Article Title




Civil Rights, section 1983, section 1988, pendent jurisdiction, municipality, municipal, government, Civil Rights Act, equal protection, education, equal opportunity, Clean Air Act, EPA, air quality, non-degradation, pollution, grand jury, secrecy


Civil Rights- Municipalities as Parties- Waiver of Sovereign Immunity by a State does not Give a Federal Cause of Action for Damages under Sections 1983 and 1988 of the Civil Rights Act: This Note evaluates the Supreme Court's holding in Moor v. Alameda with reference to the development of sections 1983 and 1988 of the Civil Rights Act through other relevant case law, such as Monroe v. Pape and United Mine Workers v. Gibbs. It then summarizes the holding, which limits persons deprived of civil rights by a municipal employee and who are seeking damages from the municipality in federal court to two approaches- pendent and diversity jurisdiction. Constitutional Law- Equal Protection- School District's Failure to Teach Chinese Speaking Students the English Language Does Not Constitute a Violation of the Equal Protection Clause: This Note summarizes Lau v. Nichols, a class action brought to compel the San Francisco Unified School District to provide Chinese speaking students who did not speak English with some instruction in the English language. It then analyzes other recent cases regarding equal protection in the context of social welfare issues, including Dandridge v. Williams and Brown v. Board of Education, to address the issue presented in Lau v. Nichols. Environmental Law- Non-Degradation- Clean Air Act and Amendments Held to Mandate a Policy Prohibiting Significant Deterioration of Air Quality in Areas of Relatively Clean Air: This Note analyzes the Clean Air Act and the impact of litigation brought by the Sierra Club against the Administrator of the EPA for permitting deterioration of air quality in areas where air quality was better than federally mandated secondary standards. Grand Jury- Secrecy of Testimony- Protection Afforded by Traditional Rule of Secrecy is Waived by a Witness Who Seeks Disclosure: This Note analyzes the history and case law regarding grand juries and disclosure of grand jury testimony in light of the case In re Biaggi involving the release of a United States Congressman's grand jury testimony. It also discusses the public interest ramifications of full disclosure, attempts to misuse the secrecy of the grand jury, and the expansion of the scope of permissible disclosure to requests not made in connection with a judicial proceeding under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e).

Included in

Other Law Commons



To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.