Colony in the Crosshairs: A Reevaluation of the High Court of American Samoa's Decision in Craddick v. Territorial Registrar in Light of Subsequent Federal Decisions in Wabol v. Villacrusis and Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. Harvard
Dante C.H. Harootunian
What the paper says
This article analyzes the High Court of American Samoa’s 1980ruling in Craddick v. Territorial Registrar and compares the decision’sreasoning with preceding cases that had also evaluated the constitutionalityof racial restrictions under the equal protection guarantees of theFifth Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment. The article then comparesthe legal analysis used by the High Court in Craddick with the legalanalysis used by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Wabol v. Villacrusis,a case that was based on similar facts and had a similar outcome toCraddick, but which relied on a different and completely incompatibleanalysis of the Constitution’s equal protection guarantees. Finally, thisarticle compares the legal analysis in Craddick with the Supreme Court’srecent decision in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. Harvard and concludesthat if a challenge to Craddick were to make it into a federal courttoday, the Supreme Court’s analysis in Harvard would require that Craddickbe overturned.
Evidence weight
Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40
| F · citation impact | 0.00 × 0.4 = 0.00 |
| M · momentum | 0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07 |
| V · venue signal | 0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03 |
| R · text relevance † | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.