Online Journal — Columbia Undergraduate Law Review

Revisiting Title VII: Supreme Court Hears Arguments on LGBTQ+ Workplace

Workplace protections against discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity are inconsistent through the U.S., and two critical issues are now in front of the Supreme Court. Based on the Court’s past interpretations of Title VII, and on the inherent role of sex in discrimination based on sexual orientation and transgender identity, the Supreme Court should find that Title VII prohibits discrimination based on sexuality and discrimination based on transgender identities.

fall 2019Angela YeJanuary 20, 2020Supreme Court, Workplace Discrimination, LGBTQ rights, civil rights, Civil Rights Act of 1964Comment

When Honor Prevents Justice: The Proper Way Forward for Prosecuting Honor Killings in Jordan

While honor killings are deeply rooted in private matters within society, mostly involving the family, only the legal system has the force and legitimacy required to carry out the prosecution of these crimes. In order to justly prosecute these murders, the Jordanian legal system must change its discriminatory legal codes and increase penalties for honor killings while raising public awareness of the violations of both Islamic law and natural rights these cases commit.

fall 2019Berra AkcanJanuary 17, 2020Comment

Disparate Impact Reinterpreted: Fair Housing Under Threat

In its original application, disparate impact is a “theory of liability” that prevents the use of “facially neutral employment practices,” or policies without a clear intention to discriminate, that adversely affect a protected employment class such as one based on race, gender, or religion. The recent development is particularly concerning because the disparate impact standard is not only integral in proving cases of employment discrimination, but it is also essential in combatting discrimination in areas ranging from education to housing.

fall 2019David JungJanuary 15, 2020Supreme Court, Housing Discrimination, HUD, civil rights, Civil Rights Act of 1964Comment

The Ongoing Supremacy of American Constitutionalism over the International Criminal Court

The United States fails to engage with international law and justice in many regards, with a major example being the nation’s abstention from the International Criminal Court (ICC). While choosing to not be a member of the ICC isn’t a violation of international law, by remaining out of the ICC, the U.S. greatly undermines its effectiveness and makes the enforcement powers of this international body extremely weak.

fall 2019Bella MannrayJanuary 15, 2020International law, American Constitutionalism, International Criminal CourtComment

Let’s Talk About Sex: Do Title VII Protections Under the Civil Rights Act of 1964 Transcend a Gender-Normative Narrative?

As American social norms progress and popular society becomes more tolerant of nontraditional gender identities and sexualities, our nation stands on the brink of a powerful legal turning point for LGBTQ+ rights. R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes, Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission offers a critical opportunity to affirm transgender individuals’ inherent right to be free from maltreatment based solely on who they are as human beings.

fall 2019Claire ChoiJanuary 15, 2020Equal employment, Supreme Court, civil rights, gender and sexuality, LGBTQ+ rightsComment

Stop, Drop, and Reintegrate: Discussing American Public Education’s History with Racial Integration

Racial integration is crucial to promoting cross-racial understanding, reducing prejudice, and improving academic performance for students of all races. The United States’ failure to racially integrate its public schools is destructive to the fabric of an equitable American society and undermines the American belief that all children deserve an equal educational opportunity. The increasing segregation of schooling institutions in 21st century America calls for placing public school districts under strict scrutiny and pursuing litigation against districts which contribute to such perpetuation.

fall 2019Anuja PharasiDecember 4, 2019Comment

Rap Beef, Diss Tracks, and what Pennsylvania v. Knox can tell us about Protected Free Speech

Pennsylvania v. Knox (2018) is situated in a larger debate concerning the extent to which rap music constitutes protected free speech. More specifically, this case tested the limits of rap as a form of free speech and the extent to which the First Amendment tolerates violence expressed in rap lyrics. However, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s limited understanding of the nuances of rap, and their judicial narrowing of this art form as monolithic, has set precedent that inserts legal and textual ambiguity into the nexus between between free speech and rap.

fall 2019JiHoon KoDecember 4, 2019free speech, First Amendment, hip-hop, rap Comments

Partisan Politics in Labor Law: Do Graduate Students have the Right to make their Voices Heard?

What role do graduate students have at universities? Although these students attend universities to learn, their learning experience requires that many of them also work. As in all workplaces, unions are vital for the protection of workers’ rights, distribution of fair pay, and the providing of safe working conditions. Without collective bargaining rights, it becomes significantly more difficult for graduate students to have a voice.

fall 2019Sasha HochmanDecember 4, 2019Comment

Mandatory Arbitration for Sexual Harassment: Fair Third Party or Toxic Intimidation?

How can survivors of harassment, assault, and/or discrimination realistically pursue justice? While the United States Federal Court System answers this question through mandatory arbitration, survivors and advocates—referring to the concept as forced arbitration—argue that it systematically allows the cycle of harassment and discriminatory behavior to continue.

fall 2019Parima KadikarDecember 4, 2019Comment