Unit 3: Civil Liberties and Civil Rights

Civil liberties

Constitutional protections from government power (limits on what government can do to individuals), such as speech, search-and-seizure protections, and the right to counsel.

Civil rights

Guarantees of equal treatment and protection against discrimination, often tied to the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause and civil rights statutes.

Bill of Rights

The first 10 constitutional amendments (ratified Dec. 15, 1791) that list key protections for individual liberty; none of these rights is absolute.

Barron v. Baltimore (1833)

Held that the Bill of Rights restricted the national government but did not apply to state governments.

Fourteenth Amendment (1868)

Post–Civil War amendment that expanded protections against state governments, including the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses; central to incorporating rights against the states.

Due Process Clause (14th Amendment)

Provides that no state may deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; key vehicle for selective incorporation.

Equal Protection Clause (14th Amendment)

Provides that no state shall deny any person equal protection of the laws; major basis for discrimination/civil rights claims.

Selective incorporation

Supreme Court process applying most (but not all) Bill of Rights protections to the states, case-by-case, through the 14th Amendment Due Process Clause.

Gitlow v. New York (1925)

Early step toward incorporating First Amendment free speech and press protections against the states.

State action doctrine

Principle that most constitutional limits apply to government actors (or conduct fairly attributable to government), not purely private conduct.

Rational basis review

Lowest tier of scrutiny: law must be rationally related to a legitimate government interest (default; easiest for government to satisfy).

Intermediate scrutiny

Mid-level scrutiny: law must be substantially related to an important government interest (often used for sex classifications).

Strict scrutiny

Highest tier of scrutiny: law must be narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling government interest (often used for race classifications and burdens on fundamental rights).

Establishment Clause

First Amendment rule that government may not establish an official religion or improperly endorse, fund, or coerce religious exercise.

Free Exercise Clause

First Amendment protection that government may not prohibit the free exercise of religion, though the right is not absolute.

Engel v. Vitale (1962)

Held that government-directed prayer in public schools violates the Establishment Clause (problem is state sponsorship/coercion, not private prayer).

Lemon test

From Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971): Establishment Clause framework asking whether a law has a secular purpose, a primary effect that neither advances nor inhibits religion, and no excessive entanglement with religion.

Kennedy v. Bremerton School District (2022)

Shifted Establishment Clause analysis away from Lemon as controlling, emphasizing history-and-tradition reasoning.

Employment Division v. Smith (1990)

Held that neutral, generally applicable laws do not necessarily require religious exemptions under the Free Exercise Clause.

Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) (1993)

Federal statute creating stronger protection for religious exercise against the federal government, providing exemptions in some situations even when the Constitution does not require them.

Schenck v. United States (1919)

Upheld conviction under the Espionage Act for anti-draft leaflets; associated with the idea that speech may be limited when it poses a serious danger (often taught with “clear and present danger”).

Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969)

Modern incitement standard: speech can be punished only if directed to inciting imminent lawless action and likely to produce it.

Content-based restriction

Speech regulation targeting ideas/viewpoints; highly suspect under the First Amendment and more likely to be struck down.

Content-neutral restriction

Speech regulation not aimed at ideas (often focused on logistics); more likely to be upheld if reasonable and leaving open alternative channels.

Time, place, and manner regulation

Content-neutral rules controlling when/where/how speech occurs (e.g., permits, noise limits) to protect safety and order without suppressing ideas.

Ward v. Rock Against Racism (1989)

Upheld certain sound-amplification rules as a permissible time, place, and manner regulation.

Tinker v. Des Moines (1969)

Protected student symbolic speech (armbands) in public schools unless it causes a material and substantial disruption.

West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943)

Held that public schools cannot compel students to participate in patriotic rituals (e.g., flag salute); protects against compelled speech.

Texas v. Johnson (1989)

Held that flag burning as political protest is protected symbolic speech under the First Amendment.

Prior restraint

Government censorship before publication; the Supreme Court applies a heavy presumption against its constitutionality.

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

Pentagon Papers case; rejected the government’s attempt to stop publication, reinforcing the heavy presumption against prior restraint even with national security claims.

New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964)

Defamation rule for public officials: they must prove “actual malice” to win suits over statements about their official conduct, protecting robust criticism of government.

Miller v. California (1973)

Established a three-part obscenity framework; obscenity is narrowly defined and can be restricted under the Miller test.

Exclusionary rule

Judicially created remedy that generally bars illegally obtained evidence from being used at trial to deter police misconduct.

Mapp v. Ohio (1961)

Applied the exclusionary rule to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.

Terry v. Ohio (1968)

Allowed stop-and-frisk based on reasonable suspicion; permits a limited pat-down for weapons when officers reasonably believe a person may be armed and dangerous.

Miranda v. Arizona (1966)

Requires police to give warnings (right to remain silent and right to counsel) during custodial interrogation.

Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)

Held that states must provide attorneys to indigent defendants in felony cases under the Sixth Amendment right to counsel (incorporated against the states).

Habeas corpus

Procedure allowing detainees to challenge unlawful detention; rooted in the Constitution’s Suspension Clause and reinforced by due process principles.

District of Columbia v. Heller (2008)

Held the Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm for lawful purposes such as self-defense in the home (in the federal/D.C. context).

McDonald v. Chicago (2010)

Incorporated the Second Amendment against the states through the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause.

Griswold v. Connecticut (1965)

Recognized an implied constitutional right to privacy (commonly taught through “penumbras”) in striking down a ban on contraception for married couples.

Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (2022)

Overruled Roe and Casey, holding the Constitution does not confer a right to abortion; regulation returned largely to the states.

Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)

Upheld racial segregation under the “separate but equal” doctrine.

Brown v. Board of Education (1954)

Unanimously held school segregation unconstitutional nationwide, rejecting “separate but equal” in public education.

Civil Rights Act of 1964

Major federal law banning discrimination in public accommodations and government-funded programs and prohibiting employment discrimination (including Title VII).

Voting Rights Act of 1965

Major statute enforcing the 15th Amendment; targeted disenfranchisement tools like literacy tests and enabled strong federal oversight (including preclearance in covered jurisdictions).

Shelby County v. Holder (2013)

Struck down the Voting Rights Act’s coverage formula used to decide which jurisdictions needed preclearance, weakening that oversight system.

Baker v. Carr (1962)

Opened the door to federal court involvement in redistricting disputes (helping establish redistricting as a justiciable issue).

Reynolds v. Sims (1964)

Advanced “one person, one vote,” requiring legislative districts to be roughly equal in population.