Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons^™

When The Court Makes Title Vii Law And Policy: Disparate Impact And The Journey From Griggs To Ricci, Ronald Turner

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

This Article focuses on judicial lawmaking and policymaking in an important area of antidiscrimination law—Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964’s regulatory regime. As enacted in 1964, Title VII only prohibited intentional employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The statute requires a finding that an employer “has intentionally engaged in or is intentionally engaging in an unlawful employment practice charged in the complaint.” “[Such] ‘disparate treatment’ . . . is the most easily understood type of discrimination. The employer simply treats some people less favorably than others . . . …

Title Vii At 50: The Landmark Law Has Significantly Impacted Relationships In The Workplace And Society, But Title Vii Has Not Reached Its True Potential, Cynthia Elaine Tompkins

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

This Article’s historical chronicle provides a valuable backdrop for an examination of Title VII. Part II analyzes Title VII’s impact on race relations in the workplace and society. While progress has been made in the effort to provide equal opportunities for all workplace employees, Title VII legislation has not eliminated employment discrimination. As Title VII marches toward its sixtieth anniversary, this Article’s final section, Part III, reviews unconscious bias and other current challenges preventing Title VII from reaching its true potential.

The Influence Of Justice Thurgood Marshall On The Development Of Title Vii Jurisprudence, Wendy B. Scott, Jada Akers, Amy White

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

This Article highlights Justice Marshall’s influence on the development of Title VII jurisprudence. Part I presents a brief overview of Justice Marshall’s personal and professional life before becoming a Justice to show how his experience influenced the development of his judicial philosophy. Part II summarizes the Court’s approach to some of the issues left unresolved by Congress in the initial passage of Title VII. Specifically, it explores how the Court determined what would constitute a violation of Title VII and standards of pleading and proof. Part III examines the changes in the Court’s jurisprudence before Justice Marshall retired from …

An Evolving Workforce, An Adapting Law: Title Vii's Coverage Of Gender Identity And Criminal History, Sandra Pullman

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

In the half-century since the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, workplace protections under the statute have expanded in a variety of ways. Legal theories that were once considered novel have increasingly been accepted in federal courts across the country, extending coverage to more employees than ever before. Yet, an analysis of these developing issues also exposes the limitations of federal antidiscrimination law. Below, this Article examines the ways that Title VII has been applied to two particularly vulnerable groups: transgender individuals and individuals with criminal records.

Fifty Years After The Passage Of Title Vii: Is It Time For The Government To Use The Bully Pulpit To Enact A Status-Blind Harassment Statute?, Marcia L. Narine

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

This Article provides a blueprint for how Congress can accept Justice Ginsburg’s challenge to protect workers, particularly in precarious economic times when employees cannot easily switch jobs and in an era in which the vast majority of workers do not have the protection of a collective bargaining agreement. Not only should Congress redefine “supervisor,” but Congress should also consider a related underlying factor that was not raised in the Vance case—the issue of workplace bullying. If workplace bullying were a viable cause of action, Maetta Vance likely would have prevailed in a state that entitled her to relief because …

The Future Of Workplace Affirmative Action After Fisher, Rebecca K. Lee

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

The Supreme Court’s decision on race-conscious affirmative action in Fisher, along with the Fifth Circuit’s ruling in Fisher on remand, importantly preserves the validity of affirmative action programs in state decisionmaking if the programs meet certain criteria under strict scrutiny and satisfy full judicial review. Although Fisher arose in the higher education context, its application extends to the public setting more generally and thus would also apply to the public sector workplace under the Constitution, making it permissible for public sector employers to use race-conscious affirmative action in hiring and promoting employees. The approach taken in Fisher also …

In Defense Of Mcdonnell Douglas: The Domination Of Title Vii By The At-Will Employment Doctrine, Chuck Henson

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

The purpose of this Article is to describe the actual relationship between the Doctrine and Title VII as implemented in the Court’s disparate treatment decisions. Title VII and the Doctrine are not separate forces warring with each other. The at-will employment doctrine guided the Court’s Title VII disparate treatment jurisprudence, giving the maximum possible latitude to employers because that was the Eighty-eighth Congress’s intent.

Past As Prologue In The Affirmative Action Jurisprudence Of The Supreme Court: Reflections On Fisher V. University Of Texas At Austin And Schuette V. Coalition To Defend Affirmative Action, David L. Gregory, Sarah Mannix

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

This Article critically analyzes the dimensions and likely ramifications of Fisher and Schuette. The principle of pragmatic political proportionality eschews the wholly ideological extremist views that would either utterly vitiate affirmative action or deeply embed it as a substantially obsolete elitist residue of endless recalibrating. Instead, this Article subscribes to Lincolnian practical wisdom supplemented with a healthy dose of plain common sense. Enlightened political leadership should seek achievable pragmatic proportionality as the guiding principle controlling access to public institutions of higher education and, consequently, entry into the professions.

Debunking Unequal Burdens, Trivial Violations, Harmless Stereotypes, And Similar Judicial Myths: The Convergence Of Title Vii Literalism, Congressional Intent, And Kantian Dignity Theory, Peter Brandon Bayer

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

The line of argument is not complex. Part I explicates the unequal burden doctrine and its link to the predecessor theory of “mutable characteristics.” Part II offers the aforementioned statutorily formal argument, disproving unequal burden theory through an examination of Title VII’s plain language and structure in light of modern Supreme Court precedents addressing Title VII’s ban against stereotyping. This analysis places special emphasis on 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(m), in which Congress clarified that plaintiffs prevail when discriminatory animus merely is a “motivating factor” rather than the “but-for cause” of the defendants’ conduct.

Although not the lengthiest discussion herein …

Sub-Saharan Africa: The Right Of Intervention In The Name Of Humanity, R. H. Payne

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

The Scapegoat, Katherine Ludwig

Geifman Prize in Holocaust Studies

This essay responds to a claim made in the aftermath of an Anti-Semitic attack. It discusses the treatment of Jews in Europe around the time of the Holocaust and what may have motivated this treatment.

Thurgood Marshall Memorial Lecture: A Keynote Address By Mahzarin Banaji: Blindspot: Hidden Biases Of Good People 04-14-2016, Roger Williams University School Of Law

School of Law Conferences, Lectures & Events

No abstract provided.

Of Mouseholes And Elephants: The Statute Oflimitations For Impartial Hearings Under Theindividuals With Disabilities Education Act, Perry A. Zirkel

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

The purpose of this article, in light of the practical significance and the limited literature addressing the IDEA’s hearing level SOL, is to provide a current and concise overview of the case law addressing this specific issue. Part I provides the basic nature and purpose of SOL generally, and specifically how SOL applies to the IDEA’s impartial hearings. Parts II–IV addresses the elements of the SOL statutory provisions in terms of the triggering date, the exceptions, and the duration and effect of the SOL, including the importance of G.L. v. Ligonier Valley School District Authority. Part V provides practice pointers …

Has The Supreme Court’S Schaffer Decision Placed Aburden On Hearing Officer Decision-Making Under Theidea?, Cathy A. Skidmore, Perry A. Zirkel

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

This article provides a systematic examination of the BOP in hearing officer decisions both before and after Schaffer. Part II examines the legal basis for the BOP both before and after the U.S. Supreme Court decision, resulting in the questions for this study. Part III explains the method used to collect and analyze the data, and Part IV presents the results that answer the specific research questions. Part V discusses those results and the implications of the findings for special education dispute resolution and provides recommendations for further study.

Flint Drinking Water Contamination: Frames Of Reference, Clifford J. Villa

Faculty Scholarship

Presentation given at Harvard Law School on Flint, Michigan, lead toxicity and what we can do as a matter of law.

Reply Brief Of Petitioners. Knight V. Thompson, 136 S.Ct. 2534 (2016) (No. 15-999), 2016 U.S. S. Ct. Briefs Lexis 1645, 2016 Wl 1555013+A12, Eric Schnapper, Mark Sabel, Peter Fruin, Randall C. Marshall, Roy S. Haber

Court Briefs

QUESTION PRESENTED Section 3 of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 ("RLUIPA") prohibits state and local governments from imposing "a substantial burden on the religious exercise of a person residing in or confined to an institution . . . unless the government demonstrates that imposition of the burden on that person": (1) "is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest," and (2) "is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest."42 U.S.C. § 2000cc-l(a). The Question Presented is: Whether RLUIPA requires that prison officials actually consider and demonstrate a sufficient basis for rejecting widely …

Trending @ Rwu Law: Deborah Johnson's Post: Implicit Bias And The Law: 04/12/2016, Deborah Johnson

Law School Blogs

Also available @ http://law.rwu.edu/blog/implicit-bias-and-law

13th Annual Diversity Symposium Dinner 04-07-2016, Roger Williams University School Of Law

School of Law Conferences, Lectures & Events

No abstract provided.

Newsroom: Are You Sure You're Not Prejudiced? 04-07-2016, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Apples-To-Fish: Public And Private Prison Cost Comparisons, Alex Friedmann

Fordham Urban Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Has All Heck Broken Loose? Examining Heck's Favorable-Termination Requirement In The Second Circuit After Poventud V. City Of New York, John P. Collins

Fordham Urban Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Voting Rights Act And The "New And Improved" Intent Test: Old Wine In New Bottles, Randolph M. Scott-Mclaughlin

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Police Misconduct - A Plaintiff's Point Of View, Part Ii, John Williams

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Police Misconduct - A Plaintiff's Point Of View, Fred Brewington

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Criminal Prosecution And Section 1983, Barry C. Scheck

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Procedural Due Process Claims, Erwin Chemerinsky

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Qualified Immunity When Facts Are In Dispute, Leon Friedman

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Section 1983 Custom Claims And The Code Of Silence, Myriam Gilles

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Eleventh Amendment Federalism And State Sovereign Immunity Cases: Direct Effect On Section 1983?, Stephen H. Steinglass

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reply Brief Of Appellant, Charlotte Garden, Jessica Levin, Fred T. Korematsu Center For Law And Equality, Ronald A. Peterson Law Clinic

Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and Equality

Merrick v. Inmate Legal Services