scholarly journals State Court Interpretation of Foreign Law: A Guide for the Federal Courts

1959 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 653
Keyword(s):  
Federal Courts ◽  
State Court ◽  
Foreign Law

The Other Muslim Bans

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 2-38
Author(s):  
Will Smiley
Keyword(s):  
Security Policy ◽  
Islamic Law ◽  
State Level ◽  
The State ◽  
The Other ◽  
State Court ◽  
Court Cases ◽  
State Laws ◽  
Foreign Law ◽  
Muslim Majority

This Article addresses and critiques the case for state-level legislative bans on courts citing “Islamic law” or the law of Muslim-majority countries. In particular, the Article reviews the most substantive evidence adduced by the bans’ supporters, in the form of a set of state court cases published by the Center for Security Policy (CSP). Very few of these cases, in fact, show courts actually applying Islamic or foreign law, and in none of these cases would the various forms of proposed legislation have been likely to alter the result. Thus even this report does not suggest a need for the state laws purporting to ban sharīʿa. The Article thus argues that even if these bans are not unconstitutionally discriminatory in their effect, they are ineffective at achieving their claimed purpose. This Article was originally published as an Occasional Paper in the Harvard Papers in Islamic Law series in 2018.

Introduction: The Desegregation Dilemma

1995 ◽  
Author(s):  
David J. Armor
Keyword(s):  
School Districts ◽  
School Choice ◽  
Civil Rights ◽  
Civil Rights Movement ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
State Court ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
State Constitutions ◽  
Current Events ◽  
The City

Despite nearly four decades of controversy and debate over school segregation, the desegregation dilemma is still largely unresolved. The “busing” problem has received less national attention in recent years, and there are no riots, bus burnings, and school boycotts, as witnessed in earlier decades. Yet current events reveal the depth of a dilemma that has divided educators, parents, jurists, social scientists, and many other groups since the beginning of the civil rights movement. Indicators of the current desegregation dilemma are numerous. Hundreds of school districts throughout the country still impose busing for desegregation purposes, many under court orders that are now more than twenty years old. Although the types of desegregation plans have evolved to some extent, with increased emphasis on school choice, many plans still compel children to attend schools that their parents would not choose, solely for the purpose of racial “balance.” Further, after a period of quiescence, school desegregation was again the subject of several major Supreme Court decisions in 1991 and 1992. The decisions affected the length of time and the conditions under which a school district has to maintain a court-ordered busing plan. Although these decisions dispelled a common misconception that school systems have to maintain desegregation plans “in perpetuity,” it is still unclear how many school districts can or will end their busing plans. Finally, new desegregation litigation and controversies continue to surface. In 1989 a lawsuit was initiated in a Connecticut state court by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) to compel desegregation between the city of Hartford and its suburban districts. A similar city suburbs desegregation strategy failed in the federal courts, but the Hartford lawsuit seeks to build on the success of school equal-finance cases under state constitutions. In 1991 the school board of La Crosse, Wisconsin, adopted a busing plan to equalize economic (rather than race) differences among schools. Reminiscent of the busing controversies of the 1970s, all board members who supported the busing plan were voted out of office in a regular and a recall election, reflecting the widespread community opposition to busing for the purpose of achieving socioeconomic balance in schools.

Foreign Law in Federal Courts

1981 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 97 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen L. Sass
Keyword(s):  
Federal Courts ◽  
Foreign Law

Stemming the Tide: Assisted Suicide and the Constitution

1995 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 389-397 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carl H. Coleman ◽  
Tracy E. Miller
Keyword(s):  
Assisted Suicide ◽  
State Level ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
The State ◽  
Equal Protection ◽  
State Court ◽  
State Laws ◽  
Equal Protection Clause ◽  
The Right

On November 8, 1994, Oregon became the first state in the nation to legalize assisted suicide. Passage of Proposition 16 was a milestone in the campaign to make assisted suicide a legal option. The culmination of years of effort, the Oregon vote followed on the heels of failed referenda in California and Washington, and other unsuccessful attempts to enact state laws guaranteeing the right to suicide assistance. Indeed, in 1993, four states passed laws strengthening or clarifying their ban against assisted suicide. No doubt, Proposition 16 is likely to renew the effort to legalize assisted suicide at the state level.The battle over assisted suicide is also unfolding in the courts. Litigation challenging Proposition 16 on the grounds that it violates the equal protection clause is ongoing in Oregon. More significantly, three cases, two in federal courts and one in Michigan state court, have been brought to establish assisted suicide as a constitutionally protected right.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document