Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Law

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Law

The constitutionality of Proposition 209 as applied

Article Abstract:

California's Proposition 209 as applied can be challenged or limited on several grounds. Constitutional ballot initiative Proposition 209 which was passed by California voters denies public entities the discretion of providing preferential treatment to individuals based upon race, sex, ethnicity, national origin, or color. The US 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in Coalition for Economic Equity v. Wilson held the law valid on its face against Equal Protection challenge. States cannot stop courts enforcing and remedying federal rights or employers' conforming practices to Title VII.

Publisher: Harvard Law Review Association
Publication Name: Harvard Law Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0017-811X
Year: 1998
Analysis, Affirmative action, Conflict of laws

User Contributions:

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

CAPTCHA


Incidental burdens on fundamental rights

Article Abstract:

US Supreme Court jurisprudence on burdens to fundamental rights that occur as a result of government action of legislation categorizes the burdens as direct or incidental, but substantiality is more accurately determined to be the threshold used trigger heightened scrutiny. The incidental/direct distinction offers little guidance because direct burdens can be trivial and incidental burdens can have great impact. The Court's test for incidental burdens on fundamental rights should incorporate whether the burdens are substantial.

Author: Dorf, Michael C.
Publisher: Harvard Law Review Association
Publication Name: Harvard Law Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0017-811X
Year: 1996

User Contributions:

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

CAPTCHA


Foreword: the limits of Socratic deliberation

Article Abstract:

Supreme Court justices on matters of constitutional and statutory interpretation split into two camps, textualists and purposivists. Textualists focus on the original meaning of legal texts, whereas purposivists use the texts to arrive at legislative purposes that deal with matters not explicit in the text. Both philosophies are limited, like the Socratic method, by too much speculation. A model of provisional adjudication, aimed at achieving answers to modern legal problems, could improve the Court's functioning.

Author: Dorf, Michael C.
Publisher: Harvard Law Review Association
Publication Name: Harvard Law Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0017-811X
Year: 1998
United States, Judges, Practice, Beliefs, opinions and attitudes, United States. Supreme Court

User Contributions:

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

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: United States, Laws, regulations and rules, Civil rights, Interpretation and construction, Constitutional law, Constitutional interpretation
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: Contingent liabilities in section 351 transactions: the IRS limits the application of Holdcroft. Sidestepping the business purpose test for corporate spin-offs
  • Abstracts: Positive rights and state constitutions: the limits of federal rationality review. Interpretation and authority in state constitutionalism
  • Abstracts: The effect of Community law on pre-accession tax treaties. Taxes and the World Trade Organization
  • Abstracts: Connecticut condemnation law makes tax-exempt bonds revocable, testing the limits of state power to alter contracts by eminent domain
  • Abstracts: Threat of surge in pay deals recedes. Finance deals static at 4%. 3%: do not disturb
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.