School reform - charter schools - Connecticut and South Carolina pass charter school statutes. - Conn. Gen. Stat. ss. 10-66aa-ff (1997); S.C. Code Ann. ss. 59-40-10 to -190 (Law. Co-op. Supp. 1996)
Article Abstract:
Both Connecticut and South Carolina have passed legislation sanctioning the formation of charter schools, but the limitations placed on charter schools by both statutes will limit the potential for innovation and increased competition with traditional public schools. Both statutes impose costs on gaining exemptions from public school laws and fail to provide start-up funding. The Connecticut law limits potential benefits by capping the number of charter schools allowed and perpetuating collective bargaining agreements. The South Carolina law imposes barriers on the ability of charter schools to serve specific student populations.
Publication Name: Harvard Law Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0017-811X
Year: 1997
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Voting Rights Act - evidence of discriminatory purpose - District Court for the District of Columbia holds that evidence of discrimination in an existing electoral system supports an inference in a preclearance proceeding that extension of the system was motivated by a discriminatory purpose. - Arizona v. Reno, 887 F. Supp. 318 (D.D.C. 1995)
Article Abstract:
The decision in Arizona v. Reno by a District Court for the District of Columbia panel allowing the Dept of Justice to consider existing electoral discrimination in a Voting Rights Act section 5 preclearance proceeding is inconsistent with congressional intent. Section 5 actions, unlike section 2 actions, were intended to restrict the implementation of new discriminatory schemes by the states. States applying for preclearance should not have to defend their entire electoral system. The court's ruling is an encroachment on state autonomy.
Publication Name: Harvard Law Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0017-811X
Year: 1996
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Civil rights - gender discrimination - California prohibits gender-based pricing - Cal. Civ. Code s. 51.6 (West Supp. 1996)
Article Abstract:
The anticipated effectiveness of the California Gender Tax Repeal Act of 1995 in eliminating gender discrimination in service pricing has been undermined by inclusion of an exemption that allows businesses to claim that price differences are justified by time, cost or difficulty. The statute was designed to curb the practice of charging women higher prices for similar hairstyling, dry cleaning and other services. The inclusion of a broad exemption will make suits under the Act difficult to prove and win.
Publication Name: Harvard Law Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0017-811X
Year: 1996
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
- Abstracts: Hopwood is bad business for business schools. Has business school education become a scandal? Should there be a Nobel prize in business?
- Abstracts: Searching beyond data bases; law librarians can offer firms services over and above their skills in computer resources. part 2
- Abstracts: Citadel worth storming. Citadel foe feels ripple effects; attorney who beat S.C. institution finds career in shambles
- Abstracts: Self-referral regs prompt second look; physicians' practices and pay likely to be restructured. Antitrust defenses in physician peer review cases
- Abstracts: Service with predecessor employer is "service with the employer" under s. 415(b)(5) if continuity of interest exists