Dahlia Lithwick - Open to Debate

aviator 1 win 1win aviator pinup india lucky jet crash pin-up 4rabet india 1 win lucky jet x 1win sayti 4era bet pin up casino online mosbet pinup pin up casino one win game lucky jet pin up 1win 1win online 1win aposta 4rabet mosbet casino parimatch 4rabet bangladesh mostbet aviator login parimatch mostbet casino pin up mostbet az mostbet aviator pinup mostbet kz 1 win 1win slot mostbet casino mostbet pin up 777 1 win mosbet india pin up 1win aviator mostbet aviator 1 win 1win yüklə 1 win az aviator lacky jet mostbet casino lucky jet mosbet aviator mostbet india

Register Login

Debates
- Features
- Topics
  Upcoming debates
- Close ✕
  - Ban the Box:…
    
    1 in 3 adults in the United States have a criminal record, which offers significant challenges to these individuals, including reentering the job market after incarceration. Over the years, there’s been a push for “Ban the Box” policies that call for removing questions asking about criminal history on job applications to give former offenders a fair chance by delaying background checks until later in the hiring process. Those who are against early screening argue that former offenders shouldn’t continue to be punished by the system, especially when it disproportionally affects minorities. It also prevents applicants from contributing and reintegrating into society and reducing dependency on social services. Those who disagree and say that screening a job applicant’s criminal history is important, argue that employers have a responsibility to ensure the safety of their business, employees, and customers and make informed hiring decisions. Without early screening, some recent studies show that employers might unconsciously resort to biased assumptions or stereotypes when evaluating candidates. With this context, we debate Ban the Box: Should We Banish the Criminal History Check Box from Job Applications?
    
    Friday, April 19, 2024
Insights
About
- - Become a Member
  - Newsletter
- Close ✕
  
  SUPPORT OPEN-MINDED DEBATE
  
  Help us bring debate to communities and classrooms across the nation.
  Donate
Header Bottom
- Become a member Newsletter Donate

Become a member Donate

Dahlia Lithwick

Legal Commentator

Host of Slate's ‘Amicus Podcast’

Dahlia Lithwick is one of the nation’s most prominent progressive legal commentators and Supreme Court analysts. She is a senior editor at Slate, where she has written her “Supreme Court Dispatches” and “Jurisprudence” columns since 1999 and is the host of the award-winning law podcast “Amicus.” She holds a J.D. from Stanford University and is currently teaching a short course on the Supreme Court and Ruth Bader Ginsburg at the University of Virginia Law.

Debates Featuring Dahlia Lithwick

We Should Expand the Supreme Court

With Akhil Reed Amar, Tamara Brummer, Dahlia Lithwick, Carter Phillips
September 30, 2021

Right now, nine justices hold tremendous power in American law. It's been that way since Ulysses S. Grant first inhabited the White House. The Constitution is silent on just how many justices should sit on the nation's top bench, and in 1937 President Roosevelt tried to add a slew of new appointments that would be sympathetic to his New Deal programs. Congress didn't bite. Now, advocates on the left are eyeing the bench once again. They see a Supreme Court…

We Should Expand the Supreme Court

Right now, nine justices hold tremendous power in American law. It's been that way since Ulysses S. Grant first inhabited the White House. The Constitution is silent on just how many justices should sit on…

With Akhil Reed Amar, Tamara Brummer, Dahlia Lithwick, Carter Phillips
September 30, 2021

Sign Up / Log In

@ 2006-2024, Open to Debate Foundation, All rights reserved