180 likes | 183 Vues
Learn about civil rights, civil liberties, and landmark Supreme Court cases. Explore the 14th Amendment, discrimination, and the Civil Rights Movement.
E N D
0 American Government and Organization PS1301 Wednesday, 28 April
Announcements • Survey on book and response pads • Review sheet will be posted on website
SC hears case on “Enemy Combatants” • Hamdi v. Rumsfeld and Rumsfeld v. Padilla • The key figures in the cases are both American citizens: Yaser Hamdi is a U.S.-born Saudi-American who was captured during fighting in Afghanistan in 2001 and Jose Padilla is a former Chicago gang member who traveled to Afghanistan and Pakistan before being arrested at a Chicago airport in 2002 on suspicion of plotting to detonate a radioactive "dirty bomb" in the United States. • At issue is Habeas Corpus: an individual’s right not to be imprisoned unless charged with a crime, except in time of “rebellion or invasion” • Listen to today’s historic testimony at the Supreme Court.
Cases Involving Civil Liberties • Free Speech, Schenck v. United States (1919) • clear and present danger • Freedom of Press, New York Times v. Sullivan (1964) • Libel violates 1st Amendment • Obscenity, Roth v. United States (1957) • Court attempts to define obscenity • Establishment Clause, Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971) • Three part test for judging constitutionality of division between church and state • Gun Control, United States v. Miller (1939) • 2nd Amendment does not provide for absolute guarantee • Right to Privacy, Roe v. Wade (1973) • Landmark case on abortion
Reasoning • Majority opinions • The Court majority sends a signal to lower courts, lawyers, potential litigants and others how they are likely to treat similar cases in the future. • Concurring opinions • Agrees with decision but not reasoning • Dissenting opinions • Explains why they disagreed with the ruling. Dissents can be important as they lay the groundwork for future decisions.
What Are Civil Rights? • Americans have applied the term civil rights to a variety of rights and privileges. • Civil rights represent those protections by government power. That is, they require governments to act, whereas civil liberties are well served when government does nothing.
Civil Liberties • We classify as civil liberties the Constitution’s protections from government power. • Freedom of speech, religion and the right to privacy are examples. • Typically violations of these liberties occur when some government agency, at any level, oversteps its authority.
Modern Day Civil Rights • Modern day “civil rights” include safeguards against any effort by government or dominant groups in a community to subjugate another group and take unfair, mostly economic, advantage of it. • The concept has advanced well beyond the “civic” rights of colonial America.
Contemporary Interpretation • Civil rights refers to the equality of all people, regardless of: – Race, ethnicity, or national origin – Religion – Gender – Sexual orientation – Age – Disability – Disease (e.g., HIV/AIDS, cancer) – Weight, etc.
Civil Rights and the 14th Amendment • •“All persons born or naturalized in the United States … are citizens of the United States … No state shall … deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” • The basic concept is political and legal equality
But does not guarantee complete equality Discrimination on the basis of achievement & behavior is allowable • – Universities may reward academic merit • – Employers may hire the best qualified • – Laws may punish people who are felons • – Income taxes may discriminate on the basis of a • person’s income
Civil Rights Movement • The 1964 Civil Rights Act • The Voting Rights Act of 1965 • This aggressive law authorized the Justice Department to suspend restrictive electoral tests in southern states that had a history of low black turnout. • Federal officers could be sent into the state to register voters directly. • States also had to obtain clearance from the Justice Department before changing their election laws.
Other examples of Civil Rights Policy - Affirmative Action • Affirmative action was the means used by the government to redress past discrimination in employment. • This policy requires any employers or government agencies that have practiced discrimination to compensate minorities by giving them special consideration in their selection for employment and education.
Affirmative Action • This policy is most controversial when applied to • Government contracting, • University admissions to increase minority enrollment, • Employment policies to promote minority presence and advancement in business and the professions. • Notion of quotas quickly rejected by the Court and the public. Bakke v. UC Regents 1978 • Still, controversy persists.
Affirmative Action • The contentious politics for and against affirmative action have revolved around “preferential” criteria. • This criteria gives minorities some advantage in university admissions, employment, and government contracts without imposing numerical quotas. • While a majority of Americans support special assistance for minorities subjected to past discrimination, a majority also draws the line at affirmative action.
Emerging Rights • Americans with Disabilities Act bars discrimination in employment, transportation, public accommodation, and telecommunications against persons with physical and mental disabilities. • Elderly with help of the American Association of Retired Persons have worked to end mandatory retirement. • Can you name some other groups waiting in the wings?
Emerging Rights • Two recent cases illustrate problems courts confront in trying to implement the ADA. • In 1999 the Court ruled that an airline that only hired pilots with 20/20 vision could reject those who required corrective lenses. They had filed their suit under ADA utilizing their eyesight as a disability. But the Court said that because it could be corrected it was not a disability, so the law did not apply.
Emerging Rights • In 2001, the Court decided that a golfer with an atrophied leg could use a golf cart on the PGA tour despite a rule forbidding one. • Walking, the Court said, was not “fundamental” to the game.