Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal Commentary Blogs -> Discriminations
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Legal Commentary
: DiscriminationsCalifornia Att?y Gen Says Non-Discrimination Is Unconstitutional
Jerry Brown (remember him?) ? once California governor, now California Attorney General, and possible future California governor ? says in a letter to the California Supreme Court that the prohibition against preferential treatment based on race or gender that was added to the California Constitution by Prop. 209 is unconstitutional.
To the extent that the prohibitions against race- and gender-based discrimination in article I, section 31 of the California Constitution (hereafter referred to as section 31) are aligned with the prohibitions enforced under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, section 31 is constitutional. However, to the extent that section 31 is interpreted more broadly to bar race- or gender-conscious programs that would be permissible under the Fourteenth Amendment, it violates the Equal Protection Clause of the federal Constitution....Brown?s argument seems to be identical to one the ACLU and NACCP tried, most recently, in Michigan, to no avail.
Closer to home, it also seems to be identical to one even the Ninth Circuit all but laughed out of court in rejecting a challenge to Prop. 209 right after it passed. As the opinion by Judge O'Scannlain put it:
.... Proposition 209 amends the California Constitution simply to prohibit state discrimination against or preferential treatment to any person on account of race or gender. Plaintiffs charge that this ban on unequal treatment denies members of certain races and one gender equal protection of the laws. If merely stating this alleged equal protection violation does not suffice to refute it, the central tenet of the Equal Protection Clause teeters on the brink of incoherence.It appears that Jerry Brown is asking the California Supreme Court to decide who is incoherent, Jerry Brown or the Fourteenth Amendment. The choice would seem to be clear, but then nothing is completely clear in California.
Full post as published by Discriminations on April 23, 2009 (boomark / email).
The Civil Rights Act of 1871
Law bans discrimination enacted under color of state law
California Supreme Court Proposition 8 Decision
Court Rejects Challenges to Proposition 8, but Finds Marriages Valid
Discrimination
Federal laws prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, or disability
Immigration Related Employment Discrimination & Unfair Labor Practices
What to do about employers who discriminate because of national origin
Selection of State Supreme Court Judges
How State Court Judges are Selected
Dumb California Laws
Stupid Laws in the Sunshine State
California Labor Laws
alleged violations of California labor laws such as overtime pay, discrimination and harassment.
New York, NY and the NYPD
alleging false arrest for violating an unconstitutional anti-loitering law.
California State University
Multi-Million Dollar Settlement Reached in Sex Discrimination Case
Drive Through Discrimination
Jack-in-the Box pays undisclosed racial discrimination settlement to two customers.
Housing Buyer Discrimination
White homeowner settles $30,000 buyer-discrimination lawsuit.
American State Bank Discrimination
$225,000 settlement reached in hiring discrimination lawsuit.

California Labor Law, Discrimination and Permatemps
California Nixes Medical Discrimination By Religous Doctors.
California Supreme Court Will Consider Google Age Discrimination Case
Judges to Decide Whether Crowded California Prisons Are Unconstitutional








