UC Law SF Scholarship Repository
Not a member yet
18602 research outputs found
Sort by
America’s Failure to Rescue Parents: A Narrative of Inequitable Tax “Reform”
Full text linkOther developed nations provide a slew of direct benefits to parents, such as paid parental leave and affordable childcare. America instead takes a circuitous route, heavily relying on the Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”) to provide tax breaks to certain parents. In addition to being indirect and comparatively stingy, these “parental tax benefits” are not awarded equitably. Instead, they favor nonpoor, one-breadwinner families, ignore the plight of nonpoor, working parents incurring substantial childcare and other work-related costs, exhibit an outright hostility toward poor parents, and raise a host of other distributional concerns. This preferentialism is sticky— when Congress alters parental tax benefits, it rarely deviates from these patterns.
That is, until the COVID-19 pandemic. Signed into law on March 11, 2021, the American Rescue Plan Act (the “ARPA”) provided much-needed relief to parents attempting to maintain jobs and care for children during this global health crisis. As is America’s tendency, the ARPA leaned extensively on the Code to do so. But it abandoned its consistent preferentialism for nonpoor, one breadwinner parents, expanding the various tax benefits available to nonpoor, working parents and poor parents in historically significant ways.
This was short-lived. The ARPA’s expanded parental tax benefits were only available in 2021 and have now expired, leaving parents back where they started. And while it initially appeared that the “Build Back Better Act” would resurrect many of these benefits, Congress ultimately let them all lapse. Because the ARPA was born in a crisis, there is a danger that this fleeting legislation will be viewed as having little historical relevance beyond the emergency context in which it was enacted. I resist this narrative and create a counter one. By situating the ARPA within a broader historical context, an alternative narrative is developed—one where the ARPA’s expansion of parental tax benefits enacted long overdue adjustments that began to correct the distributionally problematic way in which America has historically favored some families over others.
Preserving this historical narrative is imperative. It underscores the alarming failure of Congress to extend any of the ARPA’s parental tax benefits. And even more importantly, the narrative of inequitable tax reform developed in this project—supported by history—should ground imminent conversations that will shape the future of how parents in America are taxed. The parental tax benefits effectuated in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act amplified Congress’s inequitable treatment of families and favoritism towards nonpoor, one-breadwinner families, These benefits, however, will expire at the end of 2025, providing a date certain on which Congress must revisit its method of taxing parents. During these imminent conversations, a mastery of the historical context preserved in this Article should arm those who advocate for a more inclusive method of supporting parents attempting to raise children in the United States
“Prisoners of the Union”: Emporium Capwell and the Decline of Concerted Activity against Racial Discrimination
Full text linkThis paper tracks the development of judicial understanding of labor unions’ status under Section 9 of the National Labor Relations Act as the “exclusive representative” of employees for the purposes of bargaining with the employer, focusing on the how the Supreme Court case Emporium Capwell v. Western Community Addition has led to a gradual restriction of the scope of protected concerted activity by workers suffering discrimination. This ossification reveals how rigid, overly theoretical understanding of the law that is divorced from practical contexts often leads to reinforcing racial disparities in a capitalist mode of production. I further argue Emporium Capwell provides a rich common ground for radical legal theories, including both Marxist and Realist-descended theories such as Critical Race Theory (CRT) and the Law & Political Economy (LPE) movement. LPE’s framework allows for CRT and Marxist theories to engage each other over the contradictions in post-war liberalism that Emporium Capwell laid bare. Specifically, CRT and Marxist analyses of Emporium Capwell can serve as a basis for introducing Cedric Robinson’s idea of “racial capitalism” in a legal context. Derrick Bell’s critique of liberal Warren Court-era civil rights discourse, when combined with Marxist critiques of labor unions in a capitalist mode of production, can show how non-realistic legal analysis shores up racial capitalism
California’s BUG Problem: The Backup Generation Information Gap and its Impact on Vulnerable Communities
Full text linkCalifornia’s electricity system has faced unprecedented challenges in recent years. Extreme heat, wildfires, and additional severe weather events stressed the system to a breaking point. The state’s electric grid operator repeatedly called for rolling blackouts on hot summer days to preserve the integrity of the electric grid. Electric utilities proactively shut off power during dry and windy conditions to prevent their equipment from sparking wildfires. Strings of powerful winter storms left hundreds of thousands across the state without power for multiple days.
In response to the poor reliability of the electrical grid, demand for backup generation has skyrocketed. Both residents and businesses are finding alternative ways to keep their lights on, especially during emergency events. Yet backup generation predominantly runs on fossil fuels to supply temporary power. These generators create high environmental costs, emitting greenhouse gases and air pollutants that contribute to climate change and negatively impact public health. Some communities are well-positioned to respond to these impacts, while others are more vulnerable and experience disproportionate harm.
This Note reviews the evolving legal landscape that allows the deployment and use of backup generation in California with a particular focus on the use of backup generation during emergency events. In doing so, it demonstrates a lack of readily available information associated with these generators and raises the concern that the backup generation information gap harms the state’s most vulnerable populations. This Note concludes by suggesting an approach to reduce the information gap through increased reporting, tailored monitoring, and managed access of backup generators. Such an approach supports vulnerable communities while recognizing the role of backup generators in California’s electricity system of the future