Civil Rights
Unit 8
Civil Rights…defined
• Rights granted by the government to
protect individuals from arbitrary or
discriminatory treatment
• Examples:
• Bear arms
• Due Process
• Amendments 4, 5, 6, 8
4th amendment
• 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.
• “One evening a student left a campus party, carrying a
bottle of gin. A university officer spotted the student
outside a dorm, arrested him for possessing liquor, and
asked to see his identification. The student asked the
officer to wait while he retrieved his wallet from his
dorm room. The officer, however, insisted on
accompanying the student to his dorm room, where he
leaned against the door jamb and the student went in.
From the doorway, the officer thought he saw some
marijuana and paraphernalia typically associated with
drug use. Without the student’s consent, and without a
warrant, the officer entered the room seized the
material, and arrested the student for drug
possession.”
• Epstein and Epstein. Constitutional Law for a Changing
America.
Reasonable Searches and Seizures
1. Searches based on a warrant
2. Searches incident to an arrest
3. Searches to insure that evidence is
not lost.
4. Searches based on consent.
5. Searches to ensure the safety of the
law official.
6. Searches in places that merit low
levels of constitutional protection.
During a routine traffic stop a Wyoming
Highway Patrol officer noticed a
hypodermic needle in the driver’s shirt
pocket. The driver admitted using the
needle to take illegal drugs. The officer
then searched the passenger
compartment for contraband, removing
and searching the purse of a passenger.
The officer found drugs in her purse and
arrested her, too. The passenger asked
the trial court to suppress all evidence
found in her purse, arguing that it was
illegal to search the purse of a passenger
for whom the police had no independent
probable cause.
• Law enforcement officers may lawfully
search the belongings of all passengers in a
car where there is probable cause to believe
there is evidence of criminal activity
• Wyoming v. Houghton, 526 U.S. 295 (1999).
• In Wyoming v. Houghton, the Supreme Court
held that when an officer has probable cause to
search a car, this inspection also includes the
belongings of passengers in the car because they
may contain the suspected items the officer has
reason to believe are in the car. Without any
distinction carved out as to ownership, the Court
in Ross concluded that “when there is probable
cause to search for contraband in a car, it is
reasonable for police officers…to examine
packages and containers without a showing of
individualized probable cause for each one.” The
Court also stated that there is a reduced
expectation of privacy with passengers and their
belongings when they transport them in the
public.
Searches with a warrant
Illinois v Gates (1983)
• Question: Can a warrant be issued on an
anonymous tip?
• Precedence: Aguilar-Spinelli test required a
reliable source for a warrant
• Ruling: Search was legal
• ”Totality of the circumstances” test…
• A warrant can be issued if there is a:
• Nontechnical, but factual and practical
consideration of everyday life
Requirements for a warrant
Generally include:
• A probable cause
• A defined location to be searched
• A timely and orderly execution of the
warrant
• Guarantee that only specified evidence
will be taken
• Unless contraband is found
Warrantless searches
Chimel v. California (1969)
• Question: Was the warrantless search
legal?
• Ruling: Search was illegal
• The house was not under immediate control
of the suspect
Warrantless searches
Cupp v. Murphy (1973)
• Question: Was the warrantless seizure
legal?
• Ruling: Search was legal
• Evidence could be lost
Warrantless searches
Terry v. Ohio (1968)
• Question: Was the warrantless search & frisk
legal?
• Ruling: Search was legal
• Safety of the officer
U.S. v. Ross (1982)
• Question: Was the warrantless search of the
car legal?
• Ruling: Search was legal
• Contraband in plain view gives probable cause
Plain View Doctrine
Requirements:
1.Officer must be legally allowed to be present
2.No technological advancements may be used
3.Discovery must be by chance
• Defined by:
• Arizona v. Hicks (1987)
• Horton v. California (1990)
Requirements for a warrantless search
1. S & S can be done immediately
2. S & S can be done only on an area
under immediate control of the suspect
3. S & S must relate to:
• Incident to an arrest
• Preserve evidence
• Safety of an officer
• Plain view doctrine
Student searches
New Jersey v. TLO (1985)
• HISTORY:
• TLO caught smoking in the bathroom
• Purse searched by administrator
• Discovered drug paraphernalia
• Ruling: S & S was legal
• School needs “reasonable suspicion” to search
• Scope of search must be “reasonable” based
on situation
• Need to maintain discipline
Student searches
Vernonia School v. Acton (1995)
• History: Drug testing student-athletes
• Ruling: S & S was legal
• Athletes: Right to Privacy reduced
• Agreed to regulations of team
• Minimal invasion of privacy
• Important need for search
• Deter drug use
• Safety of athletes
5th amendment
• No person shall…be subject for the
same offence to be twice put in
jeopardy…no shall be compelled in any
criminal case to be a witness against
himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty,
or property, without due process…nor
shall private property be taken for
public use, without just compensation.
5th amendment
• Issues:
• Double Jeopardy
• Self-incrimination
• Exclusionary rule
• Eminent domain
Self-incrimination
Miranda v. Arizona (1966)
• History:
• Police obtained from Miranda a signed confession of rape
• Miranda was not made aware of his 5th amendment rights
• Question:
• Did the interrogation without notification of rights violate the
5th?
• Ruling: Yes…
• A person must be informed of their rights prior to
any interrogation
Double Jeopardy
US v. Halper (1989)
• “This Court protects against three
distinct abuses:
• a second prosecution for the same offense
after acquittal;
• a second prosecution for the same offense
after conviction;
• and multiple punishments for the same
offense.”
Exclusionary Rule
Evidence obtained from an illegal search
is inadmissible in court.
Defined by:
• Weeks v. US (1914)
• Mapp v. Ohio (1961)
6th amendment
• In all criminal prosecutions, the
accused shall enjoy the right a speedy
and public trial, by an impartial
jury…and to be informed of the nature
and cause of the accusation…and to
have the assistance of counsel for his
defense
6th amendment
• Issues:
• Speedy & public trial
• Right to a jury
• Awareness of rights
• Right to counsel
Right to counsel
Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
• History:
• Gideon was charged with stealing
• He requested (and was denied) a lawyer be provided
• Question:
• Did the denial of counsel violate Gideon’s 6th amendment
rights?
• Ruling: Yes…
• "lawyers in criminal courts are necessities, not
luxuries.“ (Justice Black)
Civil Rights Movement
Desegregation of schools
Brown v. Board of Ed (1954)
• Court mandates that schools desegregate
• Racial segregation in public education has a detrimental
effect on minority children because it is interpreted as a
sign of inferiority. (www.oyez.org)
Brown v. Board of Ed II (1955)
• Chief Justice Warren urged localities to
act…"with all deliberate speed."
(www.oyez.org)
• Impact…”Little Rock Nine”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSdLP
NQSa4k
Civil Rights Movement
24th Amendment &
The Civil Rights Act of 1964
• Called for by Kennedy; supported by King
Actions:
• Outlawed discrimination in voting & employment
• Outlawed segregation of public facilities involved in
interstate commerce
• Authorizes Justice Depart to enforce laws
• Withholds fed funds from discriminatory state
programs
Civil Rights Movement
Implementation
Swann v. Mecklenburg Bd. Of Ed (1971)
History
• 14,000 black students attended schools that were either totally
black or more than 99 percent black.
Question
• Were federal courts constitutionally authorized to oversee and
produce remedies for state-imposed segregation?
Ruling:
• The use of mathematical ratios or quotas were
legitimate "starting points“
• No rigid guidelines could be established concerning
busing of students
• (www.oyez.org)
• Outlaws de jure and de facto discrimination
Civil Rights Movement
Affirmative Action
Univ of Cal. v. Bakke (1978)
• History:
• U of Cal reserved 16 spots for black students
• Bakke was rejected from admission to med school even
though he had higher scores than the blacks admitted
• Question:
• Did the universities admission policies violate the 14th
amendment and the 1964 Civil Rights Act?
• Ruling:
• Strict quota systems are unconstitutional
• Race can play a factor in admission
Women’s Movement
The Early Years
Background…
• (1848) Seneca Falls Convention calls for:
• Abolition of slavery
• Temperance
• Education for women
• Equal rights of citizenship
• (1890) Women’s suffrage movement
begins during Progressive era
• Results in the 19th amendment (1920)
Women’s Movement
1960s & 1970s
Focus is on…
Equality in the workplace; politics; judicial system
Major events:
• Kennedy’s Commission on the status of Women (1961)
• Betty Friedan’s The Feminine Mystique (1963)
• Civil Rights Act (1964)
• Griswold v. Connecticut (1965)
• Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) (1972)
• Title IX (1972)
Griswold v. Connecticut (1965)
History:
• State regulations prevented contraception advice and
distribution to married people
Ruling:
• 1, 3, 4, & 9th amendments create right to
privacy therefore the regulations are
unconstitutional
Why the ERA Failed
“Equality of rights…shall not be
denied…on account of sex.” (ERA, 1972)
1. Southern Resistance
• Conservative values
2. Tactics of Demonstrators
• Radical and Offensive
3. Conservative Female Opposition
• Challenge Traditional Role
4. Women in the Draft
Kathrine Switzer
1967 Boston Marathon
“The reason other women weren't there is that they
hadn't had the same opportunities that I'd had.”
Title IX
No person in the United States,
shall on the basis of sex, be
excluded from participation in,
be denied the benefits of, or be
subjected to discrimination
under any educational program
or activity receiving federal
financial assistance.
COMPLIANCE WITH TITLE IX
Prong 1: Substantial Proportionality: Athletic
participation opportunities for men and women
must be substantially proportionate to their
undergraduate enrollments.
Prong 2: History and Continuing Practice:
Institutions must show a history and continuing
practice of program expansion that is responsive
to the interests of the underrepresented gender,
usually female athletes.
Prong 3: Accommodating Interests and
Abilities: Institutions must meet the interests
and abilities of its female students even where
there are disproportionately fewer female
students than male students participating in
sports.
Roe v. Wade (1973)
History:
• Norma McCorvey (Roe) sought an abortion in Texas
Question:
• Does the Constitution protect the right to have an abortion?
Ruling:…Trimester test (7-2)
• 1-3 Months: States cannot regulate
• 4-6 months: States can regulate in the
interest of the health of the mother
• 7-9 months: States can regulate to protect
the potentiality of human life
Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992)
History:
• PA restrictions (parental consent & notification of the
father)
Question:
• Are the restrictions permitted under Roe?
Ruling: “Undue Burden” Test (5-4)
• Regulations will not be allowed if they pose an
“undue burden” a on women’s right to privacy.
• "substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking
an abortion before the fetus attains viability.”
Stenberg v. Carhart (2000)
History:
• Nebraska banned partial birth abortions
Question:
• Does the ban violate 14th amendment rights?
Ruling: Yes (5-4)
1. Law is too vague.
2. Law bars a procedure deemed as safe by a
“significant body of medical opinion.”
3. Law does not recognize that the procedure
can be used in an emergency to protect the
health of the mother.
Gonzales v. Carhart (2007)
History:
• Congress banned partial birth abortions in 2003
Question:
• Does the ban violate 14th amendment rights?
Ruling: NO (5-4)
• No “undue burden” on women.
• Has an exception for the health of the mother.
• The new act is not vague.
The Supreme Court in 2000 &2007
Thomas
Scalia
Kennedy
Died 2005
Souter
Stevens
Ginsberg
Breyer
Retired 2006
Rehnquist
O’Connor
Bush
Appointees
Roberts
Alito