14th AmendmentMargo TillstromChris Makaryk Ariel WoldmanZach Morris

Historical Background• Adopted on July 9th 1868- part 2nd amendment of

the 3 Reconstruction Amendments.• The Southern States opposed the Amendment• Ensured to provide equal protection under the law

to all people of life, liberty and property without legislative authorization.

• Democrats were against it• Republicans were for it.

14th Amendment

Key Concepts :1) State and federal citizenship for “all persons [regardless of race] born or naturalized in the United States” was reaffirmed.2) No state would be allowed to “abridge the privileges and immunities of citizens.”3) No person was allowed to be deprived of “life, liberty, or property without due process of law."4) No person could be denied "equal protection of the laws."

The broad goal of the 14th amendment was to ensure that the Civil Rights Act passed in 1866 would remain valid.

Clauses of The 14th Amendment

• Equal Protection Clause- People are entitled to their rights in all the states of the United States of America.

• Incorporation Clause- Many amendments that are included in the Bill of Rights are imposed among the states.

• Due Process Clause- All levels of American Government must operate within the law.

Plessy v. Fergison

Background

• 1890- railroads were forced to segregate trains• The train cars had to separate blacks

and whites

Case

• Plessy- 1/8 African American business man• Arrested on a train for not moving out

of his seat• Plessy appealed to the supreme court

Plessy

• Claims he was denied equal protection• Violation of the 14th

Louisiana

• Segregation reflects public will• Segregation allows for equal

protection and makes the white people happy

The Decision• Justice Henry B. Brown read the decision

(7-1) Louisiana or Plessy.• “Legislation is powerless to eradicate racial

instincts or to abolish distinctions based upon physical differences.”

• This means legislation can’t change public attitude.

Regents of University of California v. Bakke• (1978)• The case involved the admissions practices of the

Medical School of the University of California and Allan Bakke.

• The medical school reserved 16 out of 100 seats in its entering class for minorities.

• Allan Bakke, a white applicant, was twice denied admission to the medical school even though his MCAT scores and GPA were "significantly higher" than those of some minority applicants that were admitted.

The Case• Bakke sued the University of California in a state

court, arguing that the medical school's admission policy violated the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.

The Decision• 5 to 4 vote• The Supreme Court ruled that a university's use of racial

"quotas" in its admissions process was unconstitutional, but a school's use of "affirmative action" to accept more minority applicants was constitutional in some circumstances.

• “Justice Powell wrote that “the guarantee of Equal Protection cannot mean one thing when applied to one individual and something else when applied to a person of another color.”

• “Justice Thurgood Marshall argued that race could properly be considered in an affirmative action program, a policy of taking positive steps to remedy the effects of past discrimination.”

Roe v. Wade• Jane Roe, an unmarried pregnant women who

wished to obtain an abortion.• Texas law made it a felony to abort a fetus unless

“on medical advice for the purpose of saving the life of the mother.”

Case• Roe sued on behalf of herself and all other women

in similar situations.• She claimed that the laws were unconstitutionally

vague and abridged her right of personal privacy, protected by the First, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments.

The Decision• 7-2 Vote• the Court ruled that the Texas statute violated

Jane Roe's constitutional right to privacy.

Modern Use• The 14th amendment is used all the time. • Equal protection to everyone• Due process clause expanded to women's rights.• Used to support Gay Rights.