Protection from Undesirable Neighbors: The Use of Deed Restrictions in Shaker Heights, Ohio

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 116-136
Author(s):  
Virginia P. Dawson
Keyword(s):  
African Americans ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Planned Community ◽  
Deed Restrictions ◽  
The City ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Shaker Heights

Stringent architectural and building restrictions were put in place as the Van Sweringen Company laid out Shaker Heights, Ohio, an exclusive planned community, incorporated in 1912. In 1925, as African Americans and Jews sought to purchase property there, the company devised and implemented a new restriction that, while containing no overtly discriminatory language, succeeded in achieving the company’s discriminatory objective. The company and, later, the City of Shaker Heights would continue to enforce this restriction well beyond 1948 when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled religious and racial covenants unenforceable.

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.

Ramona School and the Undereducation of Children in La Colonia

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
David G. García
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Mexican American ◽  
Board Of Education ◽  
New Schools ◽  
Predominately White ◽  
Segregated Schools ◽  
Railroad Tracks ◽  
American Children ◽  
The City ◽  
The U.S

This chapter explores the evolution of the White architects' four strategies of segregation from 1939, when they sought voter approval to construct a school east of the railroad tracks, through 1954, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that racially segregated schools were inherently unequal and therefore unconstitutional. During this time, the school trustees constructed new schools that maximized the race, class, and east–west geographic divisions in the city and sought to normalize the undereducation of Mexican American children. By 1954—the same year the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the landmark Brown v. Board of Education desegregation case—the trustees had strategically positioned nine of the district's eleven schools west of Oxnard Boulevard and the railroad tracks in neighborhoods kept predominately White through racial covenants.

Postmodern Liberalism and the Expressive Function of Law

2000 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-109 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Scott Arnold
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
The State ◽  
Constitutional Amendment ◽  
Expressive Function ◽  
Local Ordinances ◽  
The City ◽  
The U.S

In 1992, the city of Boulder, Colorado, passed an ordinance forbidding discrimination against homosexuals in employment and housing. Two years later, voters in the state of Colorado passed a constitutional amendment forbidding the passage of local ordinances prohibiting this form of discrimination. The constitutional amendment did not mandate discrimination against homosexuals; it merely nullified ordinances such as Boulder's. The amendment was later struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court as unconstitutional.

Have Ferguson and Its Companions Contaminated Black Support for Legal Institutions?

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
James L. Gibson ◽  
Michael J. Nelson
Keyword(s):  
African Americans ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Police Officers ◽  
Representative Sample ◽  
Institutional Support ◽  
Legal Institutions ◽  
Nationally Representative ◽  
High Bench ◽  
The U.S

Given that African Americans have been victimized by the abuses of individual police officers as well as by discriminatory public policies such as “stop-and-frisk,” it is no surprise that considerable alienation seems to characterize the contemporary relationship between African Americans and the legal institutions that govern them. But have those attitudes poisoned more general views of legal institutions such as the U.S. Supreme Court? Using a nationally-representative sample of African Americans, we assess whether blacks generalize from their experiences with local authorities to perceptions of legal system fairness, and further to institutional support for the high bench. While we find that perceptions of legal system fairness have not undermined Supreme Court legitimacy, all of the relationships we consider are found to be conditional upon the nature of group attachments.

Antitrust: U.S. Supreme Court Affirms FTC Jurisdiction but Vacates Scope of Analysis on CDA Policy

1999 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 197-198
Author(s):  
Joseph R. Zakhary
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Federal Trade Commission ◽  
Ninth Circuit ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
For Profit ◽  
Rule Of Reason ◽  
Antitrust Analysis ◽  
Business Financing ◽  
The U.S

In California Dental Association v. FTC, 119 S. Ct. 1604 (1999), the U.S. Supreme Court reviewed a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that a nonprofit affiliation of dentists violated section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (FTCA), 15 U.S.C.A. § 45 (1998), which prohibits unfair competition. The Court examined two issues: (1) the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) jurisdiction over the California Dental Association (CDA); and (2) the proper scope of antitrust analysis. The Court unanimously held that CDA was subject to FTC's jurisdiction, but split 5-4 in its finding that the district court's use of abbreviated rule-of-reason analysis was inappropriate.CDA is a voluntary, nonprofit association of local dental societies. It boasts approximately 19,000 members, who constitute roughly threequarters of the dentists practicing in California. Although a nonprofit, CDA includes for-profit subsidiaries that financially benefit CDA members. CDA gives its members access to insurance and business financing, and lobbies and litigates on their behalf. Members also benefit from CDA marketing and public relations campaigns.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document