The second section on 14th Amendment looking at equal protection clause through Brown v. Board of Education (1). Discriminatory impact resulting from racial impact. Due process as expressed through right to privacy (body integrity) through Roe v. Wade. Right to live vs. right to die. Expansion of right to privacy through Obergefell.

1. Fourteenth Amendment II
PSC 381 Bill of Rights

2. Facts: This case was the consolidation of four cases arising in
separate states relating to the segregation of public schools on the
basis of race. In each of the cases, African American minors had
been denied admittance to certain public schools based on laws
allowing public education to be segregated by race. They argued that
such segregation violates the Equal Protection Clause of the
Fourteenth Amendment. The plaintiffs were denied relief based on
the precedent set by Plessy v. Ferguson, which established the
“separate but equal” doctrine that stated separate facilities for the
races was constitutional as long as the facilities were “substantially
equal.”
Brown v. Board of Education (1)

3. Lower Court Holding: In the case arising from Delaware, the Supreme
Court of Delaware ruled that the African American students had to be
admitted to the white public schools because of their higher quality
facilities.
Brown v. Board of Education (1)

4. Issue: Does the segregation of public education based solely on race
violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?
Brown v. Board of Education (1)

5. Holding: Yes. Chief Justice Earl Warren delivered the opinion of the
unanimous Court. The Supreme Court held that “separate but equal”
facilities are inherently unequal and violate the protections of the
Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court
also held that the segregation of public education based on race
instilled a sense of inferiority that had a hugely detrimental effect on
the education and personal growth of African American children.
Brown v. Board of Education (1)

6. Facts: After its decision in Brown (1) which declared racial
discrimination in public education unconstitutional, the Court
convened to issue the directives which would help to implement its
newly announced Constitutional principle. Given the embedded
nature of racial discrimination in public schools and the diverse
circumstances under which it had been practiced, the Court
requested further argument on the issue of relief.
Brown v. Board of Education (2)

7. Issue: What means should be used to implement the principles
announced in Brown 1?
Brown v. Board of Education (2)

8. Holding: The Court held that the problems identified in Brown I
required varied local solutions. Chief Justice Warren conferred much
responsibility on local school authorities and the courts which
originally heard school segregation cases. They were to implement
the principles which the Supreme Court embraced in its first Brown
decision. Warren urged localities to act on the new principles
promptly and to move toward full compliance with them "with all
deliberate speed."
Brown v. Board of Education (2)

9. Holding: Roe, a Texas resident, sought to terminate her pregnancy by
abortion. Texas law prohibited abortions except to save the pregnant
woman's life. After granting certiorari, the Court heard arguments
twice. The first time, Roe's attorney -- Sarah Weddington -- could not
locate the constitutional hook of her argument for Justice Potter
Stewart. Her opponent -- Jay Floyd -- misfired from the start.
Weddington sharpened her constitutional argument in the second
round. Her new opponent -- Robert Flowers -- came under strong
questioning from Justices Potter Stewart and Thurgood Marshall.
Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973)

10. Issue: Does the Constitution embrace a woman's right to terminate
her pregnancy by abortion?
Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973)

11. Holding: The Court held that a woman's right to an abortion fell within
the right to privacy (recognized in Griswold v. Connecticut) protected
by the Fourteenth Amendment.
The decision gave a woman total autonomy over the pregnancy
during the first trimester and defined different levels of state interest
for the second and third trimesters.
As a result, the laws of 46 states were affected by the Court's ruling.
Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973)

12. Is there a right to die?

13. Facts: Groups of same-sex couples sued their relevant state agencies
in Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky, and Tennessee to challenge the
constitutionality of those states' bans on same-sex marriage or
refusal to recognize legal same-sex marriages that occurred in
jurisdictions that provided for such marriages.
The plaintiffs in each case argued that the states' statutes violated
the Equal Protection Clause and Due Process Clause of the
Fourteenth Amendment, and one group of plaintiffs also brought
claims under the Civil Rights Act.
Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. ___ (2015)

14. Lower Court Ruling: In all the cases, the trial court found in favor of
the plaintiffs.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit reversed and held that
the states' bans on same-sex marriage and refusal to recognize
marriages performed in other states did not violate the couples'
Fourteenth Amendment rights to equal protection and due process.
Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. ___ (2015)

15. Issue: (1) Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to license
a marriage between two people of the same sex?
(2) Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to recognize a
marriage between two people of the same sex that was legally
licensed and performed in another state?
Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. ___ (2015)

16. Holding: Justice Anthony M. Kennedy delivered the opinion for the 5-4
majority. The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
guarantees the right to marry as one of the fundamental liberties it
protects, and that analysis applies to same-sex couples in the same
manner as it does to opposite-sex couples. Judicial precedent has
held that the right to marry is a fundamental liberty because it is
inherent to the concept of individual autonomy, it protects the most
intimate association between two people, it safeguards children and
families by according legal recognition to building a home and raising
children, and it has historically been recognized as the keystone of
social order.
Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. ___ (2015)

17. Holding: Because there are no differences between a same-sex union
and an opposite-sex union with respect to these principles, the
exclusion of same-sex couples from the right to marry violates the
Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. ___ (2015)

18. Holding: The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
also guarantees the right of same-sex couples to marry as the denial
of that right would deny same-sex couples equal protection under the
law.
Marriage rights have traditionally been addressed through both parts
of the Fourteenth Amendment, and the same interrelated principles of
liberty and equality apply with equal force to these cases; therefore,
the Constitution protects the fundamental right of same-sex couples
to marry.
Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. ___ (2015)

19. ● Fourteenth Amendment extends federal authority over:
○ Integration of races in public schools;
○ Women’s abortion decisions;
○ Same-sex marriage.
Recap

20. Attributions:
"Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1)." Oyez, https://www.oyez.org/cases/1940-1955/347us483. Accessed 7 Apr. 2017.
"Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (2)." Oyez, https://www.oyez.org/cases/1940-1955/349us294. Accessed 7 Apr. 2017.
"Roe v. Wade." Oyez, https://www.oyez.org/cases/1971/70-18. Accessed 7 Apr. 2017.
"Obergefell v. Hodges." Oyez, https://www.oyez.org/cases/2014/14-556. Accessed 7 Apr. 2017.
For additional information:
Brandon L. Blankenship
UAB | Department of Government
(205)912-8248 | blbjd@uab.edu
Attributions and Additional Information: