All content categorized with: Social Commentary
Filter
Post List
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 Empitness of Majority Rule
In this Note, the author steers away from the current substantive debates surrounding the Voting Rights Act, its various amendments, and the "correct" way of interpreting its intended benefits and constitutionally accepted mandates. Instead, indirectly joins the many "radical" voices advocating for a departure from the majoritarian stranglehold-the decision-making process where fifty percent plus one of the voting population carry the election. The author does so not by suggesting yet another mechanism by which representatives may be elected, but by critiquing the perceived underpinnings of our democratic system of government. The author does not profess to delineate a definitive interpretation of American democracy, but rather to show what it is not required to be. More specifically, this Note directly confronts the majoritarian foundation upon which America's political society arguably rests, and posits that our reliance on the simple majoritarian paradigm is unwarranted. In short, the author argues that democracy entails anything from unanimous decision-making to simple, fifty-percent-plus-one majority rule.The Color of Truth: Race and the Assessment of Credibility
This article will address specifically the relationship between race and credibility in legal cases, while acknowledging that broader bias issues are often, though sometimes imperceptibly, intertwined in racially biased credibility determinations. Part I will survey race and credibility issues that have arisen in courts, with particular focus on two modern habeas corpus cases. Part II will summarize the legal rules that presently regulate racially influenced assessments of credibility; it may surprise some readers to realize that there is no established mechanism for challenging racially biased credibility determinations. Part I will propose some standards for determining when race is permissibly used in credibility determinations and some mechanisms for enforcing those standards. Although my sources and primary concern in this article are criminal cases, most of what follows has relevance to civil cases as well, albeit to a lesser extent.The Social Construction of Identity in Criminal Cases: Cinema Verité and the Pedagogy of Vincent Chin
This article will discuss the use of the film, Who Killed Vincent Chin?, as a method: (1) to analyze the relationship of social constructions of identity, particularly race, on the rules and discretionary application of criminal jurisprudence; (2) to provide an interactive pedagogical tool for law teachers, especially criminal law teachers, to examine the social contexts of criminal jurisprudence from multiple perspectives; and (3) to examine the ability of criminal law doctrine to address issues of race.Race Discourse and Proposition 187
Proposition 187 inspired a visceral public discourse. Proponents and opponents of the measure discussed several themes important to contemporary political theory, particularly themes related to sovereignty and civil rights. This Note shows how participants in that debate-including people of color-spoke of "rights" in a way that denied the possibility for undocumented aliens to have rights. When citizens spoke, they did so in a way that implicitly linked rights to citizenship; in other words, they assumed that without citizenship, persons were not entitled to rights or rights-based claims. Ironically, the debate about Proposition 187 pointed to the achievements of a "civil rights" vision, even as that debate reduced undocumented aliens to "nonpersons," without rights and without a legitimate place in society. California citizens talked, instead, about how useless or useful undocumented aliens were and about how society should best manage them as a resource. The debate raised serious questions about the limits of a civil rights discourse, and about its potential to divide people of color against themselves.
