Questions

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
James L. Gibson ◽  
Michael J. Nelson
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
African Americans ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Public Support ◽  
The United States ◽  
Future Research ◽  
White Americans ◽  
Two Factors ◽  
The U.S

We have investigated the differences in support for the U.S. Supreme Court among black, Hispanic, and white Americans, catalogued the variation in African Americans’ group attachments and experiences with legal authorities, and examined how those latter two factors shape individuals’ support for the U.S. Supreme Court, that Court’s decisions, and for their local legal system. We take this opportunity to weave our findings together, taking stock of what we have learned from our analyses and what seem like fruitful paths for future research. In the process, we revisit Positivity Theory. We present a modified version of the theory that we hope will guide future inquiry on public support for courts, both in the United States and abroad.

scholarly journals Immunizing the Flock: How the Pandemic Court Rewrote Religious Freedom

Laws ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 12
Author(s):  
Paul Baumgardner
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Religious Freedom ◽  
The United States ◽  
Religious Practices ◽  
The Past ◽  
The U.S

When coronavirus began to descend upon the United States, religious freedom advocates across the country sounded the alarm that citizens’ religious practices and institutions were under threat. Although some of the most extreme arguments championed by these advocates were not validated by our legal system, many were. This article explores the underappreciated gains made by religious freedom advocates before the U.S. Supreme Court over the past year. As a result of the “Pandemic Court”, religious freedom in the United States has been rewritten. This promises to radically change the educational, employment, and health prospects of millions of Americans for the rest of the pandemic and long afterwards.

scholarly journals The Unceasing Significance of Colorism: Skin Tone Stratification in the United States

Daedalus ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 150 (2) ◽  
pp. 76-90
Author(s):  
Ellis P. Monk
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
African Americans ◽  
Well Being ◽  
The United States ◽  
Skin Tone ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Past Century ◽  
White Americans ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Life Chances

Abstract For many decades now, social scientists have documented immense ethnoracial inequalities in the United States. Much of this work is rooted in comparing the life chances, trajectories, and outcomes of African Americans to White Americans. From health to wealth and nearly every measure of well-being, success, and thriving one can find, White Americans remain ahead of Black Americans. What this focus on ethnoracial inequality between “groups” obscures, however, is long-standing skin tone inequality within groups. In this essay, I trace the trajectory of colorism and skin tone stratification in the United States over the past century. Next, I high-light the contemporary persistence of skin tone stratification, not only among African Americans, but among Latinx and Asian Americans as well. I conclude by arguing that future research on colorism will be essential to understand comprehensively the significance of race/ethnicity in a demographically shifting United States (such as immigration and “multiraciality”).

Racial and Political Dynamics of an Approaching “Majority-Minority” United States

2018 ◽  
Vol 677 (1) ◽  
pp. 204-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maureen A. Craig ◽  
Julian M. Rucker ◽  
Jennifer A. Richeson
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Future Research ◽  
White Americans ◽  
Psychological Mechanisms ◽  
Political Outcomes ◽  
Essential Questions ◽  
Social Scientific ◽  
Demographic Shifts ◽  
Projected Changes

Do demographic shifts in the racial composition of the United States promote positive changes in the nation’s racial dynamics? Change in response to the nation’s growing diversity is likely, but its direction and scope are less clear. This review integrates emerging social-scientific research that examines how Americans are responding to the projected changes in the racial/ethnic demographics of the United States. Specifically, we review recent empirical research that examines how exposure to information that the United States is becoming a “majority-minority” nation affects racial attitudes and several political outcomes (e.g., ideology, policy preferences), and the psychological mechanisms that give rise to those attitudes. We focus primarily on the reactions of members of the current dominant racial group (i.e., white Americans). We then consider important implications of these findings and propose essential questions for future research.

Racial Sentiment and Public Support for Arming Teachers with Guns in the United States

2021 ◽  
pp. 215336872110389
Author(s):  
Andrew J. Baranauskas
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
African Americans ◽  
Minority Groups ◽  
Public Support ◽  
The United States ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Racial Issue ◽  
Racial Resentment ◽  
Nationally Representative ◽  
Negative Feelings

In the effort to prevent school shootings in the United States, policies that aim to arm teachers with guns have received considerable attention. Recent research on public support for these policies finds that African Americans are substantially less likely to support them, indicating that support for arming teachers is a racial issue. Given the racialized nature of support for punitive crime policies in the United States, it is possible that racial sentiment shapes support for arming teachers as well. This study aims to determine the association between two types of racial sentiment—explicit negative feelings toward racial/ethnic minority groups and racial resentment—and support for arming teachers using a nationally representative data set. While explicit negative feelings toward African Americans and Hispanics are not associated with support for arming teachers, those with racial resentments are significantly more likely to support arming teachers. Racial resentment also weakens the effect of other variables found to be associated with support for arming teachers, including conservative ideology and economic pessimism. Implications for policy and research are discussed.

scholarly journals International Law in the US Legal System

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bradley Curtis A
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
The United States ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
Sovereign Immunity ◽  
War Powers ◽  
Jus Cogens ◽  
The U.S

International Law in the U.S. Legal System provides a wide-ranging overview of how international law intersects with the domestic legal system of the United States, and points out various unresolved issues and areas of controversy. Curtis Bradley explains the structure of the U.S. legal system and the various separation of powers and federalism considerations implicated by this structure, especially as these considerations relate to the conduct of foreign affairs. Against this backdrop, he covers all of the principal forms of international law: treaties, executive agreements, decisions and orders of international institutions, customary international law, and jus cogens norms. He also explores a number of issues that are implicated by the intersection of U.S. law and international law, such as treaty withdrawal, foreign sovereign immunity, international human rights litigation, war powers, extradition, and extraterritoriality. This book highlights recent decisions and events relating to the topic, including various actions taken during the Trump administration, while also taking into account relevant historical materials, including materials relating to the U.S. Constitutional Founding. Written by one of the most cited international law scholars in the United States, the book is a resource for lawyers, law students, legal scholars, and judges from around the world.

Africa in the Shuffle

1995 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 22-23
Author(s):  
Immanuel Wallerstein
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
New York ◽  
African American ◽  
African Americans ◽  
New York Times ◽  
The United States ◽  
The New York Times ◽  
The U.S

Once upon a time, not so very long ago, the study of Africa in the United States was a very rare and obscure practice, engaged in almost exclusively by African-American (then called Negro) intellectuals. They published scholarly articles primarily in quite specialized journals, notably Phylon, and their books were never reviewed in the New York Times. As a matter of fact, at this time (that is, before 1945) there weren't even very many books written about African-Americans in the U.S., although the library acquisitions were not quite as rare as those for books about Africa.

Crackdown

2020 ◽  
pp. 88-109
Author(s):  
Russell Crandall
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Legal System ◽  
The United States ◽  
Pharmaceutical Market ◽  
Drug Control ◽  
Freedom Of Choice ◽  
Drug Laws ◽  
Federal Level ◽  
American Legal System ◽  
The U.S

This chapter recounts how the United States in the nineteenth century permitted considerable personal freedom of choice regarding drugs, citing the idiosyncrasies of the U.S. Constitution that helped ensure potent forms of opium, cocaine, and cannabis remained widely available nationwide. It talks about how the American legal system made states responsible for regulating drugs, particularly opium and cannabis, on their own turf. It also discusses how most states and several major cities by 1910 had anti-drug laws wherein ritual police raids were a hallmark of the states' haphazard enforcement schemes. The chapter recounts the first efforts at drug control at the federal level, which were designed not to break up underground dealer networks but to regulate the runaway pharmaceutical market. It refers to the Pure Food and Drug Act in 1906, which simply mandated that certain active ingredients meet standardized purity requirements and forced drug makers to label in a clear way any of ten ingredients considered unsafe.

14. Political Democracy and State Repression

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Davenport
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
African Americans ◽  
The United States ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Political Democracy ◽  
State Repression ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The Way

This chapter explores the relationship between political democracy and state repression. Afer providing an overview of the democracy–repression link, it considers what research has been conducted on the topic and also what has been ignored. It uses the United States and its treatment of African Americans as an example of how existing research in this field should change, as well as to emphasize the importance of disaggregation (regarding institutions, actors, and actions). The chapter concludes by suggesting directions for future research. It argues that researchers need to improve the way in which they think about the relationship between democracy and repression, and that they need to modify how they gather information about democracy and repression.

scholarly journals U.S. Supreme Court Denies Certiorari in Habeas Case Brought by Guantánamo Bay Detainee Challenging His Continuing Detention

2019 ◽  
Vol 113 (4) ◽  
pp. 849-855
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
September 11 ◽  
Habeas Corpus ◽  
Past Time ◽  
Guantanamo Bay ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
September 11 Attacks ◽  
The U.S

On June 10, 2019, the Supreme Court denied certiorari in a case in which the D.C. Circuit held that the United States could continue to detain an individual at Guantánamo Bay until the cessation of the hostilities that justified his initial detention, notwithstanding the extraordinary length of the hostilities to date. The case, Al-Alwi v. Trump, arises from petitioner Moath Hamza Ahmed Al-Alwi's petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenging the legality of his continued detention at the United States Naval Base at Guantánamo Bay. The Supreme Court's denial of certiorari was accompanied by a statement by Justice Breyer observing that “it is past time to confront the difficult question” of how long a detention grounded in the U.S. response to the September 11 attacks can be justified.

scholarly journals Polarization and the Judiciary

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 261-276 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard L. Hasen
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
The United States ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Political Actors ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Supreme Court ◽  
Selection Mechanisms ◽  
Federal Judges

The increased polarization in the United States among the political branches and citizenry affects the selection, work, perception, and relative power of state and federal judges, including justices of the US Supreme Court. Polarization in the United States over the last few decades matters to the American judicial system in at least four ways. First, polarization affects judicial selection, whether the selection method is (sometimes partisan-based) elections or appointment by political actors. In times of greater polarization, governors and presidents who nominate judges, legislators who confirm judges, and voters who vote on judicial candidates are more apt to support or oppose judges on the basis of partisan affiliation or cues. Second, driven in part by selection mechanisms, polarization may be reflected in the decisions that judges make, especially on issues that divide people politically, such as abortion, guns, or affirmative action. The Supreme Court, for example, often divides along party and ideological lines in the most prominent and highly contested cases. Those ideological lines now overlap with party as we enter a period in which all the Court liberals have been appointed by Democratic presidents and all the Court conservatives have been appointed by Republican presidents. Third, increasingly polarized judicial decisions appear to be causing the public to view judges and judicial decision making (at least on the US Supreme Court) through a more partisan lens. Fourth, polarization may affect the separation of powers, by empowering courts against polarized legislative bodies sometimes paralyzed by gridlock. The review concludes by considering how increased polarization may interact with the judiciary and judicial branch going forward and by suggesting areas for future research.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document