Articles
Filter
Post List
South Africa’s Amnesty Process: A Viable Route Toward Truth and Reconciliation
The road to democracy for South Africa was based on compromise. One of the most significant compromises made by the negotiators was the acceptance of an amnesty process culminating in the passage of the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act of 1995. The Act grants full indemnity from criminal and civil prosecution to anyone affiliated with a political organization who committed an "act associated with a political objective" and who fully discloses all relevant facts. The purpose of the Act is twofold: to establish the "truth" about the apartheid past and to promote "reconciliation" among South Africans. Unfortunately, such goals are often in conflict. This Note examines the origin and nature of the Act, how it is being applied,Can Minority Voting Rights Survive Miller v. Johnson
Part I of this Article reviews the congressional redistricting process in Georgia, particularly the State's efforts to comply with the Voting Rights Act and avoid the dilution of minority voting strength. Part II describes the plaintiffs' constitutional challenge and the State's asserted defenses, or more accurately its lack of asserted defenses. Part III argues that the decision of the majority rests upon wholly false assumptions about the colorblindness of the political process and the harm caused by remedial redistricting. Part IV notes the expansion in Miller of the cause of action first recognized in Shaw v. Reno. Part V comments on the lack of clear, fair standards in Miller and how that will impact upon legislative decision making and litigation. Part VI discusses the negative impact of the decision, which allows, for the first time, local federal district courts directly to review the preclearance decisions of the Attorney General on the administration of section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. Part VII argues that Miller has the potential for purging substantial numbers of minorities from elected office in the South and wiping out many of the gains so painstakingly won under the Voting Rights Act over the last thirty years.Identifying the Harm in Racial Gerrymandering Claims
This Article proceeds along two lines. First, it reviews the theories of harm set forth in the Justices' various opinions, i.e., the articulated risks to individual rights that may or may not be presented by racial gerrymandering. What is learned from this survey is that Shaw and its progeny serve different purposes for different members of the Court. Four members of the Shaw, Miller v. Johnson, and United States v. Hays majorities-Chief Justice Rehnquist, along with Justices Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas- are far more concerned with "race" than "gerrymandering." In particular, they consider all race-based government classifications to be inherently injurious, and they appear to view the racial gerrymandering cases as a vehicle for moving the Court's interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment closer to the ideal of "colorblindness.”The Two-Parent Family in the Liberal State: The Case for Selective Subsidies
This Article seeks to explore in a preliminary way some questions that would be raised by the adoption of such a program. The initial issue raised by the proposal is: does the government ever have any legitimate business favoring some family forms over others? The first-pass answer would appear to be "yes." The law recognizes marriage, restricts it to persons of the opposite sex (at least for now), and confers upon married couples comparative rights and privileges-although fewer than have been enjoyed in the past. The more difficult questions are: what exactly is the nature of the government's interest in promoting certain types of family life, and what are the limits on the forms that the favoritism may take? Specifically, what is the place of "family policy" in the design of benefits programs for the poor? May, or should, the government seek to "privilege" certain family arrangements over others when formulating welfare policy and handing out government largesse? What is the justification for doing so? Is there any reason to believe that such measures will accomplish their stated purpose? How certain must we be that such programs will work before we can "rationally" adopt them?Breaking into the Acadamy: The 1996-97 Michigan Journal of Race & Law Guide for Aspiring Law Professors
I was not very far into my law school experience when I realized that my professors had the best job in town-it took me quite a bit longer to discover that I, too, could get in on the deal. Do not misunderstand me-being a law professor is not easy. In fact, when done correctly, the job requires a tremendous amount of intellectual energy, emotional commitment, long hours, and hard work. However, if you enjoy writing, research, public speaking, and developing mentoring relationships, being a law professor could be the career for you. This Article, and the listings of helpful organizations and citations to other articles about law teaching that follow, are intended to help guide the law professor wannabe through the process of applying for a tenuretrack faculty position at a law school.Is Title VI a Magic Bullet? Environmental Racism in the Context of Political-Economic Processes and Imperatives
This Article examines avenues of redress and pollution prevention for impoverished people of color that flow from Title VI litigation strategies within the larger context of the environmental justice movement. Environmental justice issues can serve as tools with which to question status quo distributive policymaking processes and outcomes. Specifically, this Article concerns itself with practical routes toward increasing distributive justice and democratic efficacy.The Dangers of Misappropriation: Misusing Martin Luther King, Jr.’s Legacy to Prove the Colorblind Thesis
This Article focuses on one particular aspect of the colorblind thesis: the misuse of Martin Luther King, Jr.'s image and legacy by liberals, neoliberals, conservatives, and neoconservatives "who cheaply invoke Dr. King's words even as they kill the substance and spirit of his radical message." The campaign supporting the adoption of Proposition 209, the California Civil Rights Initiative ("CCRI"), directly illustrates the misappropriation of King's legacy. Supporters of this anti-affirmative action proposal which calls for racial neutrality and a colorblind America, regularly invoked King's name, suggesting that he would have embraced such a measure. The California Republican Party prepared a television commercial in support of the proposition that included King's reference to his dream of a colorblind and a content-of-character world. After opponents of the measure and civil rights leaders, including Coretta Scott King, denounced such use of King's words, complaining that King's legacy was being distorted, the "I Have a Dream" segment was removed from the commercial. The dangers of this misappropriation of "King-as-icon" and his legacy are illustrative of the ways in which facts and historical figures are distorted and in which iconolatry is substituted for reasoned argument. These dangers, as well as the need to identify and refute inaccurate distortions of history, are discussed in this Article.Stepping into the Projects: Lawmaking, Storytelling, and Practicing the Politics of Identification
In her article, "The Black Community," Its Lawbreakers, and a Politics of Identification, Professor Regina Austin proposes a paradigm to move the Black community beyond a "manifestation of a nostalgic longing for a time when blacks were clearly distinguishable from whites and concern about the welfare of the poor was more natural than our hairdos.” Austin's politics of identification provides the conceptual framework through which the Black community can reconstitute itself in accordance with its own principles, which may or may not be those embraced by the mainstream. This article considers Professor Regina Austin’s politics of identification as practiced by Black lawmakers in the congressional welfare reform debate.The O.J. Simpson Verdict: A Lesson in Black and White
This article is an attempt to analyze the O.J. Simpson verdict and the press coverage of it, to suggest ways not only of improving criminal justice in a diverse community, but also of improving press coverage of criminal justice in a diverse community. Part Two of this essay is subdivided into two sections. The first section surveys the op-ed pages of major newspapers to evaluate the analysis of, and the commentary on, the O.J. Simpson verdict. The second section deconstructs the press' spin on the verdict. Part Three of this article discusses the role of a jury and proof beyond a reasonable doubt among a diverse set of jurors. Part Four is an effort to explain reasonable doubt and to provide the factual analysis in support of the jury's verdict in the O.J. Simpson case-an exercise which the press largely shrugged off. The conclusion contains no easy answer, but suggests a role for concerned public constituencies in demanding a better brand of criminal justice and press coverage of criminal justice.The Evolution of Race in the Law: The Supreme Court Moves from Approving Internment of Japanese Americans to Disapproving Affirmative Ation for African Americans
As the Court suggests, the Korematsu precedent is crucial to the Adarand decision. In Adarand, the Court analyzes Korematsu in depth, acknowledging that its own judgment had been mistaken in the internment cases, instead of simply citing the decisions as it formally had done until the very recent past. The Court nevertheless fails to appreciate the differences between Korematsu and Adarand, and in particular the consequences of using "strict scrutiny" for all racial classifications. This essay explores the complex relation-ship between Korematsu and Adarand, and offers a critique of the reasoning used in both cases. The essay argues that Adarand may permit invidious racial classifications to survive constitutional challenge and that its analysis of the standing issues associated with collateral litigation over affirmative action are inconsistent with its resolution of substantive issues of racial discrimination.
