Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorChua-Rubenfeld, Sophia
dc.contributor.authorCosta, Frank J. , Jr.
dc.date.accessioned2020-02-07T13:38:58Z
dc.date.available2020-02-07T13:38:58Z
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2384/582973
dc.description.abstractImagine you apply to be a cashier at a supermarket. At the beginning of the interview, you sign an employment application. You don’t get the job, and your interviewer’s remarks make you suspect it’s because you are Muslim. You sue in federal court under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The supermarket moves to dismiss the suit because your employment application included an agreement to arbitrate all Title VII disputes. The court dismisses your case and compels arbitration.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.titleThe Reverse-Entanglement Principle: Why Religious Arbitration of Federal Rights Is Unconstitutionalen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.source.volume128en_US
dc.source.issue7en_US
dc.source.beginpage2087en_US
dc.source.endpage2121en_US
dc.source.numberofpages35en_US
refterms.dateFOA2020-02-07T13:38:58Z
dc.source.journaltitleThe Yale Law Journalen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
The Reverse-Entanglement Principle_ ...
Size:
386.2Kb
Format:
PDF
Description:
Full text article

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record