"Ketanji Brown Jackson, the first Black woman ever appointed to the Supreme Court of the United States, chronicles her life story and her extraordinary path to becoming a jurist on America's highest court, in her inspiring, intimate memoir. In this unflinching account, Justice Jackson invites readers into her life and world, tracing her family's ascent from segregation to her confirmation as a Supreme Court Justice, within the span of one generation. Named 'Ketanji Onyika,' meaning 'Lovely One,' based on a suggestion from her aunt, a Peace Corps worker stationed in West Africa, Justice Jackson learned from her educator parents to take pride in her heritage. She describes her resolve as a young girl to honor this legacy and realize her dreams: from hearing stories of her grandparents and parents breaking barriers in the segregated South, to honing her voice in high school as an oratory champion and student body president, to graduating magna cum laude from Harvard, where she performed in musical theater and improv and participated in pivotal student organizations. Here, Justice Jackson pulls back the curtain, marrying the public record of her life with what is less known. She reveals what it takes to advance in the legal profession when most people in power don't look like you, and to reconcile a demanding career with the joys and sacrifices of marriage and motherhood. Through trials and triumphs, Justice Jackson's journey will resonate with dreamers everywhere, especially those who nourish outsized ambitions and refuse to be turned aside. This moving, openhearted tale will spread hope for a more just world, for generations to come"--

Eliminating the terms “race and ethnicity” from the American Bar Association’s law school accreditation rules will hobble longstanding efforts to bring in diverse students and faculty, critics warned in public comments on the proposal.

"Not White Enough is a legal and political history of anti-Asian bigotry, beginning with the California Gold Rush and ending with the infamous Supreme Court decision that upheld the imprisonment without trial of more than 100,000 innocent Americans on the spurious grounds of national security. The book demonstrates how law and politics bled into each other for decades to enable two-tiered justice, brushing aside Constitutional guarantees of equality under law. Not White Enough examines each of the key Supreme Court decisions-Wong Kim Ark, Ozawa, and Thind, for example-as expressions of political will and not simply jurisprudence. The author chronicles the political history of racism that made Japanese internment almost inevitable, including the key role San Francisco mayors James D. Phelan and Eugene Schmitz, political boss Abe Ruef, and California attorney general Ulysses Webb played in instigating, for political convenience, some of the most egregious anti-Asian legislation"--

Colleges across the country will be forced to stop considering race in admissions under Thursday’s Supreme Court ruling, ending affirmative action policies that date back decades.

This article was updated on June 29 at 4:09 p.m.In a historic decision, the Supreme Court severely limited, if not effectively ended, the use of affirmative action in college admissions on Thursday.

The Supreme Court killed affirmative action, but not for military academies or the legacy admissions that protect the ruling class.

"Every Supreme Court transition presents an opportunity for a shift in the balance of the third branch of American government, but the replacement of Thurgood Marshall with Clarence Thomas in 1991 proved particularly momentous. Not only did it shift the ideological balance on the Court; it was inextricably entangled with the persistent American dilemma of race. In The Transition, this most significant transition from 1953 to the present is explored through the lives and writings of the first two African American justices on Court, touching on the lasting consequences for understandings of American citizenship as well as the central currents of Black political thought over the past century. In their lives, Thurgood Marshall and Clarence Thomas experienced the challenge of living and learning in a world that had enslaved their relatives and that continued to subjugate members of their racial group. On the Court, their judicial writings--often in concurrences or dissents--richly illustrate the ways in which these two individuals embodied these crucial American (and African American) debates--on the balance between state and federal authority, on the government's responsibility to protect its citizens against discrimination, and on the best strategies for pursuing equality. The gap between Justices Marshall and Thomas on these questions cannot be overstated, and it reveals an extraordinary range of thought that has yet to be fully appreciated. The 1991 transition from Justice Marshall to Justice Thomas has had consequences that are still unfolding at the Court and in society. Arguing that the importance of this transition has been obscured by the relegation of these Justices to the sidelines of Supreme Court history, Daniel Kiel shows that it is their unique perspective as Black justices--the lives they have lived as African Americans and the rooting of their judicial philosophies in the relationship of government to African Americans--that makes this succession echo across generations"--

"By re-writing US Supreme Court opinions that implicate critical dimensions of racial justice, Critical Race Judgments demonstrates that it's possible to be judge and a critical race theorist. Specific issues covered in these cases include the death penalty, employment, voting, policing, education, the environment, justice, housing, immigration, sexual orientation, segregation, and mass incarceration. While some rewritten cases {u2013} Plessy v. Ferguson (which constitutionalized Jim Crow) and Korematsu v. United States (which constitutionalized internment) {u2013} originally focused on race, many of the rewritten opinions {u2013} Lawrence v. Texas (which constitutionalized sodomy laws) and Roe v. Wade (which constitutionalized a woman's right to choose) {u2013} are used to incorporate racial justice principles in novel and important ways. This work is essential for everyone who needs to understand why critical race theory must be deployed in constitutional law to uphold and advance racial justice principles that are foundational to US democracy."-- from publisher's website.

Blackballed is Darryl Pinckney's meditation on a century and a half of Black participation in U.S. electoral politics. In this combination of memoir, historical narrative, and contemporary political and social analysis, he investigates the struggle for Black voting rights from Reconstruction through the civil rights movement, leading up to the election of Barack Obama as president. Interspersed throughout the historical narrative are Pinckney's own memories of growing up during the Civil Rights Era, his unsure grasp of the events he saw on television or heard discussed, and the reactions of his parents to the social changes that were taking place at the time and later to Obama's election. He concludes with an examination of the current state of electoral politics, the place of Blacks in the Democratic coalition, and the ongoing efforts by Republicans to suppress the Black vote, with particular attention to the Supreme Court's recent decision to strike down part of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and what it may mean for the political influence of Black voters in future elections. Blackballed also includes 'What Black Means Now, ' an essay on the history of the Black middle class, stereotypes about Blacks and crime, and contemporary debates about 'post-Blackness' and breaking free of essentialist notions of being Black.

Gerrymandering in America : the House of Representatives, the Supreme Court, and the future of popular sovereignty-book

"The Supreme Court's Role in Mass Incarceration illuminates the role of the United States Supreme Court's criminal procedure revolution as a contributing factor to the rise in U.S. incarceration rates. Noting that the increase in mass incarceration began climbing just after the Warren Court years and the rate kept climbing for the next four decades despite the fact that the crime rate declined substantially, the author posits that part of the explanation is the Court's failure to understand that a trial system with robust rights for defendants is not a strong trial system unless it is also reliable and efficient. There have been many explanations offered for the sudden and steep escalation in the U.S. incarceration rate, ranging from the war on drugs to harsh sentencing statutes, and more. This book gives the reader a unique position from which to counter the problem of the high rate of incarceration by showing that when a trial system becomes too complicated and expensive, it no longer serves to protect defendants. For the vast majority of defendants, their constitutional rights are irrelevant as they are forced to accept plea bargains or face the prospect of a comparatively harsh sentences if convicted. This book is essential reading for both graduate and undergraduate students in corrections and criminal justice courses as well as judges, attorneys, and others working in the criminal justice system"--

"When Simon Tam started an American dance rock band called The Slants, he didn't realize that he was starting an entire movement around freedom of expression and discussions on identity. The band flipped stereotypes with their bombastic live shows and community activism. But when Simon applied to register a trademark on the band's name, the government dragged him all the way to the Supreme Court of the United States. [This book] is the story of an indomitable spirit who so believes in the idea of justice that he's willing to risk everything along the way for the dignity of self-identity. Simon provides a deeply personal account that will take you from anime conventions to the Surpreme Court, all in the name of justice. The story provides a raw look at our legal system with unflinching honesty and offers timely insights on freedom of speech, how to connect with others we disagree with, and the power of music."--

In 1943, University of Washington student Gordon Hirabayashi defied the curfew and mass removal of Japanese Americans on the West Coast, and was subsequently convicted and imprisoned as a result. In A Principled Stand, Gordon's brother James and nephew Lane have brought together his prison diaries and voluminous wartime correspondence to tell the story of Hirabayashi v. United States, the Supreme Court case that in 1943 upheld and on appeal in 1987 vacated his conviction. For the first time, the events of the case are told in Gordon's own words. The result is a compelling and intimate story that reveals what motivated him, how he endured, and how his ideals changed and deepened as he fought discrimination and defended his beliefs. A Principled Stand adds valuable context to the body of work by legal scholars and historians on the seminal Hirabayashi case. This engaging memoir combines Gordon's accounts with family photographs and archival documents as it takes readers through the series of imprisonments and court battles Gordon endured. Details such as Gordon's profound religious faith, his roots in student movements of the day, his encounters with inmates in jail, and his daily experiences during imprisonment give texture to his storied life.

In 1967, the US Supreme Court ruled that laws prohibiting interracial marriage were unconstitutional in Loving v. Virginia. Although this case promotes marital freedom and racial equality, there are still significant legal and social barriers to the free formation of intimate relationships. Marriage continues to be the sole measure of commitment, mixed relationships continue to be rare, and same-sex marriage is only legal in 6 out of 50 states. Most discussion of Loving celebrates the symbolic dismantling of marital discrimination. This book, however, takes a more critical approach to ask how Loving has influenced the 'loving' of America. How far have we come since then and what effect did the case have on individual lives?

"In the first comprehensive account of the Supreme Court's race-related jurisprudence, a distinguished historian and a renowned civil rights lawyer scrutinize a legacy too often blighted by racial injustice. Discussing nearly 200 cases in historical context, the authors show the Court can still help fulfill the nation's promise of equality for all"--

"The standard public debate over the Fourteenth Amendment goes something like this. Critics of the Supreme Court's interpretations of the Fourteenth Amendment over the last several decades believe that the Court has used the Amendment's provisions for "due process of law" and "equal protection of the laws" as open-ended vehicles for judicial policymaking, whether on abortion or gay marriage or a host of other issues. Indeed, it is difficult for someone sympathetic to the result in the 2015 gay marriage case Obergefell v. Hodges to read the Court's opinion and get the feeling that what the Court is doing is law. The case was decided under the rather nebulous concept "substantive due process," the idea that the Fourteenth Amendment's injunction that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law is not merely about process as its terms might suggest, but also about "substance"--Namely, that the clause protects unwritten, unenumerated fundamental rights or prohibits arbitrary and oppressive legislation"--

"This authoritative overview of election redistricting at the congressional, state legislative, and local level provides offers an overview of redistricting for students and practitioners. The updated second edition pays special attention to the significant redistricting controversies of the last decade, from the Supreme Court to state courts"--

"After Pearl Harbor, President Roosevelt, claiming a never documented "military necessity," ordered the removal and incarceration of 120,000 Japanese Americans during World War II solely because of their ancestry. As Roger Daniels movingly describes, almost all reluctantly obeyed their government and went peacefully to the desolate camps provided for them. Daniels, however, focuses on four Nisei, second-generation Japanese Americans, who, aided by a handful of lawyers, defied the government and their own community leaders by challenging the constitutionality of the government's orders. The 1942 convictions of three men--Min Yasui, Gordon Hirabayashi, and Fred Korematsu--who refused to go willingly were upheld by the Supreme Court in 1943 and 1944. But a woman, Mitsuye Endo, who obediently went to camp and then filed for a writ of habeas corpus, won her case. The Supreme Court subsequently ordered her release in 1944, following her two and a half years behind barbed wire. Neither the cases nor the fate of law-abiding Japanese attracted much attention during the turmoil of global warfare; in the postwar decades they were all but forgotten. Daniels traces how, four decades after the war, in an America whose attitudes about race and justice were changing, the surviving Japanese Americans achieved a measure of political and legal justice. Congress created a commission to investigate the legitimacy of the wartime incarceration. It found no military necessity, but rather that the causes were "race prejudice, war hysteria, and a failure of political leadership." In 1982 it asked Congress to apologize and award $20,000 to each survivor. A bill providing that compensation was finally passed and signed into law in 1988. There is no way to undo a Supreme Court decision, but teams of volunteer lawyers, overwhelmingly Sansei--third-generation Japanese Americans--used revelations in 1983 about the suppression of evidence by federal attorneys to persuade lower courts to overturn ^the convictions of Hirabayashi and Korematsu. Daniels traces the continuing changes in attitudes since the 1980s about the wartime cases and offers a sobering account that resonates with present-day issues of national security and individual freedom"--;"Focuses on four Supreme Court cases involving Japanese Americans who were forcibly detained and relocated to interment camps in the early months of World War II, despite the absence of any charges or trials to address the validity of their implied guilt. Daniels, one of the acclaimed authorities on this subject, reminds us that Constitution promises much but does not always deliver when the nation is in crisis"--

"This is the second of four special Black History Month issues of De Novo the newsletter of the Law Library of Louisiana that will be distributed statewide by the Louisiana Supreme Court. Each issue will feature an Unsung Hero whose work though less well-known than others nonetheless contributed to the progress of civil rights in Louisiana"

"In several cases addressing the constitutionality of affirmative action admissions policies the Supreme Court has recognized a compelling state interest in schools with diverse student populations. According to the Court and affirmative action proponents the pursuit of diversity does not only benefit minority students who gain expanded access to elite institutions through affirmative action. Rather diversity also benefits white students who grow through encounters with minority students it contributes to social and intellectual life on campus and it serves society at large by aiding the development of citizens equipped for employment and citizen-ship in an increasingly diverse country."

"Justices of the United States Supreme Court have heard and ruled on many cases that have dealt with race”questions such as who has the right to use the courts where can black and white people live what public schools can a person attend and how can education be equal for everyone? For the courts rulings from earlier cases set a precedent for current and future rulings. Sometimes the Court even states when an earlier Court's ruling was just flat out wrong or misguided. The five cases below were decided by the U.S. Supreme Court and dealt with how the Court interpreted race and who has rights under the law."

"The Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear a legal battle involving one of the most offensive words in the English language spurning a case raising whether its utterance in the workplace even one time creates a hostile work environment."

"The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday agreed to hear the FBI's bid to block a civil rights lawsuit by three Muslim men from California who accused the agency of illegally conducting surveillance on them following the Sept. 11 2001 attacks on the United States."

"This page outlines various key court cases that deal with racial issues from a legal standpoint. These sites offer an introduction and information about historic precedents and other data that also impact on viewpoints found in relation to decisions made within wider society."

"On January 5 2022 the governor of Louisiana posthumously pardoned Homer Plessy the defendant in the famous 1896 U.S. Supreme Court case Plessy v. Ferguson. Plessy is known for affirming the legal theory of 'separate but equal' that was used to justify Jim Crow laws in the 19th and 20th centuries. It was later overturned in part by Brown v. Board of Education."