Transcript Civil Rights and Civil Liberties

Civil Rights
and
Civil Liberties
Monday, April 7
What are civil rights and
what are civil liberties?
Civil Rights = The right of every person to
equal protection under the law and
equal access to society’s opportunities
and public facilities.
Civil Liberties = Individual rights that are
protected from infringement by
government.
Transformation of Rights
Within the 19th and 20th centuries, we have
seen rights evolve:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
African-Americans
Women
LGBT
The Elderly
People with Disabilities
Civil Rights and Equality
“All men are created equal?”
-
Equality – One of the founding principles
of our democracy, yet still unrealized.
What is equality?
-
In theory, Americans have equal rights; in
practice, they are not equal and never
have been.
The Struggle for Equality:
African Americans
-
-
Slavery and the Civil War
The 13, 14, and 15th Amendments
13 = Abolished Slavery
14 = Guaranteed equal protection and
due process.
15 = Gave African Americans the right to
vote.
Jim Crow Laws (Post 1877)
Would you have been able to
vote?
The Alabama Literacy Test










Which body of Congress can try impeachments of the
President?
At what time of day on January 20th does the term of the
President end?
If the president does not sign a bill, how many days is he
allowed in which to return it to Congress for reconsideration?
If a bill is passed by Congress and the President refuses to
sign it and does not send it back to Congress in session within
the specified period of time, is the bill defeated or does it
become law?
If the United States wishes to purchase land for an arsenal
and have exclusive legislative authority over it, consent is
required from whom?
Which officer of the United States government is designated
as President of the Senate?
When is the president not allowed to exercise his power to
pardon?
Why is the power to grant patents given to Congress?
What is a tribunal?
If a person charged with treason denies his guilt, how many
people must testify against him before he can be
convicted?
Landmark Court Cases
-
Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)
-
“Separate but equal”
Court endorsed Jim Crow Laws
The use of race as a criterion of exclusion in
public matters was not unreasonable.
- Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
The Civil Rights Movement
1955 – Bus Boycott in Montgomery, AL
1957 – Little Rock, AK Desegregation
The Civil Rights Movement
(continued)
1963 – March in
Birmingham, AL led
by MLK, Jr.
1963 – March on
Washington, DC.
“I have a dream”
speech.
The Civil Rights Acts
-
-
Three civil rights acts were passed shortly
after the Brown decision; did little to help
the cause of blacks.
Civil Rights Act of 1964
Civil Rights Act of 1968
Voting Rights Act of 1965
Women and the
Struggle for Equality
-
United States carried on policies from England when
the nation was founded.
1848 – First Women’s Rights Convention in Seneca
Falls, NY
19th Amendment in 1920 gave women the right to
vote.
ERA
Equality Today
African Americans and Women:
Notable Gains v. Continued Struggles
De facto Discrimination: Discrimination that is
the result of social, economic, or cultural
biases or conditions.
De jure Discrimination: Discrimination based on
the law.
Equality of Result: Policies aimed at reducing or
eliminating de facto discrimination.
Examples: Affirmative action and busing
Gay and lesbian

Homophobia, or fear and hatred of homosexuals- has caused
many issues within the United States
 There have been many ruling against the civil rights of
Homosexuals
 The case of Bowers v Harwick allowed states to ban
homosexual relationships
 The Supreme Court also allowed the Boy Scouts to ban
homosexuals from their organization because it violated
their principles
 There have been recent success in the fight for gay civil
rights
 Recently the “Don’t Ask, Don’t tell” policy was struck
down in the military
 In the case of Romer v Evans (1996) a state constitutional
amendment was struck down after it tried to legalize
discrimination against gays
Understanding the
Transformation of LGBT:
 TIME
Article: History of Gays in the Military:
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article
/0,8599,1958246,00.html
 NBC- Today Show, reflection on the
DOMA
The Elderly



One group that has tried to hold on to their rights in this
changing work is the elderly
 People 65 and older make up about 37 million
people in the American population
 That is 12% of the American population
Many of the hot button issues regarding the elderly
revolves around Social Security and
Medicare/Medicade
 These programs account for a huge percentage of
the American budget and only appears to be an
increasing expenditure.
The elderly American population is also dealing with
age discrimination in the work place.
People with disabilities
 The
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
strengthened the protection for
Americans with disabilities

The ADA requires employers and
administrations of public facilities to make
“reasonable accommodations” and
prohibits employment discrimination against
people with disabilities.
After seeing the transformation of each
group, is Affirmative Action still necessary?
Affirmative Action
Affirmative Action = Deliberate effort to provide full
and equal opportunities in employment,
education, and other areas for women, minorities,
and individuals belonging to other disadvantaged
groups.
Many court cases have addressed the issue of
affirmative action, including the following
examples:
Regents of CA v. Bakke (1978)
US Steel v. Weber (1979)
Wards Cove v. Atonio (1989)
Adarand v. Pena (1995)
What are some
arguments in favor
of and in
opposition to
affirmative action?
Tuesday, April 8
Civil Liberties
Civil Liberties = Individual rights that are
protected from infringement by
government.
-
Foundation for Civil Liberties = Bill of Rights
and Interpretations of the Supreme Court
Our Civil Liberties
1.
The First Amendment
a. Freedom of Religion
b. Freedom of Speech
c. Freedom of the Press
2. The Second Amendment:
The Right to Bear Arms
3. The Rights of the Accused
4. The Right to Privacy
As Stated
 The
first and fourteenth amendments set
out two guarantees concerning religious
freedom. These guarantees prohibit:


An establishment of religion (establishment
clause)
Any arbitrary interference by government in
the free exercise of religion (free exercise
clause)
Establishment Clause
 According
to Thomas Jefferson the
establishment clause is:

“a wall of separation between church and
state”
Free Exercise

Both the first and fourteenth amendment
guarantees:


“Each person has the right to believe whatever
he or she chooses to believe in matters of
religion. No law and no other action by any
government can violate that absolute
constitutional right.”
There is a caveat to this though:

No person has an absolute right to act as he or
she chooses.
▪
i.e. A person does not have the right to violate
criminal laws, offend public morals, or other
wise threaten the safety of the community.
Court Cases
 Engle

v Vitale (1962):
Prior to the 1962 case of Engle V Vitale the
New York Board of Regents had a prayer
that students could recite. The prayer read:
 “Almighty
God, we acknowledge our
dependence upon Thee, and we beg, Thy
blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers,
and our country.”
The Decision
 This
court case outlawed the use, even on
a voluntary basis, of this prayer.

The supreme court decision stated that:
 “it
is no part of the business of government to
compose official prayers for any group of the
American people to recite as part of a
religious program carried on by government”
Court Cases
 Lemon

v. Kurtzman (1971):
This was a case involving a suit in which a
state law required that financial payments
be made to private schools to cover their
costs for teachers’ salaries, textbooks, and
other teaching materials in non-religious
courses.
The decision

The Supreme Court ruled that the establishment
clause is designed to:


Prevent sponsorship, financial support, and active
involvement of the sovereign in religious activity.
The court then setup the Lemon test, to verify
state aid was appropriate. The test has three
prongs which state:



The purpose of the aid must be clearly secular not
religious
Its primary effect must neither advance nor inhibit
religion
It must avoid an excessive entanglement of
government with religion
Court Cases
 In
the case of Zelman v Simmons-Harris
Zelman sued to be able to use school
vouchers to pay tuition at a religious
school

This case is very controversial as the
establishment clause generally prohibits
public money from being used for private
religious matters
The Decision


In a 5-4 decision the Ohio voucher program was
upheld as constitutional.
Under the Private Choice Test developed by the
court, for a voucher program to be constitutional it
must meet all of the following criteria:





the program must have a valid secular purpose
aid must go to parents and not to the schools
a broad class of beneficiaries must be covered
the program must be neutral with respect to
religion
there must be adequate nonreligious options
Rights of Assembly
 Under
the 1st amendment, people are
guaranteed the right to assemble, or
gather with one another to express their
views on public matters
 This amendment also protects peoples
right to bring their views to the attention of
public officials.
Limits
 The
right to assembly does have its limits
though.
 Assembly




must be peaceable.
People do not have the right to incite violence
To block public streets
To close a school
Endanger life, property or public order
DeJonge vs. Oregon (1937)


DeJonge had been speaking out about poor
jail conditions at a meeting of the Communist
party.
In the case DeJonge was arrested under the
pretence that he was committing criminal
syndicalism.

criminal syndicalism is the doctrine which
advocates crime, physical violence, sabotage
or any unlawful acts or methods as a means of
accomplishing or effecting industrial or political
change or revolution
The Decision

DeJonge’s conviction was struck down as it
was seen not to go against his states criminal
syndicalism laws.


The decision stated that the state law violated
the due process clause of the 14th
amendment.
The Judges decision stated that the auspices
under which a meeting is held, but the purpose
of the meeting and whether the speakers'
remarks transcend the bounds of freedom of
speech must be examined.

It could not be proved this his speech
constituted a clear and present danger
NAACP v Alabama (1958)
 In
1958 the KKK tried to force the NAACP
to turn over their membership list.


Because of the nature of the KKK this was
looked at as a way to intimidate and
dissuade the lawful assembly of members
of the NAACP
It was decided that forcing the NAACP to
turn over their membership list was an
unconstitutional restriction on freedom of
association
Gregory vs. Chicago (1969)
 Protestors
were arrested after peacefully
protesting segregation and asking for the
firing of the school superintendent.

Police officers demanded that the
protestors leave and when they refused to
leave is when the arrests took place.
The Decision

It was held that the protesters were arrested for
having a demonstration and not for violating
the officers directives.



The decision stated that since the protest was
peaceful and lawful that those who participated
could not be arrested
Their right to demonstrate was upheld because of
first amendment rights
Hecklers Veto

This required that a fee be paid by the group of
the main speaker of a demonstration
This was found unconstitutional during the
Gregory V Chicago case.
Forms of Free Speech
 While
free speech is guaranteed by the 1st
amendment, there are certain restrictions.

A person can be punished for:
 Using
obscene language.
 Using words in a way that causes another
person to commit a crime (i.e. to riot or to
desert the military).
 Another
example of limited free speech, is
when it contradicts the right to a fair trial
guaranteed by the 6th amendment.
Student’s Rights??
Do you as a student have rights?????
4th Amendment and Students Rights:
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/
ftrials/conlaw/searches.htm
Please read, and afterward we will discuss.
Wednesday, April 9
State v Federal

Originally the protections of the Bill of Rights were only available at the
federal level.
 There was no protection against states suppressing the freedoms
guaranteed by the Bill of Rights
 This concept is supported under the case of Barron v Baltimore
 Barron had sued Baltimore for destroying his wharf during the
creation of a public streets. He felt that under the 5th Amendment’s
eminent domain clause he should be compensated for the
destruction of his business.
 The Supreme Court ruled that only the national government, not
states or cities were responsible for adhering to the Bill of Rights
 This practice ends with the passage of the 14th Amendment and the
implications of the equal protection clause
SELECTIVE INCORPORATION: The process by which certain of the
guarantees expressed in the Bill of Rights become applicable to the states
through the Fourteenth Amendment. Under the total incorporation
approach, an approach never adopted by a majority of the Supreme
Court, all the Bill of Rights and the attendant case law interpreting them,
are applied to the states. Under the selective incorporation approach,
select guarantees in the Bill of Rights and their related case law are
applied to the states, 391 U.S. 145.
Gitlow v New York (1925)

In the case of Gitlow v New York, Benjamin Gitlow, a
member of the Socialist Party of America who had
served in the New York State Assembly, was charged
with criminal anarchy under New York's Criminal
Anarchy Law of 1902 for publishing in July 1919 a
document called "Left Wing Manifesto“

While Gitlow’s conviction was upheld under the “clear
and present danger” doctrine this case establishes the
precedent that the Supreme Court can review state
suppression of free speech at the state level under the
14th amendment and therefore establishes that free
speech is a right that must be extended to the states

This doctrine states that if an individual is using their
speech to advocate the overthrow of the government, it
is not constitutionally protected
Near vs. Minnesota (1931)

This case struck down a state law that
prohibited the publication of any “malicious,
scandalous, and defamatory” periodicals.


The Saturday Press a Minnesota newspaper
charged public corruption and attacking
“grafters” and “Jewish gangsters.”
The case guaranteed free speech can not be
restrained unless in extreme cases of war, or
when a publication is obscene or incites
violence.
New York Times CO v United
States (1971)

This case is most famously known as the Pentagon Papers
Case


The Pentagon Papers are officially known under the document
name, United States – Vietnam Relations, 1945–1967: A Study
Prepared by the Department of Defense
In this case, documents had been stolen from the State
Department discussing strategy used during the Vietnam
war.

The government tried to stop the publication of these
documents, stating that the publication would damage
national security.

The court upheld the right of the New York Times to publish these
papers as the government did not prove that the publication of
the Pentagon Papers would endanger the nation’s security.
Restraint
 Prior

Restraint:
Prior restraint is an attempt to prevent
publication or broadcast of any statement,
which is an unconstitutional restraint on free
speech and free press.
Texas vs. Johnson (1989)
 According
to this case, burning the
American flag as an act of political
protest is expressive conduct protected
by the 1st and 14th amendment.

In a 5-4 decision it was ruled that a law
forbidding the “desecration of a venerated
object” forbade freedoms of expression
held up by the 1st and 14th amendment.
Other Cases to look at
independently:




Schenck v United States: “Clear and Present
Danger”
Roth v United States: “Obscenity is not within the
area of constitutionally protected free speech or
press”
Miller v California: Avoids defining obscenity by
holding that community standards be used to
determine whether material is obscene in terms of
appealing to a “Prurient interest” and being
“patently offensive” and lacking value
New York Times v Sullivan: Having to do with Libel
The Shield

Shield Laws
A "shield law" is legislation designed to provide a news
reporter with the right to refuse to testify as to
information and/or sources of information obtained
during the newsgathering and dissemination process.
Gagged

Gag orders
Gag orders are a form of prior restraint that prohibit
parties, lawyers, prosecutors, witnesses, law
enforcement officials, jurors and others from talking to
the press. Frequently such orders are sought by one
party in a case, although judges may issue gag orders
on their own initiative.
The FCC

The FCC is responsible for:

Regulating interstate and foreign communications by:






Radio
Wire
Satellite
Cable
Radio and television tend to have greater
regulation as compared to print media.
The internet is the least regulated type of media.
Terrorism and
Civil Liberties:
Monday, April 14
The debate: After 9/11, how do we
prevent another terrorist attack?
Main Argument: National Security
should take precedence over civil
liberties (when they conflict).
Counter-Argument: Civil liberties should
ALWAYS take precedence.
THE DEBATE
We want to be a stable, democratic
system. We do not want to be vulnerable
to terrorist attacks.
What happens, however, when safety and
stability are achieved or promoted
through undemocratic means? Is
compromising civil liberties undemocratic
when it is necessary?
The Main Argument in Support
of Compromising Civil Liberties
When they conflict, national
security takes
precedence over civil
liberties.
Examples (of why this is good):

Foiled terrorist attacks.

Most Americans are unaffected.

Stability ensured.

Democratic process as watchdog.
The Counter-Argument
Civil liberties take
precedence over
National Security.
Examples (of why this is bad):

Racial profiling

Japanese internment

Discrimination against Muslims
The Patriot Act (2001)
What do you think?
Does the government have the right to infringe on
civil liberties? When? How far is too far?
What about racial profiling? Is racial profiling an
acceptable deviation from the equal protection
clause?
Is the government protecting US citizens from future
terrorist attacks or invading their privacy?
Is the Patriot Act a necessary part of life after
September 11 or does it overstep the boundaries
of privacy invasion?
April 15- Right to Privacy
Search and Seizure

Prior to an arrest being made police need to be
able to establish probable cause

Probable cause is the belief that there are
reasonable grounds to believe that someone is
guilty of a crime


This often requires physical evidence such as
fingerprints or possession of stolen property.
The 4th Amendment forbids unreasonable
searches and seizures

In order to prove that the search is reasonable
police often have to obtain a search warrant.
Warrants are generally not given unless probably
cause can be proven
Exclusion

Since 1914 the Supreme Court has used the
exclusionary rule to weigh evidence in
criminal cases


The exclusionary rule prevents prosecutors from
introducing illegally seized evidence in court
Until the case of Mapp v Ohio (1961) the
exclusionary rule only applied to federal cases

In this case the Supreme Court ruled that Mapp
could not be charged for drug possession even
though drugs were found when searching
Mapp’s home for a fugitive
Exceptions

There have been modern exceptions to the
exclusionary rule that have made the rule
more lax.

Justices have decided that good-faith
exceptions would be allowed in court


If evidence was obtained illegally but the
officers believed that they were obtaining
evidence legally, it could be valid in court.
In the case of Herring v United States (2009) it
was established that the police must
deliberately obtain evidence illegally for it to
not be valid in court
Self-Incrimination
 The
5th amendment forbids forced self
incrimination


This means that no person can be forced to
testify against themselves in a trial
This protection is furthered by the case of
Miranda v Arizona
 The
result of this case is the required reading
of one’s Miranda rights when arrested.
The Right to Counsel


The 6th Amendment ensures the right to
counsel in federal courts, but did not extend
to the states until 1963.
The case of Gideon v Wainwright (1963)
heard a case in which Clarence Gideon was
to poor to provide his own counsel


At the time only capital offenses were afforded
a court appointed lawyer
After the ruling of this case it was decided that
all individuals accused of a felony, no matter
their financial situation, could have a court
appointed lawyer defend them in a case
Cruel and Unusual Punishment


The 8th Amendment protects Americans citizens
from cruel and unusual punishment
In Gregg v Georgia (1976), Gregg was convicted
of a capitol crime and was to be sentenced to
death
 Gregg challenged the death penalty as a
violation of the cruel and unusual punishment
standard
 It was determined by the Supreme Court that
capitol punishment was not a violation of the
cruel and unusual punishment standard as it
was suitable sanction to the most extreme of
crimes
Right to Privacy

The Bill of Rights does not guarantee a citizens
express right to privacy

The Bill of Rights was however interpreted to
provide privacy starting with the case of
Griswold v Connecticut

In Griswold v Connecticut, Connecticut had
tried to pass a law preventing the use of
contraceptives

It was determined that privacy was inherent in the
rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights and that
preventing someone from using a contraceptive
was a violation of an individuals right to privacy
Right to Privacy

Roe v Wade

The case of Roe v Wade challenged state bans
on all abortions.

It was determined that states could not legally
ban abortions and that the following abortions
were allowed to be legal



No law can forbid an abortion during the first
trimester
Abortions are legal in the second trimester and can
be regulated, but only in a way that protects a
mother’s health
Abortion is legal in the third trimester ifthe mother’s
life is in danger