Alternative transcript:

the ideals of popular sovereignty and inalienable, natural rights-state constitutions contained civil liberties protections! Hamilton stated in Fed. 84 that since the national government only had the enumerated powers in the Constitution, "Why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do?" In addition, a national Bill of Rights would be impractical to enforce. 1 Cong Child S Bill of Rights Establishment Clause: Congress cannot sanction an official religion. Free Exercise Clause: Congress cannot interfere with the practice of religion. www DEMOCRACY RELIGIOUS FREEDOM FREEDOM TO ASSEMBLE FREEDOM TO PETITION FREE SPEECH FREE PRESS CENSORSHIP Natalie Ho Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971) (Involved government support for religious schools) Established the "Lemon Test": 3-part test created by the Supreme Court for examining the constitutionality of religious establishment issues. Must: Have a legitimate secular (non-religious) purpose Neither advance nor inhibit religion Avoid "excessive entanglement" of the government and religious institutions *Engel v. Vitale (1962) A Facts: The New York State Board of Regents authorized a short, voluntary prayer for recitation at the start of each school day. A group of organizations joined forces in challenging the prayer, claiming that it violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The New York Court of Appeals rejected their arguments. Question: Does the reading of a nondenominational prayer at the start of the school day violate the "establishment of religion" clause of the First Amendment? AP Gov Unit 3 Study Guide Holding: The court decided in a 6-1 decision that the school prayer did in fact violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. *Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972) Facts: Jonas Yoder and Wallace Miller, both members of the Old Order Amish religion, and Adin Yutzy, a member of the Conservative Amish Mennonite Church, were prosecuted under a Wisconsin law that required all children to attend public schools until age 16. Their parents refused to send their children to such schools after 8th grade, arguing that high school attendance was contrary to their religious beliefs. Question: Did Wisconsin's requirement that all parents send their children to school at least until age 16 violate the First Amendment by criminalizing the conduct of parents who refused to send their children to school for religious reasons? Holding: In an 8-1 decision, the court ruled that the Amish families taking their children out of school after 8th grade was protected by the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. - SPEECH: *But government interests can outweigh free exercise in certain situations! Ex: prisoners may be denied access to service. *Schenck v. United States (1919) Facts: During World War I, socialists Charles Schenck and Elizabeth Baer distributed leaflets declaring that the draft violated the 13th Amendment prohibition against involuntary servitude. The leaflets urged the public to disobey the draft, but advised only peaceful action. Schenck was charged with conspiracy to violate the Espionage Act of 1917 by attempting to cause insubordination in the military and to obstruct recruitment. Schenck and Baer were convicted of violating this law and appealed on the grounds that the statute violated the 1st Amendment. Question: Did Schenck's conviction under the Espionage Act violate his First Amendment right to freedom of speech? Holding: The Court held that the Espionage Act did not violate the First Amendment and was an appropriate exercise of Congress' wartime authority. This case established the "clear and present danger test".... Clear and Present Danger Test: allows the government to restrict certain types of speech deemed dangerous, ex: you can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater, because doing so would likely result in panic. 2 Natalie Ho Direct Incitement Test: established in Brandenberg v. Ohio, this test protects threatening speech under the First Amendment unless that speech aims to and is likely to cause imminent "lawless action." AP Gov Unit 3 Study Guide Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969) Facts: In December 1965, a group of students in Des Moines held a meeting in the home of 16-year-old Christopher Eckhardt to plan a public showing of their support for a truce in the Vietnam war. They decided to wear black armbands throughout the holiday season and to fast on December 16 and New Year's Eve. The principals of the Des Moines school learned of the plan and met on December 14 to create a policy that stated that any student wearing an armband would be asked to remove it, with refusal to do so resulting in suspension. On December 16, Mary Beth Tinker and Christopher Eckhardt wore their armbands to school and were sent home. The following day, John Tinker did the same with the same result. The students did not return to school until after New Year's Day, the planned end of the protest. Through their parents, the students sued the school district for violating the students' right of expression and sought an injunction to prevent the school district from disciplining the students. The district court dismissed the case and held that the school district's actions were reasonable to uphold school discipline. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed the decision without opinion. Question: Does a prohibition against the wearing of armbands in public school, as a form of symbolic protest, violate the students' freedom of speech protections guaranteed by the First Amendment? Holding: The court ruled in a 7-2 decision, that yes, this violated their First Amendment rights to freedom of speech. The Supreme Court held that the armbands represented pure speech that is entirely separate from the actions or conduct of those participating in it. The Court also held that the students did not lose their First Amendment rights to freedom of speech when they stepped onto school property. In order to justify the suppression of speech, the school officials must be able to prove that the conduct in question would "materially and substantially interfere" with the operation of the school. In this case, the school district's actions evidently stemmed from a fear of possible disruption rather than any actual interference. Ⓡ - PRESS: * PROTECTED SPEECH: Hate Speech: communication that belittles a person or group on the basis of race, gender, ethnicity, or other characteristics. + symbolic speech (as in Tinker v. Des Moines) * UNPROTECTED SPEECH: Libel: a false written statement that defames the character of a person. Slander: a false spoken statement that defames the character of a person. Fighting words: words that "by their very utterance" can incite violence. +Obscenity, commercial speech, & "actual malice" (knowing disregard of the truth - NYT v. Sullivan) not alway protected. New York Times Co. v. United States (1971) Facts: In what became known as the "Pentagon Papers Case," the Nixon Administration attempted to prevent the New York Times and Washington Post from publishing materials belonging to a classified Defense Department study regarding the history of United States activities in Vietnam. The President argued that prior restraint was necessary to protect national security. This case was decided together with United States v. Washington Post Co. Question: Did the Nixon administration's efforts to prevent the publication of what it termed "classified information" violate the First Amendment? Holding: Yes. The Court held that the government did not overcome the "heavy presumption against" prior restraint of the press in this case. Justice Brennan reasoned that since publication would not cause an inevitable, direct, and immediate event imperiling the safety of American forces, prior restraint was unjustified. Prior restraint: a limit on freedom of the press that allows the government to prohibit the media from publishing certain materials. 3 13 T Natalie Ho The 2nd Amendment: Right to Bear Arms U.S. v. Miller (1939) ruled that this only protects a citizen's right to own ordinary militia weapons, not sawed-off shotguns D.C. v. Heller (2008) ruled that this protects an individual's right to own a firearm for person use in Washington D.C. The 3rd Amendment: No Quartering of Troops in Peacetime Not very applicable today... reaction to British soldiers... The 4th Amendment: No Unreasonable Searches and Seizures Without a warrant, searches are limited to: The 5th Amendment: Restrictions on the Federal Government with Respect to those Suspected of Committing a Crime 1. No self-incrimination - you don't have to testify against yourself/answer questions and this cannot be evidence of guilt - "I plead the fifth" No double jeopardy - can't be tried twice for the same crime Grand jury in capital cases - a group of citizens tasked with determining whether enough evidence exists for a case to go to trial Eminent domain if the government wants your property, they have to pay you Due process the government cannot strip you of your life, liberty, or process without due process of law 2. 3. The person arrested Things in plain view of the accused person Places or things that the arrested person could touch or reach or that otherwise could easily be in the arrestee's immediate control If people have a reasonable expectation of privacy, police must obtain a warrant prior to conducting an extensive search 4. 5. MIRANDA WARNING 1. YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT. 2. ANYTHING YOU SAY CAN AND WILL BE USED AGAINST YOU IN A COURT OF LAW. 3. YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO TALK TO A LAWYER AND HAVE HIM PRESENT WITH YOU WHILE YOU ARE BEING QUESTIONED. 4. IF YOU CANNOT AFFORD TO HIRE A LAWYER, ONE WILL BE APPOINTED TO REPRESENT YOU BEFORE ANY QUESTIONING IF YOU WISH. AP Gov Unit 3 Study Guide 5. YOU CAN DECIDE AT ANY TIME TO EXERCISE THESE RIGHTS AND NOT ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OR MAKE ANY STATEMENTS. WAIVER DO YOU UNDERSTAND EACH OF THESE RIGHTS I HAVE EXPLAINED TO YOU? HAVING THESE RIGHTS IN MIND, DO YOU WISH TO TALK TO US NOW? Constitutional Rights of Criminal Defendants: (Contained in Article I, Section 9) Miranda v. Arizona (1966) ! (Rapist didn't know he didn't have to answer questions or could have an attorney present and confessed....violation of self-incrimination clause) Miranda Rights: the list of civil liberties in the 5th Amendment that must be read to a suspect before anything they say can be used in trial. 4 Writs of habeas corpus: protect against unlawful and indefinite imprisonment; prisoners have the right to know what charges are made against them and they must be freed if the government's case does not persuade the judge. Ex post facto laws: make acts punishable as a crime after the act was committed; this is not allowed. Bills of attainder: laws declaring an act illegal without a judicial trial; this is prohibited. • More criminal rights are described in amendments 4, 5, 6, 8, and 14 :) Exclusionary Rule (est. 1914): bars the use of illegally seized evidence at trial. Mapp v. Ohio (1961) (Ruled that all evidence obtained by searches and seizures in violation of the Constitution is inadmissible in state court. Law enforcement was now put on notice that if they violated rights through their searches, it would be for naught.) The 6th Amendment: Right to Counsel The right to an attorney + a speedy public trial + an impartial jury Requires federal courts to provide an attorney to defendants that can't afford one First required in capital cases, but eventually extended to all federal criminal cases Began extending the same provision to the states but did so in a piecemeal manner States were left without direction, and given the high cost of legal defense, regularly did not provide counsel Natalie Ho *Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) Facts: Clarence Earl Gideon was charged in Florida state court with felony breaking and entering. When he appeared in court without a lawyer, Gideon requested that the court appoint one for him. According to Florida state law, however, an attorney may only be appointed to an indigent defendant in capital cases, so the trial court did not appoint one. Gideon represented himself in trial. He was found guilty and sentenced to five years in prison. Gideon filed a habeas corpus petition in the Florida Supreme Court, arguing that the trial court's decision violated his constitutional right to be represented by counsel. The Florida Supreme Court denied habeas corpus relief. Question: Does the Sixth Amendment's right to counsel in criminal cases extend to felony defendants in state courts? Holding: The Sixth Amendment's guarantee of a right to assistance of counsel applies to criminal defendants in state court by way of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court held that it was consistent with the Constitution to require state courts to appoint attorneys for defendants who could not afford to retain counsel on their own. The Court reasoned that the Sixth Amendment's guarantee of counsel is a fundamental and essential right made obligatory upon the states by the Fourteenth Amendment. The 7th Amendment: Right to Trial by Jury in CIVIL Cases Reminder: civil cases are basically suing cases and involve disputes between people and organizations ... The 8th Amendment: Prohibits "Cruel and Unusual Punishments" Also prohibits excessive bail and fines Today, the U.S. is the only western nation that puts people to death for committing crimes (state-by-state differences exist) The 9th Amendment: "Unenumerated" Rights Rights kept by the people Not limited to those specifically spelled out The 10th Amendment: Federalism in a Nutshell The powers not delegated to the national government are reserved to the states or to the people. AP Gov Unit 3 Study Guide Barron v. Baltimore (1833) (This was that case about the wharf guy being mad at the state for ruining his business... The Supreme Court ruled that the Bill of Rights limited only the actions of the U.S. government and not those of the states.... Sorry wharf dude) LEGO CITY 5-12 Privacy Rights Privacy rights are mentioned nowhere in the Constitution, but in Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), the court ruled that the Bill of Rights contained an implied right to privacy with the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 9th, and 14th amendments. 5 Roe v. Wade (1973) Facts: In 1970, Jane Roe (a fictional name to protect the plaintiff's identity) filed a lawsuit against Henry Wade, the district attorney of Dallas County, Texas, where she resided, challenging a Texas law making abortion illegal except by a doctor's orders to save a woman's life. In her lawsuit, Roe alleged that the state laws were unconstitutionally vague and abridged her right of personal privacy, protected by the First, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments. Question: Does the Constitution recognize a woman's right to terminate her pregnancy by abortion? Natalie Ho Holding: Inherent in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment is a fundamental "right to privacy" that protects a pregnant woman's choice whether to have an abortion. However, this right is balanced against the government's interests in protecting women's health and protecting "the potentiality of human life." The Texas law challenged in this case violated this right. The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protects against state action the right to privacy, and a woman's right to choose to have an abortion falls within that right to privacy. A state law that broadly prohibits abortion without respect to the stage of pregnancy or other interests violates that right. Although the state has legitimate interests in protecting the health of pregnant women and the "potentiality of human life," the relative weight of each of these interests varies over the course of pregnancy, and the law must account for this variability. Divided pregnancy into trimesters... The 14th Amendment (1868) 1 of 3 major amendments enacted after the Civil War to protect the rights of former slaves and free blacks. Language suggested that some or even all protections guaranteed in the Bill of Rights might be interpreted to prevent state infringement of those rights. Privileges and Immunities Clause: "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States" Citizenship Clause: all persons born or naturalized in the U.S. are citizens of the U.S. and the state wherein they reside. Equal Protection Clause: prohibits states from denying any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law. Due Process Clause: the government can't take a person's "life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." Incorporation Doctrine... Interpretation of the Constitution holding that the due process clause of the 14th Amendment requires state and local governments to guarantee the rights stated in the Bill of Rights. Selective Incorporation: judicial doctrine whereby most, but not all, protections found in the Bill of Rights are made applicable to the states via the 14th Amendment. Gitlow v. New York (1925) (Gitlow printed a proposal in which he urged workers to overthrow the U.S. government, was convicted of violating a New York state law prohibiting such advocacy, conviction upheld in the Supreme Court...but the justices noted that states were not completely free to limit forms of political expression, extended freedom of speech and press to state governments, first decision to clearly articulate the doctrine of incorporation) Sedition laws: laws that made it illegal to speak or write any political criticism that threaten to diminish respect for the government, its laws, or public officials. 6 Provisions of the 14th Amendment's Due Process Clause AMENDMENT 1st Amendment 2nd Amendment AP Gov Unit 3 Study Guide 3rd Amendment 4th Amendment 5th Amendment 6th Amendment 7th Amendment 8th Amendment RIGHTS INCORPORATED Freedoms of speech, press, assembly, petition; Free Exercise Clause; Establishment Clause Right to bear arms No unreasonable searches or seizures No self-incrimination; No double jeopardy Right to counsel; Right to confront and obtain witnesses; Speedy trial, Trial by jury in criminal cases No cruel and unusual punishment RIGHTS NOT INCORPORATED No quartering of troops Grand jury Trial by jury in civil cases McDonald v. Chicago (2010) Facts: Several suits were filed against Chicago and Oak Park in Illinois challenging their gun bans after the Supreme Court issued its opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller. In that case, the Supreme Court held that a D.C. handgun ban violated the 2nd Amendment. There, the Court reasoned that the law in question was enacted under the authority of the federal government and, thus, the Second Amendment was applicable. Here, plaintiffs argued that the Second Amendment should also apply to the states. The district court dismissed the suits. On appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed. Natalie Ho Question: Does the Second Amendment apply to the states because it is incorporated by the Fourteenth Amendment's Privileges and Immunities or Due Process clauses and thereby made applicable to the states? Holding: The Supreme Court reversed the Seventh Circuit, holding that the Fourteenth Amendment makes the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense applicable to the states. The Court reasoned that rights that are "fundamental to the Nation's scheme of ordered liberty" or that are "deeply rooted in this Nation's history and tradition" are appropriately applied to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court recognized in Heller that the right to self-defense was one such "fundamental" and "deeply rooted" right. The Court reasoned that because of its holding in Heller, the Second Amendment applied to the states. Debate over whether the incorporation was due to the Due Process Clause or the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the 14th Amendment... Rights in Conflict Alien Act and Sedition Acts (1798): tightened restrictions on foreign-born Americans and limited speech critical of the government. Executive Order 9066: signed by FDR, this authorized the evacuation of all persons deemed a threat to national security from the West Coast to relocation centers further inland. Japanese Internment... :( USA Patriot Act (2001): modernized our ability to monitor criminal and terrorist communications by applying our wiretap laws to new technologies such as cell phones and email without modifying or reducing the legal and constitutional restraints applicable to those tools. Slavery in the United States Topic 2: Civil Rights →→ Equality "We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by the Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." - The Declaration of Independence South wanted slaves counted towards population in House of Representatives but not for taxing North wanted slaves counted for taxes but not in the House of Representatives... Despite this broad language, at the time the Declaration was written, women had no political or economic rights, equality did not apply to slaves or Native Americans, and even propertyless white men did not have full political rights until much later. The 3/5ths Compromise: of a state's entire slave population, 3/5ths would be counted for free representation in the House of Representatives. Runaways must be returned The slave trade would continue for 20 years (helped the Constitution get ratified) HUMANNESS According to the three the compromise) FREE WHITES BLACK SLAVES TRIANGULAR TRADE 7 AP Gov Unit 3 Study Guide NORTH AMERICA OCEAN PRIVACY! CARBSEAR STANDE raw materials SOUTH AMERICA SECURITY ATLANTIC OCEAN ctured goods enslaved Africans EUROPE AFRICA Missouri Compromise: an agreement between pro- and antislavery groups passed by Congress in 1820 in an attempt to ease tensions by limiting the expansion of slavery while also maintaining balance between slave states and free states. Emancipation Proclamation: issued by President Lincoln in 1863; declared the liberation of enslaved people in the rebel states. Natalie Ho Reconstruction (aka Civil War) Amendments After the bloody and costly Civil War, which ended slavery, Republicans moved quickly to ensure that the changes accomplished by the war could not be easily undone and promptly added these 3 amendments to the Constitution: The 13th Amendment: banned slavery The 14th Amendment: contains the Equal Protection clause & more... see "The 14th Amendment (1868)" section above The 15th Amendment: gave African American men the right to vote Voting Disenfranchisement (Post Civil War) Disenfranchised: to have been denied the ability to exercise a right, such as the right to vote. These are methods that were used to deny suffrage to African Americans: Literacy Tests: a test of one's ability to read and write... duh Poll Taxes: a tax of a fixed amount per adult person that is often linked to the right to vote... also duh (banned by 24th Amendment!) Continued Racial Discrimination Jim Crow Laws: any state or local laws that enforced or legalized racial segregation. → Ex: sperate schools, illegal interracial marriage... Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) (This case famously established the "separate but equal" doctrine, which allowed Southern states to twist the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment by allowing "separate but equal" facilities based on race.) AP Gov Unit 3 Study Guide Grandfather Clauses: laws enacted in several southern states to allow those who were permitted to vote before the Civil War, and their descendants, to bypass literacy tests and other obstacles to voting, thereby exempting whites from these tests while continuing to disenfranchise African Americans and other people of color. XIII 8 B coll PLESSY VS. FERGUSON Black Brown v. Board of Education (1954) Facts: This case was the consolidation of cases arising KS, SC, VA, DE, and Washington D.C. relating to the segregation of public schools on the basis of race. In each of the cases, African American students had been denied admittance to certain public schools based on laws allowing public education to be segregated by race. They argued that such segregation violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The plaintiffs were denied relief in the lower courts based on Plessy v. Ferguson, which held that racially segregated public facilities were legal so long as the facilities for blacks and whites were equal. Question: Does the segregation of public education based solely on race violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment? Holding: Separate but equal educational facilities for racial minorities is inherently unequal, violating the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court reasoned 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. This brought an end to the "separate but equal" doctrine. SEPARATE BUT NOT EQUAL Natalie Ho Civil Rights Movement Rosa Parks and the Montgomery Bus Boycott Parks refused to give up her seat to a white man on a bus Montgomery, Alabama. Her refusal sparked a massive bus boycott that lasted 381 days, ending on December 21, 1956, after the United States Supreme Court ruled that racial segregation on city buses was unconstitutional. Birmingham Campaign An American movement organized in early 1963 by the Southern Christian Leadership Conference to bring attention to the integration efforts of African Americans in Birmingham, Alabama. Civil Rights Act of 1957 In 1957, President Eisenhower sent Congress a proposal for civil rights legislation. The result was the Civil Rights Act of 1957, the first civil rights legislation since Reconstruction. The new act established the Civil Rights Section of the Justice sont and the Justice Department and empowered federal prosecutors to obtain court era pros injunctions against interference with the against right to vote. It also established a federal Comme Civil Rights Commission with authority to investigate discriminatory conditions and recommend corrective measures. The final act was weakened by Congress due to lack of support among the Democrats. The Little Rock Nine and the Little Rock Crisis The Little Rock Nine were a group of 9 African American students enrolled in Little Rock Central High School in 1957. Their enrollment was followed by the Little Rock Crisis, in which the students were initially prevented from entering the racially segregated school by Orval Faubus, the Governor of Arkansas. TAKE AS Min Tay Law FREEDOM H Enfant Wheelsore Freedons Rolling! END. SET THE LAW OF LAND IS OUR DEMAND Freedom Riders Freedom Riders were groups of white and African American civil rights activists who participated in Freedom Rides, bus trips through the American South in 1961 to protest segregated bus terminals Selma to Montgomery March The Selma to Montgomery marches were three protest marches, held in 1965, along the 54-mile highway from Selma, Alabama, to the state capital of Montgomery. They marched to ensure that African Americans could exercise their constitutional right to vote even in the face of a segregationist system that wanted to make it impossible. 9 Voting Rights Act of 1965 The Voting Rights Act of 1965, signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson, aimed to overcome legal barriers at the state and local levels that prevented African Americans from exercising their right to vote as guaranteed under the 15th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. AP Gov Unit 3 Study Guide Sit Ins and Woolworth Lunch Counter On February 1, 1960, four African American college students sat down at a lunch counter at Woolworth's in Greensboro, North Carolina, and politely asked for service. Their request was refused. When asked to leave, they remained in their seats. Their passive resistance and peaceful sit-down demand helped ignite a youth-led movement to challenge racial inequality throughout the South. March on Washington Commonly referred to as the March on Washington, the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom brought over 200,000 people to the nation's capitol to protest racial discrimination and show support for civil rights legislation that was pending in Congress. Civil Rights Act of 1964 The Civil Rights Act of 1964, which ended segregation in public places and banned employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin, is considered one of the crowning legislative achievements of the civil rights movement. First proposed by President John F. Kennedy, it survived strong opposition from southern members of Congress and was then signed into law by Kennedy's successor, Lyndon B. Johnson. Natalie Ho Letter from Birmingham Jail Author: Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Summary: In April 1963, Martin Luther King Jr. was arrested in Birmingham, Alabama, for his role in helping to organize a series of marches and sit-ins to protest racial segregation. From his jail cell, he wrote an open letter to the city's African American religious leaders. This letter outlined many of his key ideas regarding the importance of nonviolent resistance in the form of peaceful assembly. His letter convinced many, and African Americans and their supporters continued to use nonviolent resistance to dismantle legal segregation throughout the South. Key Points: There are 2 types of laws: just and unjust; individuals have a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws; "injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere;" nonviolent protests draw attention to what has previously been ignored and creates tension that leads to negotiation; constructive, nonviolent tension is necessary for growth, we haven't made a single gain in civil rights without legal and nonviolent pressure, groups are more immoral than individuals... Affirmative Action Affirmative action refers to efforts made to provide opportunities for historically underrepresented minorities and repair the effects of past discrimination that have led to inequity. This concept was first introduced by President John F. Kennedy in 1961 when he signed an executive order requiring affirmative action to prevent racial discrimination in employment and contracting. Soon after this, President Lyndon B. Johnson pushed for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to be passed, which prohibited discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, religion, and natural origin in many public settings and federal programs and processes. In the 1980s, President Ronald Reagan demonstrated his opposition to many affirmative action programs, his ideas of which generally represented more conservative views. Many people felt that affirmative action was like reverse discrimination because these policies gave minorities advantages over the majority of individuals. Today affirmative action policies are receiving increasing criticism and backlash, and many states have even banned affirmative action. In fact, nine states prohibit the consideration of race in public school admissions. In addition, many court cases have questioned the constitutionality of these affirmative action policies and they have often resulted in specific criteria that must be met in order for race to be allowed to be considered. Affirmative action policies are highly controversial, and public opinion polls have demonstrated that most Americans do not support them. (taken directly from my SLD introduction, refer back to Affirmative Action SLD...) More on Civil Rights 19th Amendment: granted women the right to vote. Equal Pay Act: requires that men and women in the same workplace be given equal pay for equal work AP Gov Unit 3 Study Guide Equal Rights Amendment (proposed, not ratified): designed to guarantee equal legal rights for all American citizens regardless of sex. Title IX of the Education Amendments Act (1972): prohibits sex (including pregnancy, sexual orientation, and gender identity) discrimination in any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC): the largest and oldest Hispanic and Latin-American civil rights organization in the United States. DAUGHTER SON of SOCCER RAISED in of ALUM BIG DONOR PLAYER DISTANT STATE MINORITY 10 ADMISSIONS 190 IT'S HIS FAULT! DIDN'T GET IN IVOTES for WOMEN Cesar Chavez: was an American labor leader and civil rights activist. Along with Dolores Huerta, he co-founded the National Farm Workers Association, which later merged with the Agricultural Workers Organizing Committee to become the United Farm Workers labor union. SENE Natalie Ho AP Gov Unit 3 Study Guide Dolores Huerta: an American labor leader and civil rights activist who, with Cesar Chavez, is a co-founder of the National Farmworkers Association, which later merged with the Agricultural Workers Organizing Committee to become the United Farm Workers. Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF): a national non-profit civil rights organization formed in 1968 by Jack Greenberg to protect the rights of Latinos in the United States. Chinese Exclusion Act (1882);: the first significant law restricting immigration into the United States. In the spring of 1882, the Chinese Exclusion Act was passed by Congress and signed by President Chester A. Arthur. This act provided an absolute 10-year ban on Chinese laborers immigrating to the United States. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA): a civil rights law that prohibits discrimination based on disability. Korematsu v. United States (1955) (The case where the Supreme Court ruled that Executive Order 9066, which established the Japanese internment camps, was constitutional) Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) 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. 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. KEEP CALM 11 MARRY ON Questions: (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? Holding: Yes, yes. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy delivered the opinion for the 5-4 majority. The Court held that 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. The Court also held that the First Amendment protects the rights of religious organizations to adhere to their principles, but it does not allow states to deny same-sex couples the right to marry on the same terms as those for opposite-sex couples.