Eatin\u27 Good? Not in This Neighborhood: A Legal Analysis of Disparities in Food Availability and Quality at Chain Supermarkets in Poverty-Stricken Areas

Many Americans-especially the poor-face severe hurdles in their attempts to secure the most basic of human needs-food. One reason for this struggle is the tendency of chain supermarkets to provide a limited selection of goods and a lower quality of goods to patrons in less affluent neighborhoods. Healthier items such as soy milks, fresh fish, and lean meats are not present in these stores, and the produce that is present is typically well past the peak of freshness. Yet, if the same patron were to go to another supermarket owned by the same chain--but located in a wealthier neighborhood-she would find a wide selection of healthy foods and fresh produce. What are the poor people who live in the inner cities--who are disproportionately African American and Latino-to do? How can they obtain healthy food against these odds? This Article argues that the actions of the supermarkets are unconscionable, and therefore proposes a federal law that will prevent chain grocery stores from engaging in such practices. The Article first examines the scope of the problem created by these supermarket practices. The Article then explains why current laws are inadequate to address this issue. Finally, the Article proposes that Congress use its authority under the Commerce Clause to enact legislation that would require supermarket chains to carry the same selection and quality of goods at all stores in the same chain

Built for Boyhood?: A Proposal for Reducing the Amount of Gender Bias in the Advertising of Children\u27s Toys on Television

While the last half-century has seen a dramatic increase in the number of US women in the workforce, women remain under represented in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) fields. For years, researchers and social commentators have tried to explain the persistence of this gender gap. Some have even argued that genetic differences explain women\u27s inability to excel in the hard sciences. This Article asserts that the impact of socialization on children\u27s educational and occupational choices has been greatly underestimated. Specifically, the toys that are marketed to boys teach spatial skills that prepare boys for STEM careers. Conversely, the toys that are advertised to girls focus on relationships, housework, beauty, and fashion. Girls denied the opportunity to develop scientific ability eventually lose interest in STEM careers. Thus, it is critical that girls be encouraged to play with a variety of toys at an early age. However, television advertisements all but tell girls that science is not for them. Congress has the power to address this issue. Children are exposed to toys primarily through television advertising. Broadcast airwaves affect interstate commerce, thereby making advertising a form of commerce. Therefore, Congress can--and should--use its powers under the Commerce Clause to regulate gender bias in the advertising of children\u27s toys on television. Moreover, Congress can take this action without violating the strictures outlined by the US Supreme Court in Central Hudson Gas and Electric v. Public Service Commission

The Story Behind a Letter in Support of Professor Derrick Bell

Professor Derrick A. Bell, Jr. had a long and proud history of disturbing authority. He is widely noted as one of the founders of Critical Race Theory. His scholarship on race was not only a direct challenge to the traditionally conservative legal academy, but also to the more liberal bastions within the academy, such as the Critical Legal Studies movement. His writings about the role of race in American law have made him one of the most prominent legal scholars of a generation. However, Professor Bell did not merely write about racial injustices. He was willing to take risks to promote racial equality and ideological balance in the legal academy. In 1980, he resigned his deanship at the University of Oregon School of Law after the faculty refused to honor his recommendation that an Asian-American woman, Pat K. Chew, be hired. In 1987, after returning to Harvard, Professor Bell staged a sit-in to protest the Law School’s failure to grant tenure to two white professors, Claire Dalton and David Trubek, whose work was aligned with the Critical Legal Studies movement

Eatin\u27 Good? Not in This Neighborhood: A Legal Analysis of Disparities in Food Availability and Quality at Chain Supermarkets in Poverty-Stricken Areas

Many Americans-especially the poor-face severe hurdles in their attempts to secure the most basic of human needs-food. One reason for this struggle is the tendency of chain supermarkets to provide a limited selection of goods and a lower quality of goods to patrons in less affluent neighborhoods. Healthier items such as soy milks, fresh fish, and lean meats are not present in these stores, and the produce that is present is typically well past the peak of freshness. Yet, if the same patron were to go to another supermarket owned by the same chain--but located in a wealthier neighborhood-she would find a wide selection of healthy foods and fresh produce. What are the poor people who live in the inner cities--who are disproportionately African American and Latino-to do? How can they obtain healthy food against these odds? This Article argues that the actions of the supermarkets are unconscionable, and therefore proposes a federal law that will prevent chain grocery stores from engaging in such practices. The Article first examines the scope of the problem created by these supermarket practices. The Article then explains why current laws are inadequate to address this issue. Finally, the Article proposes that Congress use its authority under the Commerce Clause to enact legislation that would require supermarket chains to carry the same selection and quality of goods at all stores in the same chain

The Story Behind a Letter in Support of Professor Derrick Bell

Professor Derrick A. Bell, Jr. had a long and proud history of disturbing authority. He is widely noted as one of the founders of Critical Race Theory. His scholarship on race was not only a direct challenge to the traditionally conservative legal academy, but also to the more liberal bastions within the academy, such as the Critical Legal Studies movement. His writings about the role of race in American law have made him one of the most prominent legal scholars of a generation. However, Professor Bell did not merely write about racial injustices. He was willing to take risks to promote racial equality and ideological balance in the legal academy. In 1980, he resigned his deanship at the University of Oregon School of Law after the faculty refused to honor his recommendation that an Asian-American woman, Pat K. Chew, be hired. In 1987, after returning to Harvard, Professor Bell staged a sit-in to protest the Law School’s failure to grant tenure to two white professors, Claire Dalton and David Trubek, whose work was aligned with the Critical Legal Studies movement