Sponsored by the Federalist Society's Civil Rights Practice Group, the Cato Institute, and the Heritage FoundationSeptember 09, 09:00 AMThe Mayflower Hotel 1127 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20036
Please join the Federalist Society, the Cato Institute, and the Heritage Foundation on Tuesday, September 9, 2014 for a free one day conference discussing recent developments in civil rights law. Check back as more panelists are added.
There are not many dull moments in the debate about race preferences in university admissions. Nevertheless, the issuance of the recent Fisher v. University of Texas case has often been painted as one of them. “In with a bang, out with a fizzle” is the title of one account of Fisher, and “Fisher’s big news: No big news” is the headline of another. But perhaps this perennially hot debate has not cooled down after all, and Fisher is better understood as a cliffhanger—one akin to the ending of Frank Stockton’s 1882 “The Lady or the Tiger?,” which famously leaves the protagonist uncertain whether a beautiful woman or a starved tiger will emerge from behind the door he is about to open....[Read Now!]
On January 8, 2014, the Department of Justice Civil Rights Division and the Department of Education Office for Civil Rights jointly released a memo urging public schools to revisit discipline policies that they assert have a disproportionate effect on minority students. “Schools ... violate Federal law when they evenhandedly implement facially neutral policies and practices that, although not adopted with the intent to discriminate, nonetheless have an unjustified effect of discriminating against students on the basis of race," read the memo. "Examples of policies that can raise disparate impact concerns include policies that impose mandatory suspension, expulsion, or citation (e.g., ticketing or other fines or summonses) upon any student who commits a specified offense — such as being tardy to class, being in possession of a cellular phone, being found insubordinate, acting out, or not wearing the proper school uniform.” Our experts discussed the expansion of disparate impact analysis into school discipline. Materials referenced during this podcast are available on this web page under "Related Links."
Hans Bader, Senior Attorney and Counsel for Special Projects, Competitive Enterprise Institute
Roger Clegg, President and General Counsel, Center for Equal Opportunity
Moderator: Dean Reuter, Vice President and Director of Practice Groups, The Federalist Society
If you are tired of Court watchers who like to hedge their bets, you might appreciate this: I predict a reversal in Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Integration and Immigrant Rights and Fight for Equality By Any Means Necessary. It seems unlikely that the Court granted certiorari in order to congratulate the Sixth Circuit on its keen legal insight. But I can’t help wondering why Supreme Court intervention has been necessary. How did the Sixth Circuit, sitting en banc, arrive at the profoundly counter-intuitive conclusion it did?...[Read More!]
The Supreme Court was less than one month away from hearing arguments in Mount Holly v. Mt. Holly Gardens Citizens in Action, Inc. and answering the question of whether disparate impact claims are cognizable under the Fair Housing Act when the case settled. Ilya Shapiro discussed this development and its impact on future civil rights litigation for a live Teleforum audience.
Mr. Ilya Shapiro, Senior Fellow in Constitutional Studies, Cato Institute
Moderator: Dean A. Reuter, Vice President and Director of Practice Groups, The Federalist Society