Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons^™

Credulous Courts And The Tortured Trilogy: The Improper Use Of Summary Judgment In Title Vii And Adea Cases, Ann C. Mcginley

Scholarly Works

Civil rights are under siege. In mid-1989, the United States Supreme Court decided several cases that severely limit the civil rights claims and remedies available to a plaintiff claiming employment discrimination. This Article examines the gradual and continuing erosion of the factfinder's role in federal employment discrimination cases and its replacement by an increasing use of summary judgment through which the courts make pretrial determinations formerly reserved for the factfinder at trial. This trend not only represents a major shift in court procedure and, in the case of age discrimination claims, a transfer of power from juries to judges, but …

Reinventing Reality: The Impermissible Intrusion Of After-Acquired Evidence In Title Vii Litigation, Ann C. Mcginley

Scholarly Works

This Article analyzes the use of after-acquired evidence to defeat a discrimination victim's claim against her employer. The use of the Mount Healthy and Price Waterhouse mixed motives analysis in after-acquired evidence cases is misplaced because it is impossible for the permissible motive—resume fraud—to have been a factor in the adverse employment decision. Furthermore, after the enactment of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, it would be an improper judicial intrusion upon the power of the legislature for courts to apply mixed motives analysis to these cases. Besides the constitutional limitation on the judiciary's power created by the Civil Rights …

Sanctions, Symmetry, And Safe Harbors: Limiting Misapplication Of Rule 11 By Harmonizing It With Pre-Verdict Dismissal Devices, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

With only a small risk of overstatement, one could say that sanctions in civil litigation exploded during the 1980s, with the 1983 amendment to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 acting as the principal catalyst. From 1938 until the 1983 amendment, only two dozen or so cases on Rule 11 were reported, with courts rarely imposing sanctions. Although a few cases were notable by virtue of sanction size, prestige of the firm sanctioned, or publicity attending the underlying case, the legal profession largely regarded Rule 11 as a dead letter. In addition, other sanctions provisions, such as Federal Rule of …

Authoritarianism And The Rule Of Law, Lynne Henderson

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Patterson And Civil Rights: What Rough Beast Slouches Towards Bethlehem To Be Born?, Peter Brandon Bayer

Scholarly Works

Contrary to its assertions, the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Patterson decision marks a stark departure from the federal courts' former practice of according Congressional civil rights enactments a broad reading to effectuate their remedial purposes. Indeed, Patterson offers an exceedingly narrow interpretation of this nation's oldest civil rights law, the Civil Rights Act of 1866.

In addition to its effect on the scope and application of § 1981, Patterson must be read in conjunction with several other decisions issued during the same term that limit—indeed retreat from—the application of civil rights laws designed to restore both lost opportunities and …

Civil Rights In Employment: The New Generation, Linda H. Edwards

Scholarly Works

In July 1989, Title VII was twenty-five years old. It is generally assumed that the first twenty-five years have seen significant changes in the economic opportunities available to America’s minorities and women. But with the rise to power of the Reagan appointees, the Supreme Court is clearly fashioning a new approach to issues of civil rights in employment. This article analyzes the new Court’s emerging themes and proposes a congressional response.

The Supreme Court's Denial Of Reasonable Attorney's Fees To Prevailing Civil Rights Plaintiffs, Jean R. Sternlight

Scholarly Works

The Supreme Court, through a series of recent decisions has effectively overridden Congress’ dictate that prevailing civil rights plaintiffs are entitled to recover reasonable attorney’s fees and costs. The solution to the current crisis lies not in reluctant court-appointed attorneys, but rather in a broad-based reform of the law regarding court-awarded attorney’s fees.

This article argues that only action by Congress will suffice to override the Supreme Court’s erroneous ruling and ensure just compensation for civil rights attorneys. Absent such legislation, it seems virtually certain that both the quantity and quality of civil rights litigation will continue to decrease. Fewer …

Watson V. Ft. Worth Bank And Trust: The Changing Face Of Disparate Impact, Linda H. Edwards

Scholarly Works

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 constitutes this country’s first serious commitment to eradicating the enormous economic disadvantages caused by hundreds of years of racial and gender-related prejudice. But there is also cause for concern. While members of once excluded groups have entered the mid-level workforce, most have not progressed to top-level positions. Perhaps not surprisingly, the elimination of barriers to mid-level employment has spotlighted the unique barriers to equal employment in top-level jobs. Title VII’s capacity to deal effectively with these barriers will be its major challenge for the next quarter-century. Its success will depend, in …

Rationality - And The Irrational Underinclusiveness Of The Civil Rights Laws, Peter Brandon Bayer

Scholarly Works

Congress has enacted a series of civil rights laws designed to protect individuals from public an private forms of irrational discrimination. To be lawful, such civil rights statutes must conform with the definition of rationality required by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. Yet, in one fashion, these statutes are as irrational as the behavior they seek to control. The statutes protect only certain classes of individuals in limited instances. This article argues that the existing civil rights laws, although integral to a free society, are but a first step. The statute will never be fully rational, never completely fair, until …

Mutable Characteristics And The Definition Of Discrimination Under Title Vii, Peter Brandon Bayer

Scholarly Works

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits racial, religious, gender, ethnic, and color discrimination in employment. In most instances the courts interpret the statute very broadly. However, a line of cases holds that discrimination predicated on a forbidden criterion coupled with a ‘mutable’—easily altered—characteristic does not constitute a violation of Title VII. This Article attempts to debunk the ‘mutable’ characteristic doctrine by discerning a general definition of discrimination under Title VII and applying that definition to demonstrate that mutability analysis contradicts the letter and spirit of the law.

Book Review, Elaine W. Shoben

Scholarly Works

The Burden of Brown by Raymond Wolters is a long book with a very short message: integration is bad, but desegregation is not. The distinction between the two is crucial to Wolters's analysis. Desegregation is the prohibition of officially sanctioned separation of the races. Integration, on the other hand, is the compelled mixing of the races for the sake of mixing. The "burden" of Brown v. Board of Education, according to Wolters, is that the Supreme Court has blurred this distinction and erroneously requires integration instead of merely prohibiting segregation. Wolters's thesis is that Brown had two prongs: one …