Civil Liberties and Civil Rights Chapters 4 & 5 AP Government

1. Civil Liberties and Civil Rights Chapters 4 & 5 AP Government

2. I. CIVIL LIBERTIES 1.DEFINITION: Freedoms guaranteed to individuals. Declares what government cannot do – a wall in between you and government • “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech” • Constitution - Bill of Rights – Due Process - 14th Amendment

3. 2. EXAMPLES: - Freedom of Religion - Freedom of Speech - Freedom of the Press - Freedom of Assembly and Petition - Property Rights - Right to Privacy - Rights of the Accused

4. 3.CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS: a. Writ of habeas corpus Must be brought before the court and informed of charges against you. b. No Bills of attainder A legislative act that singles out an individual or group for punishment without a trial (death penalty for treason or other felony).

5. c. No Ex post facto laws - Laws applied to acts committed before the laws’ passage are unconstitutional. If you consumed alcohol before the passage of Prohibition, you couldn’t be charged with breaking Prohibition later. You would need to consume alcohol afterthe passage of Prohibition to be charged.

6. 4. What was not included in the original U.S. Constitution? - The Bill of Rights 5. What is the Bill of Rights? - The first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution which protect civil liberties.

7. Bill of Rights Protections: 1. Amendment I: Religion, speech, press, assembly, • Petition 2.Amendment 2: Bear arms 3.Amendment 3: No one cares 4.Amendment 4-8: Due process rights • - Self incrimination, Double Jeopardy 5. Amendment 9: Just because it isn’t written down in the Constitution doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist 6. Amendment 10: Applies to the states

8. MAIN CONTROVERSIES – CIVIL LIBERTIES: 1. Is it ever OK to restrict them? - Regular every day life v. war time 2. What is constitutional and what isn’t? - Flag Burning v. Draft Card Burning - Court precedent

9. II. CIVIL RIGHTS: 1. DEFINITION: The right of every person to be treated equally under the law – protection from discrimination 2) Focus on groups: - Focus on making sure different groups are treated equally by govt and other groups - Birthright citizenship and Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment - Sometimes it is ok to discriminate - under 21 no alcohol – rational basis, intermediate, and strict scrutiny tests Group

10. 3) CIVIL RIGHTS EXAMPLES: Civil Rights Movements • Former slaves • African Americans • Hispanic Americans • Native Americans • Asian Americans • Women • People with disabilities • Homosexuals • Elderly

11. 4. Discrimination in terms of Civil Rights: • Found in the Strict Scrutiny, Intermediate, and Rational Basis Tests.

12. a. STRICT SCRUTINY TEST Grutterv. Bollinger (2003) state’s interest in racial diversity in higher education was compelling and that the admissions policy that promoted diversity at U. Michigan’s law school program were narrowly tailored. STRICT SCRUTINY TEST – 1) Is unequal treatment justified by a “compelling state Interest?” Is unequal treatment the “least restrictive” option. Cases involving “Suspect Classification. “ (race, ethnicity, creed, or national origin) IF YES TO BOTH then discrimination is legal. Few cases fit this standard. Gratz v. Bollinger (2003) court struck down Michigan’s undergraduate admissions policy for not being narrowly tailored. IF NOT, then discrimination is illegal.

13. Grutter vs. Bollinger 2003 Does the University of Michigan Law School's use of racial preferences in student admissions violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment or Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964? • No. In a 5-4 opinion delivered by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, the Court held that the Equal Protection Clause does not prohibit the Law School's narrowly tailored use of race in admissions decisions to further a compelling interest in obtaining the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body. The Court reasoned that, because the Law School conducts highly individualized review of each applicant, no acceptance or rejection is based automatically on a variable such as race and that this process ensures that all factors that may contribute to diversity are meaningfully considered alongside race. Justice O'Connor wrote, "in the context of its individualized inquiry into the possible diversity contributions of all applicants, the Law School's race-conscious admissions program does not unduly harm nonminority applicants."

14. Gratz vs. Bollinger 2003 Does the University of Michigan’s use of racial preferences in undergraduate admissions violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment or Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964? • Yes.Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist delivered the opinion for the 6-3 majority. The Court held that the OUA’s policies were not sufficiently narrowly tailored to meet the strict scrutiny standard. Because the policy did not provide individual consideration, but rather resulted in the admission of nearly every applicant of “underrepresented minority” status, it was not narrowly tailored in the manner required by previous jurisprudence on the issue.

15. b. INTERMEDIATE SCRUTINY TEST Michael M. v. Superior Court (1981) court upheld California law that states men but not women could be guilty of statutory rape. State had a strong interest in preventing illegitimate pregnancy and in punishing only the participant who, by nature, suffers few of the consequences of his conduct. IF YES TO BOTH, then discrimination is legal. Some discrimination based on gender is permitted, but this test is harder to pass than the rational basis test applied to gender cases in the past. Is the discriminatory policy substantially related to an important government objective Is the discrimination no greater than to achieve this objective. Cases involving sex or gender inequality. IF NOT, then discrimination is illegal. United States v. Virginia (1996) struck down Virginia Military Institute’s male only admission policy as a violation of the 14th amendment.

16. c. RATIONAL BASIS TEST Various state supreme courts have upheld the 21 year old drinking age that applies equally to men and women on the rational basis that the law may help prevent drunk driving among that age group. IF YES TO BOTH, then discrimination is legal. This is the easiest hurdle for a law or policy to pass. 1) Is the law rationally related to an legitimate governmental objective 2) Does the policy avoid arbitrary, capricious, or deliberate discrimination. Cases involving age, economic status or other criteria . Craig v. Boren (1976) struck down and Oklahoma law that allowed 18-20 year old women to buy 3.2% beer rejecting O.K.’s rational basis and replacing it with intermediate scrutiny. IF NOT, then discrimination is illegal.

17. Get out your Ch’s 4-5 Notes right now and go to page 2. • Take a look at my agenda for the date of the next exam.

18. 5) Compelling Government Interest Courts haven’t adequately defined it, but it refers to something crucial that can be furthered only by the law in question. Examples: Drinking ages, driving ages, etc.

19. 6) MAIN CONTROVERSY – CIVIL RIGHTS: 1. Equality of Opportunity vs. Equalityof Outcome 2 . How involved should the government be in ensuring advancement of minority groups?

20. 7. Affirmative Action: a. Definition: The practice of improving the educational and job opportunities of members of groups that have not been treated fairly in the past because of their race, sex, etc. b. In 1965, President Johnson required federal agencies and government contractors to provide written proposals regarding the hiring of certain numbers of members of various minority groups. c. The practice grew under Nixon. d. Different Forms: 1. Extra effort to recruit particular minority groups for employment or college admission 2. Using gender or race as a “plus factor” in applications

21. 8) The Supreme Court’s involvement with Affirmative Action has been most prominent in University of California Regents v. Bakke. a. Allan Bakke, a white student, sued when he was not granted admission into medical school. He demonstrated that his grade point average and entrance exam scores were higher than those of some of the minority students who were accepted to the program via affirmative action directives. b. The Court sided with Bakke, deciding that racial quotas are unconstitutional, but allowed race to be used as a “plus factor” in efforts to increase diversity on campuses. 9) Many see these efforts as “reverse discrimination.” 10) Many states, including Nebraska in 2008, passed ballot initiatives effectively banning affirmative action.

22. 11) MAIN CONTROVERSY – CIVIL LIBERTIES &CIVIL RIGHTS: • Do the protections in the founding documents that apply to the Federal Government also apply to State Governments? - Chief Justice John Marshall declares that the rights in the Founding Documents only apply to Federal Government (Barron v. Baltimore, 1833) - Reinforces The Founders feelings on BIG government and Slavery

23. 12) IMPACT OF THE CIVIL WAR: A) 13th AMENDMENT – 1865 • Slavery Ends but certain states deny citizenship rights to freed slaves/African Americans B) 14th AMENDMENT, Section 1 – 1868 • “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. • 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.”

24. C) 15th AMENDMENT – 1870 right to vote can’t be denied because of race or status as former slave D) HOWEVER: - States work around the 14th and 15th with literacy tests, poll taxes, grandfather clauses etc. - Courts do not intercede further regarding voting until 1950s/1960s

25. 13 AND 14) 14th Amendment – Selective Incorporation Selective Incorporation The practice of the U.S. Supreme Court in selecting some of the rights and liberties in the Bill of Rights considered "fundamental," and enforcing them against states. Achieved through court cases which set precedent

26. 15) HOW CIVIL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES BECAMEAPPLICABLE TO THE STATES:Gitlow v. New York - 1925 - Facts • Gitlow, a socialist, was arrested for • distributing copies of a "left-wing manifesto" that called for the establishment of socialism through strikes and class action of any form. • Gitlow was convicted under a state criminal anarchy law, which punished advocating the overthrow of the government by force. • Constitutional Question: • Does the First Amendment apply to the states? • Ruling: • Yes, by virtue of the liberty protected by due process that no state shall deny. Gitlow’s conviction is upheld (see next page “dangerous tendency” test). • Justification • 14th Amendment • Due Process Clause • Significance • Opens the gates for Selective Incorporation

27. Dangerous Tendency Test: Speech/Publication may be forbidden if the action is dangerous to public security, even though there is no clear/present danger.

28. FREEDOM OF RELIGION – 1ST AMENDMENT:

29. 2. Should tax $ be used to fund private/religious schools? a) Lemon Test (Lemon v. Kurtzman 1971): 1. Must have a secular legislative purpose - clear 2. Cannot advance or inhibit religion - clear 3. Cannot foster an excessive government entanglement with religion – vague 3) Accommodationist’ Perspective- 1984 a. Lynch v. Donnelly - Pawtucket Rhode Island - Nativity scene in a public park provided by a non for profit was allowed – Sets Precedent • “The Constitution does not require complete separation of church and state; it affirmatively mandates accommodation, not merely tolerance, of all religions, and forbids hostility toward any.” b. Tax Dollar Subsidies or School Vouchers to families for tuition costs at private schools. - School Choice allows individuals to choose among options, but the voucher system must be completely neutral in its structure, that is, it must not steer children toward religious schools.

30. c. Other Cases • Everson v. Board of Education 1947 • Upheld New Jersey policy of reimbursing parents of Catholic School students for the costs of busing their children to school. • Engel v. Vitale- 1962 • School-sanctioned prayer in public schools is unconstitutional • Abington School District v. Schempp - 1963 • Struck down Pennsylvania law requiring the reading of a bible passage at the beginning of each day. • Edwards v. Aguillard - 1987 • Louisiana could not force public schools that taught evolution to also teach creationism • Board of Education of Westside community Schools v. Mergens 1990 • Upheld Equal Access Act of 1984 which required public secondary schools to provide religious groups the same access to facilities that other extracurricular groups had. • Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe 2000 • Overturned Texas law allowing high school students to read a prayer at athletic events such as football games

31. B. FREE EXERCISE CLAUSE: Compelling Government Interest the government’s reasons for action are necessary and outweigh an individual’s constitutional rights

32. 2) Free Exercises Cases a. Reynolds v. United States 1878: - Upheld federal law prohibiting polygamy even though Reynolds, a Mormon from Utah, claimed that the law limited his religious freedom.

34. b) Sherbert v. Verner 1963:

35. c) Wisconsin v. Yoder 1972 • Wi could not require Amish parents to send their children to public school beyond 8th grade because it would violate long held religious beliefs

36. d) Employment Division v. Smith 1990 (Oregon v. Smith)

37. e) City of Boerne, Texas v. Flores 1997 • 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act – people have the right to practice religious activities unless prohibited by laws that are narrowly tailored and the government can show a compelling interest – Ruled Unconstitutional Archbishop Flores was prevented from expanding his church under the RFSA since he could do it at another site in town. The compelling interest was the historic preservation of downtown Boerne.

38. IV. CIVIL RIGHTS ERAS: A) Three ways to change ways groups are treated

39. B) 3 Eras to consider (in addition to current issues) 1. Truman Era- Modest civil rights legislation: a. Established Committee on Civil Rights - Recommended ending Jim Crow b. Executive Order banned segregation in Air Force c. Sweatt v. Painter 1950 - Sweatt denied admission Univ. of Texas Law School because of race – courts ruled that this violated Equal Protection of 14th Am. - Ended separate but equal in professional schools and played a role in Brown v. Board Truman’s actions split the Democratic Party and created the Dixiecrats

40. 2. Eisenhower Era a. Appointed Earl Warren to the SC – EW wanted the court to address civil rights b. Brown v. Board – desegregated public schools. - NAACP becomes very prominent under Thurgood Marshall c. Civil Rights Act 1957 - created to enforce African-American voting rights in the South and put measures in place to prevent mob violence in school desegregation disputes - 1st CRL since the Civil War d. Civil Rights Act 1960 - passed to help stop violence in the south against potential black voters. It authorized the U.S. Attorney General and the Justice department to appoint referees to investigate allegations of voting fraud and obstruct persons from votingand introduced penalties.

41. 3. Kennedy-Johnson Era - Emphasis on Racial Discrimination outside of schools/voting a. Civil Rights Act 1964 - provided African-American men with protected voting rights, banned discrimination in public facilities, and established equal employment opportunity. - Created the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), withheld federal funds from discriminating institutions, and authorized the Justice Department to initiate suits to desegregate public schools and facilities. b. 24th Amendment - Ended the poll tax c. Voting Rights Act 1965 - Enforced the 24th and the 15th Amendments. Ended Literacy Test - Provided federal registration - Extremely effective - black voter registration increased sharply. d. Civil Rights Act 1968 - This act made racial discrimination in housing illegal and provided protection for civil rights workers. AKA Fair Housing Act of 1968.

42. V. The Context of Civil Rights A. Native Americans 1. Native Americans were systematically removed from their lands and often eradicated. 2. Brought to reservations, prevented from voting until 1924 3. Most treaties that Native Americans signed with the U.S. government were broken or ignored

43. B. Latinos 1. Latinos’early history with the United States starts with the Mexican– American War, which lasted from 1846 to 1848. 2. Mexicans have resided in large numbers in the Southwest, where the war took place. C. Women 1. The Constitution did not give women the right to vote until the 19th Amendment was ratified in 1920. 2. The rationale was paternalistic: the idea that women were better off not engaging in politics 3. The Constitution did not give women the right to vote until the 19th Amendment was ratified in 1920. 4. The rationale was paternalistic: the idea that women were better off not engaging in politics

44. VII. The Racial Divide Today 1. The general conditions for racial minorities are not as good as they are for whites. 2. Politically: a. Voter turnout is lower among most racial minority groups, partly due to practices designed to depress turnout. - Reducing polling areas - Redistricting - Voter ID laws?

45. ADDITIONAL CASES TO KNOW 1. Roe v Wade 1973 A woman's right to an by the 14th Amendment. The decision gave a woman total autonomy over the pregnancy during the first trimester and defined different levels of state interest for the second and third trimesters. 2. Near v. Minnesota 1931 The Supreme Court recognized the freedom of the press rejecting prior restraints on publication. Prior restraint is suppression of publication on the grounds that it might be libelous or harmful. 3. Griswold v. Connecticut 1965 The Constitution implies a right to privacy in matters of contraception between married people.Though it doesn’t explicitly protect a general right to privacy, various guarantees within the BOR create penumbras, or zones, establishing a right to privacy. Together, the 1st, 3rd, 4th, and 9th Amendments, create a new constitutional right, the right to privacy in marital relations. abortion fell within the right to privacy (recognized in Griswold v. Connecticut) protected

46. 4. Miller v. California 1973 Supreme Court held that distribution of obscene materials did not enjoy First Amendment protection. 5. Mapp v. Ohio 1961 Extended the 4th amendment right against illegal search and seizure to the states. 6. Gideon v. Wainwright 1963 Extended the 6th Amendment right of a defendant to have an attorney in a felony case to the states. 7. Miranda v. Arizona 1966 Miranda’s conviction was overturned on grounds that he was not informed of his 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination. Miranda warnings have become a standard feature of arrest procedures.