7044 research outputs found
Sort by
Rizo v. Yovino: Another Step Toward Equality Through the Equal Pay Act
Get PDFStill prevalent in today’s society is a vast inequality between men and women, such that men are oftentimes treated better than women in the same contexts. One realm of society where this inequality is evidenced is through the disparities in pay rates. On average, for each dollar a man earns, a woman earns only 80.5 cents. Despite the passage of the Equal Pay Act (“EPA”), the nearly 20% gap remains. The purpose of the EPA was to bridge the pay gap among men and women working similar jobs at the same workplace. Under the EPA, an employer cannot pay men and women differently for the same or similar jobs unless the pay disparity is based on: “(i) a seniority system; (ii) a merit system; (iii) a system which measures earnings by quantity or quality of production; or (iv) a differential based on any other factor other than sex.” In a recent opinion issued by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (“Ninth Circuit”), an en banc panel provided some clarity to the last of these systems allowing for a pay difference. In Rizo v. Yovino, the en banc panel affirmed a district court’s denial of defendant’s summary judgment motion, holding that employers shall not consider prior salary as a factor other than sex to support a pay gap between men and women
California’s Capital Crisis Continues: Voter-Initiated Time Limit on Capital Appellate Review Upheld Under Improper Directive Interpretation
Get PDFPart I begins with an overview of the separation of powers doctrine. Part II provides an overview of Proposition 66 and the California Supreme Court case that challenged its constitutionality. This section discusses Proposition 66’s statutory objective, the petitioners’ claim of unconstitutionality, the respondents’ claim about the initiative’s purpose, and the court’s separation of powers analysis. Part III discusses the state of California’s capital crisis by (1) examining the Briggs ruling’s effect on death-row inmates; (2) providing a brief background of California’s death-penalty system; and (3) evaluating the Briggs ruling in connection with the court’s duty to provide meaningful appellate review. Part IV evaluates the court’s separation of powers analysis regarding the constitutionality of the five-year time limit and addresses the problems with the court’s directive interpretation. To illustrate the inappropriateness of the court’s directive interpretation of the time limit, this section analyzes the language and purpose of the initiative, the intent of the voters, and the court’s cited case law. Finally, part V concludes that the California Supreme Court had a duty to invalidate an unworkable judicial time limit that was passed by voter initiative when it is evident that the voters intended for the time limit to place a mandatory requirement on the courts
The Legal Management of International Watercourses and Its Impact on Relations With the Reference to Turkey, Syria, and Iraq Over the Utilization of the Euphrates and Tigris Rivers
No full textIncreasing demand for the most valuable and irreplaceable freshwater due to the rapidly growing population, irrigation expansion, urbanization, industrialization, and climate changes, requires the international community urgently cooperate to regulate and manage the international watercourses for Non-navigational uses. Therefore, the adoption of the UN Watercourses Convention is one of the most successful efforts that have been accomplished in the 21st century in this regard. As the Euphrates and Tigris rivers are not exempted from this dramatic changes, also having no comprehensive multilateral agreement between the three main riparian led to damage the two rivers, ultimately, affected the inhabitants of the two rivers especially downstream states. Turkey, Syria, and Iraq as a co-riparian are required to cooperate in managing and developing the two rivers in the way that satisfy at least the basic human needs for freshwater. Conversely, they should take the human right to water under consideration during negotiation over the shared freshwater, especially in the Euphrates and Tigris region.
The relationship of the Riparian Turkey, Syria and Iraq of the Euphrates and Tigris Rivers has been examined. The utilization of the two rivers equitably and reasonably has been discussed as well as the doctrine of the no significant harm and their implementations have been investigated and referenced to the case of the Euphrates and Tigris Rivers.
Implementation and the enforcement of the rules and principles of international watercourses related to the Euphrates and Tigris Rivers have become an extra challenge since Turkey has not signed or ratified the UNWC. Meanwhile, the substantive and procedural rules as instruments of international law serve the riparians to resolve problems that likely will arise from the utilization and development of the two rivers because they set up obligations and rights on the riparian states.
Even though the riparians of the Euphrates and Tigris in favor of the principles of the convention or against it, it is concluded that the UN Watercourses Convention is relevant to the Euphrates and Tigris basin and incorporates important customary principles and rules that could help address the problems in the basins. It is also held that the Convention provides the riparian states with an appropriate legal framework that could be used as the basis for negotiation as to how to apply, manage, and develop the resources of the basin to the benefit of all riparian states
The Construction and Criminalization of Disability in School Incarceration
Get PDFThis Article explores how race functions to ascribe and criminalize disability. It posits that for White students in wealthy schools, disabilities or perceived disabilities are often viewed as medical conditions and treated with care and resources. For students of color, however, the construction of disability (if it exists) may be a criminalized condition that is treated as warranting punishment and segregated classrooms, possibly leading to juvenile justice system involvement. Providing a review of the K-12 disability legal regimes, this Article maps how the process of identifying a student with a disability happens in a hypercriminalized school setting. The Article argues that the school itself contributes to the construction and criminalization of disability and that the attribution of disability is a product of the subjectivity built into the law, heavily surveilled school environments, and biases held by teachers and administrators. For students of color, instead of a designation that attracts more resources, disability is one of the mechanisms through which they are criminalized. This Article culminates with a call for scholars and practitioners to understand the web that exists in the construction and criminalization of disabilities for Black and Latinx children and the role that schools and school actors play in this process