Supreme Court and Civil Rights of African Americans

  • Slides: 7
Download presentation
Supreme Court and Civil Rights of African Americans Plessy v. Ferguson 1896 - separate

Supreme Court and Civil Rights of African Americans Plessy v. Ferguson 1896 - separate does not mean unequal Brown v. Board of Ed 1954 – overturns separate but equal doctrine Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg County Schools 1971 – busing ok to assure desegregation but only DE JURE segregation, not DE FACTO

Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg County Schools 1971 Busing ok to assure desegregation but only DE

Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg County Schools 1971 Busing ok to assure desegregation but only DE JURE segregation, not DE FACTO segregation DE JURE – by law, by government policy DE FACTO – by fact – (by reality) - something that “just happens”, not the direct result of government policies but of private choice, e. g. people choose to live in different neighborhoods Court: only DE JURE segregation in education violates 14 th amendment equal protection right

Civil Rights Act 1964 1. Full and equal enjoyment of goods, services, privileges in

Civil Rights Act 1964 1. Full and equal enjoyment of goods, services, privileges in places of public accommodation 2. Right to equality in employment opportunities 3. Creates Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) 4. Federal funds can be withheld if there is discriminatation

Supreme Court limits on CR AFFIRMATIVE ACTION Bakke case (1978) – racial quotas in

Supreme Court limits on CR AFFIRMATIVE ACTION Bakke case (1978) – racial quotas in education violate equal protection clause, but ok to factor in race, to promote diversity, so long as you don’t use an explicit numerical quota. Adarand v. Pena (1995) –

 • Adarand v. Pena (1995) – • Federal programs that classify people by

• Adarand v. Pena (1995) – • Federal programs that classify people by race… should be presumed unconstitutional. • Court says affirmative action programs must be subject to “strict scrutiny” and be “narrowed tailored” to achieve a “compelling government interest. ”

Gender discrimination 1963 –Equal Pay Act 1972 - Title IX of Education Amendments, prohibits

Gender discrimination 1963 –Equal Pay Act 1972 - Title IX of Education Amendments, prohibits sex discrimination in federally funded education programs. Court on gender discrimination v. race – Gender discrimination violates 14 th amendment BUT gender is not a “suspect” classification like race, not subject to “strict scrutiny” by court

 • Virginia Military Institute case (1996) Men-only admissions policy of state-supported military college

• Virginia Military Institute case (1996) Men-only admissions policy of state-supported military college violated 14 th Amendment. • Sexual harassment: • violates the Civil Rights Act, is a form of gender discrimination • GAY RIGHTS: Laws singling out gay people that lack a rational basis violate 14 th amendment (Romer v. Evans) • June 2015: States can’t ban gay marriage. Gay couples can marry wherever they live (14 th amendment right)