State Constitutional Law in 1940–1941

1941 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 683-700
Author(s):  
Charles Aikin
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Civil Rights ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
United States Supreme Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
State Courts ◽  
Appellate Courts ◽  
Administrative Authority ◽  
Review State ◽  
State Constitutional Law

The increase in judicial restraint noted a year ago has again been in evidence during the period under review. State courts, in following the lead of the United States Supreme Court, have construed police power liberally and have spoken out in defense of civil rights. Noteworthy, as well, has been the practice of these courts to construe strictly the power of the governor in this period of expanding administrative authority. The tendency of state courts to uphold experimental legislation, in line with the doctrine established by Nebbia v. New York rather than founded on liberty of contract and separation of powers precepts, has not been uniform. Federal decisions which recently have been greatly weakened but not expressly overruled still serve as guide-posts for some appellate courts.

Mobilized by Injustice

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hannah L. Walker
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Civil Rights ◽  
Political Action ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
The United States ◽  
Personal Contact ◽  
Racial Boundaries ◽  
Material Resources ◽  
Depth Interviews

Springing from decades of abuse by law enforcement and an excessive criminal justice system, members of over-policed communities lead the current movement for civil rights in the United States. Activated by injustice, individuals protested police brutality in Ferguson, campaigned to end stop-and-frisk in New York City, and advocated for restorative justice in Washington, D.C. Yet, scholars focused on the negative impact of punitive policy on material resources, and trust in government did not predict these pockets of resistance, arguing instead that marginalizing and demeaning policy teaches individuals to acquiesce and withdraw. Mobilized by Injustice excavates conditions under which, despite otherwise negative outcomes, negative criminal justice experiences catalyze political action. This book argues that when understood as resulting from a system that targets people based on race, class, or other group identifiers, contact can politically mobilize. Negative experiences with democratic institutions predicated on equality under the law, when connected to a larger, group-based struggle, can provoke action from anger. Evidence from several surveys and in-depth interviews reveals that mobilization as result of negative criminal justice experiences is broad, crosses racial boundaries, and extends to the loved ones of custodial citizens. When over half of Blacks and Latinos and a plurality of Whites know someone with personal contact, the mobilizing effect of a sense of injustice promises to have important consequences for American politics.

The Role of Religious Value in Political Judgment

1968 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 415-427
Author(s):  
Quentin L. Quade
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Civil Rights ◽  
New York Times ◽  
Religion And Politics ◽  
The United States ◽  
Religious Leaders ◽  
Political Issue ◽  
Religious Interventions ◽  
Number Of Citations

In The issues of the New York Times from February, 1965, to November, 1967, religious leaders and groups are reported 185 times commenting on one political issue: Vietnam. If a comparable search were done on an inclusive list of political topics, such as civil rights, the number of citations would be greatly multiplied. Most of these statements are on substantive issues — the United States should do this, do that — rather than on the theoretical questions about religion's role vis à vis politics. Most of these religious interventions presume some connection between religion and politics, whether articulated or not. A similar examination of some leading religious journals, for example, Chrisianity and Crisis, Commonweal, Christian Century, America, produces similar results: in articles and editorials, such publications are deeply immersed in direct commentary on political problems of our time.

United States Supreme Court Rules on Expert Testimony

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1995 ◽  
Vol 95 (6) ◽  
pp. 934-936 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary N. McAbee
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
United States Supreme Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
State Courts ◽  
Expert Witnesses ◽  
Us Supreme Court

Many medical and legal commentators have expressed concern about the validity of scientific evidence that is proffered by expert witnesses at depositions and in courts of law.1,2 The sparse research that is available on the testimony of medical expert witnesses suggests that it is frequently flawed and erroneous.3 On June 28, 1993, the United States (US) Supreme Court ruled on the proper standard for admissibility of scientific evidence in the courtroom.4 Although the ruling establishes guidelines that are binding only in federal courts, it is expected that many state courts will follow the Court's ruling. This commentary reviews the Court's guidelines for admissibility of expert testimony, and expresses concern about their applicability in future cases involving scientific testimony.

Gay Reparations and Their Critics

2021 ◽  
pp. 129-148
Author(s):  
Omar G. Encarnación
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
New York ◽  
Civil Rights ◽  
New York Times ◽  
The United States ◽  
Terrorist Attacks ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
New Class ◽  
Gay Community ◽  
Long Time

This chapter mentions the publication of the New York Times op-ed that calls for gay reparations in the United States, and it discusses the reactions of social conservatives to the article. It talks about homophobic individuals, who have not accepted homosexuals and gay people as human beings entitled to live their lives and deserving of civil rights, who find gay reparations an abomination. It also refers to televangelist Pat Robertson, who implied that the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, were godly retaliation for abortion, homosexuality, and secularism in the United States. This chapter examines distinct arguments against gay reparations, such as the claim that it is wrong for gay rights activists to apply today’s values to acts of discrimination against the gay community that took place a long time ago. It also reviews claims that gay reparations are divisive and generate a new class of American victims.

scholarly journals The Chinese Struggle for Civil Rights in 19th-century America: The Unusual Case of Baldwin v. Franks

1985 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 349-373 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles J. McClain
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Civil Rights ◽  
Unusual Case ◽  
United States Supreme Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
State Action ◽  
14Th Amendment ◽  
Federal Statute ◽  
19Th Century America

In its October term 1882, the United States Supreme Court handed down a decision which aborted federal efforts to deal with anti-black violence in the states of the old Confederacy. At issue in the case of United States v. Harris was the constitutionality of a federal statute, Section 5519 of the Revised Statutes of the United States of 1874, which made it a crime for private persons to conspire to deprive other individuals of the equal protection of the laws. A group of white Tennesseeans had been convicted under the statute for assaulting and badly beating a group of black criminal defendants in the custody of local authorities. The court held that there was no foundation in the Constitution for the federal law and voided it, thus overturning the convictions. The 14th Amendment, the purported basis for the statute, was aimed, according to the court, at state action and did not empower Congress to legislate against purely private conduct. It was the same line of reasoning that would lead the court in its following term, in the celebrated Civil Rights Cases, to declare unconstitutional Section 1 of the Civil Rights Act of 1875, which established civil and criminal penalties for racially motivated interference with anyone's full and equal enjoyment of public accommodations and conveyances.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document