Collisions at the Intersection of Gender, Race, and Class: Enforcing the Chinese Exclusion Laws

This article explores the ramifications of the intersections of gender, race, and class ideologies for the enforcement of the Chinese Exclusion Laws in the years immediately following their passage. Drawing from government documents and archival data, I argue that the notions of gender, race, and class that permeated the legislative debate contained significant incoherences and self-contradictions, and that many of the dilemmas surrounding the enforcement of the exclusion laws against Chinese women resulted from these collisions. Faced with conflicting mandates derived from, for example, racism and patriarchy, enforcement officers had to choose between equally powerful discourses. Their ad hoc and often pragmatic approach to such dilemmas contrasted sharply with a policy process that otherwise appeared to be driven by unquestioned—and unquestionable—moral mandates. In concluding, I note the implications for our understanding of the contingencies and instabilities of ideology and the legal practices of which it is part.     

Judging the Other: The Intersection of Race,Gender, and Class in Family Court

This critical ethnographic study of family court child maltreatment proceedings describes and illuminates the ways in which racial, gender, and class disadvantages can manifest on the ground as judges, attorneys, social service workers, and parents—joined often by gender but split by race and class—adjudicate cases. The findings suggest that intersectionality worked in ways that exponentially marginalized poor mothers of color in the courtroom. They were marginalized both through the rules of the adversarial process (which silenced their voices) and through the construction of narratives (which emphasized individual weakness) over structural obstacles as well as personal irresponsibility over expressions of maternal care and concern. Standard due process courtroom practices also communicated bias or social exclusion, especially in a courtroom split by race and class.     

The Intersection of Crime Seriousness,Discretion, and Race: A Test of the Liberation Hypothesis

Spohn and Cederblom’s interpretation of the liberation hypothesis asserts that with trivial crimes, judges are “liberated” to consider extra-legal attributes such as race when making sentencing decisions. The current study posits that this perspective may be too theoretically simplistic because it fails to distinguish between the concepts of discretion and uncertainty. In light of this argument, we examine the sentencing decisions of felony cases in the Florida circuit courts. Results indicate that blacks and Hispanics are more likely to be imprisoned than whites, and males more so than females. Contrary to expectations, this disparity increases with crime seriousness. Consistent with the imprisonment model, blacks and males receive longer sentences and the effect increases with case seriousness. We found no evidence that the effect of offender extra-legal attributes depends upon the characteristics of the judges handling the cases. Suggestions for future research and implications for the liberation hypothesis are discussed.     

人类基因组计划带来的伦理与法律问题

人类基因组计划是人类科学史上的一个里程碑。但是对于这一科学研究的迅速发展,人类社会还没有在心理上、伦理思考、法律建设上做好充分的准备,因而会受到巨大的冲击。因此,法律应该充分表现出自己的前瞻性,提前介入这一争端,对基因技术的使用加以规范和引导,使之按照符合人类伦理、道德的方向发展,避免出现一些危及整个人类的尊严、情感乃至生存的后果。     

American Skin: The Duke Lacrosse Rape Scandal and the Intersection of Race,Class, Gender,and Injustice

The Duke lacrosse team rape case showcased how race and the criminal justice system can intersect in troubling ways. This is not news to students of the history of race in America. What makes this case unusual is white men were the ones who were mistreated by the police, prosecutor, media, and others, all of who used the rape allegations to further their cause rather than to seek justice. This book review essay examines three recent books that describe and analyze the Duke scandal.     

The Rule of Law in Fragile States: Dictatorship,Collapse, and the Politics of Religion in Post-Colonial Somalia

The fate of the rule of law in fragile states rests in religious politics. Three defining periods of Somali politics illustrate this argument. First is the authoritarian regime of Mohamed Siad Barre in Somalia (1969–1991). This dictatorship used religion to rule by law. The regime executed religious leaders for disagreeing with the government's interpretation of Islam. Second is the rise of Islamic courts in Mogadishu, Somalia's capital city (1991–2007). The Islamic courts apprehended criminals, expelled warlords, and provided spaces for Somalis to resolve disputes peacefully. Third is the breakaway of Somaliland (1991–present). Somaliland has advanced Islamic legal principles to build peace and constitutional law. Taken together, these three periods demonstrate how religious politics transform law and society.     

Market Fundamentalisms: Business Ethics at the Altar of Human Rights

In this article the author explores what he terms ‘anemergent trade-related, market-friendly paradigm of human rights’,in contrast to the paradigm of human rights enshrined in theUniversal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). It focuses ona reassertion of the UDHR paradigm in relation to corporategovernance and business conduct, looking specifically at theProposed Norms on the Responsibilities of Transnational Corporationsand Other Business Enterprises with regard to Human Rights (‘Norms’).The article examines, in this respect, five central themes:the intertextuality of the Norms; the ‘network’conception of trade and business conduct; ways of categorisinghuman rights obligations; duties regarding implementation ofthe Norms; and, finally, related ethical theory concerns.     

The European Group on Ethics: Law,Politics and the Limits of Moral Integration in Europe

Abstract: The article offers a critical review of the institutional role of the European Group on Ethics in the EU, focusing on the appointment and composition of the group, the nature of its ‘opinions’, the way these are used by the Commission and other EU institutional actors, looking in particular at its controversial Opinion 22 on the ethical review and funding of stem cell research under the FP7 programme. The analysis highlights the methodological difficulties faced by the group in the grounding of its Opinions, the blurring of normative moral and legal orders, the risk of politicisation of ethics and the potential overreach by the EU of its competences in reliance on a group of this kind to reach unity on deeply contested moral questions in a culturally and morally diverse Europe.