Social Distancing as a Privilege: Assessing the Impact of Structural Disparities on the COVID-19 Crisis in the Black Community

There is a harsh reality for people living with the COVID-19 restrictions in the same city. Though the virus has been called an equal opportunity threat, the truth is that it has had a deadly, disproportionate impact on Black and Brown people. The COVID-19 pandemic has crushed communities of color. Among Black Americans, who make up around 13% of the U.S. population, the COVID-19 infection and death rate are disproportionally high. To curb the spread of this infectious disease, the CDC has advanced simple advice: apply social distancing guidelines. Social distancing (physical distancing) requires people to keep at least six feet from other people who are not in the same household. Though social distancing is an effective tool to help curb the spread of COVID-19, this simple mitigation strategy is not available to everyone. What is worse, the availability of social distancing measures at home or work often falls along racial lines. Structural racism has even impacted the ability of Black people to implement this simple mitigation strategy. The COVID-19 pandemic has laid bare in several significant ways the structural inequities that grip Black Americans, even exacerbating the impact of a global pandemic. An expansive array of short-term and long-term proposals have been explored to address the disparate impact of COVID-19 on the Black community. This Article proposes the inclusion of mandatory racial equity impact assessments into the COVID-19 response efforts. Recent federal action is one important step toward explicitly assessing race equity goals in response efforts, but mandatory assessments focused on racial equity are needed in the planning stage to minimize unintended racialized outcomes. Anti-racist solutions must be embraced to close the gap in these structural inequities that leave Black Americans more exposed to COVID-19. To ensure that social distancing and other mitigation strategies are equally available, both federal and state governments should be required to assess the racial equity implications for COVID-19 response efforts. Lawmakers must continue to expand the reach of COVID-19 relief efforts to explicitly acknowledge race and minimize unintended, racialized, negative outcomes. A consistent, deliberate acknowledgement of race in crafting response measures is needed to create equitable, sustainable corrections

Improving the Odds of Government Accountability in the Disaster-Prone Era: Using the 9/11 Fund Factors to Remedy the Problem of Toxic Katrina Trailers

This article analyzes the dangers surrounding the toxicity levels in the trailers issued to Katrina survivors by FEMA, and identifies serious medical complications stemming from the temporary homes. Lack of government oversight in the process led to the distribution of formaldehyde-laced trailers that cost the government more than $2 billion and continue to poison residents years after the storm. Furthermore, the failures connected to disaster relief are even more disturbing in this disaster-prone era. More importantly, this paper also proposes the creation of a Toxic Trailer Fund to compensate residents of toxic FEMA trailers. Using the factors implicitly established by the 9/11 Fund – the national perspective, the uniqueness of the circumstances, the need for physical and psychological closure and the prompt and predictable alternative to litigation – this article makes an argument for providing relief to toxic trailer residents. First, this fund is demanded to redress compounded government harms. Further, this fund will serve the important principle of good government by strengthening government accountability

Blowing the Lid Off: Expanding the Due Process Clause to Defend the Defenseless against Hurricane Katrina

This paper advocates an expanded reading of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to include affirmative obligations to act. Specifically, this paper considers the government\u27s failure to act during the threat of Hurricane Katrina a valid cause of action under a Section 1983 Civil Rights suit. State officials, local officials, and local government must be held accountable for their monumental failures during the storm. The government\u27s mistreatment of its most vulnerable citizens-the poor, the elderly, and the sick-may constitute a due process violation under one of the exceptions to the no-duty rule generally imposed on the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. A more perfect Union must act on its duties- both negative and affirmative-to protect the powerless against harm. Part II of this paper will provide a brief introduction to Section 1983 litigation, examining possible defendants and the type of relief available. Part III will discuss Fourteenth Amendment violations supported by two exceptions to the no-duty rule under DeShaney: the state- created danger rule and the special relationship exception. This part of the paper will also examine the government\u27s failures leading up to the Katrina debacle in light of the two exceptions, arguing that either could be used to make the state and local officials liable under a due process claim. Finally, this paper will conclude with a look ahead at government\u27s response to the constant threat of hurricanes and whether anything has been learned from the events surrounding Hurricane Katrina

Blowing the Lid Off: Expanding the Due Process Clause to Defend the Defenseless Against Hurricane Katrina

This paper advocates an expanded reading of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to include affirmative obligations to act. Specifically, this paper considers the government\u27s failure to act during the threat of Hurricane Katrina a valid cause of action under a Section 1983 Civil Rights suit. State officials, local officials, and local government must be held accountable for their monumental failures during the storm. The government\u27s mistreatment of its most vulnerable citizens-the poor, the elderly, and the sick-may constitute a due process violation under one of the exceptions to the no-duty rule generally imposed on the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. A more perfect Union must act on its duties- both negative and affirmative-to protect the powerless against harm. Part II of this paper will provide a brief introduction to Section 1983 litigation, examining possible defendants and the type of relief available. Part III will discuss Fourteenth Amendment violations supported by two exceptions to the no-duty rule under DeShaney: the state- created danger rule and the special relationship exception. This part of the paper will also examine the government\u27s failures leading up to the Katrina debacle in light of the two exceptions, arguing that either could be used to make the state and local officials liable under a due process claim. Finally, this paper will conclude with a look ahead at government\u27s response to the constant threat of hurricanes and whether anything has been learned from the events surrounding Hurricane Katrina