Chapter 14: Civil Rights Flashcards
- What is the role of the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause in the democratic system of
governance?
- Identify the background, outcome, and implication of the Supreme Court case Plessy v.
Ferguson (1896).
Plessy v Ferguson, Plessy was denied service by a transportation company. He knew it clearly violated the 14th amendment’s equal protection clause. So filed a lawsuit hoping that this would be settled in his favor. But the court ruled in favor of his opponent claiming that segregation can be enforced by the States if they choose as long as facilities were equal. This created a precedent known as “equal but separate”, which allowed segregation to be perfectly legal as long as the two facilities were equal.
- What were the major causes and consequences of racial discrimination from the late 1800s
through the 1960s? (Consider especially the role of Congress and the Dixiecrats).
Some major shake-ups were restrictions made on voting to limit black and minority voters through the use of poll taxes, literacy tests, and grandfather clauses. Those restrictions prevented minorities from voting in elections for years, even though they had the right. White primaries also disenfranchised minority voters. Congress was also responsible since they never struck down laws that clearly violated the 14th amendment. Due to Dixiecrats who wanted to disenfranchise black voters, they did so by becoming the heads of committees, effectively stopping or slowing possible reform.
4. Identify the background, outcome, and implication of the Supreme Court case Brown v. Board of Education (1954).
Colored students were negatively affected by the segregation of public schools. And the SC agreed, claiming that separate and equal were inherently not equal. Thus destroying the separate but equal doctrine and bringing into question the legitimacy of segregation in other aspects of life.
- Describe the evolution (in Congress) and importance of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (especially
the “manner” in which it was set up).
The bill was introduced in 1963 by J.F.K, and it passed through the House with some fighting. In the House, it was marked up by Northern Democrats who strengthened minorities’ protections. Johnson eventually goes public with it and helps it pass. Finally, it goes to a vote and passes 290:130.
Senate receives the bill and a tougher battle ensues. The bill immediately goes to a dixiecrat-held committee where the bill has a high chance of dying. And although it is filibustered nearly to death, eventually enough votes are made to enforce a closure. The bill was set up in the context of the commerce clause, allowing Congress to withhold funding to states if they refuse to enforce the legislation.
- What is the difference between strict scrutiny, intermediate scrutiny, and ordinary scrutiny?
Strict scrutiny often deals with race and ethnicity, here discriminatory laws can only be upheld if a compelling governmental interest is defined, such as national security. Law must also be as unrestrictive as possible to those it discriminates and has to be applied to a narrow group of people.
Intermediate scrutiny substantial relationship to important government interest bust be shown, allowing for more gender discrimination, due to biological differences between the genders.
Finally ordinary scrutiny must prove that a law has an important relationship to government purpose or interest, allowing the government to pick and choose.
- Identify the background, outcome, and implication of major Supreme Court cases dealing with
Affirmative Action in the United States.
University of California v. Bakke occurred due to a man being exempted from University despite his test scores being better than others who were put in due to their race. So he claimed that this racial quota discriminated against him, the supreme court agreed to eliminate racial quotas but allowed race to be considered during admission to improve diversity.
In Adoran v. Pena strict scrutiny was used to narrow the use of affirmative action due to it dealing with race. Finally, in Fisher v. University of Texas in Austin, it was ruled that affirmative action had to be narrowly tailored, all of these restricted and hampered affirmative action allowing it to only pass if it directly remedies past practices that harmed long discriminated individuals.
- Why did the Equal Rights Amendment have difficulty passing in the late 1970s?
- What were the primary cases involving same-sex marriage, and what was the basis for the
decision?
Windsor vs. The United State and section 3 of DOMA as well as Obergefell v. The United States and section 2 of DOMA were primary cases involving same-sex marriage. Both rule in favor of same-sex due to the 14th amendment failing to be followed. Since it guaranteed equal rights to ALL, it was not to be withheld from gay people.
