AP Gov – Chapter 05 Outline
Civil Rights refer to those things that the government must do to provide equal protection and freedom from discrimination for all citizens. Traditionally, we think of civil rights as those rights rooted in the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution. The earliest attempts to protect the civil rights of freed slaves were unsuccessful because the Supreme Court believed that it was not within its purview to stop non‐governmental discrimination nor did it believe the federal government could mandate state action on civil rights. Since the 1950s, the Supreme Court has held the opposite view, thus enabling the government to offer broader protections to citizens’ equality in social and economic life. I.
AFRICAN AMERICANS AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES A. Ending Servitude With the passage of the Civil War amendments, slavery and some of the problems slavery had created were abolished: (1) The Thirteenth Amendment (1865) prohibits slavery within the United States; (2) The Fourteenth Amendment (1868) established that all persons born in the United States are citizens and no state shall deprive citizens of their rights under the Constitution; and (3) The Fifteenth Amendment (1870) established the right of citizens to vote. B. The Civil Rights Acts of 1865 to 1875 After passing the Civil War Amendments, Congress enacted the Civil Rights Acts of 1865–1875, which were aimed at the southern states. These laws attempted to prevent states from passing laws that would circumvent the amendments. The first Civil Rights Act in the Reconstruction Period was passed in 1866. It extended citizenship to anyone born in the United States, gave African Americans full equality before the law, and gave the president authority to enforce the law with military force. Among the six other civil rights acts passed after the Civil War, the Enforcement Act of 1879 set out specific criminal sanctions for interfering with the right to vote. The Civil Rights Act of 1872 made it a federal crime to use law or custom to deprive an individual of constitutional rights, privileges, or immunities. The last of the early civil rights acts, known as the Second Civil Rights Act, was passed in 1875. It declared that everyone is entitled to full and equal enjoyment of public accommodations, theaters, and other places of amusements. What is most important about all of the Civil Rights Acts was the belief that congressional power applied to government and private actions. C. The Limitations of the Civil Rights Laws The Civil Rights Acts ultimately did little to secure equality for African Americans. Both the Civil Rights Cases and the case of Plessy v. Ferguson effectively nullified these acts. 1.
The Civil Rights Cases. The United States Supreme Court invalidated much of the civil rights legislation in the Civil Rights Cases (1883). Enforcement of the Fourteenth Amendment was limited to correcting official acts by states. This would mean that private citizens could practice discrimination without interference from the national government. D. E. 2.
Plessy v. Ferguson: Separate‐but‐Equal. The Supreme Court went further in this direction in 1892 in the case of Plessy v. Ferguson, where the Court held that “separate‐but‐equal” treatment of people of different races by state governments was not a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. 3.
Voting Barriers. The Fifteenth Amendment attempted to establish voting rights for all citizens, except females and Native Americans. However, some state governments enacted laws that circumvented the right to vote (the white primary, the grandfather clause, the poll tax, and literacy tests). The effect of these laws virtually prohibited African American males from voting in many southern states. 4.
Black Codes. Southern jurisdictions passed numerous ordinances and laws to maintain a segregated society and to control the activities of African Americans. These laws imposed curfews, limited business ownership, restricted rights to assembly, and required employment, among other things. 5.
Extralegal Methods of Enforcing White Supremacy. Lynching in the South and in the North and riots against the employment of African Americans. The End of the Separate‐but‐Equal Doctrine 1.
Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka. Plessy v. Ferguson was eventually overturned by the Supreme Court in 1954. In the case of Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, the separate‐but‐equal doctrine was reversed on the basis that it violates the Equal Protection Clause. 2.
“With All Deliberate Speed.” States were ordered to eliminate segregation policies with all deliberate speed. Reactions to School Integration States that mandated segregation were outraged at interference in state issues by the national government. Serious riots against desegregation took place in a number of localities. F. An Integrationist Attempt at a Cure: Busing Key concepts: De facto segregation is racial segregation that occurs because of past social and economic conditions and residential racial patterns. De jure segregation is racial segregation that occurs because of laws or administrative decisions by public agencies. II.
1.
Court‐Ordered Busing. A solution to both forms of segregation, it involved busing black students to predominantly white schools and vice versa. It was very unpopular among whites and not very popular among African Americans, either. It is not common today. 2.
The End of Integration? By the 1990s the Court was willing in many cases to say that local schools had done enough to desegregate, and no further actions were necessary, despite the continued existence of de facto segregation. 3.
The Resurgence of Minority Schools. Schools around the country are becoming segregated again, in large part because of de facto segregation. The attempt to integrate schools has largely failed to improve educational resources and achievement for minority children. Most non‐white schools are segregated by poverty as well as race. An alternative to integration by race has been to integrate schools on the basis of income. Low‐income students attending middle class schools perform better. THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT The elimination of segregationist policies and racial intolerance would not have occurred without a strong civil rights movement. This movement began in the South and grew to a national scale. Although this movement included thousands and had many leaders, the most famous leader was the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. A. King’s Philosophy of Nonviolence One of the major reasons King was so successful was his philosophy of nonviolent civil disobedience, a nonviolent, public refusal to obey allegedly unjust laws. B. 1.
Nonviolent Demonstrations. Peaceful civil disobedience became the hallmark of the civil rights movement. 2.
Marches and Demonstrations. This approach gained the support and respect of millions of Americans. What began as a small movement in the South quickly became a national mission. Another Approach: Black Power Leaders such as Malcolm X advocated a more forceful approach than King. His followers also resisted the impulse to cultural assimilation that was implied by the integrationist philosophy. III.
THE ESCALATION OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT A. Modern Civil Rights Legislation B. 1.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964. In response to public demands for action, Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This law prohibited discrimination in the areas of: (1) voter registration, (2) public accommodations, (3) public schools, and (4) employment. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which was established by this law, was assigned the task of ending racial discrimination in the workplace. The employment provisions of the 1964 act have been strengthened several times since its first passage, including President Johnson’s 1965 Executive Order that required employers who received federal funding to establish affirmative action plans. 2.
The Voting Rights Act of 1965. The enactment of the Twenty‐fourth Amendment in 1964, which eliminated any tax for the purpose of voting, was a modern beginning of the end to racial discrimination at the ballot box. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 made state laws restricting political participation by minorities illegal. 3.
Urban Riots. Even as the civil rights movement was winning victories, a series of intense civil insurrections spread through African American urban districts. The riots cost the movement considerable good will. 4.
The Civil Rights Act of 1968 and Other Housing Reform Legislation. One of the major omissions of the 1964 act was discrimination in housing. In 1968, days after the assassination of Dr. King, the Civil Rights Act of 1968 became law. Part of this legislation prohibited racial discrimination in the area of housing. Consequences of Civil Rights Legislation 1.
Political Participation by African Americans. There are now thousands of African American elected officials. 2.
The U.S. Census and Civil Rights. The census is the method by which Americans are counted every ten years and the information provided by the census is the basis for virtually all demographic information used by policymakers. This information is used to enforce the Voting Rights Act of 1965 as well as allocate federal dollars to communities for education, crime prevention, and transportation. Civil rights leaders have actively encouraged minority communities to fill out the Census in 2010 in the hopes of increasing resources directed toward their communities. 3.
Lingering Social and Economic Disparities. Poverty persists and is most prevalent among minority group members. How to address this fact is a major unresolved issue. 4.
Race Conscious or Post‐Racial Society? In many aspects of society, the black experience differs from the white experience. President Barack Obama has been criticized by some within the civil rights community for not making the goal of racial equality a higher priority within his administration. Candidate Obama addressed race in his “A More Perfect Union” speech, and President Obama also spoke to racial profiling in ways no previous president has been able to do. IV.
WOMEN’S CAMPAIGN FOR EQUAL RIGHTS A. Early Women’s Political Movements Activism for women’s rights began with the Seneca Falls convention in 1848. Delegates debated and adopted the Declaration of Sentiments. Modeled after the Declaration of Independence, it called for equality for women in all aspects of life including education, employment, and politics. The most controversial demand was for universal suffrage. B. Women’s Suffrage Associations The early struggle for equal rights for women focused on the right to vote. Although first divided over the Fifteenth Amendment’s exclusion of women, the National Woman Suffrage Association and the American Woman Suffrage Association ultimately combined to form the National American Woman Suffrage Association (NAWSA). The organization worked at the state and federal levels lobbying for suffrage. At the turn of the century, a new wave of suffragists under the leadership of Alice Paul adopted direct protest tactics to demand a federal amendment. The combination of persistent lobbying by NAWSA as well as direct action by Paul’s National Woman’s Party resulted in the ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment to the Constitution that states, “The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.” It took women 72 years of political activism to win the vote. C. The Modern Women’s Movement The modern women’s movement started in the 1960s, inspired in part by the civil rights movement. The publication of Betty Friedan’s The Feminine Mystique and the formation of the National Organization for Women (NOW) were significant early developments. 1.
The Equal Rights Amendment. A major initial goal of the modern women’s movement was the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment that states, “Equality of rights under law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.” The ERA was sent to the state legislatures for ratification on March 22, 1972. It failed to win the approval of the necessary 38 states in the traditional seven‐year limit. The Congress extended the time limit, but the states again failed to support the ratification of the ERA. Part of the opposition to the ERA came from an anti‐feminist backlash. This conservative line of argument asserted that the passage of the ERA would significantly alter social relations in the United States, and men and women would be the “same” under law, rather than equal. Although opponents were effective in blocking the ratification of the ERA, twenty‐one states have passed such amendments to their own constitutions. V.
2.
Three‐State Strategy. In 1997 three law students published an article arguing that because the “Madison Amendment” was accepted as the Twenty‐seventh Amendment 203 years after it was sent to the states, Congress has the power to maintain the legal viability of the ERA and the existing 35 state ratifications. If three additional states vote to ratify, the ERA could become the Twenty‐eighth Amendment. 3.
Challenging Gender Discrimination in the Courts and Legislatures. With the failure of the ERA, the women’s movement changed focus to challenge gender discrimination in the courts and through legislation. The Pregnancy Discrimination Act, Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and Title IX have been effective tools to combat gender discrimination in education and employment. Provisions also extend to sexual harassment. 4.
Women in the Military. Over 90 percent of positions in the military are now open to women and most experts think it is only a matter of time before there is full gender integration. Women have served in combat roles in Iraq and Afghanistan and a majority of the public supports direct combat roles for women. 5.
Women in Politics Today. Women make up 17 percent of the U.S. Congress, an all‐time high. However, the United States ranks 74th of 188 nations based on the proportion of women in the lower house. In 2007, Nancy Pelosi became the first female Speaker of the House. In 2008, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York became one of two contenders for the presidential nomination of the Democratic Party. In a surprise move, Senator John McCain chose the Alaskan governor, Sarah Palin, as his Republican running mate. It is now customary for the president’s cabinet to contain a number of women, and there are women serving on the U.S. Supreme Court. Men, however, continue to be overrepresented in positions of power. GENDER‐BASED DISCRIMINATION IN THE WORKPLACE A. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 This legislation prohibits gender discrimination in employment. This has been used to protect women from workplace discrimination. In 1978, Title VII was amended to include the condition of pregnancy. B. Sexual Harassment The Supreme Court also has held that Title VII includes prohibitions on sexual harassment. Some problems with addressing sexual harassment complaints are how to define a “hostile environment.” The Court has attempted to clarify the issue. C. Wage Discrimination In the year 2010, largely as a result of the recession, women comprise a majority of the U.S. workforce. Yet women, in spite of Title VII and legislation such as the Equal Pay Act, continue to earn less than men. In 2010, a woman earns 77.8 cents for every dollar made by a man. VI.
1.
The Equal Pay Act of 1963. Employers cannot establish separate pay scales for men and women performing the same work. The law does not account for occupational segregation and the ways in which “men’s work” is valued over “women’s work.” A 2007 study found a wage gap between male and female college graduates. One year beyond graduation, women earn only 80 percent of that earned by males, even when controlling same major and same occupation. 2.
The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. Lilly Ledbetter suffered wage discrimination as one of the few women employed by Goodyear Tire and Rubber. She only discovered the inequity through an anonymous tip when she retired after 19 years with the company. In reviewing the case, the U.S. Supreme Court held that discrimination claims must be made within 180 days of the employer’s discriminatory act. With the Ledbetter Act, Congress in effect overturned the Supreme Court’s ruling and said that the 180 day clock resets with each discriminatory paycheck. VOTING RIGHTS AND THE YOUNG The Twenty‐sixth Amendment to the Constitution, ratified on July 1, 1971, allows citizens 18 years of age or older to vote. VII.
IMMIGRATION, LATINOS, AND CIVIL RIGHTS A. The Continued Influx of Immigrants Today immigration rates are the highest they have been since their peak in the early twentieth century. Since 1977, more than 80 percent of immigrants have come from Latin America or Asia. Those born on foreign soil now constitute 12 percent of the U.S. population—twice the percentage of 30 years ago. B. Illegal Immigration Illegal immigration has become both a hot political issue and a serious policy problem. The majority of people entering the United States illegally come from Mexico in search of work. In addition to the argument that they are taking jobs from American citizens, another controversial aspect of their presence involves the demand that undocumented immigrants and their families place on social and medical services. 1.
C. Citizenship. Lawmakers are dramatically split over the issue of how to treat those in the country illegally, with some calling for amnesty, others creating a schedule by which they could become citizens, and still other lawmakers demanding that they be returned to their home countries. One expedited route to citizenship for those here legally is through military service. Accommodating Diversity with Bilingual Education Both Congress and the Supreme Court in the past have supported the rights of those who require bilingual education. In recent years, however, resentment and resistance have grown over the issue of bilingual education. California residents passed a ballot initiative measure that would end bilingual education in the state. VIII.
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION Affirmative action describes those policies that give special preferences in educational admissions and employment decisions to groups that have been discriminated against in the past. As originally intended, affirmative action policies were an attempt by the federal government to “level the playing field” for women and African Americans in particular. Affirmative action remains a controversial issue for several reasons. Some people argue that racial and gender‐based discrimination in employment and school admissions decisions is now so infrequent that affirmative action is no longer warranted. Others argue that the “backlash” created hurts race relations. Some women and African Americans argue that the presence of affirmative action diminishes and undermines their achievements. On the other side of the argument are the economic realities. There is no doubt that women and African Americans lack economic parity in the United States. Affirmative action represents one attempt to remedy this. Popular support of affirmative action programs seems to be based somewhat on racial identity, with majorities of African Americans and Hispanics supportive of affirmative action, and whites widely divided on the issue. A. The Bakke Case In Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978), the Supreme Court ruled that quota systems that only consider the race of an applicant were unconstitutional. The court’s decision applied only to situations where race was the sole factor being used. However, the Court ruled that race could be one of many factors considered in making admissions decisions. B. Further Limits on Affirmative Action In Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Peña, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that when governments use affirmative action programs, they must do so under the “strict scrutiny” rule. This means that governments typically cannot use quota systems, and once a program has been deemed successful, it must be eliminated. In two cases in 2003 involving the admissions policies of the University of Michigan, the Court indicated that “diversity” was a legitimate goal in college admissions, but could not be achieved by automatically assigning “points” to minority applicants. C. State Ballot Initiatives One form of backlash against affirmative action has been California’s Proposition 209, which ended all state‐sponsored affirmative action programs. D. Making Amends for Past Discrimination through Reparations Although affirmative action programs attempt to remedy past discrimination by “leveling the playing field,” reparation is a way of apologizing for past discriminatory actions and in some cases providing compensation. In 1988, Congress passed legislation that apologized for the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II. Over 1.6 billion dollars has been disbursed to Japanese Americans who were themselves interned or to their heirs. Congress also issued an apology for slavery in 2008, but the resolution did not contain any compensation for the descendants of slaves. IX.
SPECIAL PROTECTION FOR OLDER AMERICANS The number of people over the age of 65 is growing dramatically. A. Age Discrimination in Employment Age discrimination is potentially the most widespread form of discrimination. B. The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 prohibits discrimination by age in all but a limited number of occupations where age is considered relevant to the job. Also, many individuals do not desire retirement when they reach the age set as the retirement age by a company or government, and mandatory retirement has progressively been made illegal by laws passed in 1978 and 1986. X.
SECURING RIGHTS FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES A. The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 The most significant development for the disabled to date was the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. This legislation prohibits job discrimination against individuals with physical or mental disabilities. Furthermore, it requires physical access to public buildings and public services. In 1998, the Supreme Court ruled that persons infected with the HIV virus are protected by the ADA. This means that such employees must be accommodated. B. Limiting the Scope and Applicability of the ADA The Supreme Court has limited the scope of the ADA. In 1999, the Court held that the ADA did not protect persons who wear eyeglasses. In 2002, the Supreme Court ruled that carpal tunnel syndrome, a repetitive stress injury, does not constitute a disability under the ADA. In most cases, citizens cannot sue their state under the ADA. XI.
THE RIGHTS AND STATUS OF GAYS AND LESBIANS A. Growth in the Gay and Lesbian Rights Movement The modern movement is conventionally believed to have begun following the Stonewall incident, where gay men rioted against a police raid on a bar frequented by gays. B. State and Local Laws Targeting Gays and Lesbians In the 1960s every state except Illinois had laws that banned sodomy. During the 1970s and early 1980s many states repealed such laws. The repealing of such laws halted in 1986 with the case Bowers v. Hardwick when the Supreme Court upheld a Georgia law that banned homosexual conduct between adults. In Lawrence v. Texas (2003), however, the Court reversed itself and effectively struck down all remaining sodomy laws across the country. In the 1996 case of Romer v. Evans, the Supreme Court ruled that a Colorado constitutional amendment that invalidated state and local laws that protected gay males and lesbians from discrimination violated the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Since Romer, many states and cities have passed measures that afford protection to gay men and lesbians in housing, employment, public accommodation, and credit. C. Gays and Lesbians in the Military The “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, a compromise instituted under President Bill Clinton, purports to provide some protection against dismissal to gays in the military, but in fact has been relatively ineffective. President Barack Obama has promised to help bring an end to the policy. With support of the Pentagon, Congress is expected to rescind the policy very soon. D. Same‐Sex Marriages In 1993, the Hawaii state Supreme Court raised the issue of whether the state constitution protected the rights of same‐sex individuals who sought a marriage license. 1.
Defense of Marriage Act. Congress responded to the Hawaii court’s decision with the Defense of Marriage Act of 1996, which allowed states to refuse to recognize same‐sex marriages performed in other states. In Vermont, the state Supreme Court ruled that gay men and lesbians are entitled to the same benefits of marriage that opposite‐sex couples enjoy. The Vermont legislature has passed a law permitting “civil unions” between same‐sex couples. 2.
State Recognition of Gay Marriages. In 2003 the Massachusetts high court ruled that gays had a right to marry and that civil unions did not go far enough in protecting this right. States continue to wrestle with this issue.