Articles
Filter
Post List
Moving from Colonias to Comunidades: A Proposal for New Mexico to Revisit the Installment Land Contract Debate
Communities of Mexican Americans in the Southwest, known as colonias, have provided many low-income buyers with affordable opportunities. Affordability, however, comes at a high price for the colonias residents. Most of the buyers live in colonias pursuant to installment land contracts, devices which allow buyers to spread the purchase price of property over a number of years but leave them without legal title or equity under New Mexico law. The buyers sacrifice their legal rights to "own" small, unimproved lots of land in developments that are often without electricity, gas, a sewage system, and indoor plumbing. The author argues that New Mexico could allocate rights to buyers under installment land contracts while maintaining the reasonable cost of colonias housing and preserving the communities. She posits several alternatives for the state legislature and judiciary, including the adoption of a statutory definition which treats the contracts as mortgages and a more flexible interpretation of the forfeiture clauses in the contracts pursuant to mortgage and contract law. The Note concludes with suggested outreach strategies to inform colonias residents of their rights under installment land contracts and to provide them with legal assistance to enforce their rights.Fourth Amendment Accommodations: (Un)Compelling Public Needs, Balancing Acts, and the Fiction of Consent
The problems of public housing-including crime, drugs, and gun violence- have received an enormous amount of national attention. Much attention has also focused on warrantless searches and consent searches as solutions to these problems. This Note addresses the constitutionality of these proposals and asserts that if the Supreme Court's current Fourth Amendment jurisprudence is taken to its logical extremes, warrantless searches in public housing can be found constitutional. The author argues, however, that such an interpretation fails to strike the proper balance between public need and privacy in the public housing context. The Note concludes by proposing alternative consent-based regimes that would pass constitutional muster.Moving Ground, Breaking Traditions: Tasha’s Chronicle
This Note uses a fictional dialogue to analyze and engage issues concerning stereotypes, stigmas, and affirmative action. It also highlights the importance of role models for students of color and the disparate hiring practices of law firms and legal employers through the conversations and thoughts of its main character, Tasha Crenshaw.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.
