The two primary statutes that protect Minnesotans against race-based harassment in the workplace are the Minnesota Human Rights Act (“MHRA”), enacted in 1955, and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Since their enactment, courts have seemingly narrowed their protections and applied increasingly stringent standards. One such standard is the “severe or pervasive” standard, a federal case created measure used to determine whether workplace harassment in a given case is actionable.
Continue reading “Race-Based Hostile Work Environment Claims in Federal and Minnesota Courts: A Historical Perspective on the “Severe or Pervasive” Standard”Month: May 2022
Botched Statistics on Botched Executions: Refuting Austin Sarat’s Claims
Alt text: syringe and gavel
Michael Conklin*
Introduction
In 2014, Austin Sarat presented findings on the botch rates of various execution methods.[1] Sarat’s statistics on death penalty botch rates have been cited by law review articles promoting various policies, including the use of firing squads over lethal injections.[2] The statistics have also been cited by the United States Supreme Court.[3] The conclusion of Sarat’s statistics is that there exists a 0% botch rate for firing squads and a 7.12% botch rate for lethal injection.[4] These frequently cited statistics are—at best—highly misleading. The claimed firing squad botch rate leaves out blatant examples of botched firing squad executions.[5] Conversely, the lethal injection statistic arbitrarily implements a definition of “botched” execution so expansive as to render the ultimate result completely meaningless. Examples of what Sarat considers a “botched” lethal injection include inmates who resist,[6] difficulties inserting the IV,[7] passage of fourteen minutes before official death is declared,[8] and prison officials opening the curtain too early.[9] This essay documents Sarat’s inaccurate statistics and considers potential motivations for promoting the resulting misinformation.
Continue reading “Botched Statistics on Botched Executions: Refuting Austin Sarat’s Claims”How To Be Biased in the Classroom: Kwayeskastasowin – Setting Things Right?
As an Indigenous person, I know introductions are important. Introductions place you. They provide others with an understanding of where you come from and what values or perspectives you might have
because of this placement. Introductions provide your legitimacy, your credibility, and your “authenticity” as an Indigenous person. The introduction of myself has changed throughout my life because of this placement of self. It has shifted as I have shifted from place to place, from space to space, and have gained and lost “knowledge” and family. Therefore, this Article will start with an introduction of myself to you.
Some Reflections of a Métis Law Student and Assistant Professor on Indigenous Legal Education in Canada
This Article is a reflection on some of my experiences as a Métis law student and assistant professor on the subject of Indigenous legal education in Canada. I introduce myself and what brought me to law school and describe some of my experiences as a law student, as a co-president of an Indigenous Students Association, and as a student organizer for an Indigenous law camp. I argue that a significant barrier to Indigenization and decolonization of Canadian legal education is the perseverance of an ideology rooted in settler colonialism and an individual affective commitment to its future, which is facilitated by racism. The existence and nature of this barrier is highlighted through an exploratory discussion of some of the experiences that are commonly shared by Indigenous law students and professors. I describe my approach to Indigenous legal education at the Lincoln Alexander School of Law (“Lincoln Alexander”) at X University in Toronto, Ontario, as one way to work towards facilitating
efforts towards Indigenization and decolonization
Storytelling and Truth-Telling: Personal Reflections on the Native American Experience in Law Schools
In January of 2021, the American Association of Law Schools (“AALS”) theme was Freedom, Equality and the Common Good. The Indian Nations and Indigenous Peoples Section of the AALS embraced the theme and announced a call for personal reflections incorporating the experiences of Native Americans in law schools. The theme of striving for academic freedom and equality allows for an in-depth questioning of
whether Native Americans have been adequately and appropriately represented in legal curricula in the nation’s approximately two hundred law schools. The aspirational goal of realizing the common good must be inclusive of Native American voices as students, faculty, staff, and graduates and in curricula choices in law schools across the country.