Civil Rights and Supreme Court Decisions Overview
The ext{14}^{ ext{th}} Amendment and Birthright Citizenship
The ext{14}^{ ext{th}} Amendment was primarily designed to address the rights of African Americans after the Civil War.
Contemporary Relevance: Today, a clause within the ext{14}^{ ext{th}} Amendment regarding birthright citizenship is a central issue in public policy debates, particularly concerning immigration. It addresses questions of who is a citizen and who is not, a topic often highlighted by political figures like President Trump.
Expanding Political, Social, and Economic Participation
Elimination of Poll Taxes: Before the ext{1960s}, including in Texas, citizens had to pay a poll tax to receive a ballot and vote. This was a clear form of discrimination.
The ext{24}^{ ext{th}} Amendment eliminated the poll tax, thereby expanding who can participate in political, social, and, by extension, economic networks, aiming to remove arbitrary discriminations.
Supreme Court Tests for Discrimination
The U.S. Supreme Court uses different tests to determine the constitutionality of laws that make classifications, depending on the nature of the classification or the severity of the rights violation.
Strict Scrutiny Test
Application: This test is applied to "suspect classifications" that are immediately problematic in law. These include discriminations based on:
Race
Religion
Ethnicity
Fundamental Rights: It's also applied to cases involving fundamental rights, such as the right to vote.
Standard: When a law involves these classifications, the Supreme Court applies "strict scrutiny," acting like a "big magnifying glass." A "red flag goes up," and the law is "immediately suspect" and "probably going to be ruled unconstitutional."
Justification Requirement: For a law with a suspect classification to be upheld, Congress or a state legislature must demonstrate a compelling reason for the discrimination (e.g., distinguishing between Protestants and Catholics, gay versus straight, men versus female).
Outcome: Generally, the Court overturns these laws.
Intermediate Standard Review (Quasi-Suspect)
Application: This test is primarily applied to "quasi-suspect" classifications, which currently in Supreme Court history, are considered serious but not as serious as race, ethnicity, or fundamental rights.
Women's Issues: This category primarily includes issues related to gender.
Standard: The Court takes a "pretty decent look" at these cases.
Justification Requirement: For a law to be upheld, the state must show an important reason for the classification.
Outcome: Laws are often struck down because it's hard for the state to show an important state purpose, though not as frequently as with strict scrutiny cases.
Rational Basis Test (Non-Suspect)
Application: This is the least stringent test, applied to "non-suspect" classifications.
Age
Wealth
Sexual Orientation (though this is "in flux" and may be moving towards quasi-suspect).
Economic Discrimination
Standard: The Court gives "least scrutiny" to these laws, applying a "minimum rational standard." They "don't look at that very, very seriously."
Justification Requirement: The state or Congress usually only needs to provide a rational reason for the discrimination. For economic discrimination, it might be argued as an "outcome of capitalism" or some other reason.
Outcome: Most laws challenged under the rational basis test will likely "prevail."
Landmark Cases Illustrating Scrutiny Tests
Goesaert v. Cleary (1948)
Facts: Michigan passed a law requiring bartenders in cities over 50,000 population to hold licenses. The statute also stated that a woman could not be issued a license unless she was the wife or daughter of the male owner of a liquor establishment.
Issue: Not men versus women broadly, but rather discriminatory treatment of women based on their relationship to a male bar owner.
Ruling: By a 6-3 vote, the Court upheld the Michigan law.
Reasoning (Rational Basis): The Court argued that the Michigan legislature could have rationally determined that allowing women to bartend could give rise to "moral and social problems" against which it may devise protective measures. This was considered a sufficient rational reason at the time, though it would likely not hold today.
Korematsu v. United States (1944)
Context: This case involved the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II.
Significance: This is one of the rare instances where an action by the federal government, based on national security, was upheld under strict scrutiny.
Kramer v. Union Free School District (1969)
Facts: A New York school district rule allowed only property taxpayers to vote in school district elections. Mr. Kramer, living with his parents, did not own property and was denied the right to vote.
Challenge: Kramer challenged this rule, arguing that property ownership should not determine voting rights for schools.
Ruling: The U.S. Supreme Court overturned the school district's rule.
Reasoning (Strict Scrutiny): The Court applied strict scrutiny because the right to vote is a fundamental right. They ruled that someone who doesn't own property (like Kramer) can still be very interested in schools, and no one should be discriminated against in school elections based on property ownership. The law violated the principle of suspect classification (in this context, violating a fundamental right).
San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez (1973)
Context: This case addressed the property tax funding scheme for public schools in Texas (and nationwide), where poorer districts with lower property tax bases struggled to provide the same quality education as wealthier districts (e.g., Alamo Heights vs. poorer districts like
Challenge: Rodriguez, on behalf of students in poor districts, argued this funding scheme underprivileged them due to severe inter-district disparities in pupil expenditures, leading to a "class issue" with an "ethnic overlay" (predominantly Mexican American districts).
Dilemma: Education is crucial, but wealth itself is typically a "non-suspect" classification, falling under the rational basis test.
Ruling: By a 5-4 vote, the majority of the Court used the rational basis test and upheld the funding scheme.
Dissent (Justice Thurgood Marshall): Justice Marshall, the first African American on the Supreme Court, wrote a "blistering dissent." He argued that while class might not technically be a suspect classification, it represents a serious problem between "haves and have-nots." He suggested that education, though not a fundamental right, is "almost fundamental."
Significance: This dissent highlighted the need for a third test (an intermediate standard) between the rigorous strict scrutiny and the "wimpy" rational basis test, particularly for issues like women's rights and disparities based on socio-economic status. This case helped in the development of the intermediate standard.
Edgewood Independent School District v. Kirby (1989)
Context: This case, decided by the Texas Supreme Court, concerned the Edgewood School District, a poor district in San Antonio.
Ruling: The Texas Supreme Court overturned the property tax funding scheme, finding it inconsistent with the Texas Constitution.
Solution: The state legislature responded with the "Robin Hood plan" in the early ext{1990s}. This plan aimed to redistribute funds by requiring every pupil to be funded up to a certain level. If a poor district couldn't meet this minimum, money would be taken from wealthier districts that exceeded the minimum, and then redistributed. This plan is frequently revisited by the state legislature.
Goal: While not achieving "perfect quality" as acknowledged in Rodriguez, the Robin Hood plan was a "first step" towards improving educational equity, echoing Justice Marshall's sentiment that "we can do a lot better than we're doing."
Historical Context of Civil Rights in the U.S.
Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857)
Facts: Dred Scott, an enslaved man, was taken by his owner to free territories (Illinois and Wisconsin) and then returned to Missouri, a slave state. He sued for his freedom, arguing his residency in free territory made him free.
Historical Context: The case was heard in 1856 and 1857, with hopes that the Supreme Court would resolve the issue of slavery.
Chief Justice Roger Taney: Taney was well-known and polite but from Maryland, a border state with slavery. His sympathies were with the South.
Ruling: By a 7-2 vote, the Court ruled against Dred Scott and his owners. Taney's decision was "odious" and aimed to reinforce slavery and antagonize abolitionists.
Key Points from Taney's Opinion:
He argued that African Americans were not part of the political compact formed between 1775 and 1787, which was historically inaccurate.
He struck down the Missouri Compromise of 1820, which had prevented slavery in certain northern territories (such as Wisconsin and Minnesota), claiming Congress had no power to prohibit slavery in territories.
Impact: The decision fueled the division between North and South, "throwing oil on a fire," and is considered a "terrible decision." Dred Scott was not liberated.
Reconstruction Era (1865-" ext{1877})
Progress: Following the Civil War, there was significant progress in civil rights, largely due to the Republican Party (party of Lincoln) deploying federal troops to the South.
Amendments: The ext{13}^{ ext{th}}, ext{14}^{ ext{th}}, and ext{15}^{ ext{th}} Amendments were passed.
Civil Rights Acts: Post-Civil War acts aimed to integrate African Americans into political, economic, and social networks in the South and deter lynchings (e.g., the Davis regime in Texas, 1870- ext{1873}).
Retrenchment (1877): By 1877, national support for civil rights initiatives waned. A compromise in the disputed 1876 election allowed Republican Rutherford B. Hayes to become president in exchange for withdrawing federal troops from the South.
Consequence: Southern Democratic regimes regained power, leading to the establishment of a segregated society, a "surrogate slavery." In Texas, Democrats immediately reversed Reconstruction-era civil rights gains after ousting EJ Davis in ext{1873}.
Civil Rights Cases (1883)
Context: The Civil Rights Act of ext{1875}, passed by a Republican Congress, affirmed equality in transportation, hotels, inns, theaters, and places of public amusement. It aimed to prohibit discrimination in public accommodations (e.g., separate sections in theaters, denial of access to hotels or restaurants based on race/ethnicity).
Issue: Many of these were private acts of discrimination by businesses (hotels, restaurants, railroads) and not explicitly by law, occurring across the country, not just the South (e.g., New York City, San Francisco, and Texas where Black, White, and Mexican people were segregated).
Constitutional Question: Did the Civil Rights Act of ext{1875} violate the ext{10}^{ ext{th}} Amendment (states' rights to powers not granted to the federal government)? The debate was whether Congress or state legislatures should regulate this type of discrimination.
Ruling: By an 8-1 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court backed these businesses, arguing that if it's a "business matter" and a "privately owned business" (even if a "public space"), these are matters for state regulation, not the federal government.
Impact: This ruling effectively gutted federal enforcement of civil rights in private facilities. In the South, this meant no progress on civil rights; instead, a segregated society became entrenched, especially in East Texas (Black vs. White) and South Texas (Anglo vs. Mexican American).
Dissent (Justice John Harlan): Justice Harlan, a "hero of civil rights" from Kentucky, dissented. He argued that common carriers and hotel owners are not merely private persons but "businesses subject to public control" and therefore "agents of the state" that could be regulated. However, he was a lone voice.
Significance: The Supreme Court's decision sent a clear signal that the federal government "was not going to do squat on civil rights in the South," paving the way for Jim Crow laws.
Jim Crow Laws and Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)
Rise of Jim Crow: Following the Civil Rights Cases, states enacted "Jim Crow laws," legal segregation ("de jure" segregation) of whites, blacks, and Latinos in the South. This was not just private practice, but law.
Facts (Plessy v. Ferguson): This case involved a segregated railroad car in Louisiana, which had separate cars for blacks and whites. Louisiana argued that as long as facilities were "equal," segregation was legitimate under the Equal Protection Clause of the ext{14}^{ ext{th}} Amendment.
Reality: In practice, facilities were rarely equal.
Issue: The case challenged the idea of "separate but equal" which became the legal justification for wide-ranging segregation (water fountains, bathrooms, theaters) by law.
Ruling: The Supreme Court upheld "separate but equal" using the rational basis test.
Reasoning (Justice Henry Billings Brown):
He argued there was "nothing more unreasonable about separate but equal in public transportation … than with segregated schools" (a hint at future issues).
He stated that "social prejudices cannot be overcome by legislation."
He controversially asserted that "if one race is socially inferior to the other, the constitution cannot put them on the same plan." (This quote, though problematic, was used by opponents of affirmative action later).
Dissent (Justice John Harlan): Justice Harlan again dissented, famously stating, "Our Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens." He warned that Plessy would "in time, prove to be quite as pernicious as was the decision made by this tribunal in the Dred Scott case." His dissent would form the basis for future civil rights arguments, especially in education.
The Road to Desegregation
NAACP Legal Strategy
Context: In the early to mid $20^{\text{th}}$ century, the NAACP (a growing Black-White organization of liberal whites and African American activists) developed a legal strategy to attack "separate but equal."
Focus: Their initial focus was on the "equal" aspect, especially in segregated schools.
Graduate Schools First: They targeted graduate schools because it was prohibitively difficult to create truly equal separate facilities (e.g., law schools, dental schools, medical schools) for different races. Such costs would be immense.
Example: Texas attempted to create a separate law school for Black students in Austin (Sweatt v. Painter), but this was overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court, showing that even states with "enormous imagination" couldn't create genuinely equal separate facilities.
Strategic Start: By attacking from the "top level down" (graduate schools) rather than elementary schools, they avoided initial widespread "blowback" from parents in the South, building momentum gradually before challenging elementary school segregation.
Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
Context: This landmark set of cases consolidated challenges to segregated public schools across the country (most famously Topeka, Kansas, but also Washington, D.C.).
Chief Justice Fred Vinson: Initially, Chief Justice Vinson was "a little bit reluctant" to push the case, understanding that overturning Plessy v. Ferguson would not merely reverse a 60-year-old legal precedent but would upend centuries of social practices tied to racial segregation dating back to ext{1619} when Africans first arrived in Jamestown.
Chief Justice Earl Warren: After Vinson's death, President Eisenhower appointed Earl Warren, the liberal Republican Governor of California, as Chief Justice. Warren, known for leading perhaps the "most liberal court" in Supreme Court history, worked diligently to achieve a unanimous decision.
NAACP's Argument Shift:
Initially, the NAACP tried a historical strategy, arguing the ext{14}^{ ext{th}} Amendment's framers never intended segregation. They found insufficient evidence to sustain this.
They then shifted to a sociological argument. They presented studies, such as the "doll test" (where both Black and White children, particularly African American children, almost universally chose the white doll as "superior"), to demonstrate that segregated schools were inherently unequal and created an "inferiority complex" among Black children.
Ruling (Unanimous): The Supreme Court, using strict scrutiny (not rational basis), ruled that "separate but equal" in public education was unconstitutional. Segregation itself was inherently unequal.
Impact: This decision overturned Plessy v. Ferguson and mandated the desegregation of public schools, setting a critical precedent for broader civil rights reforms.
Legislative Achievements and Their Consequences
Civil Rights Act of ext{1964}
Passage: This act was steered through Congress by President Lyndon Johnson.
"Poison Pill" Strategy: To try and defeat the bill, Southern White Democrats inserted a clause extending its protections to women, believing that Northern White men in Congress would oppose it. They were mistaken, and the bill passed with this inclusion.
Beneficiaries: While primarily intended for African Americans and other people of color who faced discrimination, some argue that the most immediate beneficiaries were women, particularly White women. Already integrated into societal power networks (often through marriage to White men), the law opened doors for them in fields like architecture, engineering, and medicine, where they were previously confined to roles like teaching, nursing, or reception work.
Challenges: Eliminating de jure (by law) segregation (which is "very easy") is different from creating a society that no longer discriminates (de facto discrimination, which is much harder).
Post- ext{1970s} Backlash
Similar to the "retrenchment of conservative ideas" about race relations after ext{1877}, a backlash against civil rights gains has been observed from roughly ext{1980} to the present, leading to "polarizing" contemporary discussions in American society.
Voting Rights Act and Its Erosion
Early Voting Rights (Litigation): In the ext{1940s}, ext{1950s}, and early ext{1960s}, only about 1,000 people gained the right to vote through judicial action.
Confrontational Strategy: Civil rights leaders like Martin Luther King Jr. and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) realized that a more aggressive, confrontational strategy was needed. They sought to expose the repressive structures of segregation to garner national support for federal legislation and an executive branch presence in the South to register voters (e.g., the Selma protests).
Voter ID Laws: In ext{2011}, Texas enacted a voter ID law. This was initially overturned under the Voting Rights Act.
Shelby County v. Holder (2013): The U.S. Supreme Court struck down Section ext{5} of the Voting Rights Act, which had required certain states (with a history of discrimination) to receive "preclearance" from the federal government before changing their voting laws. This decision "took the guts out of the Voting Rights Act."
Key Considerations for Studying Civil Rights Movements
Clear Goal: Successful civil rights and voting rights actions require a clear, understandable goal to gain broad public support.
Actions of Protesters: Analyze whether actions were violent or nonviolent.
Actions of Law Enforcement: Analyze whether actions were violent or nonviolent.
Media and National Pressure: The confrontation between protesters and law enforcement, and their respective actions, creates media attention and national pressure, escalating local conflicts to nationwide issues. These factors are crucial for understanding the impact and outcomes of such movements.
The ext{14}^{ ext{th}} Amendment and Birthright Citizenship
The ext{14}^{ ext{th}} Amendment originally addressed African American rights after the Civil War; today, its birthright citizenship clause is central to immigration debates.
Expanding Political, Social, and Economic Participation
The ext{24}^{ ext{th}} Amendment eliminated poll taxes (common in Texas before the ext{1960s}) to expand political, social, and economic participation by removing discriminatory barriers.
Supreme Court Tests for Discrimination
The Supreme Court uses three tests to evaluate laws that make classifications:
Strict Scrutiny Test
Applied to "suspect classifications" (race, religion, ethnicity) and fundamental rights (e.g., voting).
Requires a compelling reason for discrimination; laws are generally overturned.
Intermediate Standard Review (Quasi-Suspect)
Primarily for "quasi-suspect" classifications, specifically women's issues/gender.
Requires an important reason for classification; laws are often struck down.
Rational Basis Test (Non-Suspect)
The least stringent, applied to "non-suspect" classifications (age, wealth, sexual orientation, economic discrimination).
Requires only a rational reason; most laws prevail.
Landmark Cases Illustrating Scrutiny Tests
Goesaert v. Cleary (1948)
Upheld a Michigan law restricting female bartenders (unless related to the male owner) using the rational basis test, finding a "rational reason" in avoiding "moral and social problems."
Korematsu v. United States (1944)
Upheld the internment of Japanese Americans during WWII under strict scrutiny, a rare instance for national security.
Kramer v. Union Free School District (1969)
Overturned a New York rule allowing only property owners to vote in school district elections. The Court applied strict scrutiny because voting is a fundamental right.
San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez (1973)
Upheld Texas's property tax school funding scheme using the rational basis test, despite disparities between wealthy and poor districts. The Court ruled wealth was not a suspect classification, and education wasn't a fundamental right. Justice Marshall's dissent highlighted the need for a third (intermediate) test.
Edgewood Independent School District v. Kirby (1989)
The Texas Supreme Court overturned the state's school funding system, deeming it unconstitutional under the Texas Constitution, leading to the "Robin Hood plan" for redistributing funds.
Historical Context of Civil Rights in the U.S.
Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857)
Ruled African Americans were not citizens and struck down the Missouri Compromise, intensifying sectional tensions before the Civil War.
Reconstruction Era (1865-" ext{1877})
Post-Civil War, significant civil rights progress ( ext{13}^{ ext{th}}, ext{14}^{ ext{th}}, ext{15}^{ ext{th}} Amendments, Civil Rights Acts) was made with federal troops in the South, but ended in 1877 when troops withdrew, allowing Southern Democratic regimes to re-establish segregation.
Civil Rights Cases (1883)
Gutted the Civil Rights Act of ext{1875} , ruling that the federal government could not regulate private acts of discrimination (e.g., in hotels, transportation), thereby enabling widespread segregation. Justice Harlan dissented.
Jim Crow Laws and Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)
The rise of Jim Crow laws legalized "separate but equal" segregation. Plessy upheld this, using the rational basis test, asserting social prejudices couldn't be overcome by legislation. Justice Harlan famously dissented, stating the Constitution is "color-blind."
The Road to Desegregation
NAACP Legal Strategy
Attacked "separate but equal" by targeting graduate schools first, where true equality was impossible to achieve (e.g., Sweatt v. Painter).
Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
Unanimously (under Chief Justice Earl Warren) overturned Plessy v. Ferguson for public education, declaring segregated schools inherently unequal under strict scrutiny, based on sociological evidence like the "doll test."
Legislative Achievements and Their Consequences
Civil Rights Act of ext{1964}
Steered by President Johnson, it banned discrimination. A "poison pill" strategy by opponents led to its inclusion of protections for women, who became significant immediate beneficiaries, opening new professional fields. This addressed de jure but faced challenges with de facto discrimination.
Post- ext{1970s} Backlash
A period of resistance to civil rights gains emerged from ext{1980} onwards, creating polarizing societal discussions.
Voting Rights Act and Its Erosion
The Voting Rights Act was passed following confrontational strategies by civil rights leaders (e.g., Selma), expanding voting rights. However, Shelby County v. Holder (2013) struck down Section ext{5} (preclearance), significantly weakening federal oversight on voting law changes in states with a history of discrimination.
Key Considerations for Studying Civil Rights Movements
Successful movements require a clear goal, nonviolent or violent actions by protesters and law enforcement, and media attention to generate national pressure
The ext{14}^{ ext{th}} Amendment and Birthright Citizenship
The ext{14}^{ ext{th}} Amendment originally addressed African American rights after the Civil War; today, its birthright citizenship clause is central to immigration debates.
Expanding Political, Social, and Economic Participation
The ext{24}^{ ext{th}} Amendment eliminated poll taxes (common in Texas before the ext{1960s}) to expand political, social, and economic participation by removing discriminatory barriers.
Supreme Court Tests for Discrimination
The Supreme Court uses three tests to evaluate laws that make classifications:
Strict Scrutiny Test
Applied to "suspect classifications" (race, religion, ethnicity) and fundamental rights (e.g., voting).
Requires a compelling reason for discrimination; laws are generally overturned.
Intermediate Standard Review (Quasi-Suspect)
Primarily for "quasi-suspect" classifications, specifically women's issues/gender.
Requires an important reason for classification; laws are often struck down.
Rational Basis Test (Non-Suspect)
The least stringent, applied to "non-suspect" classifications (age, wealth, sexual orientation, economic discrimination).
Requires only a rational reason; most laws prevail.
Landmark Cases Illustrating Scrutiny Tests
Goesaert v. Cleary (1948)
Upheld a Michigan law restricting female bartenders (unless related to the male owner) using the rational basis test, finding a "rational reason" in avoiding "moral and social problems."
Korematsu v. United States (1944)
Upheld the internment of Japanese Americans during WWII under strict scrutiny, a rare instance for national security.
Kramer v. Union Free School District (1969)
Overturned a New York rule allowing only property owners to vote in school district elections. The Court applied strict scrutiny because voting is a fundamental right.
San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez (1973)
Upheld Texas's property tax school funding scheme using the rational basis test, despite disparities between wealthy and poor districts. The Court ruled wealth was not a suspect classification, and education wasn't a fundamental right. Justice Marshall's dissent highlighted the need for a third (intermediate) test.
Edgewood Independent School District v. Kirby (1989)
The Texas Supreme Court overturned the state's school funding system, deeming it unconstitutional under the Texas Constitution, leading to the "Robin Hood plan" for redistributing funds.
Historical Context of Civil Rights in the U.S.
Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857)
Ruled African Americans were not citizens and struck down the Missouri Compromise, intensifying sectional tensions before the Civil War.
Reconstruction Era (1865-" ext{1877})
Post-Civil War, significant civil rights progress ( ext{13}^{ ext{th}}, ext{14}^{ ext{th}}, ext{15}^{ ext{th}} Amendments, Civil Rights Acts) was made with federal troops in the South, but ended in 1877 when troops withdrew, allowing Southern Democratic regimes to re-establish segregation.
Civil Rights Cases (1883)
Gutted the Civil Rights Act of ext{1875}, ruling that the federal government could not regulate private acts of discrimination (e.g., in hotels, transportation), thereby enabling widespread segregation. Justice Harlan dissented.
Jim Crow Laws and Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)
The rise of Jim Crow laws legalized "separate but equal" segregation. Plessy upheld this, using the rational basis test, asserting social prejudices couldn't be overcome by legislation. Justice Harlan famously dissented, stating the Constitution is "color-blind."
The Road to Desegregation
NAACP Legal Strategy
Attacked "separate but equal" by targeting graduate schools first, where true equality was impossible to achieve (e.g., Sweatt v. Painter).
Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
Unanimously (under Chief Justice Earl Warren) overturned Plessy v. Ferguson for public education, declaring segregated schools inherently unequal under strict scrutiny, based on sociological evidence like the "doll test."
Legislative Achievements and Their Consequences
Civil Rights Act of ext{1964}
Steered by President Johnson, it banned discrimination. A "poison pill" strategy by opponents led to its inclusion of protections for women, who became significant immediate beneficiaries, opening new professional fields. This addressed de jure but faced challenges with de facto discrimination.
Post- ext{1970s} Backlash
A period of resistance to civil rights gains emerged from ext{1980} onwards, creating polarizing societal discussions.
Voting Rights Act and Its Erosion
The Voting Rights Act was passed following confrontational strategies by civil rights leaders (e.g., Selma), expanding voting rights. However, Shelby County v. Holder (2013) struck down Section ext{5} (preclearance), significantly weakening federal oversight on voting law changes in states with a history of discrimination.
Key Considerations for Studying Civil Rights Movements
Successful movements require a clear goal, nonviolent or violent actions by protesters and law enforcement, and media attention to generate national pressure
The ext{14}^{ ext{th}} Amendment and Birthright Citizenship
The ext{14}^{ ext{th}} Amendment originally addressed African American rights after the Civil War; today, its birthright citizenship clause is central to immigration debates.
Expanding Political, Social, and Economic Participation
The ext{24}^{ ext{th}} Amendment eliminated poll taxes (common in Texas before the ext{1960s}) to expand political, social, and economic participation by removing discriminatory barriers.
Supreme Court Tests for Discrimination
The Supreme Court uses three tests to evaluate laws that make classifications:
Strict Scrutiny Test
Applied to "suspect classifications" (race, religion, ethnicity) and fundamental rights (e.g., voting).
Requires a compelling reason for discrimination; laws are generally overturned.
Intermediate Standard Review (Quasi-Suspect)
Primarily for "quasi-suspect" classifications, specifically women's issues/gender.
Requires an important reason for classification; laws are often struck down.
Rational Basis Test (Non-Suspect)
The least stringent, applied to "non-suspect" classifications (age, wealth, sexual orientation, economic discrimination).
Requires only a rational reason; most laws prevail.
Landmark Cases Illustrating Scrutiny Tests
Goesaert v. Cleary (1948)
Upheld a Michigan law restricting female bartenders (unless related to the male owner) using the rational basis test, finding a "rational reason" in avoiding "moral and social problems."
Korematsu v. United States (1944)
Upheld the internment of Japanese Americans during WWII under strict scrutiny, a rare instance for national security.
Kramer v. Union Free School District (1969)
Overturned a New York rule allowing only property owners to vote in school district elections. The Court applied strict scrutiny because voting is a fundamental right.
San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez (1973)
Upheld Texas's property tax school funding scheme using the rational basis test, despite disparities between wealthy and poor districts. The Court ruled wealth was not a suspect classification, and education wasn't a fundamental right. Justice Marshall's dissent highlighted the need for a third (intermediate) test.
Edgewood Independent School District v. Kirby (1989)
The Texas Supreme Court overturned the state's school funding system, deeming it unconstitutional under the Texas Constitution, leading to the "Robin Hood plan" for redistributing funds.
Historical Context of Civil Rights in the U.S.
Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857)
Ruled African Americans were not citizens and struck down the Missouri Compromise, intensifying sectional tensions before the Civil War.
Reconstruction Era (1865-" ext{1877})
Post-Civil War, significant civil rights progress ( ext{13}^{ ext{th}}, ext{14}^{ ext{th}}, ext{15}^{ ext{th}} Amendments, Civil Rights Acts) was made with federal troops in the South, but ended in 1877 when troops withdrew, allowing Southern Democratic regimes to re-establish segregation.
Civil Rights Cases (1883)
Gutted the Civil Rights Act of ext{1875}, ruling that the federal government could not regulate private acts of discrimination (e.g., in hotels, transportation), thereby enabling widespread segregation. Justice Harlan dissented.
Jim Crow Laws and Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)
The rise of Jim Crow laws legalized "separate but equal" segregation. Plessy upheld this, using the rational basis test, asserting social prejudices couldn't be overcome by legislation. Justice Harlan famously dissented, stating the Constitution is "color-blind."
The Road to Desegregation
NAACP Legal Strategy
Attacked "separate but equal" by targeting graduate schools first, where true equality was impossible to achieve (e.g., Sweatt v. Painter).
Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
Unanimously (under Chief Justice Earl Warren) overturned Plessy v. Ferguson for public education, declaring segregated schools inherently unequal under strict scrutiny, based on sociological evidence like the "doll test."
Legislative Achievements and Their Consequences
Civil Rights Act of ext{1964}
Steered by President Johnson, it banned discrimination. A "poison pill" strategy by opponents led to its inclusion of protections for women, who became significant immediate beneficiaries, opening new professional fields. This addressed de jure but faced challenges with de facto discrimination.
Post- ext{1970s} Backlash
A period of resistance to civil rights gains emerged from ext{1980} onwards, creating polarizing societal discussions.
Voting Rights Act and Its Erosion
The Voting Rights Act was passed following confrontational strategies by civil rights leaders (e.g., Selma), expanding voting rights. However, Shelby County v. Holder (2013) struck down Section ext{5} (preclearance), significantly weakening federal oversight on voting law changes in states with a history of discrimination.
Key Considerations for Studying Civil Rights Movements
Successful movements require a clear goal, nonviolent or violent actions by protesters and law enforcement, and media attention to generate national pressure
The ext{14}^{ ext{th}} Amendment and Birthright Citizenship
The ext{14}^{ ext{th}} Amendment originally addressed African American rights after the Civil War; today, its birthright citizenship clause is central to immigration debates.
Expanding Political, Social, and Economic Participation
The ext{24}^{ ext{th}} Amendment eliminated poll taxes (common in Texas before the ext{1960s}) to expand political, social, and economic participation by removing discriminatory barriers.
Supreme Court Tests for Discrimination
The Supreme Court uses three tests to evaluate laws that make classifications:
Strict Scrutiny Test
Applied to "suspect classifications" (race, religion, ethnicity) and fundamental rights (e.g., voting).
Requires a compelling reason for discrimination; laws are generally overturned.
Intermediate Standard Review (Quasi-Suspect)
Primarily for "quasi-suspect" classifications, specifically women's issues/gender.
Requires an important reason for classification; laws are often struck down.
Rational Basis Test (Non-Suspect)
The least stringent, applied to "non-suspect" classifications (age, wealth, sexual orientation, economic discrimination).
Requires only a rational reason; most laws prevail.
Landmark Cases Illustrating Scrutiny Tests
Goesaert v. Cleary (1948)
Upheld a Michigan law restricting female bartenders (unless related to the male owner) using the rational basis test, finding a "rational reason" in avoiding "moral and social problems."
Korematsu v. United States (1944)
Upheld the internment of Japanese Americans during WWII under strict scrutiny, a rare instance for national security.
Kramer v. Union Free School District (1969)
Overturned a New York rule allowing only property owners to vote in school district elections. The Court applied strict scrutiny because voting is a fundamental right.
San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez (1973)
Upheld Texas's property tax school funding scheme using the rational basis test, despite disparities between wealthy and poor districts. The Court ruled wealth was not a suspect classification, and education wasn't a fundamental right. Justice Marshall's dissent highlighted the need for a third (intermediate) test.
Edgewood Independent School District v. Kirby (1989)
The Texas Supreme Court overturned the state's school funding system, deeming it unconstitutional under the Texas Constitution, leading to the "Robin Hood plan" for redistributing funds.
Historical Context of Civil Rights in the U.S.
Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857)
Ruled African Americans were not citizens and struck down the Missouri Compromise, intensifying sectional tensions before the Civil War.
Reconstruction Era (1865-" ext{1877})
Post-Civil War, significant civil rights progress ( ext{13}^{ ext{th}}, ext{14}^{ ext{th}}, ext{15}^{ ext{th}} Amendments, Civil Rights Acts) was made with federal troops in the South, but ended in 1877 when troops withdrew, allowing Southern Democratic regimes to re-establish segregation.
Civil Rights Cases (1883)
Gutted the Civil Rights Act of ext{1875}, ruling that the federal government could not regulate private acts of discrimination (e.g., in hotels, transportation), thereby enabling widespread segregation. Justice Harlan dissented.
Jim Crow Laws and Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)
The rise of Jim Crow laws legalized "separate but equal" segregation. Plessy upheld this, using the rational basis test, asserting social prejudices couldn't be overcome by legislation. Justice Harlan famously dissented, stating the Constitution is "color-blind."
The Road to Desegregation
NAACP Legal Strategy
Attacked "separate but equal" by targeting graduate schools first, where true equality was impossible to achieve (e.g., Sweatt v. Painter).
Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
Unanimously (under Chief Justice Earl Warren) overturned Plessy v. Ferguson for public education, declaring segregated schools inherently unequal under strict scrutiny, based on sociological evidence like the "doll test."
Legislative Achievements and Their Consequences
Civil Rights Act of ext{1964}
Steered by President Johnson, it banned discrimination. A "poison pill" strategy by opponents led to its inclusion of protections for women, who became significant immediate beneficiaries, opening new professional fields. This addressed de jure but faced challenges with de facto discrimination.
Post- ext{1970s} Backlash
A period of resistance to civil rights gains emerged from ext{1980} onwards, creating polarizing societal discussions.
Voting Rights Act and Its Erosion
The Voting Rights Act was passed following confrontational strategies by civil rights leaders (e.g., Selma), expanding voting rights. However, Shelby County v. Holder (2013) struck down Section ext{5} (preclearance), significantly weakening federal oversight on voting law changes in states with a history of discrimination.
Key Considerations for Studying Civil Rights Movements
Successful movements require a clear goal, nonviolent or violent actions by protesters and law enforcement, and media attention to generate national pressure