DOCSLIB.ORG

Report of the Oregon Supreme Court Task Force on Racial/Ethnic Issues in the Judicial System

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Report of the Oregon Supreme Court Task Force on Racial/Ethnic Issues in the Judicial System If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. Report of the Oregon Supreme Court Task Force on Racial/Ethnic Issues in the Judicial System May 1994 Office of the State Court Administrator Oregon Judicial Department An act passed by the Oregon territorial legislature in 1849 provided: ~ tBiff to prevent Nf,groes anti 9YluCatioes to come to or reside in Oregon. whereas, situatei as the peopfe of Oreg(Jft are, in the mUfst of an Imfian popuCation, it 'UJouU be hig{y iangerous to a{{o'UJ free negroes ani muCattoes to resUfe in the territory or to intermb( with the ltuiians! instiffing into their mitufs feefings of hostifity against tft.e white race, therefore: 'Be it enactei by the .Legis{ati'lJe .9lssemE{y ofthe territory of Oreg(Jft, that it sha{{ not be Cawfu{ for any negroe or muCattoe to come into or resUfe within the fimits of this territory ... Source: Office of the Secretary of State, Archives Division, Territorial Document #3666, pp. 181-82 153720 u.s. Department of JusticE' National Institute of Justice This document has been reproduced exactly as received from the person or organization originating it. Points of view or opinions stated in :IJ this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent ;teD the offiCial position or policies of the National Institute of Justice. tJ)\l Permission to reploduce this copyrighted material has been graf£i:ce of the State Court ~O o """t Adminjstrato~/Oregon Judicial Dept. _. 0 0 85 to the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS). " ... On :I-C-toa "1 (t) Further reproduction outSide of the NCJRS system requires permission of the copyright owner. ... n ..... ~ ~ ::rCD:T ~E} CD 0 CD = (t) ~rn c...:'lO ~ t"+ o..~ ~ s::: ..,.. -= ..... (t) \l) C,.JJ(D ....~ ·0 '< -- m (Q -&. <0 ~.Q) n_. 0 e?-8 <0 ~~ ~ _Sl):l ro ~p..> en -......... (/) S '-< m c: e+~ ...... (fj ..... -C a 8. Ji;:. ....::r1lilllC m Ul .~ ""--j ~;- .'::::3- ... 4"'~ CD 2. CD q- ..' ~ <"'!l eot-~= r?~ :'-~1 c-t­ , - n o 3 3 t; G CD t-) -(J) :·.5 en o :.~~ r:: o CD c: " f.n - ......~ uJv" --.J 9-J o LI ____ _ - - --------------------------------------- The Oregon Supreme Court Task Force on Racial/Ethnic Issues in the Judicial System Chair Honorable Edwin e.T. Peterson Vice Chair M. Khalil Zonoozy Members Kathleen Bogan Honorable Nancy W. Campbell r Kathryn H. Clarke Honorable Mercedes F. Deiz Marco A. Hernandez Douglas Hutchinson Corinne J. Lai Honorable Jack L. Landau Angel Lopez Yvonne Martinez Jeffrey B. Millner Jack L. Morris Liliana E. Olberding William A. Olsen N argess Shadbeh H. Adunni Warren Abbreviations used in this report: ABA American Bar Association ABE Adult Basic Education CSD Children's Services Division DRI Disproportionate Representation Index F2d Federal Reporter Second Edition FED Forcible Entry and Detainer LJ Law Joumal LRev Law Review MHRC Multnomah Human Relations Commission Or Oregon Reports-Supreme Court OrApp Oregon Reports-Court of Appeals ORCP Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure ORS Oregon Revised Statutes OSCI Oregon State Correctional Institution OSP Oregon State Penitentiary P2d Pacific Reporter Second Edition SCt Supreme Court Reporter US United States Supreme Court Reports UTCR Uniform Trial Court Rules Edited by: Mary Bauman and Mark Ottenad OJD Publications Section Designed by: Mark Ottenad OJD Publications Section Printed by: Office of the State Court Administrator Oregon Judicial Department Salem, Oregon This document has no copyright and may be reproduced. ___ 1 -------------------------------------- Report of the Oregon Supreme Court Task Force on Racial/Ethnic Issues in the Judicial System May 1994 The Report of the Oregon Supreme Court Task Force on RaciaVEthnic Issues in the Judicial System is available to the public: PUBLICATION PRICE EACH • Report of the Oregon Supreme Court Task Force on $ 3.00 RaciaVEthnic Issues in the Judicial System (this document) • Appendices to the Report of the Oregon Supreme Court $10.00 Task Force on RaciallEthnic Issues in the Judicial System (The Appendices are composed of: Results of the Survey of RaciallEthnic Issues in the Judicial System; Oregon Judicial Department AffIrmative Action Plan; Survey Questionnaires; 1993 Oregon Laws, Chapter 687; Order Creating the Task Force.) To obtain the publications, send a request indicating the quantity and name of the publication{s) desired, enclose a check made payable to the State Court Administrator for the appropriate amount, and mail to: Oregon Supreme Court Task Force on RacialJEthnic Issues in the Judicial System Oregon Judicial Department Supreme Court Building 1163 State Street Salem, Oregon 97310 Telephone: (503) 378-6046 An order form for your convenience is available on the last page of the report. Report of the Oregon Supreme Court Task Force on Racial/Ethnic Issues in the Judicial System Table of Contents Introduction: Forenote to Nonminority Readers .................................................. v Chapter 1: Overview of Task Force Report ...................................................... 1 Recommendation....................................................................................... 2 Conclusions of the Task Force Report.... .................. ............. ..... ....... ....... 3 Overview of the Task Force ...................................................................... 4 How the Task Force Gathered Information............................................. 6 Public Hearings.................................................................................. 6 Survey of Oregon Legal Community...... ..... ... ....... .......... ............ ...... 6 Chapter 2: Interpreters .a •••••••• II ............................. Ill ........ a ........ /1 ••••••••••• ".11................. 9 Interpreters and the Judicial System .... .... .... .... ..... .................. ............... 10 Interpreters, Minorities and the Courts .................................................. 14 Findings.............................................................................................. 14 Recommendations .............................................................................. 15 Chapter 3: Minorities Working in Oregon Courts ............................................ 19 Importance of Having a Diverse Work Force ........................................... 19 The Judicial Department AtTrrmative Action Plan ................................. 21 Employment of Minorities in the Courts ......... ....... ................ ................. 22 Findings.............................................................................................. 22 Recommendations .............................................................................. 25 Chapter 4: Minorities in Criminal Courts .......................................................... 31 Arrest and Detention ................................................................................ 31 Findings ... ' .. ,............................................... , ................................ 1...... 31 Recommendations.............................................................................. 33 Charging Decisions.................................................................................... 34 Findings.............................................................................................. 34 Recommendations .............................................................................. 35 -i- ii Report of the Oregon Supreme Court Task Force on Racial/Ethnic Issues in the Judicial System Chapter 4: Minorities in Criminal Courts (continued) Pretrial Release ......................................................................................... 36 Findings.............................................................................................. 36 Recommendations .............................................................................. 37 Plea Negotiations ...................................................................................... 38 Findings .................... ,......................................................................... 38 Conduct of Trial......................................................................................... 39 Findings.............................................................................................. 39 Recommendation.... ... .............. ...... .... .......... ....... .... .......... .... ........... ... 40 Sentencing ................................................................................................. 40 Findings .......................................................... ,................................... 40 Recommendations .............................................................................. 44 Imprisonment, Parole and Probation.......... ............ ...... ........................... 45 Findings .............................................................................................. 45 Recommendations ......................................................... .................... 50 Bibliography .............................................................................................. 54 Chapter 5: The Juvenile Justice System .......................................................... 55 A Brief Description of the System........... .......... ....... ............. .......... ......... 55 Studies of Minorities in the Juvenile Justice System ............................. 57 1. The 1982 Multnomah County Juvenile Court Monitoring Study .......................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • INSURANCE COVERAGE Alert!
    INSURANCE COVERAGE Alert! News Concerning Recent Insurance Coverage Issues January 29, 2008 www.cozen.com OREGON SUPREME COURT RULES TORT REFORM PRINCIPAL OFFICE: CAP AS APPLIED TO PUBLIC EMPLOYEES PHILADELPHIA NEW YORK MIDTOWN IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL (215) 665-2000 (212) 509-9400 (800) 523-2900 (800) 437-7040 ATLANTA NEWARK By: William F. Knowles and Joshua M. Rosen (404) 572-2000 (973) 286-1200 [email protected] & [email protected] (800) 890-1393 (888) 200-9521 CHARLOTTE SANTA FE (704) 376-3400 (505) 820-3346 The Oregon Supreme Court recently held that a plaintiff could pursue liability claims (800) 762-3575 (866) 231-0144 against individual public employees of public entities. The Court further stated that the damages cap in the Oregon Tort Claims Act (OTCA) violated the Remedy Clause CHERRY HILL SAN DIEGO (856) 910-5000 (619) 234-1700 of the Oregon Constitution. Jordaan Michael Clarke v. Oregon Health Sciences (800) 989-0499 (800) 782-3366 University, No. SC S053868, (Ore. Sup., December 28, 2007). CHICAGO SAN FRANCISCO (312) 382-3100 (415) 617-6100 In February 1998, Jordaan Michael Clarke (Clarke) was born at Oregon Health & (877) 992-6036 (800) 818-0165 Science University (OHSU) with a congenital heart defect. In May 1998, Clarke returned to OHSU for surgical repair of his heart defect. After a successful surgery, DALLAS SEATTLE (214) 462-3000 (206) 340-1000 Clarke was placed in a surgical intensive care unit, where he suffered permanent brain (800) 448-1207 (800) 423-1950 damage from oxygen deprivation. DENVER TORONTO (720) 479-3900 (416) 361-3200 In 2001, Clarke sued OHSU and the medical staff personnel who treated Clarke for (877) 467-0305 (888) 727-9948 more than $17 million to pay for his lifetime care, loss and future wages and non-economic damages.
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court
    SUPREME COURT Media Release COPIES: Contact: Copies of the slip opinions may be obtained from the Appellate Records Section, (503) 986-5555 Stephen P. Armitage The full text of these opinions can be found at www.courts.oregon.gov/publications Staff Attorney (503) 986-7023 Case decided August 6, 2020. Jennifer James, et al. v. State of Oregon, et al., (SC S066933) On petition for review under Oregon Laws 2019, chapter 355, section 65. Petitioners' requests for relief challenging Oregon Laws 2019, chapter 355, sections 1-19 and 39-40, are denied. Today, the Oregon Supreme Court denied claims brought by petitioners challenging two amendments to the Public Employee Retirement System (PERS) enacted by the legislature in SB 1049 (Oregon Laws 2019, chapter 355). The first challenged amendment redirects a member's PERS contributions from the member's individual account program -- the defined-contribution component of the member's retirement plan - - to a newly created employee pension stability account, used to help fund the defined- benefit component of the member's retirement plan. The second challenged amendment imposes a cap on the salary used to calculate a member's benefits. Petitioners primarily argued that the redirection and salary-cap provisions in SB 1049 unconstitutionally impaired their employment contracts in violation of the state Contract Clause, Article I, section 21, of the Oregon Constitution. In the alternative, petitioners argued that the amendments violated the federal Contract Clause, Article I, section 10, clause 1, of the United States Constitution, breached their contracts, and constituted an unconstitutional taking of their property without just compensation in violation of Article I, section 18, of the Oregon Constitution, and the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Security Report & Drug and Alcohol Abuse Prevention Program
    Annual Security Report2020 & Drug and Alcohol Abuse Prevention Program / Fire Safety Report LOCATION: Ottawa, Kansas Annual Security Report INTRODUCTION For further information on notice of non-discrimination, please contact: Kansas City Office Ottawa University was founded in 1865 after receiving a 20,000-acre land grant of Kansas prairie from the Ottawa Indians in recognition of the service Office for Civil Rights provided by early Baptist missionaries. Ottawa University continues to serve U.S. Department of Education on the frontier of learning through innovative, high-quality, personalized One Petticoat Lane programs of study. 1010 Walnut Street, 3rd floor, Suite 320 Kansas City, MO 64106 Ottawa University is a comprehensive, not-for-profit coeducational institution affiliated with the American Baptist Churches USA. Ottawa’s educational mission brings together residential campuses in Ottawa, Kansas and Sur- Telephone: 816-268-0550 prise, Arizona; and adult campuses in Overland Park, Kansas; Phoenix, FAX: 816-268-0599; TDD: 800-877-8339 Arizona; Brookfield, Wisconsin; as well as online. Email: [email protected] Ottawa University is committed to providing a safe and secure environment for students, faculty, staff and guests to all its campuses. CAMPUS SAFETY AND SECURITY The Annual Security Report (“ASR” or “Report”) is prepared each year by the Ottawa University is committed to providing student, faculty, staff, and Associate Vice President of Compliance and his or her designees, working in visitors with as safe and enjoyable a college experience as possible. Your collaboration with local security officials and local police as necessary. The safety is a joint effort between students, faculty, staff, local police and/or Associate Vice President of Compliance, working with the designees from on-site security, and you.
    [Show full text]
  • Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States
    Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States Composition of the Supreme Court Tuesday, July 20, 2021 Written Statement of Marin K. Levy Professor of Law, Duke University School of Law Co-Chair Bauer, Co-Chair Rodriguez, and distinguished members of the Commission: Thank you for the opportunity to testify on the subject of Supreme Court expansion and composition. By way of background, I am a Professor of Law at the Duke University School of Law and a faculty advisor to the Bolch Judicial Institute. My research and teaching over the past twelve years have focused on judicial administration and appellate courts. It is a distinct honor and privilege to speak with you on these matters. Court expansion and other changes to the Court’s composition implicate fundamental questions about the role and operation of our nation’s highest court. These include whether expanding the Court would harm the institution’s legitimacy, whether expansion would prompt a series of expansions in the future, whether an expanded Court could function well as a single decision-making body, and whether expansion would contradict existing constitutional norms and conventions. Even if the answers to these questions were known, there is a larger background question to be answered—namely how such considerations should be weighted in assessing any proposal to change the Court’s structure. It is no easy task that the Commission has been given, and I hope that the legal community and public at large is cognizant of this. In contrast to the subject of the panel, my own testimony will be fairly circumscribed.
    [Show full text]
  • Oregon Supreme Court Lays Down the Law on the Product Liability Statute of Limitations by Michael “Sam” Sandmire, Partner, Litigation Group and Sara L
    Oregon Supreme Court Lays Down the Law on the Product Liability Statute of Limitations By Michael “Sam” Sandmire, Partner, Litigation Group and Sara L. Tait, Law Clerk, Litigation Group October 2002 In a little over a year, the Oregon Supreme Court has issued a trilogy of major interpretations of Oregon’s product liability statutes: Gladhart v. Oregon Vineyard Supply Co., 332 Or 226, 26 P3d 817 (2001); Kambury v. Daimlerchrysler Corp., 334 Or 367 (2002); and Griffith v. Blatt, 334 Or 456 (2002). All three of the decisions have focused on statutory construction, and the results demonstrate the reluctance of Oregon’s highest court to insert common law precepts into the product liability statutory scheme. The cases further spotlight the continuing struggle to identify the contours of Oregon’s product liability law, which arguably encompasses far more than the doctrine of strict liability. In Gladhart, the Court interpreted ORS 30.905(2), the “product liability” statute of limitations. 332 Or at 229. ORS 30.905(2) mandates that a product liability action “shall be commenced not later than two years after the date on which the death, injury, or damage complained of occurs.” The Court rejected the application of the “discovery rule” to this statute, noting that “[a] discovery rule cannot be assumed, but must be found in the statute of limitations itself.” Id. at 230. In the absence of explicit language that the statute runs upon “discovery” or “accrual,” the Court concluded that “[t]he words ‘death, injury, or damage’ [as] used in ORS 30.905(2) refer to events, not to abstractions or ideas.
    [Show full text]
  • TECHNICAL APPENDIX to ENDING CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE and EXPLOITATION: a REVIEW of the EVIDENCE • 2020 About the Authors
    TECHNICAL APPENDIX TO ENDING CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE AND EXPLOITATION: A REVIEW OF THE EVIDENCE • 2020 About the authors Lorraine Radford is Emeritus Professor of Social Policy and Social Work at the University of Central Lancashire, UK; Debbie Allnock is Senior Research Fellow at the International Centre, University of Bedfordshire, UK; Patricia Hynes is Reader in Forced Migration in the School of Applied Social Sciences, University of Bedfordshire, UK; Sarah Shorrock is Research Officer at the Institute of Citizenship, Society & Change at the University of Central Lancashire, UK This publication has been produced with financial support from the End Violence Fund. However, the opinions, findings, conclusions, and recommendations expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of the End Violence Fund. Published by UNICEF Child Protection Section Programme Division 3 United Nations Plaza New York, NY 10017 Email: [email protected] Website: www.unicef.org © United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) December 2020. Permission is required to reproduce any part of this publication. Permission will be freely granted to educational or non-profit organizations. For more information on usage rights, please contact: [email protected] Cover Photo: © UNICEF/UN0156399/Haque Click on section bars to CONTENTS navigate publication 1. Methodology ....................................................................................................................... 4 Background and Purpose...................................................................................................................................4
    [Show full text]
  • 2. We and They
    2. We and They Democracy is becoming rather than being. It can easily be lost, but never is fully won. Its essence is eternal struggle. WILLIAM H. HASTIE OVERVIEW Chapter 1 focused on factors that shape an individual’s identity. It also described how those factors are sometimes used to exclude people from membership in various groups. Chapter 2 considers the ways a nation’s identity is defined. That definition has enormous significance. It indicates who holds power in the nation. And it determines who is a part of its “universe of obligation” – the name Helen Fein has given to the circle of individuals and groups “toward whom obligations are owed, to whom rules apply, and whose injuries call for [amends].”1 For much of world history, birth determined who was a part of a group’s “universe of obligation” and who was not. As Jacob Bronowski once explained, “The distinction [between self and other] emerges in prehistory in hunting cultures, where competition for limited numbers of food sources requires a clear demarcation between your group and the other group, and this is transferred to agricultural communities in the development of history. Historically this distinction becomes a comparative category in which one judges how like us, or unlike us, is the other, thus enabling people symbolically to organize and divide up their worlds and structure reality.”2 This chapter explores the power of those classifications and labels. As legal scholar Martha Minow has pointed out, “When we identify one thing as like the others, we are not merely classifying the world; we are investing particular classifications with consequences and positioning ourselves in relation to those meanings.
    [Show full text]
  • Prototypicality Among Metaphors: on the Relative Frequency of Personification and Spatial Metaphors in Literature Written for Children Versus Adults
    METAPHOR AND SYMBOLIC ACTIVITY, 1(2), 87-107 Copyright © 1986, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Prototypicality Among Metaphors: On the Relative Frequency of Personification and Spatial Metaphors in Literature Written for Children Versus Adults Donald G. MacKay University ofCalifornia This paper argues that personification is the prototypical metaphor and that it occurs more frequently than other metaphors, especially during the early stages of child development. The paper also argues that personification comes dis­ guised in many other figurative devices (metonymy, spatial metaphors, and container metaphors) and syntactic expressions (frozen word orders and the nominal gender marking that is obligatory in languages such as French and Ger­ man) and that it pervades many other aspects of human cognition (including fundamental philosophical frameworks such as objectivism and subjectivism). The main source of data is a frequency analysis of personification and spatial metaphors in two samples of poetry: one written for adults, the other for chil­ dren. I categorized the topic and vehicle of each metaphor as either human or nonhuman and spatial or nonspatial and found that spatial topics and vehicles were relatively infrequent. Personifications (nonhuman topic-human vehicle) were much more common in both samples and were relatively more frequent in the sample written for children. Explanations of this developmental difference are proposed, based on the cognitive and social functions of personification in literature written for children versus adults. The importance of studying the comprehension and use of metaphor is by now widely recognized. As Lakoff and Johnson (1980) pointed out, meta­ phor is so pervasive in everyday language, thought, and action that the con­ ceptual system by which we perceive, think, and act must be fundamentally Requests for reprints should be sent to Donald G.
    [Show full text]
  • Oregon Benchmarks Spring 2005
    Oregon BENCHMARKS THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT OF OREGON HISTORICAL SOCIETY NEWSLETTER The Birth of the Brandeis Brief Muller v. Oregon: Women, Law, and Labor By John Stephens n 1905, Joe Haselbock, overseer of Portland’s The Supreme Court accepted review on a writ of IGrand Laundry located at 320 N. 17th, required error. This was the Progressive Era and the Oregon one of his employees, Emma Gotcher, to work more statute was not all that unusual. Nineteen other than 10 hours on, of all days, Labor Day, Septem- states had enacted similar legislation. Muller was ber 4. (Labor Day had been a holiday in Oregon special because in 1905, the same year that Gotcher since 1887, first in the nation.) This started the had been forced to work over 10 hours, the Supreme events leading to Muller v. Oregon, 208 U.S. 412 Continue on page 2 (1908), in which the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of progressive legislation pro- Our next Famous Case on May 19th viding a 10-hour work day for women, but did so for retrogressive reasons, finding as fact that women Muller v. Oregon (1908) and Bunting v. Oregon were in many respects inferior to men and there- (1917) are the subjects of our May 19, 4 – 6 p.m. fore needing of protection. The opinion is studied Famous Cases presentation at the Hatfield U.S. in history and law school courses, and affects U.S. Courthouse. Our speakers include Julie Novkov, Supreme Court jurisprudence to this day. The case associate professor of political science at Univer- is also the birthplace of the Brandeis Brief.
    [Show full text]
  • The 2021-2022 Guide to State Court Judicial Clerkship Procedures
    The 2021-2022 Guide to State Court Judicial Clerkship Procedures The Vermont Public Interest Action Project Office of Career Services Vermont Law School Copyright © 2021 Vermont Law School Acknowledgement The 2021-2022 Guide to State Court Judicial Clerkship Procedures represents the contributions of several individuals and we would like to take this opportunity to thank them for their ideas and energy. We would like to acknowledge and thank the state court administrators, clerks, and other personnel for continuing to provide the information necessary to compile this volume. Likewise, the assistance of career services offices in several jurisdictions is also very much appreciated. Lastly, thank you to Elijah Gleason in our office for gathering and updating the information in this year’s Guide. Quite simply, the 2021-2022 Guide exists because of their efforts, and we are very appreciative of their work on this project. We have made every effort to verify the information that is contained herein, but judges and courts can, and do, alter application deadlines and materials. As a result, if you have any questions about the information listed, please confirm it directly with the individual court involved. It is likely that additional changes will occur in the coming months, which we will monitor and update in the Guide accordingly. We believe The 2021-2022 Guide represents a necessary tool for both career services professionals and law students considering judicial clerkships. We hope that it will prove useful and encourage other efforts to share information of use to all of us in the law school career services community.
    [Show full text]
  • A God Worth Worshiping: Toward a Critical Race Theology
    Marquette University e-Publications@Marquette Dissertations, Theses, and Professional Dissertations (1934 -) Projects A God Worth Worshiping: Toward a Critical Race Theology Duane Terrence Loynes Sr. Marquette University Follow this and additional works at: https://epublications.marquette.edu/dissertations_mu Part of the Christianity Commons, and the Ethnic Studies Commons Recommended Citation Loynes, Duane Terrence Sr., "A God Worth Worshiping: Toward a Critical Race Theology" (2017). Dissertations (1934 -). 738. https://epublications.marquette.edu/dissertations_mu/738 A GOD WORTH WORSHIPING: TOWARD A CRITICAL RACE THEOLOGY by Duane Terrence Loynes Sr., B.A., M.A., M.A. A Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School, Marquette University, in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Milwaukee, Wisconsin August 2017 ABSTRACT A GOD WORTH WORSHIPING: TOWARD A CRITICAL RACE THEOLOGY Duane Terrence Loynes Sr., B.A., M.A., M.A. Marquette University, 2017 Theologian James Cone has declared that White supremacy is the American Church’s greatest, original, and most persistent sin. Although the Church has engaged in numerous attempts to remedy racism, theology still seems to witness to a God that stands relatively unopposed to the status quo of racial injustice and marginalization. This dissertation begins with the claim that Christian theology still operates from the normativity of whiteness. I will argue that, although the Church has made admirable progress with regard to racial justice, the attempts have been at the surface: the underlying structural logic of White supremacy remains intact. My thesis will be that the systemic problem in North American Christianity of a persistent “White privileged theology” or “normalized whiteness” can best be eliminated by constructing a theological response in classical categories—theodicy, anthropology, and epistemology.
    [Show full text]
  • From Coverture to Supreme Court Justice Women Lawyers and Judges in Oregon History
    RESEARCH FILES From Coverture to Supreme Court Justice Women Lawyers and Judges in Oregon History by Janice Dilg These are really great women and they’re doing great things for women in law. — Agnes Petersen1 WOMEN WHO ADVOCATED for of the legal profession to serving at the right to vote understood that every level of the judiciary in our state enfranchisement was only one step in and nation. full citizenship. With the vote, women The U.S. District Court of Oregon could pursue a range of economic, is the trial court of the federal court civil, and social rights by holding elec- system. Each state in the country has tive office, serving on juries, changing at least one district court, and Oregon’s laws, making laws, and enforcing laws. District Court began with statehood in The U.S. District Court of Oregon 1859. Matthew Deady was appointed Historical Society Oral History Col- the sole U.S. District Judge for Oregon, lection reveals much about the women and he remained the only Oregon who changed both the legal profession District judge for approximately the and the laws of Oregon. Oral histories next three decades. Today, the U.S. of women in this collection span from District Court of Oregon consists of the latter decades of the nineteenth twenty-five Article III, Magistrate, century into the first decade of the and Bankruptcy Court judges based twenty-first. During that time, women in Eugene, Medford, Pendleton, and moved from not having the right to Portland and is currently led by Chief vote or serve on a jury to having law Judge Ann Aiken, who became Chief degrees and working in every aspect in 29.
    [Show full text]