Date of Publication:
Susan D. Rozelle, Sometimes a Control Test is Just a Control Test, in Criminal Law Conversations (Paul H. Robinson et al. eds., Oxford University Press, 2009)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Rebecca C. Morgan, The New Importance of Advance Directives, 2 Estate Planning and Community Property Law Journal 1 (2009)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Michèle Alexandre, “Girls Gone Wild” and Rape Law: Revising the Contractual Concept of Consent & Ensuring an Unbiased Application of “Reasonable Doubt” When the Victim Is Non-Traditional, 17 Am. U. J. Gender & Soc. Pol'y & L. 41 (2009)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
This article, entitled “Girls Gone Wild” and Rape Law: Revising Contractual Concept of Consent and Ensuring an Unbiased Application of "Reasonable Doubt” When the Victim Is Non-Traditional (American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy and the Law, Volume 17, Number 1, 2009), argues that the traditional contractual standard for consent applied in rape cases is erroneous and particularly harmful to non-traditional rape victims. It, therefore, proposes a change to what is coined by the author as a “continuum-based” standard of consent. Courts’ treatment of non-traditional rape victims when applying the traditional contractual consent standard perpetuates gender biases that nullify the very purpose of the rape shield laws. These decisions are full of sexist assumptions and inferences about the victim’s sexual behavior, which courts use to justify their decisions to allow evidence of the victim’s past sexual conduct. This type of evidence unfailingly permeates the jury’s decision as to whether or not the alleged victim’s behavior and past acts are worthy of protection.
Date of Publication:
Susan D. Rozelle, No Excuse for You, in Criminal Law Conversations (Paul H. Robinson et al. eds., Oxford University Press, 2009)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Susan D. Rozelle, Pure Insanity, 42 Tex. Tech L. Rev. 543 (2009)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Stephanie Vaughan, Persuasian is an Art . . . But It is Also an Invaluable Tool in Advocacy, 61 Baylor L. Rev. 635 (2009)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
The article is about persuasion. It highlights the origins of advocacy, details how to write persuasive documents, and provides tips for presenting persuasive oral arguments. Appendices include practical checklists for editing and preparing for oral arguments, and a list of style tips. This Article is important because it gives advocates the tools they need to better prepare for making persuasive arguments, both in writing and orally, while grounding the “art of persuasion” in rhetoric and ancient-Greek philosophies and teachings.
Date of Publication:
Luz Estella Nagle, U.S. Narcotic Kingpin List Snares Innocents in Its Impersonal Web, 25 Int'l Enforcement L. Reporter 263 (2009)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Jason Bent, Systemic Harassment, 77 Tenn. L. Rev. 151 (2009)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Systemic employment discrimination cases, including private class actions and EEOC "pattern or practice" actions, have been used since the 1960s to redress overt forms of discrimination in the workplace. Today, however, there is an emerging area of systemic employment litigation that holds the potential to play an important role in combating the sources of structural or "second generation" discrimination: systemic harassment litigation. Unfortunately, litigants and courts are generally confused about how systemic harassment claims should be pursued and litigated. Harassment cases do not fit the mold for "pattern or practice" cases outlined by the Supreme Court in International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States, leaving the federal courts divided over key substantive and procedural issues in systemic harassment cases.
In this Article, I propose a litigation framework and enforcement strategy for systemic harassment cases that is founded upon the statutory language of Title VII. By carefully observing the distinction between those provisions of Title VII aimed at protecting the interests of individual "aggrieved persons" and the separate provisions aimed at protecting the public interest, a sensible litigation framework can be formulated for systemic harassment cases. Failing to observe this statutory distinction has led the EEOC to pursue an ineffective enforcement strategy. The EEOC's focus in systemic harassment cases has been to obtain monetary damages for individual victims under an increasingly outdated rules-enforcement paradigm, rather than to obtain meaningful prospective relief. As a result, the EEOC has missed an important opportunity to begin addressing structural forms of discrimination. I propose an alternative public enforcement strategy for systemic harassment cases that focuses on obtaining effective consent orders that will usher in structural reform and will result in a more efficient allocation of enforcement resources.
Date of Publication:
Royal C. Gardner, International Environmental Law, 43 American Bar Association Section of International Law Year in Review 837 (2009)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Jason Bent, What the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act Doesn’t Do: “Discrete Acts” and the Future of Pattern or Practice Litigation, 33 Rutgers Law Record 31 (2009)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act clarified the application of the EEOC charge filing period for purposes of determining whether a claim of compensation discrimination is timely. But a number of timeliness questions remain unanswered for claimants alleging discrimination on grounds other than compensation discrimination. This Essay examines one question left open after the enactment of the Ledbetter Act, specifically: When, if ever, does the EEOC charge filing period begin to run in cases where the plaintiff alleges that defendant engaged in a "pattern or practice" of unlawful "discrete acts" of discrimination? In this Essay, I consider the difficulties that arise when attempting to apply the seemingly straightforward timely-filed charge requirement to pattern or practice cases. I evaluate the policy arguments supporting the competing interpretations of the timely-filed charge requirement as applied to pattern or practice cases, and I suggest a number of possible legislative solutions that could provide certainty to employers and potential claimants.