Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons^™

Masthead And Front Matter

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

A Battle Of The Amendments: Why Ending Discrimination In The Courtroom May Inhibit A Criminal Defendant’S Right To An Impartial Jury, Gina M. Chiappetta

Fordham Law Review

Since the U.S. Supreme Court began limiting the exercise of peremptory challenges to safeguard potential jurors from discrimination, it has faced a nearly impossible task. The Court has attempted to safeguard a juror’s equal protection rights without eradicating the peremptory challenge’s ability to preserve a criminal defendant’s right to an impartial jury. Under the current legal framework, it is not certain whether either constitutional right is adequately protected. This Note examines the history of the Supreme Court’s limitation on peremptory challenges. It then discusses the current federal circuit split over whether peremptory challenges should be further limited. Finally, this Note …

What’S Hud Got To Do With It?: How Hud’S Disparate Impact Rule May Save The Fair Housing Act’S Disparate Impact Standard, William F. Fuller

Fordham Law Review

Since 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court has granted certiorari three times on the question of whether disparate impact liability is cognizable under the Fair Housing Act (FHA). The first two times, the parties settled. The question is before the Court once again in Texas Department of Housing & Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project, Inc., and this time the parties seem unlikely to settle.

Disparate impact liability in the civil rights context entails liability for actions that have a discriminatory effect, regardless of an actor’s motive. Under the FHA, this can translate into liability for actions that make housing …

The Sins Of Innocence In Standing Doctrine, Elise C. Boddie

Vanderbilt Law Review

Should reverse discrimination plaintiffs always be able to challenge race-conscious selection policies in court? Conventional standing doctrine requires plaintiffs to show that the contested policy or practice has caused a concrete, personal harm. Yet in affirmative action cases, courts seem to have quietly dispensed with this required showing. The Supreme Court's decision in Fisher v. University of Texas is a prime example. The university illustrated that the white plaintiff would not have been admitted whatever her race. Yet the Court completely ignored the standing inquiry, reinforcing the significant confusion among courts and scholars alike about the cognizability of racial injury. …

Federalism, Marriage, And Heather Gerken's Mad Genius, Kristin Collins

Faculty Scholarship

In her characteristically astute and engaging essay, Professor Heather Gerken offers a sensitive and sympathetic reading of Justice Anthony Kennedy’s majority opinion in United States v. Windsor.¹ Her core claim is that Windsor—and the transformation of political and legal support for same-sex marriage in the United States—demonstrate how “federalism and rights work together to promote change” and, in particular, how federalism furthers the equality and liberty values of the Fourteenth Amendment.² This is a natural line of argument for Gerken to develop with respect to Windsor, as she has produced an incredible body of scholarship dedicated to what …

Big Philanthropy’S Unrestrained Influence On Public Education: A Call For Change, Noelle Quam

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Riley V. California: A Pyrric Victory For Privacy, Adam Lamparello

Adam Lamparello

In Riley v. California, the United States Supreme Court ushered privacy protections into the digital era and signaled that the Fourth Amendment would not become a constitutional afterthought. The Court unanimously held that, absent exigent circumstances, law enforcement officers could not search any area of an arrestee’s cell phone, including the outgoing call log, without a warrant and probable cause. At first glance, Riley appears to be a landmark decision in favor of individual privacy rights. As with most things, however, the devil is in the details, and the details in Riley make any celebration over the seemingly enhanced …

Riley V. California: A Pyrric Victory For Privacy, Adam Lamparello

Adam Lamparello

In Riley v. California, the United States Supreme Court ushered privacy protections into the digital era and signaled that the Fourth Amendment would not become a constitutional afterthought. The Court unanimously held that, absent exigent circumstances, law enforcement officers could not search any area of an arrestee’s cell phone, including the outgoing call log, without a warrant and probable cause. At first glance, Riley appears to be a landmark decision in favor of individual privacy rights. As with most things, however, the devil is in the details, and the details in Riley make any celebration over the seemingly enhanced …

Racial Templates, Juan F. Perea, Richard Delgado

Juan F. Perea

No abstract provided.

Same-Sex Marriage, Second-Class Citizenship, And Law's Social Meanings, Michael C. Dorf

Michael C. Dorf

Government acts, statements, and symbols that carry the social meaning of second-class citizenship may, as a consequence of that fact, violate the Establishment Clause or the constitutional requirement of equal protection. Yet social meaning is often contested. Do laws permitting same-sex couples to form civil unions but not to enter into marriage convey the social meaning that gays and lesbians are second-class citizens? Do official displays of the Confederate battle flag unconstitutionally convey support for slavery and white supremacy? When public schools teach evolution but not creationism, do they show disrespect for creationists? Different audiences reach different conclusions about the …

The Heterogeneity Of Rights, Michael C. Dorf

Michael C. Dorf

What is the implication for the validity of governmental rules of the conclusion that the rule interferes with a constitutional right? This question has implications for two important doctrinal puzzles. The first is the question when, if ever, a litigant has a constitutional right to an exemption from a generally valid rule of law. Many constitutional rights are rule-dependent in the sense that they protect actors against certain kinds of governmental rules rather than shielding acts against governmental interference. This Article denies the claim by scholars and judges that this rule-dependence reflects a deep truth about the nature of constitutional …

Federal Governmental Power: The Voting Rights Act, Michael C. Dorf

Michael C. Dorf

No abstract provided.

Levels Of Generality In The Definition Of Rights, Laurence Tribe, Michael Dorf

Michael C. Dorf

This article focuses on one important aspect of the quest for constitutional meaning: how to determine whether a particular liberty-whether or not expressly enumerated in the Bill of Rights-is a "fundamental" right. Whether under the somewhat tarnished banner of substantive due process or under a different rubric, the designation of a right as fundamental requires that the state offer a compelling justification for limitations of that right. In addition, under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, state-sanctioned inequalities that bear upon the exercise of a fundamental right will be upheld only if they serve a compelling governmental interest. …

A Partial Defense Of An Anti-Discrimination Principle, Michael C. Dorf

Michael C. Dorf

Over a quarter century ago, Professor Fiss proposed that the constitutional principle of equal protection should be interpreted to prohibit laws or official practices that aggravate or perpetuate the subordination of specially disadvantaged groups. Fiss thought that the anti-subordination principle could more readily justify results he believed normatively attractive than could the rival, anti-discrimination principle. In particular, anti-subordination would enable the courts to invalidate facially neutral laws that have the effect of disadvantaging a subordinate group and also enable them to uphold facially race-based laws aimed at ameliorating the condition of a subordinate group. Since Fiss’s landmark article appeared, Supreme …

Does Heller Protect A Right To Carry Guns Outside The Home?, Michael C. Dorf

Michael C. Dorf

No abstract provided.

Rights And Rules: An Overview, Matthew Adler, Michael Dorf

Michael C. Dorf

Prior to recent decades, the United States Supreme Court often invoked the political question doctrine to avoid deciding controversial questions of individual rights. By the 1970s and 1980s, standing limits traced to Article III’s case-or-controversy language had replaced the political question doctrine as the favored justiciability device. Although both political question and standing doctrines remain tools in the Court’s arsenal of threshold decision making,3 in the last decade the Court has turned with increasing frequency to the distinction between facial and as-applied challenges to perform the gatekeeping function. However, although there is a considerable body of scholarship concerning the conventional …

Abortion Rights, Michael C. Dorf

Michael C. Dorf

No abstract provided.

A Constitution Of Democratic Experimentalism, Michael C. Dorf, Charles F. Sabel

Michael C. Dorf

In this Article, Professors Dorf and Sabel identif a new form of government, democratic experimentalism, in which power is decentralized to enable citizens and other actors to utilize their local knowledge to fit solutions to their individual circumstances, but in which regional and national coordinating bodies require actors to share their knowledge with others facing similar problems. This information pooling, informed by the example of novel kinds of coordination within and among private firms, both increases the efficiency of public administration by encouraging mutual learning among its parts and heightens its accountability through participation of citizens in the decisions that …

In Abercrombie Case, Supreme Court Should Protect Religious Freedom, Lauren Carasik

Media Presence

No abstract provided.

Gentrification And Urban Public School Reforms: The Interest Divergence Dillema, Erika Wilson

Erika K. Wilson

Across the country cities are experiencing rapid increases in gentrification: the influx of middle-class, often white residents, into cities with large minority populations. In some gentrifying cities, significant numbers of white middle-class residents are enrolling their children in city public schools, reversing a long standing trend of white flight out of city schools. Local officials value the renewed interest in public schools by these residents because it represents an opportunity to keep them, and their tax dollars, from fleeing to the suburbs once they have school aged children. This Article chronicles the ways in which local officials in gentrifying cities …