Ricci v. Destefano and Disparate Treatment: How the Case Makes Title VII and the Equal Protection Clause Unworkable

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allen R. Kamp
Keyword(s):  
Equal Protection ◽  
Title Vii ◽  
Equal Protection Clause ◽  
Disparate Treatment

Constitutional Limitations

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott Burris ◽  
Micah L. Berman ◽  
Matthew Penn, and ◽  
Tara Ramanathan Holiday
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
New York ◽  
Equal Protection ◽  
Health Issues ◽  
Equal Protection Clause ◽  
Disparate Treatment ◽  
Public Health Officials

This chapter introduces the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause by discussing its history, judicials interpretations, and application to public health issues. It reviews the fundamental equal protection doctrine—similarly situation person must not receive disparate treatment. It also describes the definitions and usage of suspect and quasi-suspect classes and the levels of scrutiny courts may apply to while reviewing equal protection claims. Using cases such as Craig v. Boren and City of New York v. New St. Mark’s Baths to illustrate, the chapter also examines the application of the equal protection clause to public health issues. The chapter highlights factors that have historically led to equal protection violations by public health officials.

Equal Opportunities: Protecting The Rights of AIDS-Linked Children in The Classroom

1989 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 377-430
Author(s):  
Maureen Anne MacFarlane
Keyword(s):  
Public School ◽  
School Boards ◽  
Section 504 ◽  
Equal Protection ◽  
Equal Opportunities ◽  
Hypothetical Case ◽  
Equal Protection Clause ◽  
Health Safety ◽  
Number Of Children ◽  
The Past

Within the past few years a number of children have been excluded from attending public school because they are linked to AIDS. School boards have justified their decisions to exclude these children on the basis that protecting the public's health, safety and welfare outweighs the rights of these children. Most courts have rejected this justification and have held that either under the equal protection clause of the Constitution or section 504 of the Rehabilitaiton Act of 1973, children cannot be excluded from the classroom solely because they are linked to AIDS.This Note discusses both section 504 and equal protection analyses used by the courts. When analyzing a school board's decision to exclude an AIDS-linked child from the classroom, most courts have used a higher level of scrutiny and individualized inquiry in order to ensure that the rights of both the AIDS-linked child and his or her uninfected classmates and teachers are protected.After applying these analyses to a hypothetical case, this Note concludes that both section 504 and the equal protection clause ensure that AIDS-linked children will not be barred from the classroom unless the presence of additional factors increases the risk of these children transmitting the virus to others.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document