Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Administrative Law (1)
- Benefits and Compensation (1)
- Business (1)
- Business Law, Public Responsibility, and Ethics (1)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (1)
-
- Constitutional Law (1)
- Criminal Law (1)
- Criminal Procedure (1)
- Criminology and Criminal Justice (1)
- Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law (1)
- Food and Drug Law (1)
- Fourteenth Amendment (1)
- Health Law and Policy (1)
- Health Policy (1)
- Human Resources Management (1)
- Labor and Employment Law (1)
- Law and Race (1)
- Legal Theory (1)
- Medical Jurisprudence (1)
- Medicine and Health Sciences (1)
- Public Affairs (1)
- Public Affairs, Public Policy and Public Administration (1)
- Public Health (1)
- Public Policy (1)
- Sports Studies (1)
- Keyword
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Other Legal Studies
Gaming The System: The Exemption Of Professional Sports Teams From The Fair Labor Standards Act, Charlotte S. Alexander, Nathaniel Grow
Gaming The System: The Exemption Of Professional Sports Teams From The Fair Labor Standards Act, Charlotte S. Alexander, Nathaniel Grow
Faculty Publications By Year
This article examines a little known exemption to the Fair Labor Standards Act relieving seasonal recreational or amusement employers from their obligation to pay the minimum wage and overtime. After evaluating the existing, confused case law surrounding the exemption, we propose a new, simplified framework for applying the provision. We then apply this framework to a recent wave of FLSA lawsuits brought by cheerleaders, minor league baseball players, and stadium workers against professional sports teams. The article concludes by considering the policy implications of exempting this class of employers from the FLSA's wage and hour requirements.
Functionally Suspect: Reconceptualizing "Race" As A Suspect Classification, Lauren Sudeall Lucas
Functionally Suspect: Reconceptualizing "Race" As A Suspect Classification, Lauren Sudeall Lucas
Faculty Publications By Year
In the context of equal protection doctrine, race has become untethered from the criteria underlying its demarcation as a classification warranting heightened scrutiny. As a result, it is no longer an effective vehicle for challenging the existing social and political order; instead, its primary purpose under current doctrine is to signal the presence of an impermissible basis for differential treatment.
This Symposium Article suggests that, to more effectively serve its underlying normative goals, equal protection should prohibit not discrimination based on race per se, but government actions that implicate the concerns leading to race’s designation as a suspect classification. For …
Toward Coherent Federal Oversight Of Medicine, Patricia J. Zettler
Toward Coherent Federal Oversight Of Medicine, Patricia J. Zettler
Faculty Publications By Year
The conventional wisdom in U.S. health law and policy holds that states regulate medical practice – the activities of physicians and other health care professionals – while the federal government regulates medical products. But relying on states as the principal regulators of medical practice has, at times, driven law and policy in directions that are problematic from a public health perspective, as demonstrated by a deadly 2012 outbreak of fungal meningitis that was linked to a state-regulated practice known as drug compounding. This Article argues that the federalism concerns underlying the conventional wisdom are misplaced. It demonstrates that, contrary to …
Abolishing Jailhouse Snitch Testimony, Russell D. Covey
Abolishing Jailhouse Snitch Testimony, Russell D. Covey
Faculty Publications By Year
Jailhouse snitch testimony is inherently unreliable. Snitches have powerful incentives to invent incriminating lies about other inmates in often well-founded hopes that such testimony will provide them with material benefits, including in many cases substantial reduction of criminal charges against them or of the time they are required to serve. At the same time, false snitch testimony is difficult, if not altogether impossible, for criminal defendants to impeach. Because such testimony usually pits the word of two individuals against one another, both of whose credibility is suspect, jurors have little ability to accurately or effectively assess or weigh the evidence. …