Race Discrimination

Courthouse Steps: Pena-Rodriguez v. Colorado - Podcast

Criminal Law & Procedure Practice Group Podcast
John C. Richter October 11, 2016

On Tuesday, October 11, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Pena-Rodriguez v. Colorado. This case involves the constitutionality of a Colorado rule that bars a defendant from introducing evidence that a juror was racially biased. The justices will consider whether applying a no-impeachment rule to block evidence in this context violates the Sixth Amendment right to an impartial jury.


  • John C. Richter, Partner, King & Spalding

Racial Pretexts in Peremptory Jury Strikes: The Impact of Foster v. Chatman - Podcast

Criminal Law & Procedure Practice Group Podcast
Joseph L. Hoffmann May 25, 2016

The Supreme Court issued its 7-1 ruling in Foster v. Chatman on May 23, reversing the Supreme Court of Georgia and remanding the case. Foster was convicted of murder and sentenced to death three decades ago by an all-white jury. The prosecutor struck all of the black jurors and had plans to do so before the voir dire began. The prosecution presented several race-neutral reasons for striking the jurors, and the Georgia courts ruled against the Batson claim. Foster later gained access to the prosecution's jury-selection notes that showed some racial pretext and used them for a renewed Batson claim. The Georgia courts rejected the claim as barred by state res judicata. Chief Justice Roberts wrote for the majority of the court finding that the court did still have jurisdiction and impermissible racial pretext was apparent for at least two of the state's peremptory strikes. Justice Thomas wrote a firm dissent where he doubted the court's jurisdiction. This Teleforum discussed the ramifications of this decision on the future of Batson deference, res judicata, and how this case might affect capital appeals pending throughout the nation.


  • Prof. Joseph L. Hoffmann, Harry Pratter Professor of Law and Director for Strategic Projects, Indiana University Maurer School of Law

Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing - Podcast

Civil Rights Practice Group Podcast
Peter N. Kirsanow, Stanley Kurtz April 21, 2016

In July of 2015, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) announced its final rule on Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing. HUD touts the rule, promulgated under the Fair Housing Act of 1928, as a critical tool to help communities “take significant actions to overcome historic patterns of segregation, achieve truly balanced and integrated living patterns, promote fair housing choice, and foster inclusive communities that are free from discrimination.” Critics charge that the program is a power grab that improperly applies disparate impact analysis and incorrectly views geographic clustering of racial and ethnic minorities as evidence of discrimination and segregation. Our experts discussed the merits of the rule from both law and policy perspectives.


  • Hon. Peter N. Kirsanow, Commissioner, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights
  • Stanley Kurtz, Senior Fellow, Ethics and Public Policy Center

Racial Preferences in Federal Government Contracting – Rothe Development Corporation v. Department of Defense - Podcast

Civil Rights Practice Group Podcast
David F. Barton March 17, 2016

On March 10, 2016, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in Rothe Development Corporation v. Department of Defense. Rothe alleges that Congress has failed to bring a statutory racial classification under section 8(a) of the Small Business Act into compliance with subsequent Supreme Court precedent as well as a 2008 decision in which the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals (in litigation also involving Rothe) unanimously struck down a Department of Defense affirmative action program as unconstitutional racial discrimination. The program struck down in Rothe required the DoD, the Coast Guard, the Air Force, and NASA to ensure that five percent of all contract dollars be awarded to individuals or businesses designated as disadvantaged individuals. Our expert argued the case before the D.C. Circuit.


  • David F. Barton, The Gardner Law Firm

American Multiculturalism: Its Force and Limits From 1776 to Today - Event Audio/Video

18th Annual Faculty Conference
Mary Anne Case, John C. Eastman, Richard W. Garnett, Heather Mac Donald, Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz January 16, 2016

Since before the Revolution, American legal and political traditions have supported many forms of multiculturalism, through institutions such as freedom of association, religious liberty, parental rights, freedom of speech, private property, federalism, often open immigration policy, and the like. And those traditions have likewise imposed constraints on such multiculturalism. What can those traditions tell us about today’s multiculturalism debates?

This panel took place during the 18th Annual Faculty Conference at the Sheraton New York Times Square Hotel in New York, NY on January 9, 2016.

Panel: American Multiculturalism: Its Force and Limits From 1776 to Today
9:00 am - 10:45 am

  • Prof. Mary Anne Case, University of Chicago Law School
  • Prof. John C. Eastman, Chapman University School of Law
  • Prof. Richard W. Garnett, University of Notre Dame Law School
  • Ms. Heather Mac Donald, Manhattan Institute
  • Moderator: Prof. Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz, Georgetown University Law Center

Sheraton New York Times Square Hotel
New York, NY