Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Constitutional Law; Criminal Law; Criminal Reform; Criminal Justice; Criminal Justice Reform; Mental Health; Police Accountability; Community Investment; Qualified Immunity; Policing; Police Reform; Defund Police; Mental Health Crisis; State-Created Danger; Disability Rights; Black Lives Matter; Law and Society; Law and Policy (1)
- Federal Rule of Evidence 606(b); No-Impeachment Rule; Juror (1)
- Gun Law; Gun Regulation; Gun Control; Second Amendment; New York State Rifle & Pistol Association (1)
- Inc. v. Bruen; New York Penal Law; Sensitive Place Laws; Concealed Carry Improvement Act; Antonyuk v. Hochul; Sullivan Law; District of Columbia v. Heller; Concealed Carry; Training Requirements; Discriminatory Policing; Crime Enforcement; NYPD; Disproportionate Impact; Ambiguity (1)
- Justin Jones; Justin J. Pearson; Tennessee House of Representatives; Expulsion; Anti-Blackness; Original Thirty-Three; Voting Rights Act; Baker v. Carr; Black Representation; Party Realignment; Tennessee State Legislature; Procedural Rules; Tennessee General Assembly; Tennessee Constitution; Cameron Sexton; Martha Nussbaum; Disgust; Pluralistic Democracy (1)
-
- Racism; Racist; Peña-Rodriguez v. Colorado; Racial Bias; Evidence; Evidentiary; Racial Disparity; BIPOC; Implicit Bias; Explicit Bias; United States v. Shalout; Criminal Defendant; Jury Deliberations; Vaise v. Delaval; Mansfield Rule; McDonald v. Pless; Tanner v. United States; United States v. Reid; Mattox v. United States; Warger v. Shauers; Iowa Rule; Wright v. Illinois & Mississippi Telegraph Co.; United States v. Smith; Harden v. Hillman; State v. Berhe; United States v. Brooks; United States v. Birchette; Commonwealth v. Ralph R.; State v. Spates (1)
- Voter ID; vote; voting law; Harper; legal financial obligation; disfranchisement; LFO; Anderson-Burdick; Section 10; Voting Rights Act; VRA; Jim Crow; discrimination; Equal Protection; Fourteenth Amendment; Crawford; provisional ballot; constitutional law; Twenty-Fourth Amendment; poll tax; ballot access; Harman; Celebrezze; election; Shelby County; Fifteenth Amendment (1)
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law and Race
The Use Of Procedural Rules To Silence Minority Party Dissent In The Tennessee State Legislature And Its Racially Discriminatory Roots, Rosie Fatt
Journal of Law and Policy
The expulsion of two young Black legislators, Justin Jones and Justin J. Pearson, from the Tennessee General Assembly in April 2023 was not an aberration. This Note argues that the expulsions follow a historical pattern of systematic marginalization of Black representative power in the South. This Note connects the history of minority exclusion in state legislatures, beginning with Black legislators barred from taking their elected seats in the Georgia House, through to the present day. Specifically, it focuses on the use of procedural rules, particularly expulsions, as tools to limit the speech and representative power of Black legislators. It discusses …
Good Intentions With Bad Consequences: Post-Bruen Gun Legislation In New York, Michal E. Folczyk
Good Intentions With Bad Consequences: Post-Bruen Gun Legislation In New York, Michal E. Folczyk
Journal of Law and Policy
In response to a changing landscape for firearm licensing, New York State adopted training requirements for handgun ownership and sensitive place laws. Prior to obtaining a handgun license, training requirements ensure that applicants will be able to safely use a firearm. Upon obtaining a firearm license, sensitive place laws limit where a licensed individual may or may not bring their firearm, as a preventative measure. A violation of a sensitive place law could not only bring revocation of one’s license to carry a firearm, but also felony charges. Although well-intentioned by New York State, unintended consequences attach. This Note explores …
What Counts As ‘Racist Enough?’: A Clearer Standard For New Trials When Jurors Demonstrate Racial Bias, Priyadarshini Das
What Counts As ‘Racist Enough?’: A Clearer Standard For New Trials When Jurors Demonstrate Racial Bias, Priyadarshini Das
Journal of Law and Policy
The no-impeachment rule, Federal Rule of Evidence 606(b), necessitates that jurors keep their deliberations secret. However, in the 2017 Supreme Court case Peña-Rodriguez v. Colorado, the Court created a racial bias exception to the no-impeachment rule. This exception allows jurors to notify the court when “one or more jurors made statements exhibiting overt racial bias that cast serious doubt on the fairness and impartiality of the jury’s deliberations and resulting verdict.” This Note argues that this standard is too narrow because it fails to consider several situations of racial bias, like implicit bias. The ineffectiveness of this exception is demonstrated …
Slaying The Serpents: Why Alternative Intervention Is Necessary To Protect Those In Mental Health Crisis From The State-Created Danger “Snake Pit”, Kathleen Giunta
Slaying The Serpents: Why Alternative Intervention Is Necessary To Protect Those In Mental Health Crisis From The State-Created Danger “Snake Pit”, Kathleen Giunta
Journal of Law and Policy
The Black Lives Matter protests in 2020 and ongoing reports of police brutality around the United States sparked extensive debate over qualified immunity and the legal protections that prevent police accountability. Individuals experiencing mental health crises are especially vulnerable to police violence, since police officers lack the requisite skills and knowledge to provide effective crisis support during mental health emergencies. Although the state-created danger doctrine was created by the courts as an exception to qualified immunity, it is so rarely applied that individuals harmed or even killed by police are left without legal remedy. This Note explores qualified immunity and …
“A Dollar Ain’T Much If You’Ve Got It”: Freeing Modern-Day Poll Taxes From Anderson-Burdick, Lydia Saltzbart
“A Dollar Ain’T Much If You’Ve Got It”: Freeing Modern-Day Poll Taxes From Anderson-Burdick, Lydia Saltzbart
Journal of Law and Policy
How much should it cost to vote in the United States? The answer is clear from the Supreme Court’s landmark opinion in Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections—nothing. Yet more than fifty years later, many U.S. voters must jump over financial hurdles to access the franchise. These hurdles have withstood judicial review because the Court has drifted away from Harper and has instead applied the more deferential Anderson-Burdick analysis to modern poll tax claims—requiring voters to demonstrate how severely the cost burdens them. As a result, direct and indirect financial burdens on the vote have proliferated. Millions of voters …