PS 101 Civil Liberties & Civil Rights

3,673 views

Published on

0 Comments
5 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
3,673
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
29
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
5
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

PS 101 Civil Liberties & Civil Rights

  1. 1. Civil Liberties & Civil Rights Dr. Christopher S. Rice
  2. 2. Civil Liberties Individuals’ freedoms and legal protections that cannot be denied or hindered by the actions of government.
  3. 3. Embodied in Bill of Rights as prohibitions against government actions that threaten freedom.
  4. 4. Liberties in the Constitution
  5. 5. Liberties in the Constitution Writ of Habeas Corpus
  6. 6. Liberties in the Constitution Writ of Habeas Corpus Prohibition on Bills of Attainder
  7. 7. Liberties in the Constitution Writ of Habeas Corpus Prohibition on Bills of Attainder Prohibition on ex post facto laws
  8. 8. Liberties in the Constitution Writ of Habeas Corpus Prohibition on Bills of Attainder Prohibition on ex post facto laws Prohibition on states from impairing the obligation of contracts.
  9. 9. Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857)
  10. 10. Rights of Property in Human Beings
  11. 11. Argued Founders believed blacks had no rights whites were compelled to respect.
  12. 12. Civil War Amendments
  13. 13. Civil War Amendments 13th Amendment – outlawed slavery
  14. 14. Civil War Amendments 13th Amendment – outlawed slavery 14th Amendment – reversed Dred Scott; Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses
  15. 15. Civil War Amendments 13th Amendment – outlawed slavery 14th Amendment – reversed Dred Scott; Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses 15th Amendment – States couldn’t deny right to vote based on “race, color or previous condition of servitude.”
  16. 16. On paper vs. reality…
  17. 17. On paper vs. reality… Civil Rights Cases of 1883 – Equal Protection clause did not include racial discrimination by private parties.
  18. 18. On paper vs. reality… Civil Rights Cases of 1883 – Equal Protection clause did not include racial discrimination by private parties. Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) – States could require separation of the races on intrastate railways if “equal” facilities for the races were provided.
  19. 19. Incorporation The process used by the Supreme Court to protect individuals from actions by state and local government by interpreting the due process clause of the 14th Amendment as containing selected provisions of the Bill of Rights.
  20. 20. Freedom of Speech
  21. 21. Gitlow v. New York (1925)
  22. 22. Schenck v. United States (1919) “Clear and Present Danger” Test
  23. 23. Limitations on Speech
  24. 24. Limitations on Speech Speech mixed with conduct may be restricted under certain conditions.
  25. 25. Limitations on Speech Speech mixed with conduct may be restricted under certain conditions. Symbolic Expression
  26. 26. Limitations on Speech Speech mixed with conduct may be restricted under certain conditions. Symbolic Expression Use of profanity or “fighting words”
  27. 27. Limitations on Speech Speech mixed with conduct may be restricted under certain conditions. Symbolic Expression Use of profanity or “fighting words” Hate Speech has generally not been as restricted.
  28. 28. Limitations on Speech
  29. 29. Limitations on Speech Imminent-lawless action test – Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969): can’t incite harmful actions
  30. 30. Limitations on Speech Imminent-lawless action test – Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969): can’t incite harmful actions Libel – published false and harmful information
  31. 31. Limitations on Speech Imminent-lawless action test – Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969): can’t incite harmful actions Libel – published false and harmful information Slander – spoken false and harmful information
  32. 32. Limitations on Speech Imminent-lawless action test – Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969): can’t incite harmful actions Libel – published false and harmful information Slander – spoken false and harmful information Classified information – national security documents
  33. 33. Limitations on free speech
  34. 34. Limitations on free speech Certain types of obscenity
  35. 35. Limitations on free speech Certain types of obscenity “Fire!”
  36. 36. Limitations on free speech Certain types of obscenity “Fire!” Where you may protest
  37. 37. Limitations on free speech Certain types of obscenity “Fire!” Where you may protest Any others?
  38. 38. Right to Privacy?
  39. 39. Right to Privacy
  40. 40. Right to Privacy 3rd Amendment – prohibition against quartering of soldiers in our homes.
  41. 41. Right to Privacy 3rd Amendment – prohibition against quartering of soldiers in our homes. 4th Amendment – prohibition against unreasonable search and seizure.
  42. 42. Right to Privacy 3rd Amendment – prohibition against quartering of soldiers in our homes. 4th Amendment – prohibition against unreasonable search and seizure. 1st Amendment Rights
  43. 43. Right to Privacy 3rd Amendment – prohibition against quartering of soldiers in our homes. 4th Amendment – prohibition against unreasonable search and seizure. 1st Amendment Rights 9th Amendment – Protection of non- enumerated rights.
  44. 44. Right to Privacy
  45. 45. Right to Privacy Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) – ruled a right to privacy exists as basis for striking down laws making birth control illegal.
  46. 46. Right to Privacy Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) – ruled a right to privacy exists as basis for striking down laws making birth control illegal. Roe v. Wade (1973) – also decided on the basis of this right to privacy.
  47. 47. Right to Privacy Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) – ruled a right to privacy exists as basis for striking down laws making birth control illegal. Roe v. Wade (1973) – also decided on the basis of this right to privacy. Lawrence and Garner v. Texas (2003) – Court decided 6-3 that Texas sodomy laws violated due process clause of 14th Amendment. (“State cannot demean their existence or control their destiny by making their private sexual conduct a crime.”
  48. 48. “Strict Constructionism”
  49. 49. Civil Rights Legal protections concerning equality and citizens’ participation in the country’s democratic governing process.
  50. 50. Civil Rights vs. Civil Liberties
  51. 51. Civil Rights vs. Civil Liberties Civil Rights are government guarantees of political equality.
  52. 52. Civil Rights vs. Civil Liberties Civil Rights are government guarantees of political equality. Civil Liberties protect individuals from governmental interference.
  53. 53. Civil Rights vs. Civil Liberties Civil Rights are government guarantees of political equality. Civil Liberties protect individuals from governmental interference. Civil rights tend to apply to groups, civil liberties are individual protections.
  54. 54. Equality for African-Americans
  55. 55. Equality for African-Americans Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) - “Separate but Equal”
  56. 56. Equality for African-Americans Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) - “Separate but Equal” Circumventing voting guarantees of the 15th Amendment:
  57. 57. Equality for African-Americans Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) - “Separate but Equal” Circumventing voting guarantees of the 15th Amendment: Poll Tax
  58. 58. Equality for African-Americans Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) - “Separate but Equal” Circumventing voting guarantees of the 15th Amendment: Poll Tax Literacy Test (+ Grandfather Clause)
  59. 59. Equality for African-Americans Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) - “Separate but Equal” Circumventing voting guarantees of the 15th Amendment: Poll Tax Literacy Test (+ Grandfather Clause) White Primaries
  60. 60. Equality for African-Americans Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) - “Separate but Equal” Circumventing voting guarantees of the 15th Amendment: Poll Tax Literacy Test (+ Grandfather Clause) White Primaries Terror and Intimidation (has this really ended?)
  61. 61. Equality for African-Americans
  62. 62. Equality for African-Americans Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, KS (1954)
  63. 63. Equality for African-Americans Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, KS (1954) Reversed Plessy: “Separate educational facilities inherently unequal”
  64. 64. Equality for African-Americans Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, KS (1954) Reversed Plessy: “Separate educational facilities inherently unequal” 1954 Gallup poll - substantial majority of Southern whites opposed decision.
  65. 65. Equality for African-Americans Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, KS (1954) Reversed Plessy: “Separate educational facilities inherently unequal” 1954 Gallup poll - substantial majority of Southern whites opposed decision. 1954 Gallup poll - only a slim majority of whites outside the South agreed with the decision
  66. 66. Equality for African-Americans Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, KS (1954) Reversed Plessy: “Separate educational facilities inherently unequal” 1954 Gallup poll - substantial majority of Southern whites opposed decision. 1954 Gallup poll - only a slim majority of whites outside the South agreed with the decision The struggle for civil rights was on…
  67. 67. Civil Rights Act of 1964
  68. 68. Civil Rights Act of 1964 Barred unequal application of voter registration requirements, but did not abolish literacy tests.
  69. 69. Civil Rights Act of 1964 Barred unequal application of voter registration requirements, but did not abolish literacy tests. Outlawed discrimination in:
  70. 70. Civil Rights Act of 1964 Barred unequal application of voter registration requirements, but did not abolish literacy tests. Outlawed discrimination in: Hotels
  71. 71. Civil Rights Act of 1964 Barred unequal application of voter registration requirements, but did not abolish literacy tests. Outlawed discrimination in: Hotels Motels
  72. 72. Civil Rights Act of 1964 Barred unequal application of voter registration requirements, but did not abolish literacy tests. Outlawed discrimination in: Hotels Motels Restaurants
  73. 73. Civil Rights Act of 1964 Barred unequal application of voter registration requirements, but did not abolish literacy tests. Outlawed discrimination in: Hotels Motels Restaurants Theaters
  74. 74. Civil Rights Act of 1964 Barred unequal application of voter registration requirements, but did not abolish literacy tests. Outlawed discrimination in: Hotels Motels Restaurants Theaters all other public accommodations engaged in interstate commerce
  75. 75. Civil Rights Act of 1964 Barred unequal application of voter registration requirements, but did not abolish literacy tests. Outlawed discrimination in: Hotels Motels Restaurants Theaters all other public accommodations engaged in interstate commerce exempted private clubs without defining quot;private,quot; thereby allowing a loophole.
  76. 76. Civil Rights Act of 1964
  77. 77. Civil Rights Act of 1964 Authorized, didn’t require withdrawal of federal funds from programs which practiced discriminations.
  78. 78. Civil Rights Act of 1964 Authorized, didn’t require withdrawal of federal funds from programs which practiced discriminations. Outlaws discrimination in employment in any business on the basis of:
  79. 79. Civil Rights Act of 1964 Authorized, didn’t require withdrawal of federal funds from programs which practiced discriminations. Outlaws discrimination in employment in any business on the basis of: race
  80. 80. Civil Rights Act of 1964 Authorized, didn’t require withdrawal of federal funds from programs which practiced discriminations. Outlaws discrimination in employment in any business on the basis of: race national origin
  81. 81. Civil Rights Act of 1964 Authorized, didn’t require withdrawal of federal funds from programs which practiced discriminations. Outlaws discrimination in employment in any business on the basis of: race national origin sex
  82. 82. Civil Rights Act of 1964 Authorized, didn’t require withdrawal of federal funds from programs which practiced discriminations. Outlaws discrimination in employment in any business on the basis of: race national origin sex religion
  83. 83. Civil Rights Act of 1964 Authorized, didn’t require withdrawal of federal funds from programs which practiced discriminations. Outlaws discrimination in employment in any business on the basis of: race national origin sex religion Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) enforces this.
  84. 84. Voting Rights Act of 1965 Made it illegal for a governmental entity to deny equal access to the electoral process to persons on account of race, color or language minority status.
  85. 85. Gay and Lesbian Rights
  86. 86. Gay and Lesbian Rights Bowers v. Hardwick (1986)
  87. 87. Gay and Lesbian Rights Bowers v. Hardwick (1986) 1992 - Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell
  88. 88. Gay and Lesbian Rights Bowers v. Hardwick (1986) 1992 - Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Romer v. Evans (1996)
  89. 89. Gay and Lesbian Rights Bowers v. Hardwick (1986) 1992 - Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Romer v. Evans (1996) 2000 - Vermont legalizes same-sex unions.
  90. 90. Gay and Lesbian Rights Bowers v. Hardwick (1986) 1992 - Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Romer v. Evans (1996) 2000 - Vermont legalizes same-sex unions. Lawrence v. Texas (2003)
  91. 91. Gay and Lesbian Rights Bowers v. Hardwick (1986) 1992 - Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Romer v. Evans (1996) 2000 - Vermont legalizes same-sex unions. Lawrence v. Texas (2003) 2004 - Massachusetts institutes same-sex marriage
  92. 92. Gay and Lesbian Rights
  93. 93. Gay and Lesbian Rights Bush and Kerry had essentially the same position on gay marriage in 2004.
  94. 94. Gay and Lesbian Rights Bush and Kerry had essentially the same position on gay marriage in 2004. 2004 - 12 states had ballot measures banning same-sex marriage. All passed.
  95. 95. Gay and Lesbian Rights Bush and Kerry had essentially the same position on gay marriage in 2004. 2004 - 12 states had ballot measures banning same-sex marriage. All passed. Most Americans oppose same sex marriage, but divided almost equally on civil union issue.
  96. 96. Gay and Lesbian Rights Bush and Kerry had essentially the same position on gay marriage in 2004. 2004 - 12 states had ballot measures banning same-sex marriage. All passed. Most Americans oppose same sex marriage, but divided almost equally on civil union issue. Attitudes toward same-sex relationships have moderated substantially in recent decades.

×