NCJ Number
106063
Journal
University of Miami Law Review Volume: 41 Issue: 4 Dated: (March 1987) Pages: 823-854
Date Published
1987
Length
32 pages
Annotation
While the Civil Rights Act of 1866 guarantees all persons the same contract, property, and equal protection rights enjoyed by whites, the courts have been remarkably inconsistent about extending coverage to nonracially identified plaintiffs.
Abstract
This note examines the courts' use of definitions of race to determine the scope of the act and suggests that the subjectivity in defining race and ethnicity requires a shift away from the plaintiff's race to the discriminatory content of the defendant's act. It is proposed that by using a content analysis of the act, the courts can evaluate the totality of the circumstance and consider discovery and documentary evidence, as well as expert testimony of ethnologists and sociologists, to determine whether the discrimination was racial in nature. Such an analysis would not preclude recovery merely because a plaintiff belongs to a group that is identified by such traits as religion or national origin. By applying this rule in future decisions, the U.S. Supreme Court can establish a principle that affords a remedy for all victims of discrimination regardless of racial origin. 167 notes.