Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.

Journal Article 1: Sherwyn, D., Wagner, P., & Gilman, G. (2004). Trying to make sense of sexual harassment law after Oncale, Holman, and Rene. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 45, 172–185.

Abstract: The state of the law governing sexual harassment, which was far from clear, was rendered more turbid by a 1998 U.S. Supreme Court holding that offered examples of specific situations under which such harassment might be actionable. The Court’s ruling in a case of same-sex harassment has muddied the waters by opening the issue of the alleged harasser’s motivation. This provides a defense for harassers who may rebut the accusation that their actions are motivated by sexual interests. In addition to making same-sex harassment difficult to prove, this holding makes it nearly impossible for an individual to make a case of sexual harassment when that harassment is not specifically directed at that person even though the conduct at issue is severe or pervasive. Employers seeking to promote fair play and to prevent claims of sexual harassment must maintain strict no-harassment policies and educate their staffs on the reasons for such policies.

Journal Article 2: Fekete, L. (2006). Europe: ‘Speech crime’ and deportation. Race & Class, 47, 82–92.

Abstract: Throughout Europe, reforms to immigration law are being introduced which effectively tie rights to citizenship and residence to limitations on freedom of speech; the penalty for breaching these is, increasingly, deportation. So far, these measures have only been applied to Muslims, usually religious leaders, held to have made inflammatory or offensive statements -! offences which could be dealt with under existing public order law. But the use of immigration legislation to deal with such issues bypasses the need for judicial transparency and overrides the rights of the accused. In the process, a separate, parallel justice system is set up which lacks any checks and balances on state power.