Author Archives: amycheung39

Labor Market Discrimination

Hello everyone! I found something interesting regarding the labor market. Did you know that your name can have a huge impact on your opportunity for an interview?

I provided a link of an example regarding labor market discrimination. José Zamora had been job hunting for long months, sending out close to 100 resumes a day, and never got any offer to an interview until he dropped a letter off his name. He went from José Zamora to Joe Zamora. The effect was immediate as the offers began to pour in through his inbox all because he “whitewash it.”

Jose Zamora wasn’t the only victim of labor market discrimination. The New York Times reveal the story of Tahani Tompkins who also had to “Whiten” her resume to get offers from jobs. New York Times reported that employers may consciously or subconsciously discriminate against names that sounds as if they belong to certain race.

Equal opportunities or life chances? Apparently not! Latinos, African Americans, and other minority groups will benefit little from improving their resume credentials or experiences when applying for a job because of labor market discrimination.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/02/jose-joe-job-discrimination_n_5753880.html


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/06/weekinreview/06Luo.html?_r=1&


http://www.chicagobooth.edu/pdf/bertrand.pdf

-Amy

Stop and Frisk (New York)

Stop and Frisk is a practice used in New York by the Police Department under New York State Criminal Procedure Law section 140.50. Police officers have the rights to stop any pedestrians, interrogate them, and frisk them for any weapons or other illegal objects. The law force mainly targets black and Latino communities. Data have shown the vast majority of the blacks and Latino victims to the Stop and Frisk tactics were innocent.

The Criminology Theory behind the Stop & Frisk is to stop people in high crime areas, hold them accountable for their minor crimes to prevent them from escalating into more serious crimes. The most common arrest from Stop & Frisk are illegal possession of drugs and weapons.

Statistics show the residents most subjected to the tactics of Stop & Frisks are the Blacks and Latinos. Some are placed under interrogation without a reasonable suspicious cause other than color/race. The data most certainly show the program is bias and discriminating.

The poor neighborhoods and the minority groups are the main focus of Stop & Frisk. Law enforcers believe violent crimes would skyrocket without the Stop & Frisk privileges given to the police.

In connection to the recent discussions we had in class about the relation between drug use and race, and how the rate of incarceration and arrest are abnormally high for Blacks and Latino compared to Whites, the Stop & Frisk program is another great example of the cast system and social control.

-Amy

Brown vs. Board of Education (1954)

Brown vs. Board of Education (1954) was a case about public segregation that brought to the attention of the Supreme Court. Brown vs. Board of Education challenged the notion of segregation in public education. The Declaration of Independence proclaimed “All men are created equal,” however, the institution of slavery showed otherwise. The slaves were not granted rights or privileges of the Whites and were not considered citizens. Later in the years, Amendments were added to change this and to improve the legal aspects of newly freed slaves. The Thirteenth Amendment in 1865 ended slavery and the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868 grants everyone the “due process of law” and the “equal protection of the law.” The Fifteenth Amendment in 1870 gave all citizens the right to vote regardless of race.

Despite these Amendments created to help the freed slaves, African Americans were not treated on equal terms with Whites. State legislatures enacted Jim Crow Laws that led to the segregation of the races, prohibiting blacks and whites from using the same public facilities, riding the same buses or even attending the same school. Due to the ruling of Plessy v. Ferguson, the legality of Jim Crow laws and discrimination were upheld by the Supreme Court.

Plessy v. Ferguson was a case where a black man refused to give up his seat for a white person on the train in New Orleans and was arrested because he was legally required to do so by the Louisiana state Law. Plessy declared the segregation of blacks and whites on trains were in violation to the Fourteenth Amendment “equal protection clause.” The Supreme Court ruled against Plessy under the reason that “The object of the [Fourteenth] amendment was undoubtedly to enforce the equality of the two races before the law, but in the nature of things it could not have been intended to abolish distinctions based upon color, or to endorse social, as distinguished from political, equality…If one race be inferior to the other socially, the Constitution of the United States cannot put them upon the same plane” (Justice Henry Billings Brown, Majority opinion). Due to this ruling, “the separate, but equal” idea was legally enacted and upheld by many states.

Brown v. Board of Education was actually a grouping of five separate cases all concerning the issue of public education segregation. The case first came before the Supreme Court in 1952, arguing that legal segregation in public education should be abolished because it was inherently unequal and in direct violation to the “equal protection clause” from the fourteenth Amendment.  The court was unable to reach a verdict, so the case was reheard again in 1953.

An interesting fact was that Chief Justice Fed Vinson died and was replaced by Gov. Earl Warren during the intervening months. The death and replacement of the chiefs may have played a crucial role in the outcome of the case because Chief Justice Warren was the first to decreed segregation in public schools as unconstitutional. It was never done before in history, thus an important fact to keep in mind.

On May 14, 1954, Chief Justice Warren stated “We conclude that in the field of public education the doctrine of ‘separate but equal’ has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal…”

On a legal stand point, all segregated public education was no longer allowed, but the actual implementation of the legal ruling didn’t take effect immediately. The process of desegregation would take a long time, possibly many years before the segregated system was to be fully desegregated. The Supreme Court decided to proceed upon the implementation of the verdict with “all deliberate speed.”

Brown v. Board of Education was a crucial and important case because the decision was the official legal end of racial segregation in public schools. The case was responsible for starting the desegregation process and the beginning to an end of racial segregation in “all facets of public life.”

The Long lasting legacy of the decision in Brown V Board, which brought a legal end to school segregation between whites and people of color is interesting to decipher today, 60 years after the case ruling as segregation in schools persist today. The segregation in public schools witnessed today across the country can be explained by various factors such as distribution of wealth public housing, immigration trends and certain policies that have made it easier for school districts and courts to dismantle desegregation plans. The legal ramifications brought by the decisions in this case were a victory for civil rights in the U.S., however the more complex social issues that affect race have not been cured and easily contribute to the segregation in public schools today.

Students living in urban settings are among those most likely to live in a desegregated community and attend a more segregated school as economic disparities are larger in these regions. For example, In the early 1990s, the average Latino and black student attended a school where roughly a third of students were low income, but now attend schools where low income students account for nearly two-thirds of their classmates. This finding reflects the trend in low-income areas becoming increasingly homogenous, and comprised of mostly Black and Latino People. This segregation based on race and class (Orfield, and Siegel-Hawley, 2012). With these disparities in place, the majority of schools in urban areas that reside in low-income communities with high concentrations of people of color with few whites also have the conditions necessary for a failing school system. With intense cultural and socio-economic differences between students, teachers and administrators, segregated schools are often subject to conflict between students and administrators along with very limited capital available to provide better schooling materials as seen in schools with predominantly white students. This situation perpetuates a trend of people of color being locked in a system that inherently prohibits them from equal quality education and integration.

Racialized policies have had a profound affect on this distribution of wealth and ultimate segregation in public school districts that hinder the accomplishments of Brown V Board. For example,In Yonkers New York, a city that boarders the Bronx in Westchester County, City council’s refusal of Section 8 vouchers to use in other areas of Yonkers aside from a designated square mile area, intensified the ghettoization of the area. By 1980, Yonkers schools were largely segregated by race, with minority schools distinctly inferior to their all white counterparts (Unites States v. Yonkers Board of Education, 1985). Integration slowed down in school districts across the nation as years passed after Brown v Board in areas such as Yonkers due to “white flight” a massive exodus of whites in urban areas to suburban areas, creating more segregate communities with schools reflecting this trend.

The effects of Brown v Board have been undoubtedly positive for students across the United States however the true potential of the decision in this case can only be realized if further Efforts made to reintegrate schools. These efforts slowed down considerably in the 1980’s and 1990’s, as time passed after brown v Board and communities seemed to become segregated “by accident” or viewed as segregated strictly based on economic reasons. However now, and in the not-so-distant future the legacy of Brown v Board ca be realized by supporting initiatives that will support reintegration along with equitable education for people of color and Whites such as Developing equitable school funding systems, creating greater accountability among school administrators and community leaders for student success, and reinforcing laws that are already in effect that promote racial and socioeconomic integration in school districts.

-Amy Cheung, Andres, & Khadil

Works Cited

The Common Place of Law

The Common Place of Law, by Patricia Ewick & Susan S. Silbey explores legal consciousness and how legality is experienced and understood in everyday life.  Legality refer to the meanings, sources of authority and cultural practices that are commonly recognized as legal, regardless of who employs them or for what ends.  Legality determines what you can or are prevented from doing. Multiple stories were taken from different people who had some interactions with the law to study their experiences and interpretations of the law.

The book separates the law into three narratives, “before the law” “With the law” and “against the law.”  “Before the law” is viewing the law as objective, with organized rules and structures. The people view the law as a buffer between their everyday lives, as if the law is physically in a separate sphere. Probably can be view as if the law is almost invisible as you go on with your daily routines.

“With the law” is a closer social interaction with legality. Stories were told about how individuals exercise the law and try to work it to his/her advantage, such as the story of Charles Reed. In this section, people play by the rules and try to participate in the legal aspect of the law. However, the law favors those with resources and skills, so only those privilege people can truly play with the law to their advantage.

Finally, “against the law” is a legal consciousness with an adversarial relationship toward the law. This is a model of resistance against legality for those that cannot work with the law, usually, because the law excludes them from their legal protection.

This section is about the relationship between power and law “might makes right.” An example from the book, Bess Sherman life was shaped by the influence and operation of laws. For example, due to her lack of resources and money, the medical terms for her diagnosis were all out of her control and the law appears to be inaccessible to her, rendering her powerless. She has no choice, but to submit to all the terms in order to continue receiving diagnoses for her illness.

Those that fall into this category of legal consciousness tend to avoid calling the police for help, getting a lawyer, etc. Some people view “against the law” as a game, much like Jamie Leeson.  A game to engage with or play with. Another example is the story of Millie Simpson, in a situation where she demonstrate a small victory against the law by suggesting to volunteer in a church (one that she already volunteers in with or without the law intervention) as her fulfillment for her legal obligation.

-Amy Cheung

Wall Street Protest

Hello everyone, last week we were discussing about the articles “banished” by Becket and “Law property, and the geography of violence: The Frontier, the Survey, and the Grid.”  The class discussion reminded me of a past event related to the case-Occupy Wall Street. The Wall Street Protest was due to dissatisfaction with our system of inequality, and how they believe “Businesses are now running the government.”

In Protest, the Power of Place-NYTIMES

Climate Change Protesters Tangle With Police at Wall St.-NYTIMES

The articles mentioned zoning laws and public spaces. How in reality, public spaces aren’t really “public spaces”, but are areas controlled by the landlords/ corporations as well. We talked about the use of spaces in class and appropriate behaviors allowed in those spaces. But, what about protesters? We all have the rights to peaceful protests and these usually happen in public spaces, but in the case of “Occupy Wall Street”, many protesters were arrested or pepper sprayed for just occupying the public area protesting. What do you guys think about this?

-Amy Cheung

Calavita, “Types of Society, Types of Law”

Calavita discusses about society and law in the reading of “Types of Society, Types of Law.” She starts off the passage by discussing the prenuptial contract for marriages and how it affected her two middle-aged friends.  Calavita states how the prenuptial contract disregards emotion, romances, and other irrational forces. She mentions Weber and how he perceived modern law is driven by logic and human calculation. She includes how her two friends went ahead with the prenuptial contract despite the angst it produced in their romance and relationship.

Personally, I think prenuptial contract exist to protect people from relationship mistakes or scams. I’m not disregarding the notion of romance or true love, but I can’t dismiss the fact that there are people out there who only marry for the money. Prenuptial contracts protect the assets of the married individuals in case of divorces.  In the society we lived in today, such contract is necessary, especially for the wealthy.  I know some friends who are rich, but pretend to be poor as they continue dating because they wish to find someone who loves them for who they are, and not their money.  Fear of being tricked into a marriage for just their wealth is a very true reality. Of course, there are good and honest people in this world, which is why not all marriages have the prenuptial contracts since they’re optional.

Another issue she discusses was how laws in society are usually based on rationalized morals, social norms, and moral values.  She pointed out the discrimination from laws toward African Americans in past and how differently students and kids are being treated in school based on their race, gender, and status.  I agreed that laws seem to be derived from moral values and social acceptance. An example would be gay marriage as many states have accepted it and made it legal because so many people are fighting for the rights and society are beginning to accept the idea of gay marriages. Laws are put in place to protect people from discrimination and racism because the society deems it as “morally unacceptable.” Laws will continue to change toward the direction people and society evolves.

The last point she addresses was unwritten laws. These “unwritten laws” are informal laws that are enforced by people behavior to act within the social norms. She gave the example of tipping in United States, how even though tipping is not required by law, people followed it so strictly that it might as well be considered as a law.  For those that deviate from this practice, usually results in disapproval from the society, and such disapproval might be the enforcing factor behind the continuous behaviors of unwritten laws.

Amy Cheung