1. WHAT IS THE BIGGEST RELIGIOUS GROUP IN THE U.S. CONGRESS?
IS IT REPRESENTATIVE OF THE POPULATION?
GET UP STAND UP

2. Current Congress

3. OVERALL, IS THIS GOOD OR BAD NEWS?
THE FIRST AMENDMENT BEGINS, "CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW RESPECTING AN ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION, OR PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF;" GIVEN THE RELIGIOUS MAKEUP OF THE CURRENT US CONGRESS, WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING DO YOU THINK WOULD BE MORE LIKELY: CONGRESS ESTABLISHING RELIGION, OR CONGRESS PROHIBITING RELIGIOUS EXERCISE?

5. Civil Liberties
Definition – legal and constitutional rights that protect individuals from arbitrary acts of government (Limitations on the government)

6. BASIS OF OUR CIVIL LIBERTIES – PROTECTED RIGHTS IN THE ORIGINAL CONSTITUTION
Writ of habeas corpus (“you shall have the body” in court)
Show cause - produce the prisoner in court and to explain to the judge why the prisoner is being held; except in rebellion (Civil War)
Ex post facto laws (no “after the fact” laws)
Punishes a person for something that was not a crime when he did it punishment); May not be passed by Congress
(wearing a hat this morning)
Bills of attainder (no trial – just punishment)
An act that punishes a person without benefit of trial
(speeding – straight to jail for 30 days)
May not be passed by Congress

7. BILL OF RIGHTS AND THE STATES
Rights of the individuals and states listed to protect them from the federal government (Limit the government)
Bill of Rights only applied to the federal government and did not include protections against state governments (Barron v. Baltimore, 1833)
Feeling was that people could protect themselves against the state governments that were in their own backyards, but they needed additional protection against a new, powerful, and distant national gov’t

8. SELECTIVE INCORPORATION (1 amendment at a time)
Modifying Effect of the 14th Amendment
The due process clause has been used to apply some of the provisions of the Bill of Rights to the states.
This clause bans states from denying life, liberty, or property without due process of law.
The “total incorporation” view would apply all of the provisions of the Bill of Rights to the states. It argues for nationalization (or federalization) of the Bill of Rights.
The “selective incorporation” view would apply only some of these provisions, and would do so on a case-by-case basis.
The important case here: Gitlow v. New York, 1925.
States may not deny free speech and press. These were protected by 14th Amendment Due Process Clause.

9. SELECTIVE INCORPORATION OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS

10. SELECTIVE INCORPORATION OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS

11. 1st Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

12. 1st Amendment - Religion
Texas wishes to have school prayer before the moment of silence.
Can they?
Engle v. Vitale, 1962
No teacher led prayer
How about a daily Bible reading?
No, projected or promoted religion which constituted an Establishment. Abbington Township

13. IF THE US SUPREME COURT WERE TO REVISIT ITS RULING TODAY, DO YOU IMAGINE IT WOULD REACH THE SAME CONCLUSION?
IF THE US HELD A REFERENDUM ON THIS ISSUE, HOW DO YOU THINK THE US WOULD VOTE?
HOW DOES THAT MAKE YOU FEEL ABOUT DIRECT VERSUS REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY?
WHAT SPECIFICALLY COULD THE POTUS DO ABOUT THIS ISSUE?
LET'S SAY THAT YOU WERE A MEMBER OF CONGRESS AND YOU WERE OUTRAGED AT THE RULING FROM ENGEL V. VITALE. WHAT SPECIFICALLY COULD YOU DO ABOUT IT?

14. Texas wishes to supply all children with calculators and math textbooks regardless of the school they attend.  Can they provide them to the catholic school?
Why?

15. Texas wishes to pay for teachers in the catholic school classrooms to teach calculus.
Can they?
Why?

16. FREEDOM OF RELIGION - THE ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE
Lemon v. Kurtzman: Established a 3-part test to determine if a statute or practice violates the establishment clause:
1. Secular (Non-Religious) Purpose
2. Advances or Inhibits Religion
3. Excessive Entanglement with Government
If any is present, the statute or practice is unconstitutional

17. Texas wants to reimburse parents for transporting their children to school.
Can they?
Yes, Everson. Pre-Lemon case.

18. A teacher put a picture showing the ten commandments on a shelf in her room.  Each of her students comment to her that those are words to live by.
Is the placement unconstitutional?
(State law requiring 10 Commandments is unconstitutional)
She is an agent of the state

19. Instead, she puts the 10 commandments on her desk. Is that ok?
Facing away from the class?
Can she wear a cross?

20. Texas wants to put a six-foot-tall rendering of the Ten Commandments among 17 other monuments at the Capitol. Can they?
OK, Texas display was acceptable because of the monument's religious and historical function. It was not in a location that anyone would be compelled to be in.
Kentucky hangs 10 commandments in 2 courthouses with several other historical documents
Not OK. Places where some citizens must attend and meant to be free from any prejudice.

21. A local church has donated bibles to the Christian Club at Eastern Hills High School.  At the request of the club, the minister wishes to lead them in prayer during the next meeting.  
Can the club accept the bibles?  
Can he lead them in prayer?

22. A student takes one of the bibles to 1st period and reads it in class, is this ok?
She shares it with a neighbor? Ok?
She has a prayer fest with all the cheerleaders
prayer is limited to prayer that is personal, voluntary and non- disruptive

23. The student asks the teacher if she can read a verse that is relevant to current events out loud to the class.  
Can she?

24. The teacher lets her, and said “praise be to the lord, our god” when she is done.  Is this ok?

25. A coach leads a team in prayer before a game. Can he?
No, school event Engel would apply.
Can a student elected leader give a prayer over the loudspeaker at a game if the students decide that they want a prayer?
No. Santa Fe v. Doe. Government event, government authorizing, forces students to abandon the event or listen to the message.

26. THEY SAY THAT AS LONG AS THERE ARE TESTS IN SCHOOL THERE WILL BE PRAYER IN SCHOOL. IS THIS TRUE OR FALSE?

27. Ohio wants to reimburse families for tuition to private schools (96% of these are religious).
Can they?
Upheld OK. It did not distinguish between religious and nonreligious schools and the money went to parents NOT the schools.

28. A Rhode Island town annually adorned its shopping district with Christmas decor, including a Christmas tree, a Santa's house, and a nativity scene.
Lynch (1984) said this is OK. It has a legitimate secular purpose of depicting the historical origins of the Christmas holiday
But…display of a creche (manger scene) alone is not OK. "Endorsement sends a message to non-adherents that they are outsiders, not full members of the political community," the Court wrote, while it signals that adherents are favored insiders.

29. The city council starts its session with a prayer.
Is this ok?
Yes, 1788 that is what they did. Legislative exception. Note that 2 courts have said that school boards can’t (applied Engel)

30. Is religion in schools still an issue?
Mass Baptism on the field (2:56)
Response

31. A public school suspends a Muslim girl for wearing a hijab for violating its no hat policy.
Can they do this?

32. A public school suspends a Muslim boy for wearing a baseball cap for violating its no hat policy.
Can they?

33. A group of Cherokee wishes to smoke peyote during their rituals
Can they?
Oregon v Smith (1990)
American Religious Freedom Act (1994) – Native American Church only

34. An Aztec community wishes to practice their ritual sacrifice
An Aztec community wishes to practice their ritual sacrifice. Bona fide religious belief.
The sacrifice believes that this is a great honor.
Can they?

35. FREEDOM OF RELIGION – FREE EXERCISE CLAUSE
Provides Freedom of Worship
Religious practices that have been restricted:
Polygamy (Reynolds v. U.S.)
Drug use (Oregon v. Smith)
Not vaccinating children of Christian Scientists before they enter school
Not paying Social Security taxes (Amish)
Wearing a Jewish skullcap (Yarmulke) in the military
Religious practices that have been permitted:
Not saluting flag in public school (Jehovah’s Witnesses)
Not sending children to school past the 8th Grade (Amish)
Animal Sacrifice (Santeria case)
Article 6 bans religious tests/oaths as qualifications to hold public office.

36. 1st Amendment Speech and press
The Fort Worth Star Telegram writes a story about Joe that states Joe has sex with underaged girls and his business should be boycotted.  Is this actionable?

37. Joe is not a pervert does this matter?
Defamation
Libel – Written
Slander - Spoken

38. Joe is in fact a pervert - does this matter?
Truth is a complete defense to defamation

39. Joe is running for city council - does this matter?
New York Times v. Sullivan (1964)
Public figures - prove "actual malice" …toward the truth
It looks at the defendants state of mind… any basis is likely enough

40. A student speaks at a pep rally and says “I think Ms
A student speaks at a pep rally and says “I think Ms. Herman does a great job with the students” while giving a pelvic thrust. Can he be suspended?
Limits on student speech
Bethel v. Fraser (1986) – school can suspend a student from school for making a speech full of sexual double entendres or innuendos. Speech had no real political value and was designed to entertain an audience of high school students.

41. A student posts a sign at a football game after school at Cowboy Stadium, “BONG HITS 4 JESUS.”
Can they suspend him or is this freedom of speech?
Does he have a freedom of religion claim?
Morse v Frederick (2007)
Yes, suspended. Promoting illegal drug use at a school event.

42. It is 1968. I burn my draft card violating federal law. I am arrested
It is I burn my draft card violating federal law. I am arrested. Is the law constitutional?
Yes. O’Brien. Upheld his conviction and sided with the government's right to prevent this behavior in order to protect Congress's authority to raise and support an army. Symbolic act not protected.
The Court didn't protect the defendant's speech but rather upheld a law to assist Congress in its conscription powers.

43. Cohen wore a jacket bearing the words "F — the Draft" while walking into a Los Angeles courthouse. He was convicted or "disturbing the peace ... by offensive conduct."
Cohen wins. The phrase on the jacket in no way incited an illegal action. "One man's vulgarity is another's lyric," the majority opinion stated.
He did nothing to incite public protest and did not actually refuse to enlist, so the Court protected the speech.

44. TIME, PLACE, AND MANNER TEST
Restriction can’t suppress the content
Must serve a significant government interest
Narrowly tailored (Specific, targeted)
Adequate alternative ways of expression

45. Students wear a black armband protesting our involvement in Vietnam.
Tinker v Des Moines (1969) – symbolic speech
No actual disruption – only potential
students' right to political, symbolic speech based on the First Amendment overrode the school administrators' concern for potential disorder
failed the content-neutral criterion of the time, place, and manner test: it was intended to quiet the students' anti-war message to avoid possible disruptions.

46. Students wear a pink bracelet supporting breast cancer that says, “Save the Boobies.”
Students win – not an extreme disruption (school didn’t say lewd until trial – were using “out of dress code”)

47. At a student rally, a student burns a flag.
Texas v. Johnson (General Flag burning is ok) V
Fire at a school event (other rules apply)

48. Mailing circulars to recruits telling them to fight the draft
 Schenk (1919) - The character of every act depends on the circumstances. "The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent." During wartime, utterances tolerable in peacetime can be punished.
Speech may be restricted when it incites violent action (imminent threat to society such as falsely shouting “Fire” in crowded theater)

49. A KKK member burns a cross.
Brandenburg (no clear and present danger)
government could punish the advocacy of illegal action only if “such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action”

50. A KKK member burns a cross.
…… In a black man’s yard
Trespass/Terroristic threatening/intimidation

51. A man stands on a corner wearing a shirt showing 2 people having sex.
Obscenity (i.e. pornography)
Miller v. California (1973) gave constitutional definition of obscenity
Appeals to prurient interest in sex (violates Community Standards),
Patently offensive, and
Must lack serious literary/artistic/political/scientific value.
If not meeting all three criteria, then not obscene
Sexually explicit materials about or aimed at minors are not protected by the First Amendment

52. Prior Restraint
Writing an article that public officials were corrupt and taking bribes, Officials prevented publication under the Minnesota gag law?
Who wins?
Near v Minnisota(1931) – no prior retraint

53. The government learns that the New York Times is about to publish the size, location, and troop movements of our forces in combat. Can it prevent the publication?
Yes – national security - to "prevent actual obstruction to its recruiting service or the publication of sailing dates of transports orthe number and location of troops.’ Near
"clear and present danger that.., will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent. ‘ Schenck

54. The government learns that the New York Times is about to publish a secret Department of Defense study of U.S. political and military involvement in Vietnam from 1945 to Can it prevent the publication?
New York Times v US - Pentagon papers – No prior restraint

55. The Nebraska Press wants to publish details of a gruesome murder
The Nebraska Press wants to publish details of a gruesome murder. The trial court issues a gag order.
Unconstitutional – no prior restraint -  Nebraska Press v. Stuart, 1976
A principal censors articles in student newspaper about divorce and teen pregnancy
Constitutional?
Yes, Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier
But 14 state adopted laws against if afterwards

56. 2nd Amendment – Right to bear arms
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

57. Deconstruct the amendment
Can I own a pistol?
Can I own a rifle?
Can I own a machine gun?
Can I own a tank?
Can I own an aircraft carrier?

58. Washington DC bans hand guns, can they?
No, Heller (2010) 2nd Amendment includes a right to self-defense. Applies to the federal government (DC is not owned by any state.)
Chicago bans handguns, can they? Remember, they are in a state not DC.
No, 2nd Amendment covers a fundamental freedom and is incorporated to be effective against the states through selective incorporation.

59. 4th & 5th
4th
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

60. 5th
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

61. John stole $3,000 worth of property from a house
John stole $3,000 worth of property from a house.  The police see him walking around and searched him finding a key.  He told them that it was to a storage unit with the goods in it.  The police searched the unit and found the items.  What is going to happen to him?  What else do we need to know?
Did they have a warrant?
Did they have probable cause?
Consent?
Can the evidence be used at trial?
Exclusionary Rule
Fruit of the poisonous tree

62. Police have a fake warrant to enter a house to look for a bombing suspect. While there, they find pornography (illegal). Can they charge the person?
No – unlawful warrant (Mapp v Ohio – 1958) – Exclusionary rule applies to states.

63. What if the warrant was good
What if the warrant was good? Warrant = where to search and what to seize.
Yes – Exceptions
Plain View
Independent Source
Inevitable discovery
What if it were the wrong house because the warrant gave that address erroneously?
Yes – Good fiath

64. A car is speeding, can it be stopped and searched for drugs?
Yes – almost always

65. The assistant principal believes that Sophie has drugs, can she be searched? Can her bag? Can her locker?
Yes, the public interest argument outweighs concerns for individual liberties
They only need to have reasonable cause or suspicion. New Jersey v. TLO

66. Can she be required to take a drug test? What if she refuses?

67. The PoPo tracks me using my GPS without a warrant because they think that I am a drug dealer(Breaking Bad, Baby. Same hairdo and beard anyway!), can they do this?
Generally not.
An officer brings a narcotics-sniffing dogs to a person's front door, can they use the evidence?
Generally not…for now.

68. Verizon gives the NSA information on your call histories without a warrant, can they use the information at trial?
Yes. If they voluntarily give the information, it is like asking you where Jack got his stash.

69. 5th Amendment
The prosecutor wants to put you(the defendant) on the stand, can they?
Only if you testify
You agree to testify. You say, “I was not there.” can they question you about unrelated matters that have no relationship to your being there?
Yes

70. You were found “not guilty.” Are you innocent?
Not necessarily – they just couldn’t prove that you were guilty
They, thereafter, find a video of you killing the man. They file the same charges again. Can they do this because of the new evidence?
No. - Double jeopardy.
The police arrest you and question you. You confess. Can they use the confession at trial.
Miranda v. Arizona- Miranda Rights :28

71. Exceptions
Police chase me into a store after I assault a woman and run into a store has me surrounded and says, “Where is the gun?” I say, “The Gun is over there!”
Public Safety
- needed to know to protect others from a loaded gun – not otherwise coerced
Consent – blurting it out

72. 6th Amendment
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense

73. Are STATES required to provide defendants an attorney?
Yes – Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
every defendant should have an equal chance at a fair trial, and that without an attorney, a defendant does not have that equal chance
the absence of counsel amounted to a denial of fundamental fairness (only got counsel in death penalty cases in Florida before Gideon)

74. 8th
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Is the death penalty unconstitutional?
No – Gregg v Georgia (Furman had said that it might be too random and disproportionate socially disadvantaged, the poor, and racial minorities)
Excessive fines – under civil forfeiture – SCOTUS is hearing a case this term(18-19). Result by May.

75. Due Process - Procedural
Most cases in Amendments 4-8 are based on procedural due process which guarantees that the accused are treated fairly and according to the law. The system followed the proper PROCEDURE.
For example – you were read your rights, had probable cause, properly charged, search warrant obtained, legal confession, had an attorney, etc.

76. Due Process - Substantive
Substantive due process places substantive limits on what laws can actually be created. —the very point of the law—violates some basic right, even one not listed in the Constitution.
For example – The right to privacy (family planning, abortion, etc) – Not in the Constitution but it exists through the penumbras (shadows) of the First, Third, Fourth, and Ninth Amendments.

77. 9th
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

78. Right to Privacy - penumbras (implied rights)
Connecticut passes a law preventing the sale of contraceptives (birth control). Is this ok?
No, Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) – fundamental right to marital privacy including family planning.
Even though “privacy” doesn’t appear in the Constitution, specific guarantees in the 1st, 3rd, 4th, and 5th Amendments create a zone of privacy that is protected by the 9th Amendment

79. Roe v. Wade (1973)
Issue: Does the U.S. Constitution protect the right of a woman to obtain an abortion?
Majority: In a 7–2 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court decided in Roe’s favor. Justice Blackmun wrote the opinion of the Court, which recognized that a woman’s choice whether to have an abortion is protected by the Constitution.
The majority rooted a woman’s right to decide whether to have an abortion in the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, which prohibits states from “depriv[ing] any person of … liberty … without due process of law.” According to the majority, the “liberty” protected by the 14th Amendment includes a fundamental right to privacy. The majority began by surveying the history of abortion laws, and concluded that “the restrictive criminal abortion laws in effect in a majority of States today are of relatively recent vintage,” and “are not of ancient or even of common-
law origin.” The Court then held that “[t]his right of privacy, whether it be founded in the Fourteenth Amendment’s concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action, as we feel it is, or, as the District Court determined, in the Ninth
Amendment’s reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy.”
1st trimester abortions are allowed
2nd trimester abortions can be restricted, but not prohibited by the state
3rd trimester abortions can be regulated or prohibit abortions except when medical judgment determines that an abortion is necessary to save a woman’s life

80. Texas passes a law to eliminate abortions. Is this ok?
No, Roe v Wade – trimester test – 1st No regulation, 2nd Health of the mother, 3rd Up to the state, except for life/health of the mother.
Pennsylvania requires a 24 hour waiting period and parental consent for an abortion. Is this ok?
Yes, Planned parenthood v. Casey (1992). Cannot place an “undue burden” which this was not. Casey also found exposing patients using public records unconstitutional.

81. Missouri passes a law preventing abortions at state supported hospitals or by state funded doctors.
Yes, this is ok. Webster v. Reproductive Health (1987)
Aso see Supreme Court Stops Louisiana Abortion Law From Being Implemented

82. Hobby Lobby (a Christian closely held corporation) refuses to purchase Obama Care (Affordable Care Act) for employees because it funds plan B contraception and IUDs.
Hobby lobby wins. They can refuse that in their plan. Very limited decision.

83. Gay and Lesbian Rights
The civil rights movement of the 1960s heralded the rights of African-Americans and Women. Subsequently it was extended to Latinos. Today such civil rights are being waged on behalf of the LGBT community.
Court Cases and Laws for/against the Gay Community
Court Cases and Laws
Detail of Cases/laws
Bowers v. Hardwick
Supreme Court ruled that states could legal forbid gay sex.
“Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”
Created during the Clinton Administration. 2011, Pentagon ended the policy and allowed gays to serve openly in the military.
Lawrence v. Texas
Overturned Bowers that laws regarding private sexual conduct violate the right to privacy and are unconstitutional.

84. Obergefell v. Hodges (2015)
The Court held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees the right to marry as one of the fundamental liberties it protects, and that analysis applies to same-sex couples in the same manner as it does to opposite-sex couples.
Court also held that the First Amendment protects the rights of religious organizations to adhere to their principles, but it does not allow states to deny same-sex couples the right to marry on the same terms as those of opposite-sex couples.
Groups of same-sex couples sued their relevant state agencies in Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky, and Tennessee to challenge the constitutionality of states’ bans on same-sex marriage or refusal to recognize legal same-sex marriages occurred in jurisdictions that provided for such marriages.

85. PRIVACY RIGHTS - HOMOSEXUALS
Lawrence v. Texas (2003) – Court struck down Texas sodomy law through use of “liberty” part of 14th Amendment’s due process clause
Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) – Same-sex couples right to marry is protected by the due process clause and the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment
Most effective way to secure rights has been through litigation in the courts to gain protections against discrimination

86. CIVIL RIGHTS 14th Amendment
Definition – policies designed to protect people against arbitrary or discriminatory treatment by government officials or individuals
14th Amendment
No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
race, color, religion, national origin, and sex, age, disability, sexual orientation, other factors
due process and equal protection clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments

87. Supreme Court Tests
New law - Chinese people cannot drive more than 55 at night because of bad night vision (assume that it was a real thing).
Constitutional? No
Suspect class - race and ethnicity, are considered to be inherently suspect. In such cases, the burden of proof is on the lawmaker to prove:
compelling public interest
no other way
legitimate purpose
It is virtually impossible for a law to pass this standard. Can you imagine a legitimate law that discriminates on the basis of race or ethnicity? What sort of compelling public interest would it serve?

88. Supreme Court Tests
New law – Women cannot drive more than 55 at night because of bad night vision (assume that it was a real thing).
Constitutional? No
Laws that discriminate on the basis of gender have a lower standard to meet. They must bear only a:
substantial relationship
important government purpose.
The law restricting the military draft to men has been upheld as constitutional under this standard (a federal judge on 2/22/19 ruled it unconstitutional)
Why is there a difference?

89. Supreme Court Tests
New law - People cannot drive more than 55 at night because of bad night vision (assume that it was a real thing).
Constitutional?
Yes, affects everyone.
rational relationship to a legitimate government purpose.
You must be 21 to vote for mayor.
Yes, age is a reasonable classification for voting. A law that only allowed those with blue eyes or red hair to vote would be arbitrary and unconstitutional.

90. Protecting Voting Rights – 15th Amendment - "on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude,"
1877 Federal troops withdraw
Literacy tests
Poll taxes
Grandfather clauses – allowed illiterate and poor whites to vote
Jim Crow Laws - separated the races
White Primaries – keep AA out of the race
Racial Gerrymandering
Registration Requirements
Intimidation

91. THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT OF 1965
Provisions
Requires that states that had a history of denying African‑Americans the right to vote must clear any changes in any voting practice or laws that might result in dilution of voting power with the Department of Justice (some have since been struck down)
Eliminated literacy tests
Empowered federal officials to register voters
Empowered federal officials to ensure that citizens could vote (w/ marshals)
Empowered federal officials to count ballots
Requires states to include ballots in languages other than English if a significant number of non-English speakers reside in an area
Effects
Huge increase in black turnout
Large increase in number of black elected officials
Forced white elected officials to take into account the needs of blacks

92. Landmark Civil Rights Legislation
24th Amendment (1964)
Banned Poll Taxes
Voting Rights Act of 1965
Banned Literacy Tests
Allowed federal intervention in counties where voter registration was less than 50%

93. What do the numbers show?
What impact did the 1965 Voting Rights Act have on black voter registration?
Which states had the lowest voter registration before the law?
Which states experienced the greatest increases in registration?
Is there a regional trend regarding registration among these Southern states?

94. ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENTS
Shaw v. Reno, 1993 – majority-minority districts are LEGAL
Supreme Court announced that states may take race into account, they may not make race the sole reason for drawing district lines.
Effect – Major instrument for increasing the number of African American and other minority voters

95. Shaw v. Reno (1993)
Issue: Did the North Carolina residents’ claim that the 1990 redistricting plan discriminated on the basis of race raise a valid constitutional issue under the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause?
Majority: In a 5–4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court decided in favor of Shaw, and sent the case back to the lower court to be reheard.
Justice O’Connor detailed the troublesome history of racial gerrymandering and explained how North Carolina District 12 was similar in many ways to past districts that had been held unconstitutional, like the bizarrely shaped district in Gomillion. The justices said that classifications of citizens predominantly on the basis of race are undesirable in a free society and conflict with the American political value of equality.

96. Jim Crow Era and Separate, but Equal
13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments were known as the Civil War amendments and were designed to help African Americans.
When Reconstruction ended in 1877 and the North left the South, the South responded.
The Southern states would pass Jim Crow Laws, which were laws aimed at separating minorities from the white population.
Almost twenty years later, the Supreme Court under Melville Fuller would listen to the famous case of Plessy
v. Ferguson (1896). They ruled 7-1 that separate facilities were NOT UNCONSTITUTIONAL provided they were
equal.
This motto would be known as “Separate, but Equal.”

97. PLESSY V. FERGUSON (1896)
The Court endorsed the SEPARATE-BUT-EQUAL doctrine
Separate but equal always resulted in discrimination against African-Americans, leading to lawsuits challenging the doctrine 7

98. Educational Segregation in the
U.S. Prior to Brown v. Board

99. BROWN V. BOARD OF EDUCATION (1954)
The Court reversed its Plessy decision; segregation is itself discrimination (separate‑but‑equal unconstitutional)
Brown I was the end of segregation - racially segregated system did damage to the black child's psyche and instilled feelings of inferiority - the separation itself was inherently unequal
Used the equal protection clause.
Brown II was the process of integration - "with all deliberate speed,“ (it still took many years to happen)
1 result was white flight – moving to non-diverse neighborhoods.
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 stipulates that federal dollars under any grant or project be withdrawn from a school that discriminates (Civil Rights Act of essentially ends Jim Crow laws)

100. Percentage of Black Students Attending School With any Whites in Southern States

101. Civil Rights Movement Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
Montgomery bus boycott
Birmingham March
March on Washington
Civil disobedience
Woolworth sit-ins
Freedom Summer
Voting Rights
Militant Movement
Malcolm X, Nation of
Islam, separatist
Black Panthers

102. Letter from a Birmingham Jail (1963)
"A Call for Unity," written by eight white clergymen from Birmingham and published in a Birmingham newspaper, called on the protesters to abandon their plans, arguing that the proper way to obtain equal rights was to be patient and let those in a position to negotiate do their job.
MLK responded from jail
In any nonviolent campaign there are four basic steps: 1) Collection of the facts to determine whether injustices are alive. 2) Negotiation. 3) Self- purification and 4) Direct Action.
Dr. King also expressed disappointment in the white clergy, in whom he had hoped and expected to find allies.
“Wait!” response – We cannot wait – lynchings, police brutality, poverty, “nobodiness,” despair

103. Civil Rights Act of 1964
Ended segregation in public places and banned employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin >> ended Jim Crow Laws
Interestingly – the Civil Rights Act of 1875 forbade discrimination in public accommodations, but the court ruled that equal protection only applied to the state – not shopkeepers.
Heart of Atlanta Motel v. US (1964) – visitors are an interstate commerce connection. Must serve everyone.

104. EQUALITY Civil Rights Act of 1968 (Fair Housing Act of 1968)
– Forbids owners to refuse to sell or rent to any person because of race, color, religion, national origin, sex (since 1978), handicap, or because a person has children (since 1988) 15

105. FROM SEGREGATION TO DESEGREGATION
de jure segregation – segregation imposed by law
Supreme Court sustained the right of judges to order busing to overcome de jure segregation
de jure segregation doesn’t exist in America today
de facto segregation – segregation resulting from economic, social conditions or personal choice
The Court has refused to permit judges to order busing to overcome the effects of de facto segregation
de facto segregation still exists in America legally today (i.e. neighborhoods)

106. AFFIRMATIVE ACTION
Policies designed to give special attention or compensatory treatment of members of some previously disadvantaged groups.

107. Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978)
UC Davis Medical School desired to produce more minority doctors so they set aside 16 (out of 100) places in the entering class for members of disadvantaged groups
Alan Bakke, a white applicant, was repeatedly deferred even though his MCAT scores were substantially higher than most of the minority applicants who were accepted
Affirmative Action laws are not unconstitutional, but quotas in college admissions are unconstitutional. The Court said the university could use race as one element in admissions.

108. THE AFFIRMATIVE ACTION CONTROVERSY
Affirmative action - policies requiring special efforts in employment, promotion, or school admissions on behalf of disadvantaged groups
The goal of affirmative action is to move beyond equal opportunity toward equal results.
Some groups have claimed that affirmative action programs constitute “reverse discrimination.”
Constitutionality of affirmative action programs
University of California Regents v. Bakke (1978)
Quotas cannot be used for admissions (cannot reserve seats for racial minority groups)
Affirmative action programs are not necessarily unconstitutional
Reaffirming the Importance of Diversity
Gratz v. Bollinger (2003) – race cannot be used as a “bonus” point
Grutter v. Bollinger (2003) – race can be one of the factors to be considered in admissions

109. Is Affirmative Action the same thing as Quotas?
Some, but not all, Affirmative Action programs use
quotas
Quotas require that a certain number or percentage of a disadvantaged group get a job
For example, if it is proven that a police force actively discriminated against hiring minority officers, a quota may be used to correct past discrimination

110. Civil Rights and People with Disabilities
PROGRESS FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
LAWS PASSED BY CONGRESS
DESCRIPTION OF LAW
Rehabilitation Act of 1973
Wheelchair ramps, Braille signs, and other efforts to ensure equal access have become commonplace
Education of All Handicapped Children Act of 1975
Declared that all children are entitled to a free public education appropriate to their needs.
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
Required employers to make reasonable accommodations for disabled access to their facilities and prohibited employment discrimination against the disabled.

111. EQUALITY Civil Rights Act of 1968 (Fair Housing Act of 1968)
Forbids owners to refuse to sell or rent to any person because of race, color, religion, national origin, sex (since 1978), handicap, or because a person has children (since 1988)
Americans with Disabilities Act, 1990
Prohibits discrimination based on disability
Requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations to employees
with disabilities
Requires facilities be made accessible to those with disabilities 25