Harvard Law & Policy Review

Archives for October 2014

by on

Defining a Terrorist

By Ming Cheung

Over the past week, a series of tragic and senseless attacks have taken place in the United States and Canada. First, a man struck two soldiers in a hit-and-run in Quebec , another targeted the Canadian Parliament in Ottawa, and a hatchet-wielding individual assaulted police officers in New York City. All three attackers happen to be Muslim, and as human nature is wont to do — politicians, the media, and our national attention — have begun to fit these incidents into our schema of a Muslim terrorist threatening our national security. By labeling these attacks as the acts of “terrorists,” we are reminded of our vulnerability and are implicitly bracing for a strong response. Yet the seemingly automatic process by which we affix the “terrorist” label has significant implications for our integrity as a free and democratic society. [Read more…] about Defining a Terrorist

by on

School Segregation in New York City

By Ana Choi

On October 22, the New York City Council introduced a package of legislation aimed at addressing the problem of racial and socioeconomic segregation in New York City’s public schools. The package contains three pieces. The first piece would require the city’s Education Department to report statistics for various measures of diversity in the schools. The second piece calls on the Education Department to officially declare school diversity a policy goal. The third piece urges the New York State Legislature to rewrite a 1971 law that made the Specialized High School Admissions Test (SHSAT) the only criterion that could be used to admit students into the city’s elite specialized high schools—including Stuyvesant High School and the Bronx High School of Science.

Although the City Council has very little power over the public school system, the sponsors of the legislation package hope to draw attention to the issue and influence the conversation about how to improve integration in the schools. The package of legislation comes in the wake of a recent report from the Civil Rights Project at UCLA which found that New York state has the most segregated schools in the country. There currently is a bill before the New York state legislature that, if passed, would change the admission policy for the specialized schools so that they would use a “power score” factoring in a student’s grade point average, attendance, and state exam scores, in addition to the SHSAT. So far, however, the bill has not received much support. [Read more…] about School Segregation in New York City

by on

Any Traction for the Dukes Majority’s Characterization of “Most Managers?”

Anne King 

As I wrote previously, as courts apply the Supreme Court’s decision in Wal-Mart Stores Inc. v. Dukes, observers are ever gaining new insight on how the opinion will impact future litigation.  Nearly four months after Dukes (decided 6/20/11), I thought it would be interesting to take a look at whether a noteworthy passage in the majority opinion is finding any traction in the courts.

Here’s the language I have in mind: “To the contrary, left to their own devices most managers in any corporation – and surely most managers in a corporation that forbids sex discrimination – would select sex-neutral, performance-based criteria for hiring and promotion that produce no actionable disparity at all.” [Read more…] about Any Traction for the Dukes Majority’s Characterization of “Most Managers?”

by on

Whatever Happened to NSA Reform?

By Jake Laperruque

For the last year and a half, government surveillance and NSA monitoring have generated one of the most intense discussions in the country. The Snowden disclosures have not only brought the surveillance debate to the front page, congressional hearings, and the campaign trail, but have also significantly impacted public opinion: Most Americans believe that NSA practices have gone too far, and need to be reined in. Now Congress needs to act to reform these surveillance practices — but time is running out.

Throughout most of 2014, lawmakers steadily worked towards this goal. This summer, the USA FREEDOM Act — which would enact significant reforms by ending bulk collection programs, enhancing transparency, and improving proceedings in the secret FISA Court — was approved by the House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees with strong support. The bill was significantly watered down prior to a vote before the full House floor (where it received strong support), but was reintroduced in the Senate with significant improvements. The legislation seemed primed for passage, but suddenly the momentum halted, with the Senate failing to take action on the bill this fall. Now, if the USA FREEDOM Act doesn’t receive a Senate vote in the post-election lame duck session, NSA reform will be forced to go back to step one when the new Congress convenes in 2015. [Read more…] about Whatever Happened to NSA Reform?

by on

Closing Guantanamo (For Real This Time)

By Lisa Ebersole

This week, Obama Administration officials revealed that the President is considering using his executive power to close Guantanamo. Congress has attempted to preemptively block such action by including a provision in the military spending bill that forbids the transfer of any of Guantanamo’s prisoners back to the United States. However, Obama could circumvent Congress by vetoing the military spending bill or by signing the law into effect, but including a signing statement saying that the prohibition against transferring Guantanamo inmates violates his powers as Commander-in-Chief, signaling that he does not intend to comply with that aspect of the law. This news has summoned an ironic accusation from John Boehner: that the President would be “thumb[ing] his nose at the American people and the Constitution” by bringing the inmates to prisons in the United States. [Read more…] about Closing Guantanamo (For Real This Time)

by on

Veasey v. Perry & The Voting Rights Amendment Act

By Tharuni Jayaraman

Thursday night was a busy night in the voting rights world. Just before 9:00 PM EST, District Court Judge Ramos, in Veasey v. Perry, enjoined Texas’ photo identification law, SB 14. She held that the law (1) “creates an unconstitutional burden on the right to vote,” (2) has an impermissible discriminatory effect against Hispanics and African-Americans, and (3) was imposed with a discriminatory purpose.” Furthermore, as emphasized by Justin Levitt of Election Law Blog, Judge Ramos will also be considering the plaintiffs’ request for a “bail-in” order under Section 3(c) of the Voting Rights Act. If such an order were issued, Texas would become the first state to be subject to preclearance in the post-Shelby County v. Holder world.

Then, about an hour later, the Supreme Court issued an order vacating the Seventh Circuit’s stay on the district court’s permanent injunction of Wisconsin’s photo identification law. Several scholars, including Volume 8.1 author Richard Hasen, have written excellent analyses of these two decisions. Rather than rehashing their analyses, I hope to demonstrate that Judge Ramos’ decision in Veasey underscores the need for the Voting Rights Amendment Act (VRAA). [Read more…] about Veasey v. Perry & The Voting Rights Amendment Act