comparative politics: rights and pressure groups

introduction

UK

USA

  • Reliant on ‘the three pillars of liberty’ (A.V. Dicey)

    • Parliament

    • A culture of liberty

    • The courts

  • Change happened with Human Rights Act (1998) which incorporated ECHR into law

    • Added into formal structure of British law – freedom of expression, freedom of religion, right to a fair trial and right to life.

  • Rights are not entrenched.

    • Unprotected by special amendment procedures.

    • Conservative government is currently under going a review of the HRA – having pledged to replace it with a British Bill of Rights in 2015’s manifesto.

    • These rights could be changed or altered by a simple majority in both houses of Parliament.

  • The conclusion is simply that civil rights in the USA enjoy far more protection than those in the UK

  • Civil rights appear in written form of the constitution.

    • Notably first ten amendments.

    • Plus 15th, 24th, 26th (voting rights) & 19th (gender)

  • Also appear in laws passed by Congress.

    • Civil Rights Acts

    • Voting Rights Act (1965)

    • Americans with Disabilities Act (1990)

    • Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act (2009)

Effectiveness of the protection of rights

  • This role is played by all three branches of government – as well as other parts of the political system inc.  pressure groups, political parties and the media.

  • Three basic principles need establishing:

    • Effective protection of rights and liberties is a defining characteristic of a liberal democracy. 

      • Without effective protection of rights for all its citizens no nation state can claim to be a liberal democracy.

    • Constitutions and laws do not themselves offer effective protection of those rights.

      • To be meaningful and effective these need to rigorously, consistently and impartially enforced through the political system.

    • Balancing rights is like balancing scales.

      • As one group’s rights are protected, a different group may well feel that their rights have been eroded or threatened.

rights protection

UK

USA

  • Effective protection can be achieved by the judiciary in a number of ways:

    • Use of judicial review, inc. ruling govt actions as ultra vires.

    • Upholding the provisions of HRA

    • Declarations regarding common law

    • Judicial inquiries

  • Parliament also plays its part by passing legislation to ensure the more effective protection of rights:

    • Equal Pay Act (1970)

    • Sex Discrimination Act (1975)

    • Race Relations Act (1976)

    • Disability Discrimination Act (1995)

    • Freedom of Information Act (2000)

  • 2010 Equality Act consolidated all of the UK’s anti-discriminatory legislation into one law protecting rights based on gender, disability, race and sexuality.

  • Similar debate in UK between individual rights and national security following 7/7 (2005).

    • Wanted to detain terror suspects for up to 90 days – and an offence created for ‘glorifying terrorism’

    • How were such terms to be defined? Where did national security trump rights of freedom of religion and freedom of speech?

  • Examples of rights not being protected despite provisions of constitution of federal law.

    • Post Civil War amendments did not end racial discrimination.

    • ‘Separate but equal’ in 1896 (Plessy v Ferguson) the court was clearly not protecting the rights of African Americans.

    • Neither did the 24th amendment end discrimination against racial minorities in voter registration.

  • Defence of Marriage Act (1996) would be seen by the LGBT+ community to not be protective of their rights to same sex marriage.

  • Obergefell v Hodges (2015) would be viewed by the evangelical Christian community of unsupportive of the Christian view of marriage.

  • 9/11 created a lively debate concerning the protection of rights and liberties vs protecting the nation from a terrorist attack.

    • New rules on detention of immigrants, new search powers of homes and businesses as well as of telephone, e-mail and financial records caused unease.

  • Equality in today’s America is more effectively protected than 50 years ago.

    • This has happened due to combined action of courts, presidents, legislators and pressure groups.

There is overriding Anglo-American cultural belief in the overriding principle of the rule of law.

Role of pressure groups in the protection of rights.

UK

USA

  • The UK courts’ use of judicial review over the past three decades has increased.

    • PGs have been encouraged to focus their campaigning on the courts as well as Parliament etc.

    • Countryside Alliance has been highly influential in challenging the ban on fox hunting with dogs in the courts.

  • Examples exist where effective protection of rights of one group have lead to concerns over the infringements of rights of another group.

    • Ashers Bakery – Colin McArthur was prosecuted under the Equality Act for refusing to produce a cake for Gareth Lee bearing the slogan ‘support gay marriage’.

      • McArthur claimed his firm could not produce the cake because it would be contrary to his religious beliefs.

      • McArthur was supported by the Christian Institute, Mr Lee supported by gay rights groups and those supporting same-sex marriage.

      • The case found against McArthur – but this did attract some criticism: ‘….people should be able to discriminate against ideas they disagree with.’ (Tatchell)

  • The PG ‘Liberty’ plays a similar role to the ACLU.

    • It has fought for civil rights, rights of women, gay rights etc.

    • More recently it campaigns on torture, extradition, the rights of asylum seekers, modern slavery etc.

  • PGs do play an important role.

    • Legal defence and education fund of National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People (NAACP) that brought Brown v Board of Education of Topeka to court.

  • A number of cases have been mentioned already that have sought to protect the rights of individuals or groups from:

    • Citizens United

    • National Federation of Independent Business

    • Parents Involved in Community Schools

  • Others submit ‘amicus curiae’ briefs to the courts.

    • Amicus curiae – legal term for ‘friend of the court’ where groups who are not party to a case can try to influence the court outcome.

    • These briefs to influence court decisions – 2003 Gratz v Bollinger and Grutter v Bollinger – supporters of University of Michigan’s admissions programmes deluged the court with such briefs.

      • Justice John Paul Stevens said the Court had relied on the ‘powerful consensus of the dark green briefs’

    • McDonald v City of Chicago had 33 such briefs submitted.

  • The most influential is American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)

    • Has 750,000 members and a staff of 200+

    • Joined NAACP in challenging school segregation, involved in Roe v Wade (1973), brought a case against Attorney General Reno that resulted in the Supreme Court striking down the 1996 Communications Decency Act.

    • Has faced criticism for defending the rights of such groups such as American Nazis, Ku Klux Klan & Nation of Islam… but - p 228

Electioneering and endorsing

UK

USA

  • Fewer elections than USA

    • General Elections are every 5 years, and Government comes from Parliament.

    • House of Lords is unelected.

  • No primaries – only party members get a say in candidate selection.

  • Only elections to devolved bodies compare.

  • Pressure groups are loosely tied to political parties and will campaign to get to get seats for the candidates they support (i.e. Unite & Labour)

    • Most Labour MPs have a formal link to a trade union.

    • Over half to Unite

    • Many business groups and corporations have strong links with the Conservative Party

  • Union membership peaked in 1970s. Down from 13m (1979) to 6m (2016)

    • Members approx. 29% of the workforce.

  • Far more elective posts

    • Direct election for President/Vic President

    • Direct elections to both houses of Congress

      • HoR every 2 years

  • Direct primaries

  • Elections on a state level as well.

  • Pressure groups give money to incumbents not challengers that won’t win.

    • Businesses gravitate towards Republicans whilst organised labour gravitates towards the Democrats.

  • Trade Union membership peaked in 1950s

    • Members approx. 13% of the workforce

    • AFL-CIO is the equivalent of the TUC

CONCLUSIONS: US pressure groups have far more opportunities for influence because of structural reasons. Workers’ lobbying power is much reduced in the USA compared to the UK.

lobbying

UK

USA

  • Support for political parties rather than individuals.

  • Revolving door can happen immediately unless you have been a Minister or Civil Servant.

  • Courts not traditionally lobbied due to Parliamentary sovereignty.

  • £2bn a year on lobbying is spent.

  • 57%/61% trade associations and lobbying firms succeed; 56%/67% citizen groups/foundations succeed.

  • Greensil scandal for David Cameron/ Owen Paterson scandal.

  • Executive and executive groups more likely to be lobbied rather than Parliament – though House of Lords more likely to get lobbied due to less party loyalty.

  • Revolving door – but 2 year gap.

  • Supreme Court lobbied more because they interpret the constitution.

  • £3bn a year on lobbying is spent.

  • Corporations etc more likely to succeed than other groups – 89% of corporations and 53% of trade associations succeed in their lobbying aims; 40% of citizen groups/37% of foundations succeed in their lobbying.

  • Lobbying more culturally acceptable.

  • Policy specific interest groups focus on congressional committees rather than executive departments/agencies.

potential questions

  • Examine the ways in which members of the US and UK Supreme Courts are appointed.

  • Examine the role of pressure groups in the protection of rights in the USA and UK.

  • Analyse the differences in the powers of the US and UK Supreme Courts.

  • Analyse the effectiveness of the protection of rights in the USA and the UK.