remedied in one of two ways: improving the lot of the disfavored group to match that of the most favored group, or lowering the level of treatment for the favored group until their members fare as badly as the persons complaining of inequality. The term “leveling down” refers to the latter response. The 1971 case of Palmer v. Thompson provides the classic example of the typical judicial response to leveling down: the Supreme Court accepted the decision of Jackson, Mississippi, to close its swimming pools, rather than operate them …

Constitutional Interpretation And Coercive Interrogation After Chavez V. Martinez, John T. Parry

ExpressO

Using the Supreme Court's decision last Term in Chavez v. Martinez as a launching pad, this article reveals and addresses fundamental tensions in constitutional interpretation, the law of interrogation, and civil rights litigation. First, this article highlights the importance of remedies to the definition of constitutional rights, which compels us to jettison the idea of prophylactic rules and accept Congress's role in constitutional interpretation. Armed with these insights, the article next considers the law of coercive interrogation. I explain why the privilege against self-incrimination is more than a trial right, and I redefine the central holding of Miranda to take …

Connecting The Dots: Grutter, School Desegregation, And Federalism, Wendy Parker

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Enemies Foreign And Domestic: A Historical Look At The Use Of Military Commissions By The United States And The Case For Using Them Against American Citizens, James T. Barnett

ExpressO

An historical look at the use of Military Commissions by the United States of America. This article examines the constitutional powers to use Military Commissions as well as the limitations on such commissions.

It also examines the use of these commissions against American citizens and argues that they are proper in certain circumstances. The limitations set out by the Supreme Court are eroded to the point of being void.

The article goes on to examine the cases of John Walker Lindh and Yasser Hamdi to show that Military Commissions are the proper forum for such cases.

A Call To Leadership: The Future Of Race Relations In Virginia, Rodney A. Smolla

Scholarly Articles

Not available.

Racial Profiling Of African-American Males: Stopped, Searched, And Stripped Of Constitutional Protection, 38 J. Marshall L. Rev. 439 (2004), Floyd D. Weatherspoon

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The New Post 9/11 America Or The Making Of King George: A Review Of Executive Power In The Effort To Combat Global Terrorism As It Relates To The Power Of The Purse, Woodrow E. Turner

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

An Ohio Dilemma: Race, Equal Protection, And The Unfulfilled Promise Of A State Bill Of Rights, Jonathan L. Entin

Cleveland State Law Review

Race was a central issue in Ohio from the very beginning. The original state constitution of 1802 and the successor constitution of 1851 explicitly limited suffrage to whites even as both documents forbade slavery. Moreover, the legislature imposed various legal disabilities and restrictions on African Americans. For much of the Nineteenth Century, however, the Ohio Supreme Court tried to narrow the scope of those restrictions by developing a distinctive jurisprudence that was in some respects more progressive, and in general less obnoxious, than that developed in other states and by the U.S. Supreme Court. Before the end of the century, …

Employment Law: Congress Giveth And The Supreme Court Taketh Away: Title Vii's Prohibition Of Religious Discrimination In The Workplace, Huma T. Yunus

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Is There A Place For Race As A Legal Concept, Sharona Hoffman

Faculty Publications

What does "race" mean? The word "race" is omnipresent in American social, political, and legal discourse. The concept of "race" is central to contemporary debate about affirmative action, racial profiling, hate crimes, health inequities, and many other issues. Nevertheless, the best research in genetics, medicine, and the social sciences reveals that the concept of "race" is elusive and has no reliable definition.

This article argues that "race" is an unnecessary and potentially pernicious concept. As evidenced by the history of slavery, segregation, the Holocaust, and other human tragedies, the idea of "race" can perpetuate prejudices and misconceptions and serve as …

Critical Race Histories: In And Out, Darren Lenard Hutchinson

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Legacy Of Public Law 280: Comparing And Contrasting Minnesota’S New Rule For The Recognition Of Tribal Court Judgments With The Recent Arizona Rule, Kevin K. Washburn, Chloe Thompson

William Mitchell Law Review

Tribal court dockets across the country have been growing steadily, and tribal courts are becoming an important part of the judicial fabric of the United States. To acknowledge this reality, state courts and legislatures across the United States have begun to address the important issues of how and whether to recognize tribal court judgments in state courts. The Minnesota Supreme Court adopted a rule that took effect in January of 2004 that provides guidelines for the recognition and enforcement of tribal court orders and judgments. The Minnesota Supreme Court Rule on the Recognition and Enforcement of Tribal Court Orders and …

O Say, Can You See: Free Expression By The Light Of Fiery Crosses, Jeannine Bell

Articles by Maurer Faculty

This Article presents a comprehensive, context-based theory which both places cross burning in its proper doctrinal framework and recognizes the history of cross burning as one of Ku Klux Klan-inspired terrorism directed at African Americans. The author prefaces critical commentary on the Supreme Court's decision in Virginia v. Black with analysis of the full landscape of cross burning cases including another issue to which others have paid little attention - the ways in which state courts have negotiated First Amendment challenges to cross burning statutes. Thoroughly examining cross burning from each of these perspectives, the Article argues that cross burning …

"You Are Entering A Gay And Lesbian Free Zone": On The Radical Dissents Of Justice Scalia And Other (Post-) Queers – [Raising Questions About Lawrence, Sex Wars, And The Criminal Law], Bernard Harcourt

Faculty Scholarship

The most renowned substantive criminal law decision of the October 2002 Term, Lawrence v. Texas, will go down in history as a critical turning point in criminal law debates over the proper scope of the penal sanction. For the first time in the history of American criminal law, the United States Supreme Court has declared that a supermajoritarian moral belief does not necessarily provide a rational basis for criminalizing conventionally deviant conduct. The Court's ruling is the coup de grâce to legal moralism administered after a prolonged, brutish, tedious, and debilitating struggle against liberal legalism in its various criminal …

Furthering American Freedom: Civil Rights & The Thirteenth Amendment, Alexander Tsesis

Faculty Publications & Other Works

Abstract: This Article discusses why the Thirteenth Amendment's reach extends beyond the institution of slavery and has important implications for civil liberties. The Amendment-in providing a mechanism to protect fundamental rights articulated in the Declaration of Independence and Preamble to the Constitution-not only ended slavery, but also created a substantive assurance of freedom. This Article reviews Thirteenth Amendment jurisprudence and shows that, despite substantial narrowing after its adoption, the Amendment is a source of sweeping constitutional power for enacting federal civil rights legislation. The Article also distinguishes congressional power under the Thirteenth Amendment from that under the Fourteenth Amendment and …

The Tri-Ethnic Dilemma: Race, Equality, And The Fourteenth Amendment In The American West, Tom I. Romero Ii

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

A Glimpse Behind And Beyond Grutter, Evan H. Caminker

Articles

Many people have suggested that the recent battle over affirmative action was a defining moment for the contemporary relevance of Brown v. Board of Education and that it would determine the promise and potential for widespread societal integration. In my remarks, I want to comment upon a couple of comparisons and links between the Brown, Bakke, Grutter, and Gratz cases.

Constitutional Law: Beyond The Bounds Of Roe: Does Stenberg V. Carhart Invalidate The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act Of 2003, Scott A. Hodges

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

The "Inexorable Zero", Bert I. Huang

Faculty Scholarship

[F]ine tuning of the statistics could not have obscured the glaring absence of minority [long-distance] drivers .... [T]he company's inability to rebut the inference of discrimination came not from a misuse of statistics but from "the inexorable zero."

The Supreme Court first uttered the phrase "inexorable zero" a quarter-century ago in International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States, a landmark Title VII case. Ever since, this enigmatic name for a rule of inference has echoed across legal argument about segregation, discrimination, and affirmative action. Justice O'Connor, for instance, cited the "inexorable zero" in a major sex discrimination decision upholding an …

Diversity And The Practice Of Interest Assessment, Robert F. Nagel

Publications

No abstract provided.

Bolling Alone, Richard A. Primus

Articles

Under the doctrine of reverse incorporation, generally identified with the Supreme Court's decision in Bolling v. Sharpe, equal protection binds the federal government even though the Equal Protection Clause by its terms is addressed only to states. Since Bolling, however, the courts have almost never granted relief to litigants claiming unconstitutional racial discrimination by the federal government. Courts have periodically found unconstitutional federal discrimination on nonracial grounds such as sex and alienage, and reverse incorporation has also limited the scope of affirmative action. But in the presumed core area of preventing federal discrimination against racial minorities, Boiling has virtually no …

Federalism Re-Constructed: The Eleventh Amendment's Illogical Impact On Congress' Power, Marcia L. Mccormick

All Faculty Scholarship

The Constitution is designed to protect individual liberty and equality by diffusing power among the three branches of the federal government and between the federal and state governments, and by providing a minimum level of protection for individual rights. Yet, the Supreme Court seems to think that federalism is about protecting states as states rather than balancing governmental power to protect individuals. In the name of federalism, the Supreme Court has been paring away at Congress' power to enact civil rights legislation. In doing so, it has transformed the Fourteenth Amendment into a vehicle for protecting states rights rather than …