Student No. _____

Women & Law Answer Key 1996

Question 1.A.

___ 10 not obscene under 1st A 'prurient interest' std; redeeming artistic value v. painting silences women students
___ 5 possible content-based censorship if removed by state actor
___ 5 MacKinnon: pornography (which goes beyond obscenity) is sex discrimination
___ 5 esp. in power situation where there is no escape
___ 5 but silencing porn also silences women (artists & repressive attitudes)
___ 5 Title IX applies to universities
___ 5 disparate impact/disparate treatment theories
___ 5 sexual harassment hostile learning environ. Meritor Bank v. Vinson is it suff. 'severe or pervasive' to create an abusive environment? painting hangs all the time; intentional retention of painting as harassment?
___ 5 no need to show $$ loss or emotional distress Harris v. Forklift
___ 5 what std? Perhaps reas woman std Ellison v. Brady men & women react differently
___ 5 equal protection (Irk a state actor)
___ 5 female students disparate impact claim (v. male students)
___ 5 is there a gender specific state classification? Feeny (allowing painting to remain offends women; might offend men too, although not in facts) or does painting perpetuate gender stereotypes?
___ 10 intermediate scrutiny Craig v. Boren (goal of open debate is important, but perhaps no sub. rel. between goal & means bk painting hangs regardless of class discussion)
___ 10 university policy: is the painting 'insulting or stigmatizing' on the basis of sex? purpose or effect
___ 5 univ. policy may be unconst. in chilling const. protected expression American Booksellers

Question 1.B.

___ 5 acknowledge complainants' offense; inform Irk of S.H. laws & univ. policy
___ 5 promptly investigate and reasonable corrective action Intelkofer
___ 5 ask University to display painting elsewhere for voluntary viewing, since women students captive audience in a required course
___ 5 is removal adequate remedy?
___ 5 use as a consciousness-raising opportunity: e.g., colloquium
___ 10 innovative argument/thoughtful analysis

Question 2

___ 5 equal treatment theorists (= opp; male model)
___ 5 would oppose gender-specific legislation, criticize protectionism; Sears 'choice' theory or (less likely) support as remediation
___ 5 special treatment/cultural theorists (recog. cult. diffs)
___ 5 would acknowledge econ disadvantages and support bill that rectifies cultural subordination or provides ex post compensation for mothering
___ 5 dominance theorists (look at institutional structures re patriarchy)
___ 5 support redistribution, but believe bill does not go far enough
___ 5 or see bill as repressive tolerance: a single year of alimony is a bone toss that will defeat more fundamental reforms
___ 10 other types of feminists (socialist, postmodern, pragmatist, essentialist)
___ 5 sufficiency of remedy (only one year of alimony)
___ 5 equal protection
___ 5 disparate treatment: intentional classification
___ 5 but not mandatory preference, like Reed (exception)
___ 5 disadvantages men MUW v. Hogan
___ 5 intermediate scrutiny Craig: econ parity an important purpose (supported by 70% SOL disparity data), but sub relation problematic (only one year; exception provision)
___ 5 gender inappropriate proxy for specific $$ circumstances
___ 5 does bill perpetuate outmoded stereotype or is it based on actual
$$$ realities?
___ 5 propose gender-neutral amendment of language re spouse w/lower income
___ 10 innovative arguments/thoughtful analysis