Mod 2 Civil Liberties & Civil Rights

Question 1

Bill of Rights

Answer 1

Ten amendments added to the Constitution to protect individual liberties and rights from government interference

Question 2

Civil liberties

Answer 2

The rights of citizens to be free from undue government interference in their lives, including those rights guaranteed in the Bill of Rights and those established by long legal precedent (such as the right to marry or travel freely)

Question 3

Civil rights

Answer 3

The rights of citizens to be free of unequal or discriminatory treatment on the basis of race, gender, or membership in a particular demographic group

Question 4

Individual liberties

Answer 4

Constitutionally-established rights and freedoms protected by law from interference by the government

Question 5

First amendment

Answer 5

Freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and to petition

Question 6

Second amendment

Answer 6

Right to keep and bear arms

Question 7

Third amendment

Answer 7

Right to not quarter (or house) soldiers during time of war

Question 8

Fourth amendment

Answer 8

Right to be protected from unreasonable search and seizure

Question 9

Fifth amendmentKg

Answer 9

Rights in criminal cases, including due process and protection from self-incrimination; no person can be tried for a serious crime without the indictment of a grand jury

Question 10

Sixth amendment

Answer 10

Right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury, to an attorney, and to confront witnesses

Question 11

Seventh amendment

Answer 11

Right to a trial by jury in civil cases

Question 12

Eighth amendment

Answer 12

Right to not face excessive bail, fines, or cruel and unusual punishment

Question 13

Ninth amendment

Answer 13

There are other rights besides the ones listed in the Bill of Rights and the federal government cannot violate those rights

Question 14

Tenth amendment

Answer 14

All powers not given to the national government or prohibited to the states are reserved to states or to the people

Question 15

What is an underlying principle to the Bill of Rights?

Answer 15

An underlying principle to the Bill of Rights is that there are certain freedoms that the government should not be allowed to interfere with.

Question 16

Selective incorporation

Answer 16

Requiring states to uphold the Bill of Rights is made possible through selective incorporation. Selective incorporation is the process by which the Constitution effectively inserts parts of the Bill of Rights into state laws and constitutions. In this way, selective incorporation is an implicit, not explicit, process. The Supreme Court decides whether state laws are unconstitutional because they violate the Bill of Rights.

Question 17

Supreme Court and the Bill of Rights

Answer 17

The Bill of Rights protects individual liberties and rights: The Supreme Court is responsible for hearing cases and interpreting the application of the provisions in the Bill of Rights. Since 1897, the Supreme Court has heard cases on potential state infringement of individual liberties and rights. The Court has found that the Bill of Rights must be upheld, even in states whose constitutions and laws do not protect fundamental liberties as fully as the Bill of Rights.

Question 18

Why was the Bill of Rights added to the Constitution?

Answer 18

When ratifying the Constitution, Federalists and Anti-Federalists disagreed about how individual liberties and rights are protected in the Constitution. The two groups eventually agreed to ratify (lawfully accept) the Constitution and add the Bill of Rights, a series of ten amendments that explicitly protects individual liberties and rights.

Question 19

Establishment clause (of freedom of religion)

Answer 19

the first clause of the First Amendment, which states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion;” this prevents the federal government from supporting an official religion and sets the United States apart from many European nations, which provide official government support for a national, or “established,” church

Question 20

Free exercise clause (of freedom of religion)

Answer 20

the second clause of the First Amendment, which prevents the federal government from interfering with its citizens’ religious beliefs and practices; the Supreme Court has upheld some limits on religious practices that conflict with secular laws, such as religious drug use or polygamy

Question 21

Lemon test

Answer 21

a 3 part test to determine whether a law violates the establishment clause devised by the Supreme Court in the 1971 case Lemon v. Kurtzman; based on the Lemon test, laws are constitutional only if: (1) they have a legitimate secular purpose, (2) neither advance nor inhibit religion, and (3) do not result in an “excessive government entanglement” with religion

Question 22

Nondenominational prayer

Answer 22

prayer that does not advocate the beliefs of a specific religion but that acknowledges the existence of a divine being

Question 23

Secular vs. religious

Answer 23

Secular = nonreligious or unaffiliated with religion

Question 24

“Wall of separation” between church and state

Answer 24

a phrase coined by Thomas Jefferson in an 1802 letter, which described his view that there should be complete separation between the government and religion

Question 25

Engel v. Vitale (1962)

Answer 25

EV - Prayer free - school kids with sign (Establishment clause case) A case contesting a New York state law requiring schoolchildren to recite a nondenominational prayer each morning (although children could choose not to participate). A group of parents sued the state arguing that the law was a violation of the establishment clause; the Supreme Court ruled in their favor, judging that New York state was giving unconstitutional government support to religion by providing the prayer.

Question 26

Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972)

Answer 26

WY - No high (school) - Amish buggy with school kids (Free exercise clause case) A Supreme Court case concerning the mandatory schooling of three Amish students. The state of Wisconsin fined the students’ families for refusing to send them to school after the eighth grade; the Amish families argued that higher education conflicted with the free exercise of their religious beliefs. The Court ruled in their favor, holding that the First Amendment’s protections for free exercise of religion outweighed the state’s interests in compelling Amish students to attend school past the eighth grade.

Question 27

Key takeaways - Freedom of Religion (Balancing Liberty & Order)

Answer 27

The First Amendment prevents the government from supporting a religion and protects the free exercise of religion; citizens’ ability to worship, or not worship, as they please is a fundamental individual liberty. The Supreme Court has upheld some limits to free exercise, however; although individuals may believe whatever they want, the government may limit actions that break secular laws (society laws) if there is a compelling government interest at stake. Similarly, the Court has permitted some government support for religion, such as public funding for students attending religious schools.

Question 28

“Clear and present danger”

Answer 28

formulated during the case Schenck v. United States, the “clear and present danger” test permitted the government to punish speech likely to bring about evils that Congress had a right to prevent, such as fomenting anti-war sentiment; since the 1960s, the Supreme Court has replaced the “clear and present danger” test with the “direct incitement” test, reducing the circumstances under which the government can restrict speech only to those likely to result in imminent lawless action

Question 29

Defamation

Answer 29

the act of damaging someone’s reputation by making false statements; defamation through a printed medium is called libel, while spoken defamation is called slander

Question 30

Hate speech

Answer 30

written or spoken communication that belittles a group based on its characteristics, such as race, gender, or sexual orientation

Question 31

Obscenity

Answer 31

lewd or sexual art or publications; although the Court has struggled to define what constitutes obscenity, it has upheld restrictions on materials that “to the average person applying contemporary community standards” depict offensive or sexual conduct and lack literary or artistic merit

Question 32

Symbolic speech

Answer 32

nonverbal forms of speech protected by the First Amendment, such as picketing, wearing armbands, displaying signs, or engaging in acts of symbolic protest such as flag burning

Question 33

Time, place, and manner restrictions

Answer 33

limits to freedom of expression based on when, where, and how individuals or organizations express opinions; for example, a city may require an organization to obtain a permit in order to conduct a public protest

Question 34

Schenck v. United States (1919)

Answer 34

SUS No draft leaflets (Clear and Present Danger Case) During World War I, socialist antiwar activists Charles Schenck and Elizabeth Baer mailed 15,000 fliers urging men to resist the military draft. They were arrested under the Espionage Act of 1917, which banned interference with military operations or supporting US enemies during wartime. The resulting Supreme Court case concerned whether the Espionage Act violated freedom of speech. The Court upheld the Espionage Act, ruling that the speech creating a “clear and present danger” was not protected by the First Amendment.

Question 35

Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969)

Answer 35

TDM - Black Tinker Bands - (Symbolic Speech case) Iowa teenagers Mary Beth Tinker, her brother John, and their friend Christopher Eckhardt were suspended from their public high school for wearing black armbands to protest the Vietnam War. In the resulting case, the Supreme Court ruled that the armbands were a form of symbolic speech, which is protected by the First Amendment, and therefore the school had violated the students’ First Amendment rights.

Question 36

Libel

Answer 36

the act of damaging someone’s reputation by printing false statements; although ordinary citizens can sue for libel based on false statements alone, public persons or officials must also prove that the false statements were made with malicious intent

Question 37

Pentagon Papers

Answer 37

a top-secret account of U.S. military action in Vietnam, which showed that President Lyndon Johnson had lied to Congress and the public about the extent of the war; analyst Daniel Ellsberg leaked the Pentagon Papers to the New York Times in 1970

Question 38

prior restraint

Answer 38

government censorship of free expression by preventing publication or speech before it takes place; the Supreme Court has established a “heavy presumption against prior restraint” (in other words, it is likely the Court will declare unconstitutional an act of the government that blocks free expression)

Question 39

New York Times Co. v. United States (1971)

Answer 39

In 1971, the United States government attempted to restrain the New York Times and the Washington Post from publishing excerpts from the Pentagon Papers, a top-secret history of US military action in Vietnam, based on national security concerns. In the resulting case, the Supreme Court ruled that the government’s attempt to bar publication of the Pentagon Papers violated the First Amendment right to freedom of the press, and that publishing a history of the war did not pose an immediate national security threat to American military forces.

Question 40

Key takeaways - Freedom of the Press (Balancing Liberty & Order)

Answer 40

Freedom of the press is critical for the functioning of a democracy, since it facilitates the free exchange of ideas. Since the 1970s, the Supreme Court has bolstered the freedom of the press by establishing a “heavy presumption against prior restraint.” But freedom of the press is not absolute; citizens can seek redress if false statements printed about them damage their reputation, and leaking government documents that pose an immediate threat to American military forces is a crime.

Question 41

Key takeaways - Freedom of expression (Balancing liberty and order)

Answer 41

Freedom of expression is one of the most fundamental individual liberties protected by the Bill of Rights, as democracy depends upon the free exchange of ideas. The Supreme Court has supported the free speech rights of individuals engaged in protest, including nonverbal “symbolic speech.” But freedom of speech is not absolute: the Court has upheld restrictions on defamatory and obscene speech, as well as speech that incites violence or lawbreaking.

Question 42

Key takeaways - Second Amendment

Answer 42

A provision in the Bill of Rights that protects the right to bear arms (weapons). Since the 1960s, the issue of gun control legislation has continued to surface in Congress and the Supreme Court. The Court has been consistent in their commitment to individual liberty and upholding an individual’s right to own a gun with little to no government interference. The Supreme Court will most likely continue to hear cases that question the balance of the government’s power to pass gun control legislation and the individual liberty to own guns with limited restrictions.

Question 43

Selective incorporation

Answer 43

A judicial doctrine applying some protections of the Bill of Rights to the states, based on the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Question 44

Supreme Court recent interpretations of Second Amendment

Answer 44

In recent decades, states have attempted to pass gun control legislation that would limit an individual’s access to guns or to particular types of guns. In both District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) and McDonald v. Chicago (2010), the Court struck down laws that placed restrictions on gun ownership. The majority in both cases argued that gun control legislation gave the government too much power and violated individual liberties.

Question 45

Why do recent Second Amendment Court cases matter?

Answer 45

The importance of McDonald v. Chicago has to do with the fact that Constitutional rights don’t automatically apply to state and local governments. So, even though the decision in DC v. Heller had granted individuals the right to own operative had guns in their home in the District of Columbia, it was the McDonald decision that extended this right to state and local governments. The decision was based on the principle of “selective incorporation” of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Question 46

Fourth Amendment

Answer 46

protects individuals’ homes, persons, and belongings from unreasonable search and seizure

Question 47

Eighth Amendment

Answer 47

protects individuals from the government enforcing (1) excessive bails or (2) excessive fines, or (3) inflicting cruel and unusual punishment

Question 48

Rule of law

Answer 48

the principle that government is based on a body of law applied equally and fairly to every citizen, not on the whims of those in charge, and that no-one is above the law including the government

Question 49

Supreme Court’s interpretation of Eighth Amendment

Answer 49

The Court’s interpretation of cruel and unusual punishment has changed over time; in some recent cases, it has prevented states from issuing the death penalty to defendants who are minors or are legally judged to be mentally incompetent.

Question 50

Recent controversy of Fourth Amendment

Answer 50

In 2013 when former CIA employee Edward Snowden released classified information to the world showing that the NSA had been monitoring the phone calls of leaders of allied nations. Snowden’s intelligence sparked a public debate about whether or not this collection of data was an example of an unreasonable search and seizure. NSA critics contend that the agency violated the Fourth Amendment because it neither had the appropriate warrants to use this data, nor had it disclosed the fact it was doing so. In the NSA’s defense, others argue that the agency was doing what was necessary to protect public safety, and that the likely delays associated with getting a court warrant each time the government wants to monitor digital metadata could impede its ability to prevent future terrorist attacks.

Question 51

5 provisions of 5th amendment

Answer 51

Protection from Authorities (old days - King & Soldiers) DDSGE Double, Due, Self, Grand, Eminent (1) Double jeopardy - can’t be tried for the same offense twice (2) Due process - fair legal proceedings (3) protection against Self-incrimination (4) Grand jury indictment for serious crime (5) Eminent domain - taking property if needed, but pay

Question 52

5 provisions of the 6th amendment

Answer 52

Rights of the Accused CITCW (1) right to know the Charges (what you are being accused of) (2) Impartial jury (who don’t have an opinion yet) (3) public and speedy Trial (4) legal Counsel (lawyer) (5) right to question Witnesses and have witnesses

Question 53

Selective incorporation

Answer 53

The gradual process of applying amendments in the Bill of Rights to state and local governments; only some of the rights in the Bill of Rights have been selectively incorporated.

Question 54

Due process clause

Answer 54

Provisions of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments that limit the power of the government to deny people “life, liberty, or property” without fully respecting their legal rights and the correct legal procedure. the legal requirement that an individual’s rights must be respected by a state or government; protected at the federal level by the Fifth Amendment, and at the state level by the incorporation of the Fourteenth amendment.

Question 55

Miranda rule

Answer 55

A requirement that law enforcement officers inform a person subject to an interrogation of their right not to incriminate themselves under the Fifth Amendment and receive a lawyer under the Sixth Amendment; created after the decision in Miranda v. Arizona (1966).

Question 56

Public safety exception

Answer 56

An exception to the Miranda rule; it allows the police to perform unwarned interrogation and have the findings to stand as direct evidence in court, provided the information relates to public safety. The public safety exception allows officers to interrogate a suspect without informing them of their rights if there is an objective need to protect the police or the public from immediate danger. An example of the public safety exemption is when the police interrogate a suspect to determine the location of a bomb.

Question 57

Right to legal counsel

Answer 57

The right to have the assistance of a lawyer; protected under the Sixth Amendment.

Question 58

Right to speedy and public trial

Answer 58

The right to speedy and public trial protects a defendant from having a long delay between being arrested and facing trial; protected under the Sixth Amendment.

Question 59

Right to an impartial jury

Answer 59

The right to an impartial jury means that the defendant has the right to face a jury that is not likely to have an opinion about the case already formed; protected under the Sixth Amendment.

Question 60

Exclusionary rule

Answer 60

A requirement of 4th amendment that any evidence found during an illegal search or seizure cannot be used to try someone for a crime. For example, the exclusionary rule stipulates that evidence illegally seized by law enforcement officers searching without a warrant cannot be used against that suspect in criminal prosecution.

Question 61

Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)

Answer 61

A Supreme Court ruling that guaranteed the right to an attorney for the poor or indigent. The Supreme Court incorporated the Sixth Amendment right to legal counsel at the state level, ruling that state courts were responsible for providing a lawyer to a defendant who could not afford one.

Question 62

“Penumbra” of privacy

Answer 62

derived from the Latin for “partial shadow;” the Supreme Court has ruled that several amendments in the Bill of Rights cast a “penumbra” of the right to privacy, although the right to privacy itself is never explicitly named–for example, the Court has interpreted that the Fourth Amendment right of the people to be secure in their houses from unreasonable searches and seizures implies a right to privacy in the home

Question 63

Right to privacy

Answer 63

the right to “be left alone,” or to be free of government scrutiny into one’s private beliefs and behavior

Question 64

Roe v. Wade (1973)

Answer 64

Norma McCorvey, called by the alias Jane Roe in the court proceedings, wished to terminate her pregnancy but found she could not do so safely or legally in the state of Texas. In the resulting Supreme Court case, the Court ruled that a woman’s decision to have an abortion in the first trimester of pregnancy fell under the right of privacy and thus was protected by the Constitution (by the penumbra of the Bill of Rights & Fourth amendment implication of privacy in the home). The Court did permit limits on abortion in the second and third trimesters of pregnancy.

Question 65

Fourteenth Amendment

Answer 65

explicitly guarantees certain rights against infringement by states, including citizenship, due process, and equal protection for all citizens; before the Amendment’s 1868 adoption after the Civil War, these rights were protected at the Federal level by the Bill of Rights, but not explicitly at the state level.

Question 66

Fundamental rights

Answer 66

rights and immunities protected by the Bill of Rights and interpreted by the Supreme Court as “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty,” and therefore protected against state governments in addition to the federal government

Question 67

Incrementalism

Answer 67

the process of incorporating specific rights and provisions of the Bill of Rights to the state level on a case-by-case basis; compare to total incorporation

Question 68

Total incorporation

Answer 68

a doctrine that applies all the guarantees of the Bill of Rights to the state level without exception; this doctrine has never been adopted by a Supreme Court majority opinion, although several dissenting justices have advocated for it

Question 69

McDonald v. Chicago (2010)

Answer 69

The first case in which the Second Amendment right to “keep and bear Arms” was incorporated to the states. The City of Chicago passed a handgun ban in 1982; Chicago resident Otis McDonald filed a lawsuit challenging the ban in 2008 on the basis that he needed a handgun for self-defense. The Court declared the handgun ban unconstitutional by a 5-4 majority, ruling that the Second Amendment right to bear arms for self-defense is fundamental, and therefore incorporated to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause.

Question 70

“Separate but equal” doctrine

Answer 70

the Supreme Court’s decision in Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) that having separate facilities for black and white citizens was not a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause

Question 71

Majority-minority districts

Answer 71

a congressional district whose boundaries are set so that the majority of voters are from one minority group; the aim of creating districts in this way is to make it easier for citizens of a racial or ethnic minority to elect a representative who reflects their concerns, and to prevent their collective votes from being diluted when spread across several different districts

Question 72

Voting Rights Act of 1965

Answer 72

legislation prohibiting racial discrimination in voting, including the use of literacy tests, poll taxes, and grandfather clauses; it also specifies that electoral district lines may not be drawn in such a way as to improperly dilute the votes of minority groups

Question 73

Brown v. Board of Education (1954)

Answer 73

Oliver Brown was the father of Linda, an African American third grader who was forced to attend a segregated elementary school. Along with other African American families in the area, Brown sued the Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas. Under the leadership of future Supreme Court justice Thurgood Marshall, the NAACP’s Legal Defense Fund sought to prove with this case that segregated public schools violated the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause. In its decision, the Supreme Court agreed, ruling that “in the field of public education, separate but equal has no place.” This ruling was a crucial victory for the civil rights movement, and later cases challenging segregation built on the precedent set in Brown.

Question 74

Shaw v. Reno (1993)

Answer 74

The US attorney general rejected a congressional reapportionment plan from North Carolina because it created only one black-majority district. In response, North Carolina submitted a second plan creating two black-majority districts, but one of those districts was an abnormal shape. Five North Carolina residents challenged the constitutionality of that district, arguing that its only purpose was to secure the election of additional black representatives. The Supreme Court ruled that while legislative redistricting must be conscious of race and comply with the Voting Rights Act of 1965, exceeding what is reasonably necessary to avoid racial imbalances is unconstitutional, representing a violation of the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Question 75

CHANGES in Supreme Court restrictions and protections of minority rights

Answer 75

The Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Constitution can change over time, as it did between their decisions in Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) and Brown v. Board of Education (1954). In Plessy, the Court ruled that having public facilities that were “separate but equal” did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment, holding that it did not cause a sense of inferiority in minority groups. This decision sanctioned segregation in public places all across the United States. However, in Brown v. Board of Education (1954), the Court under Chief Justice Earl Warren ruled that race-based school segregation violates the equal protection clause, overturning Plessy. The These different interpretations of the constitutionality of segregation show how at times the Court has restricted rights, and at others protected them; while Shaw v. Reno (1993) is an example of the Court upholding the rights of the majority, arguably at the expense of minority rights, by placing limits on majority-minority redistricting.

Question 76

Influence of the composition of the Supreme Court on Minority Rulings

Answer 76

The Court’s composition is a contributing factor to their different interpretations of the Constitution: for example, the majority of justices on the Warren Court who ruled against segregation in Brown v. Board tended to hold liberal positions and ruled in favor of expanding civil rights, many having been appointed by FDR and Truman. By the time of Shaw v. Reno, eight of nine justices were nominees of Republican president; with this more conservative composition, the Court interpreted the Fourteenth Amendment to uphold the rights of the racial majority (white voters) in the case of Shaw.

Question 77

Affirmative action

Answer 77

Efforts to improve opportunities for underrepresented or disadvantaged groups, especially in relation to employment or education.

Question 78

The “colorblind” Constitution

Answer 78

The belief that the Constitution protects citizens of all races equally, and that additional measures such as affirmative action are unnecessary.

Question 79

Equal protection clause

Answer 79

A provision of the Fourteenth Amendment that prohibits states from denying equal protection of the laws to their residents.

Question 80

Supreme Court rulings on affirmative action

Answer 80

The Court’s interpretation of the Constitution has influenced the debate on affirmative action: some justices argue that affirmative action is constitutional, holding that the Constitution only forbids racial classifications designed to harm minorities. Other justices disagree, arguing that affirmative action is unconstitutional because it creates race-based and gender-based classifications, benefitting certain genders and race groups over others.

Question 81

Grutter v. Bollinger (2003) Gratz v. Bollinger (2003)

Answer 81

In Grutter v. Bollinger (2003), the Court ruled in favor of affirmative action in circumstances where race was one factor among many considered in admissions decisions, and when the purpose of the school’s affirmative action policy was to achieve a diverse student body. But in Gratz v. Bollinger (2003), the Court ruled against affirmative action when it takes the form of a points- or quota-based system.

Question 82

Civil rights

Answer 82

rights of individuals against discrimination based on race, national origin, religion, sex, ability, sexual orientation, age, or pregnancy

Question 83

Civil Rights Act of 1964

Answer 83

legislation passed by Congress prohibiting segregation of public facilities, as well as discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, religion, or national origin; the Civil Rights Act also created the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to enforce these provisions

Question 84

Civil Rights Movement (1960s)

Answer 84

a movement, led by both grassroots and national civil rights organizations, to end segregation and other forms of discrimination against African American citizens

Question 85

Equal protection clause

Answer 85

a clause of the Fourteenth Amendment stipulating that no state shall “deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws;” the equal protection clause has served as the basis for most legal challenges to discrimination

Question 86

LGBTQ movement

Answer 86

a civil rights movement which emerged in the 1970s, dedicated to combating legal restrictions on lesbian, gay, bisexual, transexual, and queer citizens on the basis of Fourteenth Amendment protections; note that some advocate for using alternative acronyms such as LGBTQIA+ and GSRM

Question 87

National Organization for Women (NOW)

Answer 87

an organization founded in 1960 with the goal of advancing the rights of women through legislative and legal challenges to sex discrimination

Question 88

Pro-life (anti-abortion) movement

Answer 88

a movement opposed to abortion, led by the National Right to Life Committee, which argues that Fourteenth Amendment protections begin at conception

Question 89

Betty Friedan

Answer 89

author of The Feminine Mystique, a 1963 book that raised concerns about the status of women in society and fueled the women’s rights movement of the 1960s and 1970s; Friedan became the first president of NOW

Question 90

Martin Luther King, Jr.

Answer 90

civil rights activist and religious leader whose nonviolent protests helped bring about desegregation and equal protection legislation for African Americans; delivered the “I Have a Dream” speech at the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom in 1963

Question 91

Thurgood Marshall

Answer 91

founder and first executive director of the NAACP’s Legal Defense and Educational Fund, which pursued a strategy of legal challenges to segregation on the basis of the equal protection clause; Marshall successfully argued Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954) and later became the first African American Supreme Court justice

Question 92

Letter from a Birmingham Jail (1963)

Answer 92

Written by Martin Luther King, Jr., while detained in a Birmingham, Alabama jail cell for protesting segregation, this open letter to members of the clergy was published in newspapers throughout the United States. The letter critiqued the idea that civil rights demonstrators should wait until a later time to pursue racial justice and that it was immoral for protesters to break the law. King argued that there are two types of laws—justs laws and unjust laws— and that “one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.”

Question 93

QUOTE from Letter from a Birmingham Jail (1963)

Answer 93

“We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct action campaign that was “well timed” in the view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. For years now I have heard the word ‘Wait!’ It rings in the ear of every Negro with piercing familiarity. This ‘Wait’ has almost always meant ‘Never.’ We must come to see, with one of our distinguished jurists, that ‘justice too long delayed is justice denied.’”

Question 94

The Fourteenth Amendment and Discrimination

Answer 94

The Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was ratified in 1868 in response to ongoing discrimination against African Americans in the South after the Civil War. This amendment incorporated elements of the Bill of Rights, which originally applied only to the actions of the federal government, into the states by barring state governments from infringing upon the rights of citizens. The Fourteenth Amendment also declared that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States . . . are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside,” effectively overturning the 1857 ruling in Dred Scott v. Sandford that black people were not citizens of the United States.

Question 95

Title IX

Answer 95

a provision of the Education Amendments of 1972, which prevents schools and universities receiving federal funding from discriminating against female students