We the People

Unit 6 evidence

Naomi Osaka’s Mask Protest at the US Open (2020)

Tennis player Naomi Osaka wore masks with names of victims of racial injustice to raise awareness during the tournament. (Global Sports)

NBA Player Boycotts for Racial Justice (2020)

A series of protests by NBA players following the police shooting of Jacob Blake, leading to a pause in playoffs. (Global Sports)

Human Rights Protests at the Qatar 2022 World Cup

Players and teams expressed concerns over Qatar's treatment of migrant workers and LGBTQ+ rights during the World Cup. (Global Sports)

Iranian Athletes’ Support for Women’s Rights (2022)

Protests by Iranian athletes advocating for women's rights following the death of Mahsa Amini, highlighting government repression. (Global Sports)

Banning Russian Athletes from International Events (2022)

An action taken in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, raising debates on accountability and sports neutrality. (Global Sports)

Brown v. Board of Education 1954

A landmark Supreme Court case that declared racial segregation in public schools unconstitutional. (Civil Rights)

Civil Rights Act of 1964

Legislation that prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin in various settings. (Civil Rights)

Economic Inequality

The disparity in wealth and income among different groups, affecting access to opportunities and resources. (Civil Rights)

Brnovich v Democratic National Committee (2021)

A Supreme Court case regarding voting rights, focusing on challenges to Arizona's election laws and their impact on minority voters. It addressed issues of voter suppression and discrimination against voters of color. addressed the legality of certain voting restrictions in Arizona. Specifically, the case focused on two provisions: one that made it illegal for anyone other than a voter’s family members or caregivers to return a completed ballot, and another that discarded ballots cast in the wrong precinct. The Democratic National Committee argued that these laws disproportionately affected minority voters and violated the Voting Rights Act. (State vs. Federal)

Shelby County v Holder (2013)

A landmark Supreme Court case that invalidated a key provision of the Voting Rights Act, effectively weakening federal oversight of changes to state voting laws. The ruling stated that the formula used to determine which jurisdictions were subject to federal approval for voting changes was outdated and unconstitutional. (State vs. Federal)

2015 Obergefell v Hodges

A landmark Supreme Court case that legalized same-sex marriage across the United States, ruling that state bans on same-sex marriage were unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment. (Civil Rights)

Carlos Delgado

A former Major League Baseball player who gained attention for his protest of the U.S. national anthem by sitting during 'God Bless America' in 2004 to raise awareness of social issues, particularly in Puerto Rico. (Global Sports)

Just Stop Oil

A British environmental activism group that campaigns against fossil fuel projects and advocates for a transition to renewable energy sources by using sports games as their platform. (Global Sports)

Tom Daley

An Olympic diver from Great Britain known for his advocacy for LGBTQ+ rights and environmental issues. (Global Sports)

Rule 50

Prohibits any demonstration or political, racial and religious propaganda in any Olympic sites, venues or other areas (Global Sports)

2022 Wimbledon

Was notable for its ban on Russian and Belarusian players due to the invasion of Ukraine, sparking controversy in the tennis community. (Global Sports)

Fugitive Slave Clause (Article IV Section 2 Clause 3)

A provision in the U.S. Constitution that required the return of runaway slaves to their owners, reflecting the contentious nature of slavery in America. (Civil Rights)

13th Amendment

Abolished slavery and involuntary servitude in the United States, except as punishment for a crime. (Civil Rights)

14th amendment

Granted citizenship to all persons born or naturalized in the United States, ensuring equal protection under the law. (Civil Rights)

15th amendment

Prohibited the federal and state governments from denying a citizen the right to vote based on "race, color, or previous condition of servitude." (Civil Rights)

NAACP v Button (1963)

A Supreme Court case that upheld the rights of individuals to protest for the purpose of advocating for civil rights, protecting the NAACP's activities. (Civil Rights)

Dobbs v Jackson (2022)

A Supreme Court case that overturned Roe v. Wade, significantly altering the legal landscape of abortion rights in the United States. (Civil Rights)

Usain Bolt Effect

Refers to the phenomenon where a dominant athlete's success elevates the performance of others in their sport, inspired by Usain Bolt's record-breaking achievements in sprinting. (Global Sports)

Louisiana v Callais (2024)

Challenges Louisiana's new congressional map under the Voting Rights Act. The map, which creates two majority-Black districts, was mandated after courts found the prior map violated Section 2. Opponents argue the new map overemphasizes race, while supporters say it ensures fair representation. (Civil Rights)

Stanley v City of Sanford, Florida (2024)

A recent case that debates whether the ADA protects against post-employment discrimination in benefits. Karyn Stanley, a retired firefighter, sued after her health insurance subsidy was limited due to disability retirement, unlike other retirees who received coverage until age 65. Lower courts ruled the ADA applies only to current employees or applicants. (Civil Rights)

Alexander v South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP (2023)

Challenges South Carolina's congressional redistricting, alleging racial gerrymandering. The case questions whether the state's redistricting plan unfairly used race in drawing one district, potentially violating the constitutional rights of voters. Their legislature moved tens of thousands of Black voters to a different district, effectively making the district a safe seat for Republicans. (Civil Rights)

Muldrow v City of St Louis Missouri (2023)

Concerns a claim by Jatonya Muldrow, a police sergeant, who argued that her transfer to a different position was based on sex discrimination. The case focused on whether the transfer was a form of discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that employees only need to show "some harm" from such a transfer, not the higher standard of "substantial harm," making it easier for discrimination claims to proceed in court​. (Civil Rights)

1973 Roe v Wade

(see Dobbs v Jackson) A landmark U.S. Supreme Court case that established a constitutional right to privacy, protecting a woman’s decision to have an abortion. The Court ruled 7–2 that states could not ban abortion outright but could regulate it based on the pregnancy stage, allowing greater restrictions in later trimesters. The decision struck down many state laws prohibiting abortion, framing it as a right under the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause. Was recently overturned. (Civil Rights)

303 Creative LLC v. Elenis (2023)

a U.S. Supreme Court case addressing free speech and anti-discrimination laws. The Court ruled 6–3 in favor of a web designer who refused to create wedding websites for same-sex couples, citing First Amendment protections. The decision held that forcing the designer to provide such services violated her right to free speech, as it compelled her to express a message against her beliefs. The ruling sparked debates over the balance between free expression and protecting LGBTQ+ individuals from discrimination. (Civil Rights)

Jim Crow Laws

State and local statutes enforcing racial segregation in the U.S., primarily in the South, from the late 19th century to the mid-20th century. They mandated "separate but equal" facilities, disenfranchised Black Americans, and were overturned by Civil Rights legislation in the 1960s. (Civil Rights)

2018 Husted v A. Philip Randolph Institute

Centered on Ohio's process for maintaining voter rolls by removing individuals who had not voted for a specified time and failed to respond to a confirmation notice. Ohio argued this method complied with the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) and the Help America Vote Act, which allow states to take reasonable steps to update voter registrations. Critics contended that the policy disproportionately targeted low-income and minority voters, suppressing turnout. (Voting Rights)

2007 Massachusetts v EPA

The Court ruled that the federal government must determine whether greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles contribute to air pollution that endangers public health and welfare under the Clean Air Act. This case established that greenhouse gases are pollutants and that states can challenge federal agencies' failure to act on environmental issues, strengthening state influence in federal environmental policy. (State vs Federal)

2024 Ames v Ohio Department of Youth Services

Ongoing case. Marlean Ames, a heterosexual woman, filed a Title VII discrimination lawsuit after being demoted from her position and denied a promotion, allegedly due to her sexual orientation and sex. Ames argued that she was replaced by gay individuals in both roles. However, the court ruled in favor of the Department, stating that Ames failed to establish a prima facie case for sexual orientation discrimination. The court required Ames to show "background circumstances" suggesting discrimination against the majority (heterosexuals), which she could not provide, and found no evidence of a broader pattern of discrimination against heterosexual employees. (Civil Rights)

2015 Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v Inclusive Project Inc.

The Supreme Court ruled that the Fair Housing Act allows claims based on disparate impact, meaning policies that unintentionally lead to racial segregation can be challenged, even without proving intentional discrimination. The Court upheld the use of disparate-impact claims but emphasized that any remedies must be narrowly focused to avoid racial quotas (Civil Rights)

2008 District of Columbia v Heller

The Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess firearms, unconnected to service in a militia, and that the federal government cannot ban private ownership of handguns. This landmark decision struck down a Washington, D.C. law that banned handgun possession and required firearms to be kept inoperable. The ruling affirmed that the right to bear arms extends beyond militia service, establishing a constitutional right for individuals to own firearms for self-defense and other lawful purposes. (State v. Federal debate)

First election of African American President in 2008

Barack Obama was elected in 2008. He defeated Republican John McCain in a historic election, marking a milestone in civil rights. Obama’s victory, with 365 electoral votes to McCain's 173, was propelled by a broad coalition of voters and a message of hope and change. (Civil Rights)

1961 Freedom Rides

A series of integrated bus rides organized by civil rights groups, including the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) and the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), to challenge racial segregation in the South. Activists, both Black and white, rode interstate buses from Washington, D.C., to New Orleans, testing new federal regulations prohibiting segregation in bus terminals. Despite facing violent opposition, including physical attacks and arrests, the Freedom Riders' actions gained national attention and contributed to the eventual enforcement of civil rights laws. (Civil Rights)

2023 US v. Rahimi

A Texas man was convicted for possessing a firearm while subject to a domestic violence protective order. The Fifth Circuit Court had previously ruled that the law prohibiting gun possession in such circumstances violated the Second Amendment. The case centered on whether laws preventing individuals under restraining orders from possessing firearms could be considered constitutional under the modern interpretation of the Second Amendment, specifically considering historical analogues for such laws. (Modern Interpretations of Constitution)

2020 Bostock v. Clayton County

A landmark U.S. Supreme Court case that expanded the interpretation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The case involved a man who was fired from his job after his employer learned he was gay. The central issue was whether discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity constitutes discrimination on the basis of "sex," as prohibited by Title VII. The Supreme Court decided that Title VII protects against cases like this. (Civil Rights)

2024 Eternal Vigilance Action Inc. v Georgia

Ongoing case. A lawsuit was filed to challenge new election rules passed by the Georgia State Election Board in September 2024. These rules, including one requiring ballots to be hand-counted at precincts before being sealed for tabulation, were seen as potentially disruptive, causing delays and putting voters' rights at risk. The plaintiffs argued that the hand-counting rule violated state law and exceeded the authority of the Election Board. After a court blocked the rule, the Georgia Supreme Court denied an emergency appeal to reverse the decision. (Voting Rights)

1896 Plessy v. Ferguson

A landmark U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the constitutionality of racial segregation under the doctrine of "separate but equal." The case involved a man of mixed race who was arrested for sitting in a "whites-only" railroad car in Louisiana, challenging the state’s segregation laws. The Court ruled 7-1 that segregation did not violate the 13th and 14th Amendments, which address slavery and equal protection under the law, so long as the facilities provided to Black Americans were equal to those for white Americans. (Civil Rights)

Jackie Robinson in 1947 MLB

A player that made history by becoming the first African American to play in Major League Baseball in the modern era. He joined the Brooklyn Dodgers, breaking the color barrier that had kept Black players out of the league for decades. His debut on April 15, 1947, marked a significant moment in both sports and civil rights, as it challenged the pervasive racial segregation of the time. He faced considerable adversity, including racist taunts from fans and players, but he persisted, earning Rookie of the Year honors in 1947. His courage and performance paved the way for greater integration in sports and had a broader impact on the Civil Rights Movement, demonstrating the power of sports to challenge racial inequality. (Global Sports)

Billie Jean King

A legendary American tennis player who became a trailblazer for gender equality in sports. She made history in 1973 by defeating Bobby Riggs in the famous "Battle of the Sexes" match, which symbolized a significant moment in the fight for women's rights and gender equality in sports. Beyond her athletic achievements, King was an advocate for LGBTQ+ rights, having publicly come out as gay in 1981. She also played a crucial role in founding the Women's Tennis Association (WTA) and was instrumental in securing equal pay for women in professional tennis. (Global Sports)

Ghandi’s Salt March

A significant act of civil disobedience during India’s fight for independence. It began with a 240-mile walk to the coastal village of Dandi to protest British salt laws, which taxed salt, a basic necessity. Upon reaching Dandi, the protesters made salt from seawater, defying British authority. (Civil Rights)

Cristiano Ronaldo

Famous Italian soccer player. In 2023, he was asked by Amnesty International to speak out about human rights issues in Saudi Arabia while he played at Al Nassr. He has now become subject to “sportswashing”, the phenomenon of burnishing one’s reputation through sport. (Global Sports)

2018 Masterpiece Cakeshop Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Committee

Involved a bakery owner who refused to create a custom wedding cake for a same-sex couple, citing his religious beliefs. The couple filed a complaint under Colorado's anti-discrimination laws, which prohibit businesses from discriminating based on sexual orientation. (Civil Rights)

Ryan Lochte in 2016 Olympics

In 2016, during the Rio Olympics, an athlete and three teammates falsely claimed they were robbed at gunpoint. The incident, initially reported as a robbery, turned out to be a fabrication to cover up their vandalism at a gas station, including breaking a bathroom door and arguing with security. CCTV footage and witness accounts revealed the truth, leading to international backlash and scrutiny of his behavior. The controversy tarnished his reputation, strained U.S.-Brazil relations, and raised questions about accountability and the portrayal of the host country during the Olympics

Spectators removed from Paris Olympics for Taiwanese flags

During the 2024 Paris Olympics, spectators displaying Taiwanese flags and banners were removed from venues due to political tensions. China, which views Taiwan as part of its territory, pressured organizers to enforce the "One China" policy. The incident sparked controversy, with critics accusing the IOC of restricting free expression.

US v Skrmetti 2024

A very recent case which challenges Tennessee's ban on gender-affirming care for transgender minors, arguing it violates the Equal Protection Clause. The case debates whether the law discriminates based on sex or transgender status and if heightened scrutiny should apply​

Douglas’s point of view during the Lincoln Douglas debates

“I believe this Government was made on the white basis. I believe it was made by white men for the benefit of white men and their posterity for ever, and I am in favor of confining citizenship to white men, men of European birth and descent, instead of conferring it upon negroes, Indians, and other inferior races.”

William Lloyd Garrison

Viewed the Constitution as inherently pro-slavery, referring to it as a "covenant with death" and an "agreement with hell." Garrison believed that compromises like the Three-Fifths Clause and the protection of the slave trade in the Constitution entrenched slavery in the nation's foundation. He advocated for immediate disunion, stating, "No union with slaveholders!"

Frederick Douglass

Initially sympathetic to Garrison's stance, he later argued that the Constitution could be interpreted as anti-slavery when read without the framers' pro-slavery intentions in mind. Contended that the Constitution "should be construed in its plain meaning, without regard to the intentions of those who framed it," emphasizing that the document does not explicitly mention slavery. Argued that if slavery were not explicitly protected, abolitionists could work within the Constitution to eliminate it

Prigg v Pennsylvania (1842)

Ruled that states couldn’t interfere with federal enforcement of fugitive slave laws, striking down Pennsylvania’s law. The Court said the federal government had sole authority but states didn’t have to help enforce it, leading Northern states to pass laws resisting slave capture​

Progressive Era

A time of major reforms in response to industrialization and corruption. It brought labor protections, women’s suffrage, regulation of big businesses, and social justice efforts like improving education and public health. Conservation efforts also preserved natural resources, though reforms often excluded minorities.

Florida Amendment 3 (passed in 2006)

A state constitutional amendment that required future amendments to receive at least 60% of the vote for approval, replacing the previous simple majority rule. It passed with 57.8% of the vote and was intended to make it more challenging to amend the state constitution, though critics argued it hindered grassroots efforts.

Arizona Prop 132 (2022)

This measure introduced a requirement for a 60% supermajority vote to approve any ballot measure that enacts a tax. Supporters argued it would ensure broader consensus for tax-related decisions, while opponents contended it could hinder the public's ability to implement fiscal policies. Voters approved this proposition.

Arizona Proposition 129 (2022)

This proposition mandated that citizen-initiated ballot measures adhere to a single-subject rule, limiting each measure to one main issue. Proponents believed this would prevent voter confusion and ensure clarity, whereas critics feared it might restrict the scope of citizen initiatives. The measure passed with 55.2% of the vote.

Arizona Proposition 128 (2022)

This measure sought to empower the state legislature to amend or repeal voter-approved ballot initiatives if any portion was deemed unconstitutional by the Arizona Supreme Court or the U.S. Supreme Court. Supporters claimed it would allow for necessary corrections to flawed initiatives, but opponents viewed it as undermining the will of the voters. Voters rejected this proposition.

John-Lewis Voting Rights Act

Proposed federal legislation aimed at restoring and strengthening provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that were weakened by Supreme Court decisions, particularly Shelby County v. Holder (2013) and Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee (2021). Seeks to reinstate preclearance requirements to states with a history of voting discrimination.

Arab Springs in Egypt

A series of mass protests in 2011 against President Hosni Mubarak's authoritarian regime, driven by demands for democracy, justice, and economic reform. Mubarak resigned after 18 days, but the transition led to political instability, culminating in military rule under Abdel Fattah el-Sisi.

Initiative, Referendum, and Recall

Arizona’s policy that lets citizens propose laws or amendments, to approve or reject legislative acts, and remove elected officials before their term ends through a petition and election.

Sections 4b and 5 of Voting Rights Act

Aimed to prevent racial discrimination in voting. They established a formula to identify jurisdictions with a history of discriminatory practices, subjecting them to federal oversight, and required these jurisdictions to obtain federal preclearance before changing voting laws or practices to ensure they did not discriminate against minority voters. Overturned by Shelby County v. Holder.

Grutter v Bollinger 2003

A landmark Supreme Court case concerning affirmative action in college admissions. The Court upheld the University of Michigan Law School's policy of considering race as one factor among many in its admissions process. Ruled that the policy was constitutional because it furthered a compelling interest in achieving diversity and treated race flexibly rather than as a decisive factor.

2018 NFL National Anthem Policy

In response to Colin Kaepernick’s protests against police brutality, the NFL implemented a controversial policy requiring players to stand for the national anthem or remain in the locker room. This sparked debate and eventual changes within the NFL, though the original rule was later suspended.

Blue Girl incident

Involved the tragic death of Sahar Khodayari, an Iranian woman who set herself on fire in 2019 after being arrested for trying to attend a football match, as women were banned from stadiums in Iran. Her death sparked global protests and calls for women's rights.

2019 Iranian Women’s Stadium Access

Protests and international attention, like the "Blue Girl" incident, resulted in a shift in Iran's policy allowing limited female attendance at stadiums. In 2019, the Iranian government allowed women to attend a World Cup qualifying match for the first time in decades, following pressure from global protests and human rights organizations.

1972 Title IX

Required gender equality in school-funded activities, specifically sports. One specific action that led to this was the 1973 Battle of the Sexes tennis match between Billie Jean King and Bobby Riggs that highlighted women’s inequality in sports.

Labor and Athlete Rights in Germany

A system where athletes receive government support, including employment in public services (e.g., military or police), social benefits like healthcare and pensions, and dual-career programs for life after sports.

Labor and Athlete Rights in France

A framework providing athletes with secure public service jobs, access to social security benefits, and programs like PACTE to support career transitions post-athletics.

Article 5 of Germany’s Basic Law

Protects freedom of expression, the press, and information. However, it prohibits hate speech, Holocaust denial, and speech threatening democratic order.

Section 2b of Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

Ensures freedom of thought, belief, opinion, and expression, with limitations for hate speech and obscenity under the "reasonable limits" clause.

Article 19 Section 1 Clause a of the Constitution of India

Guarantees freedom of speech and expression, restricted by laws on defamation, public order, morality, and incitement to offense.

Section 16 of South African Constitution

Protects freedom of expression but excludes incitement to violence, hate speech, and propaganda for war.

Article 10 of the 1998 Human Rights Act in the UK

Protects free expression with restrictions for national security and public order.