Civil Rights and Civil Liberties
The Unalienable Rights
• The Constitution protects the rights of
individuals against government.
• America’s commitment to freedom led to the
creation of the Bill of Rights (BOR).
• The BOR are the first 10 amendments of the
Constitution.
The Unalienable Rights
• Securing personal freedoms against
government was the driving force of the
American Revolution.
• The Constitution, when it was first written
contained many guarantees of freedom, but it
did not include a list of people’s rights.
The Unalienable Rights
• This caused an argument over needing to add
in writing, a listing of rights.
• Remember, Anti-Federalists (against making
new Constitution) vs. Federalists (for it).
• Ten rights were agreed upon and thus were
added, becoming the BOR.
The Unalienable Rights
• BOR quick run down:
• 1. Gives people the right to freedom of religion,
speech and assembly.
• 2. Gives people right to own guns.
• 3. Military cannot force citizens to give them
room and board.
The Unalienable Rights
• 4. Government cannot seize property without
warrant or probable cause.
• 5. Do not have to testify against yourself,
cannot be tried for the same crime twice.
• 6. Right to fair trial and access to a lawyer.
The Unalienable Rights
• 7. Guarantees a jury trial in federal civil cases.
• 8. Punishments for crimes must be fair and not
excessively cruel.
• 9. People have more rights than those listed in
the Constitution.
• 10. States have all power not given to federal
government in Constitution.
The Unalienable Rights
• The Constitution guarantees civil rights, and
civil liberties to all citizens – but what is the
difference?
• Civil liberties are protections against the
government like speech and religion.
• Civil rights are protections from the
government like discrimination.
The Unalienable Rights
• However, the rights granted by limited
government are not absolute.
• Just as our government is limited, or in other
words, it has to obey laws and rules.
• Our rights are not absolute – or not above the
law either.
The Unalienable Rights
• The Constitution gives us rights, but that doesn’t
mean we can do anything we want.
• Are freedoms end when we infringe on others’
rights.
• Example is Morse v. Frederick in 2007 – Supreme
Court ruled 5-4 that banner promoted drug use
and was not protected by freedom of speech.
The Unalienable Rights
• Federalism also affects individual rights.
• Federalism is the relationship between
national government and state government.
• The BOR are protections people have against
the national government, not the states.
The Unalienable Rights
• Thanks to the 14th Amendment, states cannot
deny the BOR to anyone.
• 14th Amendment is also called the Due
Process Clause, which protects all rights that
are basic and essential.
• Supreme Court has ruled that the BOR are all
basic and essential.
The Unalienable Rights
• The 9th Amendment is also important when it
comes to protecting people’s rights.
• The 9th Amendment points out that just because
a right is not listed in the Constitution, doesn’t
mean that we don’t have it.
• It serves as almost like a safety net to the BOR –
anything not covered is also inferred.
YOUR TURN TO WRITE
• How did America’s commitment to freedom
lead to the creation of the BOR?
• What does it mean when we say the rights
guaranteed to us are not absolute?
• How do the 14th Amendment and the 9th
Amendment help protect our rights?
Due Process of Law
• Why is due process of law important to a free
society?
• Did you know that DNA evidence obtained
through medical technology has reversed over
200 cases recently?
• Those are innocent people who have been in
prison for crimes they did not commit.
Due Process of Law
• The Constitution has two due process clauses
– the 5th and 14th Amendments.
• 5th Amendment says that the government
cannot deprive life, liberty, or property
without due process of the law.
• 14th Amendment says that states must do the
same.
Due Process of Law
• Due process of the law means that
government must act fairly and within the
rules.
• This also means that laws must be fair as well.
• Here is an example of due process of law in
action:
Due Process of Law
• Rochin v. California 1952.
• Rochin was a suspected drug dealer – police
got a tip about where he was – police busted
into his apartment – Rochin grabbed drugs
and swallowed them – police had his stomach
pumped – he was convicted.
• However, Supreme Court said “not so fast!”
Due Process of Law
• Judges ruled that police violated Rochin’s
rights by busting into his apartment and
forcing his stomach to be pumped.
• Due process of the law kept Rochin free from
conviction.
• Speaking of police – each state’s police power
plays an important role in due process.
Due Process of Law
• Police power is designed to protect and
promote safety in society.
• The use of police power is often controversial
causing the courts to determine the balance
between the good of society, and an
individual’s rights.
• One of the most common battles is over drunk
driving.
Due Process of Law
• Each state has its own drunk driving tests –
walking, breathalyzers, etc.
• Question is raised – is it a violation of
individual rights to force someone to take a
drunk driving test?
• Usually the courts side with the police
because the safety of society is at risk.
Due Process of Law
• Famous case – Schmerber vs. California where
courts sided with police when they ordered a
doctor to draw suspects blood.
• Due process of law also is related to people’s
right to privacy.
• Right to privacy is someone’s right to be let
alone.
Due Process of Law
• The most compelling right to privacy issue is
abortion – a woman’s rights to terminate a
pregnancy.
• In Roe vs. Wade in 1973 – the Supreme Court
ruled that a Texas law, making abortion a
crime was unconstitutional.
Due Process of Law
• They ruled this way because they believed it
violated a woman’s due process of the law.
• Since the ruling there has been numerous
challenges to abortion.
• Anti-abortion supporters have won some
minor battles recently placing serious
regulations of getting abortions.
YOUR TURN TO WRITE
• Explain the meaning of due process of the law,
and why it is important to a free society.
• What is police power, and why is it important
to balance it with individual rights?
• What is the right to privacy, and how far
should the law protect your right to privacy?
Freedom and Security
• How does the Constitution protect your
freedom and provide you security?
• The Constitution is a rule book for
government – but also says what the
government cannot do to you.
• It lists freedoms and securities that you have.
Freedom and Security
• The 13th Amendment ends slavery in the U.S.
– but also ends involuntary servitude.
• You cannot be forced to work to pay off a
contract or debt that has already been given.
• This does not protect citizens from duty in the
military, or convicted criminals from doing
work in prison.
Freedom and Security
• However, even after the 13th Amendment,
people were still allowed to practice private
discrimination.
• This did not end until the Civil Rights
movement in the 1960s.
• Jones vs. Mayer 1968 – Courts ruled that
private discrimination is illegal as well.
Freedom and Security
• The 2nd Amendment gives citizens the right to
bear arms – allows for the citizen soldier.
• This amendment has limits too – U.S. vs.
Miller 1939 – weapons cannot be shipped
across state lines without a license.
• Felons and mentally ill cannot have weapons –
or near schools or government buildings.
Freedom and Security
• 3rd and 4th Amendments also provide
securities – government cannot violate your
home without just cause.
• 3rd Amendment prohibits military forcing you
to provide room and board.
• British troops used this often in the Colonies –
hasn’t been challenged since 1791.
Freedom and Security
• 4th Amendment developed after British
commonly searched homes for smuggled
goods.
• Now, probable cause or a warrant is needed
for a search.
• Example – Florida vs. J.L. 2000 – police get a
tip about a man with a concealed weapon.
Freedom and Security
• They find him at a bus stop and search him –
they find a gun – they arrest him.
• This is illegal – no probable cause or warrant.
• However, Courts have allowed for arrests “in
plain view” – man bagging cocaine in home –
police see him through an open window –
legal arrest.
Freedom and Security
• Courts have also supported roadblocks –
Lidster vs. Illinois 2004 – man arrested for
drunk driving at roadblock stop – no probable
cause or warrant needed to stop his car.
• Arrests are considered seizure of a person –
but no warrant is needed for an arrest.
• Illinois vs. Wardlow – man arrested after
running from police car – probable cause.
Freedom and Security
• When it comes to cars, trucks, planes and
boats, they are considered moveable crime
scenes – no warrant needed.
• Police can search but need to prove probable
cause later in trial.
• Since 1991 police can search all parts of cars –
including locked glove compartments.
Freedom and Security
• Police can also determine probable cause
from a police dog’s reaction.
• However – they cannot search you without
probable cause or a warrant.
• Obtaining evidence correctly is important
because of the Exclusionary Rule.
Freedom and Security
• This rule states that evidence obtained
illegally cannot be used in trial – police must
obey rules and laws themselves.
• Critics to the rule claim it allows criminals to
walk free over a technicality.
• To prevent this, Courts have narrowed the
Exclusionary Rule.
Freedom and Security
• Drug tests and screenings are allowed – no
warrant, no probable cause.
• Trend is for school districts to use this on all
athletes and extracurricular activities.
• Patriot Act of 2001 has also given authorities
more freedom in investigating.
Freedom and Security
• Patriot Act was created to combat terrorism
activity in U.S.
• Federal agents – with a warrant – can search
property without owner knowing – take
photographs, and notes.
• Wiretapping or bugging has also been a
controversial issue.
Freedom and Security
• Wiretapping for a long time was allowed
because it was not considered searching
property.
• However, Katz vs. U.S. 1967 changed that –
man made calls about illegal gambling from
public phone booth that was bugged.
• Court ruled it should have been private – so
now warrants are needed to wiretap.
YOUR TURN TO WRITE
• How does the Constitution provide freedom
and security for you? Be SPECIFIC.
• Do you agree with the restrictions placed on
the government when it comes to arresting
and gathering evidence against suspected
criminals? Explain your answer.
Rights of the Accused
• Okay, so after due process of the law you have
been arrested – what now?
• Think about this quote: “It is better to let ten
guilty criminals go free than to punish one
innocent person.”
• Even after arrest you still have rights protected
by the Constitution.
Rights of the Accused
• Habeas Corpus – prohibits unjust arrests and
states that you cannot be held without
reason.
• Explains the charges and when you get a trial.
• Habeas Corpus has been suspended in the
past during times of war – Civil War and World
War II.
Rights of the Accused
• Bills of Attainder – a legislative act – produced
by Congress.
• Allows for punishment to be carried out
without trial.
• Does not happen anymore – accused have
right to a fair trial.
Rights of the Accused
• Ex Post Facto Law – Latin term meaning “after
the fact”.
• Prevents government from making a law and
then arresting you for breaking it before it was
a law.
• This only applies to criminal law – this can
happen with civil laws – taxes are an example.
Rights of the Accused
• A person who is accused of breaking a serious
criminal law facing a punishment of death or
imprisonment has the right to a grand jury.
• Grand jury is made up of 16 to 23 citizens who
listen to the evidence and determine if
evidence is good enough to have a trial.
• The grand jury stage is a private session – no
media – and prosecution questions only.
Rights of the Accused
• A minimum of 12 votes from jurors are
needed to pass an indictment – that evidence
is good enough to have a trial.
• The grand jury stage is not a trial – just to
determine if a trial should occur.
• When it goes to the trial stage, the accused
has even more rights.
Rights of the Accused
• Double jeopardy – an accused person can only
be tried once for a crime.
• However, in many crimes have more than one
offense.
• Example – robbing a liquor store after it closed
– unlawful entry and theft.
Rights of the Accused
• Speedy and public trial – trials must occur
within a reasonable time.
• 100 days maximum between arrest and start
of trial.
• Public trial means people can come and watch
– this guarantees that process is fair.
Rights of the Accused
• Judge can limit the amount of spectators, or
clear the courtroom as he or she wishes.
• In Federal Courts, no television cameras are
allowed – but some state courts allow.
• Press involvement jeopardizes the accused
right to a fair trial – Supreme Court has
overruled some cases based on media.
Rights of the Accused
• Trial by jury – accused is tried in front of an
impartial jury of his or her peers.
• Jury must be a diverse group of citizens from
the same state and district of crime.
• Accused can request different venue if they
feel they cannot receive a fair trial.
Rights of the Accused
• Accused can also waive their right to a jury
which means the judge decides on case.
• Usually there are 6 to 12 people on a jury and
a guilty verdict must be unanimous in a
criminal case.
• Adequate defense – accused has the right to a
lawyer.
Rights of the Accused
• The accused also has the right to question
witnesses and gather witnesses.
• Escobedo vs. Illinois 1964 – accused was
denied permission to speak to a lawyer and
his confession was thrown out.
• Self-Incrimination – accused cannot be forced
to testify – or answer questions on trial.
Rights of the Accused
• This puts the pressure on the prosecution to
prove guilt of the crime.
• However, this does not mean that witnesses
do not have to testify – you can be forced to
“rat” somebody out.
• This also does not give accused power to deny
fingerprints, photographs, or police lineup.
Rights of the Accused
• Ernesto Miranda a mentally challenged man
accused of kidnapping and rape.
• He did not understand his rights as an accused
criminal.
• His case created the Miranda Rights – forces
police to read rights before questioning.
Rights of the Accused
• However, this does not apply to undercover
cops – suspects can be questioned without
being read Miranda Rights.
• Miranda Rights are controversial – does it
allow criminals to walk free too often?
• Supporters claim it allows police to present a
rock solid case on a suspect instead of relying
on a questionable confession only.
YOUR TURN TO WRITE
• “It is better to let ten guilty criminals go free
than to punish one innocent person.” Do you
agree or disagree with this? Why?
• Does freedom of the press interfere with the
right to a fair trial? Explain.
• Do the Miranda Rights let too many criminals
walk free, or is it necessary in a free society?
Punishment
• The Constitution sets limits on punishments
for a crime.
• The first is bail – the sum of money the
accused pays to the court to guarantee they
will show up for trial.
• This enables the accused to not have to be
restricted to jail until they are guilty.
Punishment
• If the accused is not in jail, they can prepare for a
trial better.
• However, sometimes the court can deny bail – called
preventive detention.
• This is done on a case to case situation depending on
the type of crime or if there is reason to believe the
accused will commit another crime.
Punishment
• The 8th Amendment in the Constitution prohibits
cruel and unusual punishment for citizens.
• Wilkerson vs. Utah 1879 – man was convicted of
murder and sentenced to death by firing squad.
• The Supreme Court ruled against method of
sentence – considered cruel and unusual.
Punishment
• In the majority opinion court stated citizens
are protected from “all barbaric tortures, such
as burning at the stake, crucifixion, drawing
and quartering”.
• What is not considered cruel and unusual?
• Two prisoners in a cell designed for one – ok.
Punishment
• Death penalty is ok – most controversial.
• Executing prisoners is called “Capital
Punishment” – today the Federal Government
allows it, and 35 states allow it.
• Capital Punishment can only be a sentence if
the victim of the crime died.
Punishment
• There are two stages for all Capital
Punishment cases.
• 1. Regular trial to determine if the accused is
guilty of the crime.
• 2. After accused is found guilty, jury listens to
arguments for and against death penalty.
Punishment
• Restrictions against the death penalty include
that no mentally challenged person may be
executed.
• No one under 18 years of age may be executed.
• Capital Punishment very controversial – over 125
prisoners released from death row because they
were innocent in last 30 years.
Punishment
• What is treason?
• Treason is a major crime against the United
States – can only be charged when U.S. is at
war.
• Levying war against the U.S. – or aiding
enemies against the U.S.
Punishment
• Treason law applies to all U.S. citizens – home
and abroad.
• If U.S. is not at war and someone spies or
helps spies against the U.S. it is not treason –
considered espionage or sabotage.
• The punishment for treason is death penalty.
YOUR TURN TO WRITE
• When is the death penalty allowed to be considered
as a punishment?
• What is treason, and how is it different from
espionage and sabotage?
• BIG ONE: How does the Constitution set limits on
punishments for crime? Use the following terms:
Bail, 8th Amendment, Cruel and Unusual, Capital
Punishment, Jury.
Diversity and Discrimination
• The Constitution guarantees equal rights for
all citizens under the law.
• However, that interpretation has changed over
time.
• America was built on the concept of freedom
– “all men are created equal”.
Diversity and Discrimination
• Ironically, over 400 slaves worked on the
construction of the capitol building.
• The Equal Protection Clause – government
cannot discriminate unreasonably.
• Example: Government can tax smoking
products, but government cannot tax blonde
smokers.
Diversity and Discrimination
• Supreme Court makes all rulings on equal
protection using the rational basis test.
• Does the law in question achieve a reasonable
governmental purpose?
• If yes, than the Court will defend the law and
allow it.
Diversity and Discrimination
• Example: Statutory rape – illegal for a man to
have “relations” with a girl under 18.
• Rational basis test – does this achieve a
reasonable governmental purpose?
• Yes – it prevents underage pregnancies from
getting out of hand.
Diversity and Discrimination
• Example: Alabama law allowed women to
receive alimony payments after divorce, but
not men.
• Rational basis test – does this achieve a
reasonable governmental purpose?
• No – no reason to discriminate between men
and women in this case – unconstitutional.
Diversity and Discrimination
• Segregation by race – the separation of one
race from another.
• After the Civil War, former slaves were free –
many states made segregation laws.
• These were called Jim Crow laws – prevented
blacks from having equal access to public
facilities.
Diversity and Discrimination
• These included, schools, parks, cemeteries,
restaurants, railroads, buses.
• Jim Crow laws were challenged in Court by Plessy
vs. Ferguson – black man forced to sit in different
rail car.
• The Supreme Court ruled that “separate but
equal” is allowed – as long as facilities are equal.
Diversity and Discrimination
• Problem with that – what does “equal” mean?
• Separate but equal was the law for 60 years in
the U.S. – allowed segregation.
• Finally in 1954, another court case – Brown vs.
Board of Education overruled Plessy vs.
Ferguson – ended segregation in public
schools.
Diversity and Discrimination
• However, progress from Brown vs. Board of
Education was slow – especially in south.
• It was not until the Civil Rights Movement of
the 1960s that sped things up.
• Civil Rights Act of 1964 – cut off federal
money to any state with segregation.
Diversity and Discrimination
• This forced all states to shape up – or become
economically damaged.
• However, even though segregation by law is
illegal, de facto segregation still exists.
• De facto segregation is natural, society driven
segregation.
Diversity and Discrimination
• Schools are still segregated in areas because
housing patterns are segregated.
• Contrast percentage of black students here,
with percentage of black students in St. Louis
City schools.
• De facto segregation – not a law, happens
naturally.
Diversity and Discrimination
• Classification by gender – women have also
struggled for equal protection through history.
• 1920 women were given right to vote – other
laws struck down other gender segregation.
• Gender classification still exists by law in some
parts – female security guards at male prisons.
Diversity and Discrimination
• There is also de facto gender segregation –
not by law – but by society.
• Women who share similar college degrees are
paid significantly less than men.
• This will only change through time.
YOUR TURN TO WRITE
• What were the Jim Crow laws – and what was
the purpose of them?
• What was important about Plessy vs. Ferguson
and Brown vs. Board of Education?
• What is gender segregation, and which gender
has suffered to achieve equal rights in
America?
Civil Rights Laws
• America has a long history of Civil Rights laws
– debate and passage – since the Civil War.
• Most Civil Rights laws did not pass until after
the Civil War – 100 years later.
• Most opposition to the laws came from
southern politicians who used filibusters and
other means to block laws.
Civil Rights Laws
• The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was the longest
debate in Senate history – 83 days.
• When it was finally passed, it provided
tremendous protection for all citizens.
• The law states that no person can be denied
access or service in a public place because of
race, religion, gender, or physical disability.
Civil Rights Laws
• The law also forced employers to stop
discriminating based on race, religion, gender,
or physical disability when it came to hiring.
• The Civil Rights Act of 1964 paved the way for
the Civil Rights Act of 1968.
• That law states that you cannot discriminate
when it comes to selling or renting homes.
Civil Rights Laws
• Why was the Civil Rights movement
important?
• Because it finally enforced what America was
founded on – equal rights and tolerance.
• Not just for African-Americans, but for every
citizen.
Civil Rights Laws
• In 1972, another important law called Title IX
was established.
• This law states that any school receiving
Federal money cannot discriminate when it
comes to programs.
• This has had a huge impact on schools –
especially athletics – especially in college.
Civil Rights Laws
• Colleges have had to provide equal
opportunities to women’s sports – same
number of programs – equal funding.
• Title IX has received criticism because some
college men’s teams have been eliminated to
comply with the law.
Civil Rights Laws
• Another controversial “equality driven” program
is Affirmative Action.
• It was created to force employers to take steps to
make up for previous problems regarding
discrimination.
• Affirmative Action’s goal is to make the work
force resemble the general population of the
area.
Civil Rights Laws
• The benefits of Affirmative Action include:
• Prevents inequalities of pay and promotions.
• Provides jobs for more minorities and more
females.
Civil Rights Laws
• The negatives of Affirmative Action:
• In some cases has caused “reverse
discrimination”.
• Reverse discrimination is when employers do
not consider any candidate from the majority
population, so they can hire a minority.
Civil Rights Laws
• Affirmative Action came under fire in the
courts recently.
• In 1997 a white female applied to the
University of Michigan (YUCK!) and was
rejected in favor of a minority.
• The minority scored lower on the entrance
exam, and had a lower G.P.A.
Civil Rights Laws
• The woman was named Gratz and the case
went to the Supreme Court – Gratz vs.
Bollinger.
• Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in favor of Gratz –
claiming that University of Michigan (YUCK!)
went against Gratz’s 14th Amendment rights –
equal protection under the law.
YOUR TURN TO WRITE
• Why did civil rights laws take so long to come
into effect?
• Do you agree or disagree with Affirmative
Action – explain your answer by using at least
three ideas that back it up.