Civil Rights
Protections against the government
Civil rights reflect
Who can partcipate
How they can participate
How much they can participate
Civil rights reflect government’s collective decisions on the treatment of individuals
14th Amendment
“No state shall make or enforce any law which shall… deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws”
Protection for a person rather than a citizen
Evolved throughout history
Universal
Equal
Residency— who gets to be here?
Political— who gets to participate?
Legal— due process
Others— Property, education, healthcare
“Separate but equal”
Established Jim Crow laws as legal
14th Amendment did not abolish segregation
In the field of education, separate but equal is inherently unequal
Initially started out as only for desegregating schools, spread over time
Problems:
Local officials had to enforce Brown and would delay in doing so
Brown only attacked de jure segregation (segregation by law), not de facto segregation (customary/private segregation)
Brown did not directly address discrimination in employment, voting, etc.
Brown gave the SCOTUS a lot of moral capital but did little initial change
Segregation on the grounds of race, religion, or national origin was banned in all public places
Barred race, religious, national origin, or gender discrimination by employers and unions
Created Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
The right to vote is not included in the Constitution
Initially, states restricted voting based on religion, property, gender, and race
Voting Rights Act of 1965
Voter ID
Voter roles purged after someone does not vote for a long time
Shelby County v. Holder— “Preclearance” removed requiring states with past history of voter suppression to have voting changes approved by the federal government
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
Fair Pay Act of 2009 (Ledbetter case)
Equal pay for male and female employees
ERA— Equal Rights Amendment
Originally didn’t pass— 3 states short
Expiration date passed
38th state ratified after the expiration date
Currently in question of whether or not it should be an amendment
Intermediate Scrutiny
Gov has a substantial/important interest in a narrowly tailored way
Connected to gender/sex
Different from strict scrutiny, easier for the government to prove its case
No person in the US can be denied participation in education programs or activities based on sex or gender
Increased girls’ participation in sports
Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990
More accessible public and private spaces for people with disabilities
Equal employment rights
Equal access
LGBTQ+ rights
DOMA (1996)— marriage is between one man and one woman
Don’t Ask Don’t Tell (1994)— the military could discharge people for being openly gay, but closeted people could
Lawrence v. Texas (2003)— two consenting adults engaging in sexual activity in the home is not the business of the government
United States v. Windsor (2013)— Windsor’s wife died but she was unable to inherit without paying taxes, sued because if her spouse was male she wouldn’t have had to
Obergefell v. Hodges (2015)— 🙂
Bostick v. Clayton (2020)— trans woman fired after transitioning, sued for discrimination and won
Native American Civil Rights Movement
University of CA v Bakke
Gratz v Bollinger
Grutter v Bollinger
Students for Fair Admissions v Harvard (2023)
Students for Fair Admissions v UNC (2023)
Protections against the government
Civil rights reflect
Who can partcipate
How they can participate
How much they can participate
Civil rights reflect government’s collective decisions on the treatment of individuals
14th Amendment
“No state shall make or enforce any law which shall… deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws”
Protection for a person rather than a citizen
Evolved throughout history
Universal
Equal
Residency— who gets to be here?
Political— who gets to participate?
Legal— due process
Others— Property, education, healthcare
“Separate but equal”
Established Jim Crow laws as legal
14th Amendment did not abolish segregation
In the field of education, separate but equal is inherently unequal
Initially started out as only for desegregating schools, spread over time
Problems:
Local officials had to enforce Brown and would delay in doing so
Brown only attacked de jure segregation (segregation by law), not de facto segregation (customary/private segregation)
Brown did not directly address discrimination in employment, voting, etc.
Brown gave the SCOTUS a lot of moral capital but did little initial change
Segregation on the grounds of race, religion, or national origin was banned in all public places
Barred race, religious, national origin, or gender discrimination by employers and unions
Created Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
The right to vote is not included in the Constitution
Initially, states restricted voting based on religion, property, gender, and race
Voting Rights Act of 1965
Voter ID
Voter roles purged after someone does not vote for a long time
Shelby County v. Holder— “Preclearance” removed requiring states with past history of voter suppression to have voting changes approved by the federal government
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
Fair Pay Act of 2009 (Ledbetter case)
Equal pay for male and female employees
ERA— Equal Rights Amendment
Originally didn’t pass— 3 states short
Expiration date passed
38th state ratified after the expiration date
Currently in question of whether or not it should be an amendment
Intermediate Scrutiny
Gov has a substantial/important interest in a narrowly tailored way
Connected to gender/sex
Different from strict scrutiny, easier for the government to prove its case
No person in the US can be denied participation in education programs or activities based on sex or gender
Increased girls’ participation in sports
Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990
More accessible public and private spaces for people with disabilities
Equal employment rights
Equal access
LGBTQ+ rights
DOMA (1996)— marriage is between one man and one woman
Don’t Ask Don’t Tell (1994)— the military could discharge people for being openly gay, but closeted people could
Lawrence v. Texas (2003)— two consenting adults engaging in sexual activity in the home is not the business of the government
United States v. Windsor (2013)— Windsor’s wife died but she was unable to inherit without paying taxes, sued because if her spouse was male she wouldn’t have had to
Obergefell v. Hodges (2015)— 🙂
Bostick v. Clayton (2020)— trans woman fired after transitioning, sued for discrimination and won
Native American Civil Rights Movement
University of CA v Bakke
Gratz v Bollinger
Grutter v Bollinger
Students for Fair Admissions v Harvard (2023)
Students for Fair Admissions v UNC (2023)