Oregon Law Review : Vol.100, No.1 (2021)

Permanent URI for this collection

https://hdl.handle.net/1794/26945

Browse

Browsing Oregon Law Review : Vol.100, No.1 (2021) by Subject "Constitutional law"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Are We Still Not Saved? Race, Democracy, and Educational Inequality (Derrick Bell Lecture, University of Oregon, February 12, 2021)
    (University of Oregon School of Law, 2021-12-15) Epperson, Lia
    Thirty-four years ago, in his seminal book, "And We Are Not Saved: The Elusive Quest for Racial Justice," Derrick Bell provided a critical view of American history and constitutional jurisprudence to illustrate the challenges the United States faces in reaching true equality. In his enlightened observations about the structure of our republic, Bell refers to “the American contradiction.” To see true progress toward meaningful equality, he contends, we must reckon with the challenging truth of our history—that we are a nation founded on this “constitutional contradiction”... In his work, Professor Bell argued that this American contradiction, “shrouded by myth,” serves as a perpetual impediment to addressing historic and persistent forms of racial injustice. This, he says, is “the root reason for the inability of black people to gain legitimacy.” This reality of racial inequality is part of our culture and common history. It is the contradiction embedded in the ideology that formed our republic.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Stacked Injustice and an Avenue for Relief: The Interplay of “Stacked” 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) Convictions and Expanded Compassionate Release Under the First Step Act
    (University of Oregon School of Law, 2021-12-15) Costello, Ryan
    In Part I, this Comment sets forth the historical context of § 924(c) in terms of legislative background, Supreme Court interpretation, and subsequent congressional adjustment. This explanation of § 924(c) illustrates how we have arrived at the current iteration of the law and the extensive dialogue Congress and the courts have had regarding its meaning and purpose. Part II explores controversial sentences imposed under § 924(c) and judicial pleas for presidential, prosecutorial, or legislative action to redress the wrongs imposed.Part III addresses congressional changes made to both § 924(c) and compassionate release via the First Step Act, and it articulates that, despite Congress mandating that changes to § 924(c) be nonretroactive, relief is appropriate on a case-by-case basis for those incarcerated under stacked § 924(c) charges through compassionate release. Part IV addresses, then dispels, concerns that such relief may be an end around of legislative intent with regard to stacked § 924(c) charges, explaining that foreclosing blanket retroactivity does not preclude relief on a case-by-case basis. Part V provides additional support for case-by-case relief on the basis of two particularly germane sentencing factors, which are relevant when considering a reduction in sentence via compassionate release.
©University of Oregon School of Law, 1515 Agate St, Eugene, OR, 97403 Phone: (541) 346-3852