ROLES, RIGHTS & RESPONSIBILITIES OF CITIZENS
SS.7.C.2.1: Define the term "citizen," and identify legal means of becoming a United States citizen.
Citizen: a native or naturalized member of a state or nation who owes allegiance to its government and is entitled to its protection.
You can become an U.S. citizen by birth, through a process called "naturalization," through "derivative citizenship," or through "acquired citizenship."
Naturalization: A process where you show Immigration – the government agency that regulates questions of citizenship -- that you meet certain legal requirements for becoming a U.S. citizen is called
"naturalization."
You must have "good moral character" to become a naturalized U.S. citizen. This does not necessarily mean the same as a "good person," as opposed to a "bad person." This is only a legal phrase. You might know a person whom you think of as a "good person" but Immigration might consider this person to lack
"good moral character" and deny him or her citizenship. “Good moral character” is not the only requirement for naturalization.
If a person meets all the naturalization requirements, they can apply for naturalization. Immigration will send out an interview notice several months after the naturalization application is filed. During the interview, Immigration will go over the application to make sure the citizenship answers are correct.
English skills and an understanding of U.S. history and government are tested. If either the English or
U.S. history or government tests are failed, a second interview will be scheduled 3 months later to allow more time to study. If the second interview is failed, citizenship will be denied. Filing again is acceptable, but fees will need to be paid once again.
If the tests are passed during the first or second interview, Immigration will set an appointment to be
"sworn in" as a U.S. citizen. This appointment might take several months, but once a person is sworn in, they are a citizen of the United States.
If you are in, or have been in, active duty service in the U.S. Armed Forces, you will want to find out more about the naturalization requirements and if any of the exceptions to the requirements might apply to you.
Derivative Citizenship through their parents' naturalization, some children become U.S. citizens automatically, or "derivatively." Laws about "derivative citizenship" vary depending upon the date the parent(s) were naturalized. Children become U.S. citizens derivatively through their parents' naturalization as long as all of the following requirements are met before the child's 18th birthday.
At least one parent is a U.S. citizen, the child is under 18 years of age, and the child is admitted to the
United States as an immigrant.
Acquired Citizenship A child might have "acquired" U.S. citizenship at birth without knowing, or without the parents knowing, if they were born outside the United States and either parent was a U.S. citizen when the child was born. This might also be true even if neither parent was born in the United States, but one or more of the grandparents were. This is an extremely complicated area of immigration law.
1

SS.7.C.2.2: Evaluate the obligations citizens have to obey laws, pay taxes, defend the nation, and serve on juries Pgs.: 65
SS.7.C.2.3: Experience the responsibilities of citizens at the local, state, or federal levels. Correlating to benchmark SS.7.C.2.2. Pgs.:80 Q 7-8
SS.7.C.2.14: Conduct a service project to further the public good.
The United States government recognizes a citizen as a legal member of the nation who is either born or naturalized in the United States. Being a U.S. citizen means that there are both obligations and responsibilities that must be met, in order to maintain representative democracy and the proper role of government. An obligation is an action that a citizen is required to fulfill by law. A responsibility is an action that a citizen should take for the sake of the common good . Below are examples of obligations and responsibilities:
Obligations of Citizens
An action that is required by law
Obeying laws
Paying taxes
Defending the nation
Registering for selective service
Serving on juries
Responsibilities of Citizens
An action that benefits the community/people
Voting
Attending civic meetings
Petitioning the government
Running for office
Performing community service
Each citizen in the United States has certain obligations and responsibilities .
Both the government and citizens are responsible for protecting the rights of individuals and for promoting the common good (benefits to the community/people).
When citizens fulfill their obligations to the government they are making the United
States a safer and better place to live. By following the law and not committing crimes, communities are less dangerous places. By paying taxes, citizens are ensuring that the government can afford to provide services that benefit the general public. By choosing to defend the nation, citizens are making sure that those who live in the United States are protected against enemies. And finally, by serving on juries, citizens are making sure that the right to a trial by jury is protected. All of these examples demonstrate how citizens, by fulfilling their obligations, can protect and promote the common good . See the chart below for more examples:
Citizen Obligation
Obeying the laws
Paying taxes
Jury duty
How the Obligation Relates to the Common Good
Obeying laws keeps order so that people are safe
Taxes pay for large programs that benefit everyone (roads, schools and libraries, among others)
By participating in jury duty, one is protecting the
Constitutional right to be tried by one’s peers.
2

Defending the nation
Responsibilities of a
Citizen
Voting
Attending civic meetings
Petitioning the government
Community service
Defending the nation benefits the entire country and protects the nation.
How the Responsibility Relates to the Common Good
Voting relates to the common good because voting is one way for citizen views to be heard by representatives of the people.
By at tending civic meetings one is able to have one’s voice heard by public officials.
Petitioning the government allows one to voice one’s opinion to the government.
Community service helps the common good. It benefits everyone when a citizen sees a need in their community and takes an extra step to find the solution.
Each citizen has certain basic obligations and responsibilities that relate to active participation in society and government. Active participation happens when a citizen is actively participating to help maintain promote the common good .
Active participation comes in many different forms for both obligations and responsibilities. Obeying the laws, registering for selective service , defending our nation, serving on juries and paying taxes are all obligations and examples of active participation in the society and government. Registering to vote, attending civic meetings, joining interest groups, joining a political party, running for office, and petitioning the government are all responsibilities of good citizens and are examples of active participation in the society and government.
A citizen is a legally recognized and protected member of a country. In the
United States, citizens have both obligations and responsibilities . In a democracy, the people actively participate in government and make decisions to promote the common good . Examples of contributions that citizens can make, as related to obligations and responsibilities, include:
Obeying laws (obligation)
– there are federal, state, and local laws that everyone has to follow.
Paying taxes (obligation) – there are federal, state, and local taxes that everyone must pay. Taxes pay for different services.
Jury duty (obligation)
– the right to a trial by jury is a guarantee for the people; it is an obligation for citizens to serve on juries.
Defending the nation (obligation) – all males between the ages of 18-25 have to register for selective service (this does not mean they are automatically active in the military; instead, this means that they may be called up in an emergency draft situation).
Voting (responsibility) – voting is important to the function of a democracy. Voting gives citizens the opportunity to be heard by government and to express their points of view about candidates.
3

Attending civic meetings (responsibility)
– when one attends civic meetings, one can become a more informed citizen, which is important in a democracy.
Petitioning the government (responsibility) – petitioning the government is a freedom listed in the First Amendment to the Constitution. This freedom allows individuals to tell the government what they believe the government should do, such as asking U.S. Senators to vote to ratify a treaty.
Running for office (responsibility)
– running for office provides citizens an opportunity to become involved in the government and represent their community.
Community service (responsibility) – performing community service provides an opportunity for people to see problems in their community and help to fix them.
If citizens did not fulfill their responsibilities , the United States would be a very different place.
Responsibilities of a
Citizen
Voting
Attending civic
What are the Consequences if People do not Fulfill this
Responsibility?
If people do not vote, the government will only represent those people who do vote.
If people do not attend civic meetings, it is more difficult to meetings
Petitioning the government
Community service get involved and know what is happening in the community and government.
If people choose not to exercise this freedom, the government will assume that the people are happy with the government’s decisions.
If people choose not to offer community or volunteer services, problems can get overlooked and people who need help will not get their needs met.
Vocab citizen - a legal member of a state and/or country common good - beliefs or actions that are seen as a benefit to the larger community rather than individual interests, also known as the public good obligation - something a person is required to do responsibility - something a person should do naturalized - a person that has gone through the process by which an immigrant becomes a citizen selective service - a system by which men ages 18 through 25 register with the U.S. government for military service
4

SS.7.C.2.4: Evaluate rights contained in the Bill of Rights and other amendments to the Constitution.
Pgs.: 192 Q 7-8, 422
The Bill of Rights includes the first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
The Bill of Rights was added to the U.S. Constitution in 1791, two years after the U.S.
Constitution was ratified . These amendments define individual freedoms, rights of those accused of a crime, and protections from the federal government.
The First Amendment includes five individual freedoms. Those freedoms are the right to free speech, press, religious exercise, peaceable assembly, and petitioning the government. Freedom of speech allows individuals to express their opinions. This includes speech that may criticize the government or government officials. Freedom of the press allows individuals to publish or print information. Freedom of religious exercise allows individuals to practice their religion freely or to choose not to practice a religion at all. Freedom to peaceably assemble is the ability to peacefully gather in groups. These groups can include those meeting to publicly demonstrate ideas or beliefs, such as a protest. Freedom to petition allows individuals to express their concerns with the government. A petition may formally ask the government for a policy change and may include the signatures of those who support those changes.
There are three categories of rights, freedoms and protections listed in the Bill of
Rights .
The first are individual freedoms as stated in the First Amendment: free speech , press , religious exercise , peaceable assembly , and petition .
The second category is the rights of those accused of a crime. Search and seizure occurs when police believe that a crime has been committed. Police conduct a search to seize (collect) evidence that may have to do with the crime. Protection from unreasonable search and seizure means that police must have a reason and in most cases a warrant from a judge to search a person’s personal property, home or body that may include their car, home, locker, backpack or purse belonging to the accused person. Rights of those accused of a crime also include the right to due process of law . Due process means that one cannot have their life, liberty or property taken without appropriate legal procedures and protections. Pleading the Fifth , or protection against self-incrimination , means that those accused of crimes may refuse to testify against themselves in a court of law. Pleading the Fifth prevents anything that a person may say to be used as evidence against them to convict them of a crime. Double jeopardy is also protected by the Bill of Rights. If evidence is found after an accused person is foun d “not guilty” of a crime, that person cannot be brought back to stand trial for the same crime. The right to legal counsel (lawyer) allows all people accused of a crime to have legal representation in court. Trial by jury is an additional right protected by the
Bill of Rights. Protection of trial by jury means that a judge and jury must decide the issue based on the facts and evidence of a criminal case. Further, persons accused of a crime are protected against cruel and unusual punishment which may include torture or other forms of punishment considered too harsh for the crime committed. The constitutionality of the death penalty has long been questioned as to whether it should be considered cruel and unusual punishment.
The third category is protection from government abuse of power. Such matters may deal with property rights , voting rights or the right to protect oneself. For example,
5

Wisconsin v. Yoder
(1972)
New York
Times v.
Sullivan
(1964)
Cox v.
Louisiana
(1964)
Brown v.
Glines
(1980)
Furman v.
Georgia
(1972) the right to bear arms is included in this category. The right to bear arms means that one is able to own and carry weapons, such as owning and carrying a gun for selfprotection. Eminent domain allows the government to take private property (property owned by people organizations or companies) for public use although the owner must be compensated (paid) fairly for it. A good example of this is if a road needs to be expanded and someone’s property is in the path of the road. The government must pay the owner for the land that will be taken by the government for expanding the road. The
Ninth Amendment gives the people unenumerated rights or rights that are not be listed in the Constitution. Unenumerated rights include privacy rights which, while not listed in the Constitution, belong to the people. Equal protection under the law guarantees citizens protection from states treating them in a way that denies them their rights under federal law. The 15th, 19th, 24th and 26th Amendments each deal with suffrage . Each amendment deals with a different aspect of suffrage; the 15th Amendment protects the voting rights of African-American men, the 19th Amendment
The rights contained in the Bill of Rights have been evaluated by the U.S.
Supreme Court based on cases that have come before the Court. Since 1803, the U.S.
Supreme Court has had the power to declare federal, state and local laws unconstitutional . However, the U.S. Supreme Court does not evaluate laws unless a challenge to the constitutionality of those laws is brought before the Court and the Court has agreed to hear the case.
Below are some scenarios that the U.S. Supreme Court has considered that deal with rights protected by the Bill of Rights.
Case Name Scenario Right Protected by the
Bill of Rights being
Challenged
Yates v.
U.S. (1957)
Speech The First Amendment protects radical speech if it does not present a “clear and present danger”.
Free exercise of religion
Press
A Wisconsin law requiring that students attend school until age 16 violates the free exercise freedoms of the Amish.
The first Amendment protects the publication of all statements, including false statements, about the behavior of public officials except when the statements are made knowing that they are false.
Peaceable assembly The First Amendment protects peaceable assembly even when the demonstration may cause violence.
Petition the government
Cruel and unusual punishment
Military staff may be required to seek approval of military base commanders before sending petitions to members of Congress.
The death penalty may not be imposed in a racially discriminatory manner such that a higher percentage of African-American defendants are sentenced to death compared with the percentage of white defendants committing the same crimes.
6

Palko v.
Connecticut
(1937)
Double jeopardy A person convicted of second-degree murder may be later tried for first degree murder. Protection against double jeopardy was not found to be a fundamental right in this case.
Miranda v.
Arizona
(1966)
Self-incrimination/ pleading the fifth
Police who question individuals without notifying them of their right to counsel and their protection against self-incrimination are violating those persons’ Fifth Amendment right.
Mapp v.
Ohio (1961)
Unreasonable search and seizure
Evidence obtained through a search in violation of the Fourth Amendment cannot be admitted in a state criminal proceeding.
The wording of the Bill of Rights is not entirely clear. What is “speech”? “What is the freedomof religious exercise”? What does it mean to guarantee the right to counsel?
The U.S. Supreme Court has been asked to evaluate situations where individuals have questioned whether their rights guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution have been violated (abused) by a federal, state or local law or other government regulation.
Through evaluating these situations, the U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted what the
Bill of Rights and other amendments to the Constitution mean. Through these interpretations, the U.S. Supreme Court has recognized violations (abuses) of citizen and individual protections. And, these decisions have established precedents for future case decisions.
One key example is Tinker v. Des Moines (1969). Tinker v. Des Moines is a case that interpreted the First Amendment right to free speech to include “ symbolic speech
”. John and Mary Beth Tinker, who attended public school in Des Moines, Iowa, wanted to wear black armbands to school to protest the Vietnam War in 1965. The school did not allow students to wear black armbands, and the Tinkers were suspended. Their parents sued and the case was eventually heard by the U.S.
Supreme Court. The Court decided that the wearing of black armbands was a form of
“symbolic speech” or “political speech” that was protected by the “free speech” right in the First Amendment. The U.S. Supreme Court stated that denying students the right to wear the black armbands violated their free speech rights under the Bill of
Rights.
Miranda v. Arizona (1966) dealt with protection from self-incrimination or the right to plead the fifth . The police did not tell Miranda that he did not have to say anything to police when they questioned him. He confessed to a crime and the confession was used against him in court.
The U.S. Supreme Court stated that his confession could not be used against him in court because the police did not inform him of his protection from self-incrimination. As a result of this case, police must inform a person of their rights if they are arrested for committing a crime.
These rights are now called Miranda Rights.
7

Vocab cruel & unusual punishment - punishment prohibited by the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution; includes torture or other forms of punishment too severe for the crime committed double jeopardy - the prosecution of a defendant for a criminal offense for which he has already been tried; prohibited in the Fifth Amendment to the U. S. Constitution freedom of peaceable assembly - the right to hold meetings and form groups without interference by the government; guaranteed in the First Amendment freedom of press - the right of the press to write and print news and information free from government involvement; guaranteed in the First Amendment freedom of religious exercise - the right for citizens to practice the religion of their choice without government involvement; guaranteed in the First Amendment freedom of speech - the right for citizens to speak freely without government involvement; guaranteed in the
First
Amendment freedom to petition the government - the freedom for citizens to engage in any nonviolent, legal means of encouraging or disapproving government action, directed to the judicial, executive or legislative branch; guaranteed in the
First
Amendment pleading the fifth - the act of a person refusing to testify under oath in a court of law on the grounds that the answers could be used as evidence against him to convict him of a criminal offense search & seizure - the process by which police or other authorities who suspect that a crime has been committed do a search of a person's property and collect any relevant evidence to the crime; protection from illegal search and seizure is in the Fourth Amendment self-incrimination - the right in the Fifth Amendment that protects a person from being forced to reveal to the police, prosecutor, judge, or jury any information that might subject him or her to criminal prosecution unconstitutional - not in agreement with the U.S Constitution
8

SS.7.C.2.5: Distinguish how the Constitution safeguards and limits individual rights.
The writers of the U.S. Constitution wanted to create a federal government that was effective and powerful, but one that also safeguards the rights of individuals. The
U.S. Constitution establishes a system that protects the rights of individuals and in turn, limits the powers of the federal government. The Bill of Rights lists many individual rights and guarantees that the government will not interfere with these rights. Other individual rights safeguarded in the U.S. Constitution are located in Article I, Section 9.
These rights include the writ of habeas corpus and ex post facto laws .
Although the Constitution safeguards rights, it is reasonable and fair to place limits on most rights. This means that rights are not absolute and can be limited in certain situations. Over the years, courts in the United States have developed various guidelines for limiting individual rights. These guidelines are used to help decide when individual rights interfere with other important rights and interests, including the rights of other individuals. Citizens may not exercise their freedoms to the full extent that they might like because doing so would threaten the common good . Federal and state laws, and U.S. Supreme Court decisions, have all placed limitations on First Amendment freedoms in order to protect the public interest . Rights and freedoms have been safeguarded because they are a foundation of the system of government in the United
States while they are also limited in order to insure that the government is stable.
Freedom of expression includes the First Amendment rights of free speech, press, assembly, and petition. The unlimited right to free expression may be dangerous to public safety, national security, or other important interests. If the danger is great enough, the courts have allowed freedom of expression to be limited. Also, some rights may be limited when they conflict with other rights or with other important values and interests. In situations where the rights of one citizen may conflict with the rights of other citizens, limitations to protect everyone’s rights may be put into place.
In the landmark case Schenck v. U.S.(1919) , the Supreme Court set the precedent of the“balancing test.” This balancing test focuses on the relationship between individual rights and the public interest . Rights may be limited when the public interest is threatened or at risk. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on different occasions that the government may be allowed to limit individual rights in order to protect the public interest. In these situations, there must be a balance of individual rights , the rights of others, and the common good .
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the government sometimes may be allowed to limit individual rights , specifically freedom of speech and freedom of the press. In general, there must be a balance of individual rights, the rights of others, and the common good .
Listed below are additional conditions used to limit freedom of speech and freedom of the press.
* Clear and Present Danger
– Will this act of speech create a dangerous situation?
* Fighting Words – Will this act of speech create a violent situation?
* Libel – Is this information false or does it put true information appear false?
* Conflict with Government Interests – During times of war the government may limit
acts of speech due to national security.
9

One sce nario where the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Congress’ right to limit individual rights was in Schenck v. U.S. (1919). In this case, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the Espionage Act of 1917, legislation that limited free speech during World War
I . Charles Schenck was Secretary of the Socialist Party of America who printed and distributed 15,000 pamphlets to possible draftees (someone registered for selective service ) encouraging them not to fulfill their obligation of serving in the military during
World War I. Schenck argued that the Espionage Act of 1917 violated his First
Amendment freedom of speech by limiting what he could say about the war. The U.S.
Supreme Court upheld Schenck’s criminal conviction because, it argued, the First
Amendment does not protect speech that would create a “clear and present danger”. In this case, draftees who refused to be drafted to defend the nation during World War I would threaten the public interest because it would reduce the nation’s ability to defend itself.
The judicial branch plays an important role in how the government protects individual rights . The writers of the U.S. Constitution designed an independent judiciary where the judicial branch would have freedom from the executive and legislative branches. The U.S. Consti tution guaranteed that judges would serve “during good behavior” and would be protected from any decrease in their salaries. Both of these features prevent the other two branches from removing judges or decreasing their salaries if they don’t like a judge’s opinion (decision) on a case. This gave the judicial branch the freedom to make decisions based on the law and not based on pressure from the other two branches.
The writers of the U.S. Constitution wanted to create a federal government that was effective and powerful, but one that did not step on the rights of the individual. In
Article 1, Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution, there are two key individual rights that are protected, or safeguarded:
The first is in this statement:
"The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in
Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it."
Habeas corpus is an important individual right. This statement from Article I, Section 9 means that an authority has to prove to a court why it is holding someone. If the government cannot show why a person is being held in jail, that person must be released.
The second is in this statement:
"No… ex post facto Law shall be passed."
An ex post facto law is one that makes an act a crime after it has been committed.
The appellate process in the federal and state court systems also protect the rights of the individual. The appellate process allows citizens to appeal a decision from a lower court to a higher court to make sure that the trial was conducted properly.
By ensuring that the rights of individuals would be protected, this created a system where the powers of the federal government also became limited. The judicial branch interprets the U.S. Constitution and establishes guidelines and sets precedents on when and how individual rights are safeguarded and limited.
10

SS.7.C.3.6: Evaluate Constitutional rights and their impact on individuals and society.
The Bill of Rights protects individual rights. For example, the First Amendment includes the personal rights or personal freedoms that include religious exercise, peaceable assembly, speech, press and petition. Freedom of peaceable assembly is the right to hold meetings and form groups without interference by the government. An example of political rights is the freedom to petition the government to fix problems.
The Fifth Amendment protects citizens’ life, liberty, and property rights from inappropriate federal government action while the Fourteenth Amendment protects citizens’ life, liberty and property rights from inappropriate state government action.
Property rights include the right to own, produce, trade, purchase or use property.
Economic rights include the right to buy, sell, produce, trade, purchase or use goods and services. Economic rights also include rights related to employment.
The Fifth Amendment protects individuals from the federal government. The
Fourteenth Amendment protects individuals from the state governments. Some of these rights and protections include protection from illegal search and seizure , protection from cruel and unusual punishment , and the right not to be a witness against oneself, and the right to a jury trial, legal counsel, and due process .
Social, political, and economic systems rely on individual rights and freedoms.
In order for the government to represent the people well, the people’s right to express their opinion on issues and concerns to the government needs to be protected.
Freedom of the press would not be effective if there were no freedom of speech because the press gives the people a voice in expressing their concerns about government.
The economic system also depends on individual freedoms such as the freedom of individuals to build businesses and employ workers. One of the biggest challenges that citizens face is balancing the protection of individual rights and the need to protect society. Eminent domain gives government the right to take private property from individuals in order to benefit the public interest. Property taken from individuals under eminent domain requires a fair payment as stated in the Fifth Amendment .
The U.S. Supreme Court case Kelo v. City of New London (2005) focused on property rights . The city of New London, Connecticut wanted to use eminent domain to take private property for development of businesses. The city believed it was correct in taking the land because the public would benefit from economic freedom and the money earned from taxes. The Supreme Court upheld the city’s right of eminent domain and the city developed the land. The Court decided that, because the businesses would collect sales taxes and pay property taxes, the taking of the property from the owner was justified because the businesses would contribute to the public good by paying taxes.
In another event that took place in 1965, John Lewis and Hosea Williams committed civil disobedience by refusing to obey certain laws as a form of political protest. They were part of a larger group assembling and marching from Selma,
Alabama to Montgomery, Alabama to raise awareness about voting discrimination against African-Americans. The Alabama State Police gave the protesters a two-minute
11

warning to break up the group. Before the two minutes were up the police attacked the protesters.
In another case, President Franklin Roosevelt issued Executive Order 9066 during World War II. This order forced thousands of Japanese Americans into internment camps. Forced internment is the confinement or detainment of people especially during wartime. Fred Korematsu, an American citizen of Japanese descent, believed that he was discriminated against because of his Japanese heritage
(Korematsu was a U.S. citizen by birth). Korematsu also believed that the government did not have the right to force U.S. citizens into internment camps. In Korematsu v.
United States
(1944), the Supreme Court decided that the government’s view that the action was reasonable to protect society during wartime.
The Founding Fathers knew that the needs of the public could change over time. This knowledge gave the government the ability to keep or limit individual rights .
The government’s job is to protect both the Constitution and public interest even though there are some who argue that protecting the public interest may result in the loss of individual rights and others who argue that protecting individual rights may result in a loss to the public interest.
SS.7.C.3.7: Analyze the impact of the 13th, 14th, 15th, 19th, 24th, and 26th amendments on participation of minority groups in the American political process. Pgs.: 186, 187, 188, 309, 324 Q 7-8

The 13 th
Amendment, ratified in 1865, made slavery illegal in the United States.
While people were slaves, they were considered property; they were not considered citizens, and so therefore they could not vote. While this amendment did not extend voting rights, it was an important first step in expanding voting rights.

The 14 th
Amendment, ratified in 1868, stated that anyone born in the United
States was a citizen of the United States and that they had the same rights as any other citizen of the United States. This amendment established that anyone who had been born a slave was a citizen of the United States. The 14 th
Amendment also established that state governments could not pass laws that limi ted U.S. citizens’ rights. This Amendment also extended the right to vote to all males age 21 and over the right to vote. The impact of the 14 th
Amendment on various social movements was that the U.S. Constitution now protected all U.S. citizens (including former slaves) from state-level policies that discriminated against them because of their race. This meant that African-Americans and women could sue in court when they believed that state-level policies discriminated against them and violated their rights as U.S. citizens.
 
The 15 th
Amendment, ratified in 1870, stated specifically that race could not be a factor in denying someone the right to vote. This amendment protected the right to vote extended to any male over the age of 21 that was established with the
14 th
Amendment.

The ratification of the 13 th
, 14 th and 15 th amendments was not well received by the former slave states. In their efforts to keep African-Americans from voting, many of whom had been slaves, several southern states passed laws that made it very difficult, sometimes impossible, to vote. For example, in Alabama, African-
12

Americans were required to take a 68 question
“literacy” test that had to be answered completely in a short time, otherwise, those African-Americans would not be allowed to register to vote. Voter registration was a requirement. In
Mississippi, African-Americans were asked questions that had no correct answer, such as “How many seeds are in a watermelon?” Failing to answer the question correctly meant that these U.S. citizens were not allowed to register or vote.
States’ rights” was the argument they used
– that states could make their own laws regarding elections and voting, even if it made it impossible for people to actually register to vote.
The impact of the 13 th
, 14 th and 15 th amendments on various social movements included states being sued by individual citizens and interest groups because the state laws denied them their rights as U.S. citizens. Interest groups also organized marches and took part in civil disobedience as a way to protest these state policies. The number of protest activities and lawsuits against states increased dramatically beginning in the 1950s.
Even though the 15 th
Amendment was supposed to allow all races to vote, many states did everything they could to prevent African-Americans from voting.
Many Americans recognized that this was unfair, and several laws were passed during the 1960s to protect civil rights . The Civil Rights Acts of 1964 said employers could not discriminate based on race or gender. The Voting Rights
Act of 1965 banned racial discrimination in voting laws. This act specifically banned the use of literacy tests to determine whether someone could register to vote. The Civil Rights Act of 1968 banned discrimination based on race or gender when selling or renting a house.

The 19 th
Amendment, ratified in 1920 eliminated discrimination in voting based on gender. A person’s gender could not be used as a reason to deny their suffrage , or the right to vote. This amendment denied states and the federal government from preventing women the right to vote. The ratification of the 19 th
Amendment gave to women power that they had not had before. Beginning in the
1960s, women began to form interest groups seeking equal employment opportunities, and other economic and social opportunities. Women have also taken part in marches protesting federal and state actions affecting women’s rights, and more women than ever before run for, and win, elected offices including the U.S. Congress. Several women have run for president and vicepresident although no women have ever been elected president or vicepresident. Women have also sued in court when federal and state laws discriminate against them because they are women.
Even though the 19 th
Amendment guarantees that voters cannot be discriminated against based on gender, there has been push to ratify the Equal
Rights Amendment which will specifically prohibit all discrimination based on gender. Despite being first introduced in Congress in the 1920s, and ratified by
Congress in the 1970s, this amendment has never been ratified by enough states to be added to the U.S. Constitution.
 
The 24 th
Amendment, ratified in 1964, said that failure to pay a poll tax could not be a reason for a person to be denied the right to vote. Before the 24 th
13

Amendment, many states were trying to charge people money to allow them the right to vote. This often kept minorities or poor people from voting. The ratification
24 th
Amendment allowed more minorities and poor people to vote. One impact of this amendment is that candidates and public officials now pay more attention to concerns of the poor and minorities because the candidates and public officials know that these individuals are more likely to vote in elections.

The 26 th
Amendment, ratified in 1971, said that any United States citizen age 18 or older could vote when up to that point the federal government, and some states, allowed only persons age 21 or older to vote. One impact of this amendment is that candidates and public officials now pay more attention to concerns of young people because the candidates and public officials know that these individuals are more likely to vote in elections
14

SS.7.C.3.12: Analyze the significance and outcomes of landmark Supreme Court cases including, but not limited to, Marbury v. Madison, Plessy v. Ferguson, Plessy v. Ferguson, Brown v. Board of Education,
Gideon v. Wainwright, Miranda v. Arizona, in re Gault, Tinker v. Des Moines, Hazelwood v. Kuhlmier,
United States v. Nixon, and Bush v. Gore. Pgs.: 174, 277, 278, 282 Q 7-8, 426 Q 4, 428 Q 7-8
Landmark Supreme Court Cases
(related to civil liberties)
Primary Sources
Case Significant Details Passages from the Court
Opinion
Linked to the Significance of the Case
Gideon v.
Wainwright
(1963)
Miranda v.
Arizona
(1966)
Tinker v.
Des
Moines
(1968)
United
Clarence Gideon was arrested and charged in a Florida court for breaking and entering. He was unable to afford a lawyer and the court refused to appoint a lawyer to him. Gideon was forced to defend himself in court and the jury found him guilty.
In his appeal to the Supreme Court, Gideon claimed the lower court violated his rights under the 6th Amendment, which protects the rights of the accused and the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment that says that states must apply the law equally and cannot discriminate against citizens or groups of citizens.
The state of Arizona arrested Ernesto Miranda for kidnapping and the state court found him guilty. He was questioned about the charges when he was arrested without being advised of his right to speak with an attorney or any of his other legal rights.
Miranda appealed his conviction of these charges to the
Supreme Court claiming the police violated his rights under the portion of the 5th Amendment that protects the rights of the accused against self -incrimination .
John Tinker, his sister Mary Beth Tinker, and other students decided to wear black armbands to school in protest of the
Vietnam War. The school adopted a policy prohibiting armbands. When the students arrived to school, they refused to remove their armbands and were suspended . The Tinkers claimed the school officials violated their 1st Amendment right to freedom of speech.
In 1972, the offices of the Democratic National
“Lawyers in criminal courts are necessities, not luxuries.”
“The prosecution may not use statements,
…from questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any significant way, unless it demonstrates the use of procedural safeguards effective to secure the Fifth Amendment's privilege against selfincrimination.”
In wearing armbands, the petitioners were quiet and passive. They were not disruptive, and did not impinge upon the rights of others. In these circumstances, their conduct was within the protection of the Free Speech
Clause of the First
Amendment and the Due
Process Clause of the
Fourteenth.”
“Neither the doctrine of
15

States v.
Nixon
(1974)
Committees in Washington D.C. were broken into.
During the criminal investigation, a federal judge ordered President Nixon to turn over audio tapes of conversations recorded by Nixon about the break-in. Nixon refused to produce the tapes for the court by claiming that executive privilege
(the belief that conversations between the
President and his aides are protected from being revealed to anyone) allowed him to withhold the conversation tapes from the other government branches and protect the secrecy of the conversations. The United States government prosecuted (carry a legal action against a person to prove guilt or innocence) President Nixon and requested that the case and evidence against
President Nixon be heard by the U.S. Supreme
Court.
Hazelwood
School
District v.
Kuhlmeier
(1987)
Students of Hazelwood East High School wrote and edited the school-sponsored newspaper.
The school principal removed two articles from the issue and claimed they were inappropriate.
Cathy Kuhlmeier and two other students brought the case to court because they believed the principal violated their 1st Amendment rights of freedom of the press.
Bush v.
Gore
(2000)
During the 2000 presidential election, Al Gore and George W. Bush were close in their number of Electoral College votes and the Florida
Supreme Court required that the votes in question be recounted by hand. These votes determined which candidate won Florida’s
Electoral College votes and would ultimately win the presidential election . Bush requested to stop the recount and claimed it violated the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment that says that states must apply the law equally and cannot discriminate against citizens or groups of citizens. In this case, the inequality was linked to the fact that only certain ballots were to be recounted (those that did not give a clear idea of the voter’s choice) and not all votes.
District of After the District of Columbia passed a law
16 separation of powers nor the generalized need for confidentiality of high-level communications, without more, can sustain an absolute, unqualified
Presidential privilege of immunity from judicial process under all circumstances.”
“First Amendment rights of students in the public schools are not automatically coextensive with the rights of adults in other settings, and must be applied in light of the special characteristics of the school environment. A school need not tolerate student speech that is inconsistent with its basic educational mission, even though the government could not censor similar speech outside the school.”
“Because it is evident that any recount …would be unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause, the Florida Supreme Court’s judgment ordering manual recounts is reversed. The
Clause’s requirements apply to the manner in which the voting franchise is exercised. Having once granted the right to vote on equal terms, Florida may not, by later arbitrary and disparate treatment, value one person’s vote over that of another.”
“The Second Amendment

Columbia
(DC) v.
Heller
(2007) requiring the registration of handguns, requiring licenses for all pistols, and requiring that all legal firearms be kept unloaded and disassembled or trigger locked, a group of private gun-owners
(including Mr. Heller) brought a suit claiming the laws violated their Second Amendment right to bear arms. The federal court that heard the case first said the Second Amendment only protected ownership of firearms for those associated with a militia, like the National Guard. Heller appealed this decision to the Supreme Court.
protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self defense within the home.”
Landmark Supreme Court Cases and Case Impact on Society
Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
This judicial opinion on this case further clarified and strengthened the rights of the accused (which are the rights protected in the 4 th
, 5 th
, and 6 th
Amendments). This case focused on the 6 th
Amendment provision of the right to counsel (attorney) in criminal cases.
Miranda v. Arizona (1966)
This judicial opinion on this case further strengthened the rights of the accused (which are the rights protected in the 4 th
, 5 th
, and 6 th
Amendments). This case focused on the 5 th
Amendment provision of due process and protection from self-incrimination. As a result of this ruling, law enforcement is now required to read people thei r “Miranda Rights” when they are being arrested for a crime. The “Miranda Rights” let suspects know that they have the right to remain silent and have the right to an attorney (the right to an attorney was established in Gideon v. Wainwright).
Tinker v. Des Moines (1968)
This judicial opinion in this case focused on the 1 st
Amendment rights of students. It was assumed, before this case, that students lost all of the rights “at the school house gate”.
This case did away with that belief, instead making sure that students do have some of their rights, including freedom of expression (including “symbolic speech”) and freedom of speech, as long as it does not disrupt the educational mission of the school.
United States v. Nixon (1974)
The judicial opinion in this case confirmed the concept of legal equality, which is that everyone is equal in the eyes of the law. Even though this case involved a U.S. President, it did not prevent him from being held responsible for his wrongdoings, or mistakes, including refusing to follow the rule of law.
Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1987)
The judicial opinion in this case focused on the 1 st
Amendment rights of students, specifically freedom of the press. The Court determined that a school could prevent the publication of articles in the school newspaper or limit the speech of their students if it disrupted the educational mission of the school.
Bush v. Gore (2000)
The judicial opinion on this case set a precedent related to U.S. Supreme Court dealings with state elections. Considering that elections are handled by each state, and that there was no uniform way to count the presidential votes, the Supreme Court believed that the
Florida Supreme Court, in deciding that only certain votes would be recounted (those that did not indicate a preferred candidate), acted in an unconstitutional manner.
17

District of Columbia (DC) v. Heller (2007)
The judicial opinion on this case focused on the meaning of the 2 nd
Amendment right to bear arms. The Supreme Court’s interpretation of the 2 nd
Amendment is that individuals, not just militias, have the right to own or carry a weapon.
Landmark Supreme Court Cases and Case Constitutional Rights/Principles
Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
This case dealt with rights of the accused which is protected by the 4 th
, 5 th and 6 th
Amendments:
4 th
Amendment – no unreasonable searches and seizures
5 th
Amendment – protection from double jeopardy, the right to due process, protection from selfincrimination
6 th
Amendment – the right to an attorney, the right to a speedy and public trial, the right to be informed of criminal charges, the right to be confronted by witnesses accusing the person of committing a crime
Miranda v. Arizona (1966)
This case dealt with rights of the accused which is protected by the 4 th
, 5 th and 6 th Amendments.
5 th
Amendment - provision of due process and protection from self-incrimination.
Tinker v. Des Moines (1968)
This case dealt with the 1 st
Amendment as applied in schools and to students.
1 st
Amendment – freedom of speech, freedom of expression (symbolic speech)
United States v. Nixon (1974)
This judicial opinion in this case confirmed the concept of legal equality, which is that everyone is equal in the eyes of the law.
Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1987)
This case dealt with the 1 st
Amendment as applied in schools and to students.
1 st
Amendment – freedom of speech, freedom of expression, freedom of the press
Bush v. Gore (2000)
The judicial opinion on this case set a precedent related to U.S. Supreme Court and state
(Florida) Supreme Court dealings with state elections.
District of Columbia (DC )v. Heller (2007)
This case dealt with the right to bear arms which is protected by the 2 nd Amendment.
18

There have been several landmark Supreme Court cases that have significantly impacted American society and government and the Court has acted as an arbiter
(someone with the power to settle disputes) in these instances. These cases include unique or important decisions based on certain events, facts and discoveries. We call these decisions judicial opinions.
The landmark Supreme Court cases reviewed here are related to the protection of
Americans’ civil rights.
Landmark Supreme Court Cases
(related to civil rights)
Primary Sources
Case Significant Details Passages from the Court Opinion
Linked to the Significance of the Case
Marbury v.
Madison
(1803)
In his last days of office, President John Adams appointed several federal judges and justices of the peace including John Marshall, Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court and William Marbury as Justice of the Peace for Washington D.C. Not all of the appointments should be handled.
were finalized before the end of the Adams presidency. President
Thomas Jefferson informed his Secretary of
State, James Madison, not to deliver the remaining appointments because they were no longer valid . Marbury (an Adams appointee) referred to an act of Congress that he believed would require that Madison make certain that
Marbury would get to hold his government position. This case went to the Supreme Court to determine how these presidential actions
Plessy v.
Ferguson
(1896)
Under Louisiana law, whites and blacks were required to ride in separate railway cars.
Although Homer Plessy was seven-eighths (7/8) white and one-eighth (1/8) African-American, he was required to ride in the “colored” car. Plessy was arrested for refusing to leave the “whites only” railway car. He took his case to state court because he believed that this segregation
(separation based on the law) violated the 14 th
Amendment equal protection clause , which says that states must apply the law equally and cannot discriminate against citizens or groups
“To enable the Court to issue a mandamus to compel the delivery of the commission of a public office by the Secretary of State, it must be shown that it is an exercise of appellate jurisdiction, or that it be necessary to enable them to exercise appellate jurisdiction.
It is the essential criterion of appellate jurisdiction that it revises and corrects the proceedings in a cause already instituted, and does not create the cause.
The authority given to the Supreme Court by the act establishing the judicial system of the
United States to issue writs of mandamus to public officers appears not to be warranted by the Constitution.
It is …the duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases must, of necessity,
…interpret the rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the Court must decide on the operation of each.”
”Legislation is powerless to eradicate racial instincts or to abolish distinctions based upon physical differences, and the attempt to do so can only result in accentuating the difficulties of the present situation. If the civil and political rights of both races be equal, one cannot be inferior to the other civilly or politically. If one race be inferior to the other socially, the Constitution of the United States cannot put them upon the same plane.”
19

In re
Gault
(1966) of citizens. The Louisiana judge, John Ferguson, ruled that Louisiana can enact segregations laws within the state. As a result, Plessy appealed this case to the United States
Supreme Court.
Brown v.
Board
(1954)
African-American students were not allowed to attend the same public schools as white students because state laws permitted racial segregation (separation based on the law).
Several parents of African-American children, including Oliver Brown, sued the Topeka,
Kansas School Board claiming racial segregation (separation of people based on race) is unequal and violates the equal protection clause of the 14 th
Amendment which says that states must apply the law equally and cannot discriminate against citizens or groups of citizens. The lower courts ruled in favor of the school system; Brown appealed this case to the
United States Supreme Court.
At age 15, Gerald Gault was arrested for making an indecent phone call. Gault was denied the right of due process (established legal procedures) because he was a j uvenile
(someone under the age of 18). Gault was tried in juvenile court and sentenced to six years to the State Industrial School. Gault appealed this case to the United States Supreme Court.
“We conclude that in the field of public education the doctrine of ‘separate but equal’ has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.”
”Appellants urge that the Arizona statute is unconstitutional under the Due Process
Clause because, as construed by its
Supreme Court, ‘there is no right of appeal from a juvenile court order.’”
Landmark Supreme Court Cases and Case Impact on Society
Marbury v. Madison (1803)
The judicial opinion in this case strengthened the system of checks and balances. The outcome of this case established the power of judicial review for the Supreme Court. Judicial review is the power that the Court has to find something as “unconstitutional”.
Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)
The judicial opinion in this case established that separate but equal did not violate the 14 th
Amendment equal protection clause as long as the separate
African-
American facilities were “equal” in quality to those of whites.
Brown v. Board (1954)
This judicial opinion on this case strengthened the meaning of the equal protection clause of the 14 th
Amendment and struck down the use of the
“separate but equal” approaches in public education established in Plessy v.
Ferguson. The Court upheld that segregation (separation of people based on
20

race) in public schools is unconstitutional.
In re Gault (1966)
The judicial opinion in this case confirmed the concept of legal equality, which is that everyone is equal in the eyes of the law. Even though this case involved a juvenile, the Court determined that minors are given the same rights as adults and that Gault’s 14 th
Amendment due process rights had been violated.
Landmark Supreme Court Cases and Case Constitutional Rights/Principles
Marbury v.Madison (1803)
This landmark case helped define the checks and balances system and established the Supreme Court’s power of judicial review (the Supreme Court has the final say on what the Constitution means).
Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)
This decision upheld the concept of separate but equal meaning that separate facilities for blacks and whites satisfied the Fourteenth (14 th
) Amendment as long as they are “equal”. 14 th
Amendment (Equal Protection Clause) says that states must apply the law equally and cannot discriminate against citizens or groups of citizens.
Brown v. Board (1954)
The Supreme Court overruled Plessy v. Ferguson. The Court decided that racial segregation (separation based on race) in public education is unconstitutional, according to the equal protection clause of the 14 th
Amendment.
14 th
Amendment (Equal Protection Clause ) says that states must apply the law equally and cannot discriminate against citizens or groups of citizens.
In re Gault (1966)
This judicial opinion on this case confirmed that the proceedings of Mr. Gault’s case in Juvenile Court were unconstitutional. The Court decided that criminal cases for juveniles must obey the equal protection clause of the 14 th
Amendment .
Minors have the same rights as adults.
14 th
Amendment (Equal Protection Clause ) says that states must apply the law equally and cannot discriminate against citizens or groups of citizens.
21