Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Law

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Law

Constitutional law - equal protection - Fourth Circuit finds University of Maryland minority scholarship program unconstitutional

Article Abstract:

The Fourth Circuit in Podberesky v. Kirwan incorrectly applied a legal standard to find unfair discrimination in a minority scholarship program at the University of Maryland at College Park. The court considered only the factors involved in the case of City of Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co., rather than the more comprehensive standard of United States v. Paradise. The scholarship program would have been considered narrowly tailored to remedy past discrimination according to the Paradise standard. The case concerned the Benjamin Banneker Scholarships given to African American students based on merit.

Publisher: Harvard Law Review Association
Publication Name: Harvard Law Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0017-811X
Year: 1995
United States, Cases, Minorities, Maryland, Discrimination in education, Educational discrimination, Student financial aid, University of Maryland (College Park)

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Constitutional limits on anti-gay-rights initiatives

Article Abstract:

Initiatives to prohibit gay-rights laws, such as Colorado Amendment Two, are unconstitutional in that they violate both the Equal Protection Clause and the Free Speech Clause. Laws protecting gay rights do not grant special treatment to gays, but rather represent an attempt to counteract discrimination. Gay-rights laws adopted as of May 1993 at the state and local level are listed in an appendix.

Publisher: Harvard Law Review Association
Publication Name: Harvard Law Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0017-811X
Year: 1993
Gays, Laws, regulations and rules

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Constitutional law - Fourth Amendment - separation of powers - Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review holds that prosecutors may spy on American agents of foreign powers without a warrant

Article Abstract:

In the case of In re Sealed Case, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review declared that criminal prosecutors could conduct warrantless surveillance on a probable agent of a foreign power in the US. The court placed limits on the authority of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court over the Department of Justice.

Publisher: Harvard Law Review Association
Publication Name: Harvard Law Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0017-811X
Year: 2003
Separation of powers, Searches and seizures, Electronic surveillance, Case Note, Warrants (Law), Search warrants

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA

Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: Constitutional innocence. Constitutional law - abortion - Sixth Circuit strikes down Ohio ban of post-viability and dilation and extraction abortions
  • Abstracts: Continuing protection: converting a limited liability structure raises key insurance issues
  • Abstracts: The special 301 investigation of China's software protection laws: cautious optimism leads for a successful exercise in dispute resolution
  • Abstracts: Choice-of-law clause, often overlooked, can trip up counsel. Independent counsel idea gone awry
  • Abstracts: Privatization, political insurrection and corporate welfare. Moving people from welfare rolls to payrolls
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.