Chapter 14: Citizenship and Equal Justice

386

Rights and ResponsibilitiesYour right to vote at age 18 is onlyone privilege of United States citizen-ship. What other rights do you have?This chapter will show how responsiblecitizenship makes everyone’s rightsmore meaningful and effective.

To learn more about yourrights and responsibilities

as a citizen of the United States, viewthe Democracy in Action Chapter 14video lesson:

Citizenship in the United States

Chapter Overview Visit the United StatesGovernment: Democracy in Action Web siteat gov.glencoe.com and click on Chapter14—Overview to preview chapter information.

GOVERNMENT

★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★

386-390 CH14S1-860053 12/1/04 10:45 PM Page 386

http://www.gov.glencoe.com

CHAPTER 14: CITIZENSHIP AND EQUAL JUSTICE 387

Oscar Handlin, a well-known Americanhistorian, described what immigrationhas meant to America: “Once I thoughtto write a history of the immigrants in

America. Then I discovered that the immigrantswere American history.”

Immigrants and AliensThroughout American history immigrantshave often been referred to as aliens. An

alien is a person who lives in a country where he orshe is not a citizen. Aliens may not intend to be-come citizens, or they may be in a country only fora short time—conducting business or working fora foreign government, for instance. An immigrant,however, is a person who comes to a new countryintending to live there permanently.

Classifying Aliens United States law classifiesaliens into five different categories: (1) A residentalien is a person from a foreign nation who has es-tablished permanent residence in the UnitedStates. Thus, immigrants are resident aliens untilthey become naturalized citizens. Resident aliensmay stay in the United States as long as they wishwithout becoming American citizens. (2) A non-resident alien is a person from a foreign countrywho expects to stay in the United States for ashort, specified period of time. A Nigerian jour-nalist who has come to report on a presidentialelection is an example of a non-resident alien.(3) An enemy alien is a citizen of a nation withwhich the United States is at war. Legally, enemyaliens living in the United States are entitled tothe full protection of their lives and property.During wartime, however, the public’s feelingsoften run high, and enemy aliens have some-times been subjected to discriminatory prac-tices. (4) Refugees are people fleeing to escapepersecution or danger. In the early 1990s au-thorized refugee admissions averaged 121,000per year. (5) An illegal alien is a person who

A Nation of ImmigrantsS e c t i o n 1S e c t i o n 1

Tactic Saves Refugees OSWEGO, NEW YORK, JUNE 12, 1944

Agovernment agency

has found a way to

save some European Jews

from the Nazis. Overcom-

ing opposition from within

and outside the govern-

ment, the War Refugee

Board has convinced Presi-

dent Franklin Roosevelt

to consider 1,000 Jewish

refugees as prisoners of

war. The Jews will be held

for the remainder of World

War II at an army base near

Oswego. Despite their confinement, the tactic gets

around immigration laws and allows the refugees

into the United States. The government has come

under increasing attack for its restrictions on immi-

gration, as reports of Adolf Hitler’s extermination of

Europe’s Jews have reached the United States.

Jewish refugeescheck in at Fort Ontario

Reader’s Guide

Key Termsalien, resident alien, non-resident alien, enemyalien, illegal alien, amnesty, private law

Find Out■ How does the United States classify

noncitizens?■ How has immigration policy in the United

States changed over time?

Understanding ConceptsCultural Pluralism How has immigration policycontributed to the diversity of cultures in the United States?

Statue of Liberty▲

386-390 CH14S1-860053 12/1/04 10:46 PM Page 387

comes to the United States without a legal permit,such as a passport, visa, or entry permit. Mostenter by illegally crossing United States borders,but many are foreigners who have stayed in theUnited States after their legal permits have expired.The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services estimates that between 2 and 3 million “illegals”were living in the United States during the mid-1990s.

Aliens’ Rights The protections that the Bill ofRights guarantees, such as freedom of speech andassembly, apply to aliens as well as citizens. In ad-dition, the Supreme Court has repeatedly struckdown state government attempts to limit the rightsof aliens. In 1982, for example, the Supreme Courtruled that the state of Texas could not deny freepublic education to children of illegal aliens.

Aliens may own homes, attend public schools,carry on businesses, and use public facilities, just ascitizens do. Similarly, aliens are expected to sharein many of the responsibilities of American life.

They are required to pay taxes, obey the law, and beloyal to the government. They cannot vote, howev-er, and are usually exempt from military and juryduty. Unlike citizens, aliens are not guaranteed theright to travel freely in the United States. This re-striction has been applied in times of war. Allaliens, even those who have applied for UnitedStates citizenship, are required to notify the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services whenthey change their residence.

388 CHAPTER 14: CITIZENSHIP AND EQUAL JUSTICE

In 2002 the total foreign-born population of the United States was approximately 32.5 million, or 11.5 percent of the total population. Approximately how many immigrants from Asia were admitted to the United States in 2002?

Critical Thinking

Sources: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, 2002 Yearbook of Immigration Statistics.

Immigration byRegion, 2002Immigrants Admitted to

the United States,1993–2002

Top 10 States forImmigration, 2002

California

New York

Florida

Texas

New Jersey

Illinois

Massachusetts

Washington

Virginia

Maryland

291,216

114,827

90,819

88,365

57,721

47,235

31,615

25,704

25,411

23,751

NorthAmerica

31.6%

Asia32.2%

Europe16.4%

South and Central America

13.5%

Africa5.7%

Otherless than 1%

0’93 ’94 ’95 ’96 ’97 ’98 ’99 ’00 ’01 ’02

300

600

900

1,200

(in

th

ou

san

ds)

Immigration to the United StatesImmigration to the United States

Immigrant’s trunk

386-390 CH14S1-860053 12/1/04 10:46 PM 88

Immigration Policy The Constitution clearly assigns Congress the power

to control immigration policy. Inthe years before 1882, however,Congress rarely exercised thispower. Since then United States immigration policy has gonethrough four distinct stages.

1882–1924: The Growth ofRestrictions In 1882 Congresspassed the first major federal im-migration law that barred entranceto people such as the mentallyhandicapped, convicts, and pau-pers. In that year Congress alsopassed the Chinese Exclusion Act,which restricted the admission ofChinese laborers. At the same time,the law prevented all foreign-born Chinese fromacquiring citizenship. This provision marked thefirst time a federal law had restricted either immi-gration or citizenship on the basis of nationalityor ethnicity.

The number of restrictions grew steadily in thenext three decades. Many Americans feared thatimmigrants from Asia and southern and easternEurope would take jobs away from United Statescitizens. The new immigrants’ languages, appear-ance, customs, and religions were different fromthose of earlier immigrants from England, Ireland,and Germany. Despite the many restrictions, thenumber of immigrants soared, and between 1882and 1924, about 25 million immigrants entered theUnited States.

1924–1965: National Origins Quotas In1924 Congress took a more drastic step toward re-stricting immigration. The Immigration Act of1924, also known as the Johnson Act, lowered thenumber of immigrants allowed into the country toless than 165,000 per year—an 80 percent decreasefrom the years before World War I. It also favoredimmigrants from northern and western Europe.The national origins system gave countries such asEngland and Ireland high quotas, because manyAmericans were of English or Irish descent. Thequotas assigned to countries such as Greece and


Preferential Treatment The Immigration Reform Act of 1965granted some immigrants, such as this doctor, high preferencefor entering the United States. Why do you think the currentimmigration laws give special preference to immigrantswho have certain occupations?

Regulating Immigration

Italy were low because there were fewer Greek orItalian Americans. During the next 40 years,immigration dropped sharply because relativelyfew people in countries with large quotas were in-terested in coming to the United States.

Immigration Reform Act of 1965 Con-gress passed the Immigration Reform Act of 1965abolishing the system of national origins quotas.The 1965 law set up two categories of immigrants:(1) those who could come from countries of theEastern Hemisphere—Europe, Asia, and Africa;and (2) those who could come from WesternHemisphere countries—Canada, Mexico, and thenations of Central and South America. Congressfixed a ceiling of 120,000 total immigrants per yearfrom Western Hemisphere countries and 170,000per year from the rest of the world.

The Immigration Reform Act of 1965 estab-lished preference categories, giving highest prefer-ence to persons whose skills would be “especiallyadvantageous to the United States.” Next in prefer-ence were unmarried adult children of UnitedStates citizens; then husbands, wives, and unmar-ried children of permanent residents; and thenprofessionals such as doctors, lawyers, and scien-tists. The lowest preference class included refugeesfrom Communist countries or the Middle East and victims of natural disasters.

386-390 CH14S1-860053 12/1/04 10:47 PM Page 389

Immigration Reform and Control Act of1986 To stem the tide of illegal immigrants,Congress passed the Immigration Reform andControl Act of 1986. This law also provided a wayfor illegal immigrants to become permanent resi-dents and citizens, as well as punishment for em-ployers who hire illegal immigrants.

The major provisions of the act included: (1)Aliens who can show that they entered the UnitedStates before January 1, 1982, and have residedcontinuously in the country since then may applyfor amnesty. Amnesty is a general pardon the gov-ernment offers—in this case, to illegal aliens. Theywould first become lawful temporary residents,then after 18 months they would become perma-nent residents. (2) After 5 years of permanent res-idence in the United States, aliens may apply forUnited States citizenship. (3) Employers are for-bidden to hire illegal aliens. Those who do are sub-ject to penalties ranging from $250 to $2,000 foreach illegal alien hired. For subsequent and consis-tent offenses, employers are subject to additionalfines and even imprisonment. (4) Employers mustask applicants for documents such as passports orbirth certificates to prove they are either citizens oraliens qualified to work in the United States.

The Immigration Act of 1990 By 1990, 85percent of immigrants to the United States werecoming from Asia and Latin America. In 1990Congress passed a sweeping revision of the 1965

law. The new law was designed to once again takethe countries of origin into account and to admitmore highly skilled and educated immigrants.

The act established a limit on immigrantsfrom any single country to no more than 7 percentof the annual visas. It also established a “TransitionDiversity Program” designed to open immigrationto nationals from countries adversely affected bythe 1965 law. Europeans, especially Irish immi-grants, would benefit from these “diversity visas.”

The new law allowed immigration to climbfrom about 500,000 people to about 700,000 dur-ing each of the first 3 years. Then it leveled immi-gration to about 675,000 people per year. Thesetotals did not include refugees or people who werefleeing persecution from unjust governments intheir homelands.

The Immigration Act of 1990 encouraged immi-gration of workers with “extraordinary abilities,”providing 140,000 visas annually for people who hada guaranteed job when entering the United States.

In addition to the immigration quotas, the Im-migration Act of 1990 established a category forspecial immigrants. Special immigrants fall intothree groups—refugees displaced by war, close rel-atives of United States citizens, or those admittedthrough private laws passed by Congress. A privatelaw is one that applies to a particular person. Forexample, a private law may allow a certain individ-ual to enter the United States regardless of the nu-merical limits on immigration.

Sect ion 1 Re v iewSect ion 1 Re v iewSect ion 1 AssessmentSect ion 1 Assessment

Cultural Pluralism Every community has aunique ethnic history. When did people of vari-ous ethnic and racial groups begin to come toyour community? Research your community’simmigration history at the local library. Draw atime line showing how your community grewand when each group began to arrive.

Checking for Understanding1. Main Idea Use a graphic organizer like the one

below to analyze the purposes of the ImmigrationReform and Control Act of 1986.

2. Define alien, resident alien, non-resident alien,enemy alien, illegal alien, amnesty, private law.

3. Identify refugee.4. What are the five categories of aliens according

to United States law?

Critical Thinking5. Making Inferences What changes in attitudes

toward immigration does the Immigration Act of1990 reflect?


Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986

386-390 CH14S1-860053 12/1/04 10:47 PM Page 390

Citizens are members of a political soci-ety—a nation. As such, citizens of theUnited States have certain rights, duties,and responsibilities. The Declaration of

Independence addresses these rights and responsi-bilities:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident,that all men are created equal, that theyare endowed by their Creator with certainunalienable Rights, that among these areLife, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.. . . That to secure these rights, Govern-ments are instituted among Men, derivingtheir just powers from the consent of thegoverned. . . .”—The Declaration of Independence

The United States government, then, draws itspower from the people and exists to secure theirfundamental rights and equality under the law.Duties of citizens include obeying the law, payingtaxes, and being loyal to the American govern-ment and its basic principles. As participants ingovernment, citizens have the responsibility to beinformed, vote, respect the rights and property ofothers, and respect different opinions and ways oflife. Concerned citizens must be willing to exer-cise both their rights and their responsibilities.

National CitizenshipOver the years the basis of citizenship haschanged significantly in the United States.

Today citizenship has both a national and statedimension. This was not always so, however.

The articles of the Constitution mentioncitizenship only as a qualification for holdingoffice in the federal government. The Foundersassumed that the states would decide who wasor was not a citizen, and their citizens were alsocitizens of the United States. The exceptionswere African Americans and immigrants who

The Basis of CitizenshipS e c t i o n 2S e c t i o n 2

Citizenship at RiskTALLINN, ESTONIA, AUGUST 2, 1993

Aleksander Einseln,

a retired U.S.

Army colonel, may

have lost a $50,000-a-

year pension when

he took command of

the army of Estonia.

And he risks an even

greater loss. Citing a

law that forbids Amer-

icans from serving in a

foreign army, the U.S.

government has suspended Einseln’s military

pension and is threatening to revoke his citizenship.

Einseln, a combat veteran and dedicated anti-Com-

munist, agreed to command Estonia’s army without

pay after that nation gained its independence from the

Soviet Union. Although upset over the loss of his pen-

sion, Einseln’s citizenship concerns him more. “I will

fight to the end not to lose it,” he vows.

Einseln with an Estonian soldier


Reader’s Guide

Key Termsnaturalization, jus soli, jus sanguinis, collectivenaturalization, expatriation, denaturalization

Find Out■ What are the requirements for citizenship in

the United States?■ What are the main responsibilities of American

citizens?

Understanding ConceptsConstitutional Interpretations What questionsabout citizenship did the Fourteenth Amendmentanswer?

391-397 CH14S2-860053 12/1/04 11:01 PM Page 391

became United States citizens through naturaliza-tion, the legal process by which a person is grant-ed the rights and privileges of a citizen.

Dred Scott v. Sandford The basis of statecitizenship was at stake in the controversial DredScott v. Sandford case in 1857. Dred Scott was anenslaved African American in Missouri, a slave-holding state. Scott had also lived with his slave-holder in Illinois—a free state—and the Wisconsinterritory, where the Northwest Ordinance forbadeslavery. Scott sued his slaveholder’s widow for hisfreedom, claiming that his earlier residence in afree state and a free territory made him free. A statecourt ruled in Scott’s favor, but the MissouriSupreme Court later reversed the decision,prompting Scott’s lawyers to go to the UnitedStates Supreme Court.

The Court, led by Chief Justice Roger Taney,ruled that Scott could not bring a legal suit in a federal court. Taney reasoned that African

Americans, whether enslaved or free, were notUnited States citizens at the time the Constitutionwas adopted. Therefore, they could not claim citi-zenship. Only descendants of people who werestate citizens at that time, or immigrants who became citizens through naturalization, wereUnited States citizens. The Court also stated thatCongress could not forbid slavery in United Statesterritories.

The Fourteenth Amendment The DredScott decision caused great outrage and protest inthe North and added to the tensions that led to theCivil War. African American abolitionist FrederickDouglass hoped that the Court’s decision wouldbegin a “chain of events” that would produce a“complete overthrow of the whole slave system.” In1868, three years after the end of the war, the Four-teenth Amendment to the Constitution overruledthe Dred Scott decision. The amendment clearly es-tablished what constitutes citizenship at both thenational and state levels of government.

The Fourteenth Amendment was clear andforceful about the basis of citizenship:

“ All persons born ornaturalized in theUnited States, and subject to the juris-diction thereof, arecitizens of the UnitedStates and of the statewherein they reside.No State shall makeor enforce any lawwhich shall abridge[deprive] the privi-leges or immunitiesof citizens of theUnited States.”—Fourteenth

Amendment,1868


Civil Rights Dred Scottcreated a nationwide stormof controversy with his law-suit. Here Dred Scott ap-pears with his wife and twodaughters on the cover ofan 1857 newspaper. In hisruling, what assumptiondid Taney make aboutthe intentions of theFounders of the UnitedStates?

Citizenship at Stake

Chief JusticeRoger Taney

391-397 CH14S2-860053 12/1/04 11:02 PM Page 392

The Fourteenth Amendment guaran-teed that people of all races born in theUnited States and subject to its governmentare citizens, making state citizenship an au-tomatic result of national citizenship.

Citizenship by BirthThe Fourteenth Amendment setforth two of the three basic sources

of United States citizenship—birth onAmerican soil and naturalization. Thethird source of citizenship is being bornto a parent who is a United States citizen.

Citizenship by the “Law of theSoil” Like most other nations, theUnited States follows the principle of jussoli (YOOS SOH• LEE), a Latin phrase thatmeans “law of the soil.” Jus soli, in effect,grants citizenship to nearly all peopleborn in the United States or in Americanterritories. Birth in the United States is themost common basis of United States citizenship.

Not everyone born in the United States is au-tomatically a citizen. People born in the UnitedStates who are not subject to the jurisdiction of theUnited States government are not granted citizen-ship. For example, children of foreign diplomatsare not American citizens, even though they mayhave been born in the United States. Children bornin this country to immigrant parents or to foreignparents merely passing through the country, how-ever, are citizens of the United States.

Citizenship by Birth to an American Parent Another method of automatic citizen-ship is birth to an American parent or parents. Thisprinciple is called jus sanguinis (YOOS SAHN •

gwuh • nuhs), which means the “law of blood.”The rules governing jus sanguinis can be very

complicated. If an individual is born in a foreigncountry and both parents are United States citizens,the child is a citizen, provided one requirement is met.One of the parents must have been a legal resident ofthe United States or its possessions at some point inhis or her life. If only one of the parents is an Ameri-can citizen,however, that parent must have lived in theUnited States or an American possession for at least 5 years, 2 of which had to occur after the age of 14.


Citizenship by NaturalizationAll immigrants who wish to become Amer-ican citizens must go through naturaliza-

tion. At the end of that process, they will havealmost all the rights and privileges of a native-borncitizen. The major exception is that a naturalizedcitizen is not eligible to serve as president or vicepresident of the United States.

Congress has defined specific qualifications andprocedures for naturalization. These include a resi-dency requirement that immigrants must satisfy before they can even apply to become citizens. TheU.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, a bureauof the Department of Homeland Security,administersmost of the key steps of the naturalization process.

Qualifications for Citizenship Immigrantswho want to become citizens must meet five re-quirements. (1) Applicants must have entered theUnited States legally. (2) They must be of goodmoral character. (3) They must declare their sup-port of the principles of American government.(4) They must prove they can read, write, andspeak English. (If applicants are more than 50years old and have lived in the United States for 20years, they are exempt from the English-language

American Citizenship A child born to American parentsautomatically becomes a citizen of the United States. Howdoes the law of jus sanguinis relate to children ofAmericans working abroad?

391-397 CH14S2-860053 12/1/04 11:02 PM Page 393

requirement.) (5) They must show some basicknowledge of American history and government.Draft evaders, military deserters, polygamists,anarchists, Communists, or followers of any othertotalitarian system will be denied citizenship.

The Steps to CitizenshipAn applicant requesting citizenship must be at least 18 years old, have lived in the

United States as a lawfully admitted resident alienfor 30 months out of the previous 5 years, and havelived in the state where the petition is filed for at least 3 months. If married to a United States citizen, he or she needs only 3 years of residencybefore filing.

The key step in the naturalization process is aninvestigation and preliminary hearing in which theindividual is asked questions about his or her moralcharacter. Two witnesses are also asked about theprospective citizen’s character and integrity. In ad-dition, applicants may be asked to demonstratetheir grasp of the English language and questionedabout American government and history. Typical

questions include:“What is the highest court in theland?” “How many states are there in the UnitedStates?” Sometimes applicants are asked to identi-fy certain American presidents.

If an applicant makes it through this step—and most do—he or she will be asked to attend afinal hearing. This hearing is usually held in a fed-eral district court and is normally only a formality.Here the judge administers the United States oathof allegiance. The oath requires individuals to re-nounce loyalty to their former governments, toobey and defend the Constitution and laws of theUnited States, and to bear arms on behalf of theUnited States when required by law. The judge thenissues a certificate of naturalization that declaresthe individual a United States citizen. New citizensreceive a letter from the president, a short history ofthe Pledge of Allegiance, and a booklet containingimportant documents in American history.

Exceptions While naturalization procedures aresimilar for most people, some exceptions exist. Oneis collective naturalization, a process by whichmembers of a whole group of people, living in thesame geographic area, become American citizensthrough an act of Congress. These individuals donot have to go through the naturalization process.

Congress has used collective naturalizationfive times. In 1803 people living in the territorygained through the Louisiana Purchase weregranted American citizenship. Similarly, whenFlorida was purchased in 1819, and when the Re-public of Texas was admitted to the Union in 1845,people living in these territories received UnitedStates citizenship. Likewise, Congress granted citi-zenship to all people living in Hawaii in 1900 andto the residents of Puerto Rico in 1917.

Other exceptions have occurred. For more thana century, most Native Americans were excludedfrom citizenship—even after their land was annexedby the United States. A few groups became citizens


Taking the Oath Immigrants must take an oath ofallegiance to the United States when they become citi-zens. Why do you think there are so many stepsto becoming a citizen of the United States?

Gaining Citizenship

Student Web Activity Visit the United StatesGovernment: Democracy in Action Web site atgov.glencoe.com and click on Chapter 14–Student Web Activities for an activity about thebasis of citizenship.

GOVERNMENT

391-397 CH14S2-860053 12/1/04 11:03 PM Page 394


through treaties with the federal government, but in1868 Congress decided that the citizenship guaran-tees of the Fourteenth Amendment would not applyto Native Americans. Later Congress offered citizen-ship to individual Native Americans who gave uptheir traditional culture. Not until 1924 did Con-gress make all Native Americans citizens of theUnited States. On the other hand, citizenship re-quirements also have been waived under special cir-cumstances. In 1981 a federal judge exempted a99-year-old Russian immigrant from naturalizationrequirements because he wanted “to die free as a cit-izen of this great country.”

Losing CitizenshipOnly the federal government can both grantcitizenship and take it away. State govern-

ments can deny a convicted criminal some of theprivileges of citizenship, such as voting, but haveno power to deny citizenship itself. Americans can

lose their citizenship in any of three ways: throughexpatriation, by being convicted of certain crimes,or through denaturalization.

Expatriation The simplest way to lose citizen-ship is through expatriation, or giving up one’scitizenship by leaving one’s native country to livein a foreign country. Expatriation may be volun-tary or involuntary. For example, a person who be-comes a naturalized citizen of another countryautomatically loses his or her American citizen-ship. Involuntary expatriation would occur in thecase of a child whose parents become citizens ofanother country.

Punishment for a Crime A person may losecitizenship when convicted of certain federalcrimes that involve extreme disloyalty. Thesecrimes include treason, participation in a rebel-lion, and attempts to overthrow the governmentthrough violent means.


Irena Sliskovic

Making a DifferenceMaking a Difference Irena Sliskovic came to theUnited States in 1995 to es-cape a war that was tearing

her country apart. She was one of83 Bosnian Muslim students whoparticipated in a program thatpromised high school students achance to finish their educationin the United States—safely awayfrom the war in Bosnia.

Irena, who was living in Sara-jevo, Bosnia-Herzegovina, duringthe war, lost many friends to theviolence that became a part ofher everyday life. She and herfamily were afraid to leave theirhome for fear of being killed bysnipers. When Irena was just 10months away from her high schoolgraduation, she heard about theAmerican program. Eighty Ameri-can families offered to open theirhomes to Bosnian students andhelp them enroll in schools. Irenaapplied for the program and wasaccepted because of her strong

academic abilities. She remem-bers thinking, “I’m going far awayto peace and freedom.”

Getting to the United Stateswas no easy task. Irena had tosneak out of Sarajevo at night.Shelling near the main road de-layed the trip, and she wasstopped just 5 minutes from theborder and ordered to return toSarajevo. She escaped, however,and finally crossed the border toCroatia. A few weeks later sheflew to the United States.

Irena moved in with a hostfamily in Florence, Kentucky. Sheattended a nearby high schooland graduated a year later. In1995 the Dayton peace accordhelped bring peace to Bosnia—at least temporarily. After highschool Irena continued to live in the United States. She attend-ed a college in Kentucky andstudied business and computerscience.Sarajevo road sign

391-397 CH14S2-860053 12/1/04 11:03 PM Page 395

Growth of Democracy Immigrantsmust learn about American laws to become naturalized citizens.Why must citizens know aboutAmerican laws?

Moreover, many states now require that govern-ment regulations be written in everyday languageso that people can understand them.

Citizenship Involves Participation TheAmerican ideal of citizenship has always stressedeach citizen’s responsibility to participate in polit-ical life. Through participation, citizens help gov-ern society and themselves and are able to fashionpolicies in the public interest. Through participa-tion, individuals can put aside personal concernsand learn about one another’s political goals andneeds. In short, participation teaches about the es-sentials of democracy—majority rule, individualrights, and the rule of law.

Voting The most common way a citizen partici-pates in political life is by voting. By casting theirballots, citizens help choose leaders and help directthe course of government. Voting therefore affirmsa basic principle of American political life that wasinscribed in the Declaration of Independence—“the consent of the governed.”


These immigrants have completedall the naturalization steps to become new citizens.

Responsible Citizens

Denaturalization The loss of citizenshipthrough fraud or deception during the naturaliza-tion process is called denaturalization. Denatural-ization could also occur if an individual joins aCommunist or totalitarian organization less thanfive years after becoming a citizen.

The Responsibilities of CitizensThe ability to exercise one’s rights dependson an awareness of those rights. A constitu-

tional democracy, therefore, requires knowledge-able and active citizens.

Knowing About Rights and Laws Respon-sible citizens need to know about the laws that gov-ern society and to be aware of their basic legal rights.Respect for the law is crucial in modern society, butthis respect depends on knowledge of the law.

In addition to schools, a number of organ-izations help citizens learn more about their rights,laws, and government: legal aid societies, consumerprotection groups, and tenants’ rights organizations.

391-397 CH14S2-860053 12/1/04 11:03 PM Page 396

Voting is also an important way to expressfaith in one’s political system. When a person castsa vote, he or she is joining other citizens in a com-mon effort at self-government. Voting enablesAmericans to share responsibility for how their so-ciety is governed.

Many people do not vote because they believethey have little effect on political outcomes. Othersdo not vote because they have little interest in anyform of political life.

Voter Participation Counts There havebeen many close elections over the years at all lev-els of government. Many seats in the House ofRepresentatives in the 1996 election were decidedby very close races. In Pennsylvania RepublicanJon D. Fox won by a mere 84-vote margin of victo-ry. Some races were not decided until all absenteevotes were tabulated.

Ways of Participating as a CitizenCampaigning for a candidate, distributing leaf-lets for a political party, and working at the pollson Election Day are all important forms of par-ticipation. People can exercise the rights andprivileges of citizenship in other ways as well. Forexample, they can support the efforts of a specialinterest group to influence legislation or discussissues with a legislator or another person in government. Writing letters to the editor of a

newspaper or newsmagazine, or exercising theright to dissent in a legal and orderly manner, areother ways citizens can participate. Exercisingthese rights is the only way of ensuring theirstrength and vitality.

Students may be-come involved bycommunicatingtheir concerns to their represen-tatives.

Urging Americans to vote

Sect ion 2 AssessmentSect ion 2 Assessment

Constitutional Interpretations The FourteenthAmendment extends the “privileges and immu-nities” of each state to all American citizens.Make a chart that lists the privileges that youbelieve your state should provide out-of-statepersons and the privileges that should extendonly to residents of your state.


below to describe the conditions of American citizenship.

2. Define naturalization, jus soli, jus sanguinis, collective naturalization, expatriation, denaturalization.

3. Identify Dred Scott v. Sandford.4. What are the five requirements for becoming

a naturalized citizen?5. In what three ways may American citizenship be

lost?

Critical Thinking6. Synthesizing Information Why does the United

States require citizenship applicants to speakEnglish and have knowledge of the Americangovernment?


Sources in 14th Amendment Responsibilities

391-397 CH14S2-860053 12/1/04 11:04 PM Page 397

Amajor challenge for democratic politicalsystems is dealing with crime and crimi-nals. A crime is an act against a law of thestate. It may also harm an individual or a

person’s property. On the one hand, society mustprotect itself against criminals. At the same time,individual rights must be preserved. Justice in ademocracy means protecting the innocent fromgovernment police power as well as punishing theguilty.

To deal with these challenges, the Foundersbuilt into the Constitution and the Bill of Rights asystem of justice designed to guard the rights ofthe accused as well as the rights of society. Lawswere to be strictly interpreted, trial procedures fairand impartial, and punishments reasonable. Later,the Fourteenth Amendment1 protected the rightsof the accused in the same section in which it defined national citizenship.

Searches and SeizuresThe police need evidence to accuse peopleof committing crimes, but getting evidence

often requires searching people or their homes,cars, or offices. To protect the innocent, theFourth Amendment guarantees “the right of peo-ple to be secure in their persons, houses, papers,and effects, against unreasonable searches andseizures.” What constitutes unreasonable search-es and seizures? No precise definition has beenmade, so the courts have dealt with FourthAmendment issues on a case-by-case basis.

Today the police must state under oath thatthey have probable cause to suspect someone ofcommitting a crime to justify a search. General-ly they must obtain a warrant from a court offi-cial before searching for evidence or making anarrest. The warrant must describe the place tobe searched and the person or things to be seized.

The Rights of the AccusedS e c t i o n 3S e c t i o n 3

Seale Bound and Gagged CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, OCTOBER 29, 1969

Political radical Bobby

Seale, charged with

conspiracy to incite a riot

at last year’s Democratic

National Convention, had

to be restrained during his

trial today. Seale’s loud

outbursts regarding his

constitutional rights have

repeatedly disrupted court

proceedings. Today, federal

marshals twice had to

wrestle Seale back into his seat. The trial was re-

cessed while marshals tied a gag around Seale’s

mouth and shackled him to his chair. When Seale’s

now-muffled shouts continued, Judge Julius Hoff-

man ordered the gag replaced with strips of tape.

While courtroom chains are not uncommon, gag-

ging a defendant is extremely rare.

Bobby Seale


Reader’s Guide

Key Termsexclusionary rule, counsel, self-incrimination, double jeopardy

Find Out■ What constitutes unreasonable searches and

seizures by the police?■ In the 1960s, how did the Supreme Court rule

on the right to counsel and self-incriminationcases?

Understanding ConceptsCivil Rights How have Supreme Court rulings bothexpanded and refined the rights of the accused asdescribed in the Constitution?

See the following footnoted materials in the Reference Handbook:1. The Constitution, pages 774–799.

398-405 CH14S3-860053 12/1/04 11:10 PM Page 398

ask whether criminals should go free simply be-cause the police made a mistake in collecting evi-dence. In United States v. Leon8 (1984) the Courtruled that as long as the police act in good faithwhen they request a warrant, the evidence theycollect may be used in court even if the warrant isdefective. In the Leon case, for example, a judgehad made a mistake by issuing a warrant based onprobable cause that later was found to be invalid.


See the following footnoted materials in the Reference Handbook:1. Payton v. New York case summary, page 763. 2. Florida v. J.L. case summary, page 758.3. Whren v. United States case summary, page 768. 4. Atwater v. City of Lago Vista case summary, page 754. 5. California v. Greenwood case summary, page 756. 6. Weeks v. United States case summary, page 767. 7. Mapp v. Ohio case summary, page 761. 8. United States v. Leon case summary, page 766.

Enforcing Laws Policeofficers conduct a searchto investigate the proper-ty of persons suspectedof committing a crime.In what circumstancesis a search warrant not required?

An official search warrant

Before 1980, 23 states had search laws that per-mitted police to enter a home without a warrant ifthey had probable cause to believe that the occu-pant had committed a felony, or major crime. InPayton v. New York 1 (1980) the Supreme Courtruled that, except in a life-threatening emergency,the Fourth Amendment forbids searching a homewithout a warrant. In Florida v. J.L.2 (2000), theCourt strengthened Fourth Amendment protec-tions even further by ruling that an anonymous tipthat a person is carrying a gun does not give policethe right to stop and frisk that person.

Special Situations The police do not need awarrant to search and arrest a person they seebreaking the law. This power extends to evenminor infractions for which the penalty is only asmall fine. In Whren v. United States 3 (1996), forexample, the Court held that the police could seizedrugs found in a suspect’s vehicle when theystopped him for a traffic violation. In Atwater v.City of Lago Vista 4 (2001), the Court found thatthe Fourth Amendment protection against unrea-sonable seizures did not prevent the police from arresting a Texas woman who was driving her chil-dren in a vehicle in which none of the occupantswere wearing seatbelts.

The police do not need a warrant to searchgarbage placed outside a home for pickup. In Cal-ifornia v. Greenwood 5 (1998), the Court upheld awarrantless search of garbage, explaining that people do not have a reasonable expectation ofprivacy in refuse placed outside the home in anarea of public inspection.

Since the 1980s, the Court has considered cer-tain kinds of drug tests as searches that do not re-quire a warrant. Even without direct evidence thatone or more workers uses drugs, such tests are law-ful if they serve to protect public safety.

The Exclusionary Rule In Weeks v. UnitedStates 6 (1914) the Court established the exclusion-ary rule—any illegally obtained evidence cannotbe used in a federal court. The Weeks decision didnot apply to state courts until Mapp v. Ohio 7

(1961) extended the protection to state courts.

Relaxing the Exclusionary Rule Somepeople have criticized the exclusionary rule. They

398-405 CH14S3-860053 12/1/04 11:07 PM Page 399

That same year the Court also approved an“inevitable discovery” exception to the exclusion-ary rule. In Nix v. Williams 1 (1984) the Court heldthat evidence obtained in violation of a defendant’srights can be used at trial. The prosecutor, howev-er, must show that the evidence would have even-tually been discovered by legal means. The Nix caseinvolved a murderer whom police had tricked intoleading them to the hidden body of his victim.

California v. Acevedo In October 1987 policeofficers observed Charles Steven Acevedo leaving asuspected drug house. He carried a paper bag thesize of a package of drugs they knew had beenmailed from Hawaii. When Acevedo drove off, thepolice stopped his car, opened the trunk, and founda pound of marijuana. When the defense moved tosuppress the evidence, the trial court denied the

motion. Acevedo pleaded guilty but appealed thecourt’s refusal to exclude the marijuana as evidence.

The Supreme Court overruled an earlier deci-sion (Arkansas v. Sanders, 1979) that had imposeda warrant requirement to search containers orpackages found in a lawfully stopped vehicle. TheCourt established a new precedent to be used inautomobile searches. The police are free to “searchan automobile and the containers within it wherethey have probable cause to believe contraband orevidence is contained.”

Fourth Amendment in High SchoolsFourth Amendment protections may be limitedinside high schools. In the case of New Jersey v.T.L.O.2 (1985) the Supreme Court ruled thatschool officials do not need warrants or probablecause to search students or their property. All thatis needed are reasonable grounds to believe asearch will uncover evidence that a student hasbroken school rules.

The New Jersey case arose when an as-sistant principal searched the purse of astudent he suspected had been smoking to-bacco in a restroom. The search turned upnot only cigarettes but marijuana. The stu-dent was suspended from school and pros-ecuted by juvenile authorities. The Courtwould probably have ruled in favor of thestudent if a police officer had conductedthe search, but the justices did not place thesame restraints on public school officials.

In 1995 the Court further limitedFourth Amendment protections in highschools. In Vernonia School District 47J v.Acton 3 (1995) the Court upheld mandatorysuspicionless drug tests for all students par-ticipating in interscholastic athletics.

Wiretapping and Electronic Eaves-dropping One observer has said that inWashington, D.C., many important peopleassume or at least joke that their telephonesare tapped. The Supreme Court considers


See the following footnoted materials in the Reference Handbook:1. Nix v. Williams case summary, page 763. 2. New Jersey v. T.L.O. case summary, page 762. 3. Vernonia School District 47J v. Acton case

summary, page 767.

Constitutional Searches School administration offi-cials search school lockers for illegal materials. In youropinion, how does the Supreme Court ruling in thecase of New Jersey v. T.L.O. apply to the search ofschool lockers?

Limits of the Fourth Amendment

398-405 CH14S3-860053 12/1/04 11:07 PM Page 400

wiretapping, eavesdropping, and other means ofelectronic surveillance to be search and seizure.

The Court first dealt with wiretapping in Olm-stead v. United States 1 (1928). Federal agents hadtapped individuals’ telephones for four months toobtain the evidence neces-sary to convict them of boot-legging. The Court upheldthe conviction, ruling thatwiretapping did not violatethe Fourth Amendment. TheCourt said no warrant wasneeded to wiretap becausethe agents had not actuallyentered anyone’s home.

This precedent stood foralmost 40 years. Then in 1967,in Katz v. United States,2 theCourt overruled the Olmsteaddecision. Charles Katz, a LosAngeles gambler, was using a public phone boothto place bets across state lines. Without a warrant,the FBI put a microphone outside the booth togather evidence that was later used to convict Katz.In reversing Katz’s conviction, the Court held thatthe Fourth Amendment “protects people—andnot simply ‘areas’” against unreasonable searchesand seizures. The ruling extended Fourth Amend-ment protections by prohibiting wiretapping with-out a warrant.

Congress and Wiretaps In 1968 Congresspassed the Omnibus Crime Control and SafeStreets Act. This law required federal, state, andlocal authorities to obtain a court order for mostwiretaps. Then in 1978 Congress passed the For-eign Intelligence Surveillance Act, requiring acourt order even for wiretapping and bugging innational security cases. These two laws virtuallyprohibit the government from using all electronicsurveillance without a warrant.

Guarantee of CounselThe Sixth Amendment guarantees a defen-dant the right “to have the assistance of

counsel for his defense.” Generally the federalcourts provided counsel, or an attorney, in federalcases. For years, however, people could be tried instate courts without having a lawyer. As a result,

defendants who could pay hired the best lawyers todefend them and stood a better chance of acquit-tal. People who could not pay had no lawyer andwere often convicted because they did not under-stand the law.

Early Rulings on Rightto Counsel The SupremeCourt first dealt with theright to counsel in statecourts in Powell v. Alabama 3

(1932). Nine African Ameri-can youths were convicted ofassaulting two white girls inAlabama. The Court re-versed the conviction, rulingthat the state had to providea lawyer in cases involvingthe death penalty.

Ten years later, in Betts v.Brady 4 (1942), the Court held that states did nothave to provide a lawyer in cases not involving thedeath penalty. The Court said appointment ofcounsel was “not a fundamental right, essential to afair trial” for state defendants unless “special cir-cumstances” such as illiteracy or mental incompe-tence required that the accused have a lawyer inorder to get a fair trial.

For the next 20 years, under the Betts rule, theSupreme Court struggled to determine when thecircumstances in a case were special enough to re-quire a lawyer. Then in 1963 Clarence Earl Gideon,a penniless drifter from Florida, won a landmarkcase that ended the Betts rule.

Gideon v. Wainwright Gideon was chargedwith breaking into a pool hall with the intent tocommit a crime—a felony. Because he was too poorto hire a lawyer, Gideon requested a court-appoint-ed attorney. The request was denied by the court.Gideon was convicted and sentenced to a five-yearjail term.


See the following footnoted materials in the Reference Handbook:1. Olmstead v. United States case summary, page 763. 2. Katz v. United States case summary, page 760. 3. Powell v. Alabama case summary, page 763. 4. Betts v. Brady case summary, page 755.

The use of wiretaps, such as this one usedto bug the Democratic National Committee

headquarters in the Watergate office in1972, is prohibited without a warrant.

398-405 CH14S3-860053 12/1/04 11:08 PM Page 401

While in jail, Gideon studied law books. Heappealed his own case to the Supreme Court witha handwritten petition. “The question is very sim-ple,” wrote Gideon. “I requested the [Florida]court to appoint me an attorney and the court re-fused.” In 1963, in a unanimous verdict, the Courtoverruled Betts v. Brady. Justice Black wrote:

“Those guarantees of the Bill of Rightswhich are fundamental safeguards of lib-erty immune from federal abridgment areequally protected against state invasion bythe Due Process Clause of the FourteenthAmendment. . . . Reason and reflection re-quire us to recognize that in our adversarysystem of criminal justice, any personhaled into court, who is too poor to hire alawyer, cannot be assured a fair trial un-less counsel is provided for him.”—Justice Hugo Black, 1963

Results of the Gideon Decision Gideonwas released, retried with a lawyer assisting him,and acquitted. Hundreds of other Florida prison-ers and thousands more in other states who hadbeen convicted without counsel were also set free.The Court has since extended the Gideon decisionby ruling that whenever a jail sentence of 6 monthsor more is a possible punishment—even for mis-

demeanors and petty offenses—the accused has aright to a lawyer at public expense from the time ofarrest through the appeals process.

Self-incriminationThe Fifth Amendment says that no one“shall be compelled in any criminal case to

be a witness against himself.” The courts have in-terpreted this amendment’s protection againstself-incrimination to cover witnesses before con-gressional committees and grand juries as well asdefendants in criminal cases. This protection restson a basic legal principle: the government bearsthe burden of proof. Defendants are not obliged tohelp the government prove they committed acrime or to testify at their own trial.

The Fifth Amendment also protects defen-dants against confessions extorted by force or violence. Giving people the “third degree” is un-constitutional because this pressure forces defen-dants, in effect, to testify against themselves. Thesame rule applies to state courts through the dueprocess clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

In the mid-1960s the Supreme Court,under ChiefJustice Earl Warren, handed down two decisionsthat expanded protection against self-incrimina-tion and forced confessions. The cases were Escobe-do v. Illinois (1964) and Miranda v. Arizona (1966).

Constitutional Interpreta-tions The Supreme Court ruledthat it is the duty of the court toprovide counsel for those ac-cused of a crime. Here a lawyerconsults with a client in jail.How did the ruling in theBetts case differ from that inthe Gideon case?

Sixth Amendment Guarantees

ClarenceGideon


398-405 CH14S3-860053 12/1/04 11:08 PM Page 402

Escobedo v. Illinois In 1960 ManuelValtierra, Danny Escobedo’s brother-in-law, was shot and killed in Chicago. Thepolice picked up Escobedo and questionedhim at length. Escobedo repeatedly askedto see his lawyer, but his requests were de-nied. No one during the course of the in-terrogation advised Escobedo of hisconstitutional rights. After a long night atpolice headquarters, Escobedo made someincriminating statements to the police. Athis trial, the prosecution used these state-ments to convict Escobedo of murder.

In 1964 the Court reversed Escobedo’sconviction, ruling that Escobedo’s FifthAmendment right to remain silent and hisSixth Amendment right to an attorney hadbeen violated. The Court reasoned that thepresence of Escobedo’s lawyer could havehelped him avoid self-incrimination. Aconfession or other incriminating state-ments an accused person makes when he orshe is denied access to a lawyer may not beused in a trial. This is another version of theexclusionary rule.

Miranda v. Arizona Two years later, the Courtestablished strict rules for protecting suspects duringpolice interrogations. In March 1963, Ernesto Mi-randa had been arrested and convicted for the rapeand kidnapping of an 18-year-old woman. The vic-tim selected Miranda from a police lineup, and thepolice questioned him for two hours. During ques-tioning, Miranda was not told that he could remainsilent or have a lawyer. Miranda confessed, signed astatement admitting and describing the crime, wasconvicted, and then appealed.

In Miranda v. Arizona (1966) the SupremeCourt reversed the conviction. The Court ruledthat the Fifth Amendment’s protection againstself-incrimination requires that suspects be clearlyinformed of their rights before police questionthem. Unless they are so informed, their state-ments may not be used in court. The Court setstrict guidelines for police questioning of suspects.These guidelines are now known as the Mirandarules. The Court said:


See the following footnoted materials in the Reference Handbook:1. Oregon v. Elstad case summary, page 763. 2. Braswell v. United States case summary, page 755.

Landmark Decisions In 1966 the Court threw out the felonyconviction of Ernesto Miranda, who had confessed while in police custody. Analyze the impact of the Miranda decisionon police policies and procedures across the nation.

The Power of Judicial Review

“Prior to any questioning, the person mustbe warned that he has a right to remainsilent, that any statement he does makemay be used as evidence against him, andthat he has a right to the presence of an attorney, either retained or appointed.”—Chief Justice Earl Warren, 1966

Since 1966 the Court has qualified the Mirandaand Escobedo rules. For example, in Oregon v. El-stad 1 (1985) the Court held that if suspects confessbefore they are informed of their rights, the prose-cutor may later use those confessions as evidence. Inthe 1988 case of Braswell v.United States,2 the Courtnarrowed the protection from self-incrimination incases involving business crime by ruling that em-ployees in charge of corporate records can be forcedto turn over evidence even if it is incriminating.

In 1991 the Court narrowed protection fromself-incrimination even further when it ruled thatcoerced confessions are sometimes permitted. In

398-405 CH14S3-860053 12/1/04 11:09 PM Page 403

Double JeopardyThe Fifth Amendment states in part that no person shall be “twice put in jeopardy of

life and limb.” Double jeopardy means a personmay not be tried twice for the same crime, thus protecting people from continual harassment. InUnited States v. Halper,3 (1989) the Supreme Courtruled that a civil penalty could not be imposed aftera criminal penalty for the same act. However, theCourt ruled in Hudson v. United States4 (1997) thatpeople who have paid civil fines for regulatorywrongdoing may also face criminal charges. Also, ifa criminal act violates both state and federal law,the case may be tried at both levels.


Sources: U.S. Department of Justice; Death Penalty Information Center, 2002.

Critical Thinking The Supreme Court has ruled capital punishment legal, as long as cases are considered on an individual basis. What principle of the Constitution permits states to allow or not allow the death penalty?

States that allow thedeath penalty, 2002

States that do not allow the death penalty, 2002

WA

OR

CA

AK

HI

NV

ID

MT

WY

UT

AZ NM

CO

TX

OK

KS

NE

SD

NDMN

WI

IA

MO

AR

LAMS

AL GA

FL

SC

NCTN

KYWV VA

MD DEDC

NJCT

RI

MA

MENHVT

NY

PAOHIN

MI

IL

0

1930

1940

1950

1960

1970

1980

1990

2002

800

400

1,600

1,200

2,000

State Death Penalty Executions,1930–2002

Capital Punishment in the United StatesCapital Punishment in the United States

the case of Arizona v. Fulminante ,1 Oreste Fulmi-nante, who was in prison for illegal possession of afirearm, confessed to a fellow inmate that he hadmurdered his stepdaughter. The inmate hadpromised Fulminante protection from other pris-oners in exchange for the confession. After the in-mate told the authorities about the confession,Fulminante was tried and convicted. Upon appealthe Supreme Court ruled that a forced confessiondid not void a conviction if other independentlyobtained evidence sustained a guilty verdict.

In 2000, however, the Court reaffirmed thatthe Miranda rules are deeply rooted in the Consti-tution and that Congress cannot reverse the re-quirement to inform arrested persons of theirrights. Writing for a seven-to-two majority inDickerson v. United States,2 Chief Justice WilliamRehnquist stated,“Miranda has become embeddedin routine police practice to the point where warn-ings have become part of our national culture.”

See the following footnoted materials in the Reference Handbook:1. Arizona v. Fulminante case summary, page 754. 2. Dickerson v. United States case summary, page 757.3. United States v. Halper case summary, page 766. 4. Hudson v. United States case summary, page 759.

398-405 CH14S3-860053 12/1/04 11:09 PM Page 404

In addition, a single act may involve more thanone crime. Stealing a car and then selling it in-volves theft and the sale of stolen goods. A personmay be tried separately for each offense. When atrial jury fails to agree on a verdict, the accusedmay have to undergo a second trial. Double jeop-ardy does not apply when the defendant wins anappeal of a case in a higher court.

Cruel and Unusual Punishment

The Eighth Amendment forbids “cruel andunusual punishments,” the only constitu-

tional provision specifically limiting penalties incriminal cases. The Supreme Court has rarely usedthis provision. In Rhodes v. Chapman 1 (1981), forexample, the Court ruled that putting two prison-ers in a cell built for one is not cruel and unusualpunishment.

There is a controversy, however, over how thisprotection relates to the death penalty. During the1970s the Supreme Court handed down severaldecisions on the constitutionality of the deathpenalty. In Furman v. Georgia 2 (1972) the Courtruled that capital punishment as then adminis-tered was not constitutional. The Court found thedeath penalty was being imposed in apparently ar-bitrary ways for a wide variety of crimes and main-ly on African Americans and poor people.

See the following footnoted materials in the Reference Handbook:1. Rhodes v. Chapman case summary, page 764. 2. Furman v. Georgia case summary, page 758. 3. Woodson v. North Carolina case summary, page 768. 4. Gregg v. Georgia case summary, page 759.

The Furman decision, however, stopped shortof flatly outlawing the death penalty. Instead, itwarned the states that the death penalty neededclarification. Thirty-five states responded withnew death penalty laws. These laws took one oftwo approaches. North Carolina and some otherstates made the death penalty mandatory for cer-tain crimes. In this way, they hoped to eliminatearbitrary decisions. In Woodson v. North Carolina 3

(1976), however, the Court ruled mandatory deathpenalties unconstitutional. The Court held thatsuch laws failed to take into consideration thespecifics of a crime and any possible mitigating cir-cumstances.

Georgia and several other states took a differ-ent approach. They established new procedures fortrials and appeals designed to reduce arbitrary de-cisions and racial prejudice in imposing the deathpenalty. In Gregg v. Georgia 4 (1976) the Court up-held the Georgia law. In the Gregg case, the Courtruled that under adequate guidelines the deathpenalty does not constitute cruel and unusualpunishment. The Court stated: “Capital punish-ment is an expression of society’s moral outrage.. . . It is an extreme sanction, suitable to the mostextreme of crimes.”


Civil Rights Would you be willing to undergoroutine random drug testing or locker searchesin your school? Note that the Fourth Amend-ment right to privacy is at issue here. Create a slogan explaining your position and use it tocreate a one-page advertisement promotingyour position.


below to analyze the significance of the Gideon,Escobedo, and Miranda cases.

2. Define exclusionary rule, counsel, self-incrimina-tion, double jeopardy.

3. Identify Fourth Amendment, Sixth Amendment,Fifth Amendment, Eighth Amendment.

4. What procedure must police follow in making alawful search?

Critical Thinking5. Identifying Alternatives What decisions does

the accused person have to make at the time heor she hears the Miranda rules?


Gideon Escobedo Miranda

398-405 CH14S3-860053 12/1/04 11:09 PM Page 405

Many forms of discrimination are ille-gal. The Declaration of Independenceaffirmed an ideal of Americandemocracy when it stated “all men are

created equal.” This statement does not mean thateveryone is born with the same characteristics orwill remain equal. Rather, the democratic ideal ofequality means all people are entitled to equalrights and treatment before the law.

Meaning of Equal ProtectionThe Fourteenth Amendment forbids anystate to “deny to any person within its juris-

diction the equal protection of the law.”The Supreme Court has ruled that the FifthAmendment’s due process clause also providesequal protection.

Generally the equal protection clause meansthat state and local governments cannot draw un-reasonable distinctions among different groups ofpeople. The key word is unreasonable. In practice,all governments must classify or draw distinctionsamong categories of people. For example, when astate taxes cigarettes, it taxes smokers but not non-smokers.

When a citizen challenges a law because it violates the equal protection clause, the issue isnot whether a classification can be made. Theissue is whether or not the classification is rea-sonable. Over the years the Supreme Court hasdeveloped guidelines for considering when astate law or action might violate the equal pro-tection clause.

The Rational Basis Test The rationalbasis test provides that the Court will uphold astate law when the state can show a good reasonto justify the classification. This test asks if theclassification is “reasonably related” to an acceptable goal of government. A law prohibit-ing people with red hair from driving would fail the test because there is no relationship

Equal Protection of the LawS e c t i o n 4S e c t i o n 4

Pizza Refusal Illegal?KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI, JANUARY 1997

Is this discrimination in

pizza delivery? Paseo

Academy, a city magnet

school, planned a big mid-

day pizza party for honor-

roll students. Pizza Hut

refused delivery of a $450

pizza order explaining that

the area was unsafe—

one of its “trade area re-

strictions” based on crime

statistics. A local chain,

Westport Pizza, filled the order. Principal Dorothy

Shepherd later learned that Pizza Hut had a

$170,000 contract to deliver pizzas to 21 Kansas City

schools, including Paseo. A school board committee

recommended canceling the contract.

The politics of pizza


Reader’s Guide

Key Termsrational basis test, suspect classification, fundamental right, discrimination, Jim Crow laws, separate but equal doctrine, civil rights movement

Find Out■ What is the constitutional meaning of “equal

protection”?■ How has the Court applied the Fourteenth

Amendment’s equal protection clause to theissue of discrimination?

Understanding ConceptsConstitutional Interpretations Why do SupremeCourt decisions in discrimination cases rest largelyon the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments?

406-411 CH14S4-860053 12/1/04 11:15 PM Page 406

between the color of a person’s hair and drivingsafely. In Wisconsin v. Mitchell 1 (1993), however,the Supreme Court upheld a state law that impos-es longer prison sentences for people who commit“hate crimes,” or crimes motivated by prejudice.Unless special circumstances exist, the SupremeCourt puts the burden of proving a law unreason-able on the people challenging the law. Special cir-cumstances arise when the Court decides that astate law involves a “suspect classification” or a“fundamental right.”

Suspect Classifications When a classifica-tion is made on the basis of race or national origin,it is a suspect classification and “subject to strictjudicial scrutiny.” A law that requires AfricanAmericans but not whites to ride in the back of abus would be a suspect classification.

When a law involves a suspect classification,the Court reverses the normal presumption ofconstitutionality. It is no longer enough for thestate to show that the law is a reasonable way tohandle a public problem. The state must show theCourt that there is “some compelling public inter-est” to justify the law and its classifications.

Fundamental Rights The third test the Courtuses is that of fundamental rights, or rights thatgo to the heart of the American system or are in-dispensable in a just system. The Court gives a statelaw dealing with fundamental rights especiallyclose scrutiny. The Court, for example, has ruledthat the right to travel freely between the states, theright to vote, and First Amendment rights are fun-damental. State laws that violate these fundamen-tal rights are unconstitutional.

Proving Intent to DiscriminateLaws that classify people unreasonably aresaid to discriminate. Discrimination exists

when individuals are treated unfairly solely be-cause of their race, gender, ethnic group, age, phys-ical disability, or religion. Such discrimination isillegal, but it may be difficult to prove.

What if a law does not classify people directly,but the effect of the law is to classify people? Forexample, suppose a law requires that job applicantsat the police department take a test. Suppose mem-bers of one group usually score better on this testthan members of another group. Can discrimina-tion be proven simply by showing that the law hasa different impact on people of different races,genders, or national origins?


Triumph of Civil RightsPresident Johnson offers thepen used to sign the CivilRights Act of 1964 to NAACP’sRoy Wilkins, as Attorney Gener-al Robert F. Kennedy (aboveright) looks on. SenatorEverett McKinley Dirksensupported the civil rights billsaying, “No army can with-stand the strength of an ideawhose time has come.”What do you think hemeant?

Guaranteeing Equal Rights

See the following footnoted materials in the Reference Handbook:1. Wisconsin v. Mitchell case summary, page 768.

406-411 CH14S4-860053 12/1/04 11:15 PM Page 407

Showing Intent to Discriminate In Wash-ington v. Davis 1 (1976) the Supreme Court ruledthat to prove a state guilty of discrimination, onemust prove that an intent to discriminate motivat-ed the state’s action. The case arose when twoAfrican Americans challenged the District of Co-lumbia police department’s requirement that allrecruits pass a verbal ability test. They said the re-quirement was unconstitutional because moreAfrican Americans than whites failed the test.

The Court said that this result did not mean thetest was unconstitutional. The crucial issue was thatthe test was not designed to discriminate. As theCourt said in a later case, “The Fourteenth Amend-ment guarantees equal laws, not equal results.”

Impact of the Washington DecisionSince the Washington case, the Court has appliedthe principle of intent to discriminate to otherareas. In one Illinois city, a zoning ordinance per-mitted only single-family homes, prohibiting low-cost housing projects. The Court ruled theordinance constitutional, even though it effective-ly kept minorities from moving into the city. The


Protest Strategy Civil rights activistscarry out a sit-in in Charlotte, North Car-olina, in the early 1960s. They continuedtheir silent protest at the counter, evenafter the waitresses refused to servethem and left. What do you think civilrights activists hoped to accomplishthrough sit-ins?

The Struggle for Equality Under the Law

reason for the decision was that the Court foundno intent to discriminate against minorities.

The Struggle for Equal RightsThe Fourteenth Amendment, guaranteeingequal protection, was ratified in 1868, shortly

after the Civil War. Yet for almost a century thecourts upheld discrimination against and segrega-tion of African Americans. Racial discriminationis treating members of a race differently simply be-cause of race. Segregation is separation of peoplefrom the larger social group.

By the late 1800s, about half the states hadadopted Jim Crow laws. These laws, most often inSouthern states, required racial segregation in suchplaces as schools, public transportation, and hotels.

Plessy v. Ferguson The Supreme Court justi-fied Jim Crow laws in Plessy v. Ferguson (1896).The Court said the Fourteenth Amendment al-lowed separate facilities for different races as longas those facilities were equal. Justice Harlan dis-sented:

See the following footnoted materials in the Reference Handbook:1. Washington v. Davis case summary, page 767.

A button expressing a motto of civil rights activists

406-411 CH14S4-860053 12/1/04 11:15 PM Page 408

“I deny that any legislative body or judicialtribunal may have regard to the race of citizens when the civil rights of thosecitizens are involved. . . . Our Constitutionis color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens. In respectof civil rights, all citizens are equal beforethe law.”—Justice John Marshall Harlan, 1896

Nevertheless, for the next 50 years the separatebut equal doctrine was used to justify segregationin the United States. In the late 1930s and the 1940sthe Supreme Court began to chip away at the doc-trine in a series of decisions that have had far-reaching implications. The most importantdecision came in 1954 in a case involving anAfrican American student in Topeka, Kansas.

Brown v. Board of Education of TopekaIn the 1950s Topeka’s schools were racially segre-gated. Linda Carol Brown, an eight-year-oldAfrican American student, was denied admissionto an all-white school near her home and was re-quired to attend a distant all-black school. With thehelp of the National Association for the Advance-ment of Colored People (NAACP), Linda’s familysued the Topeka Board of Education. The NAACPsuccessfully argued that segregated schools couldnever be equal. Therefore, such schools were un-constitutional. In 1954 the Court ruled on this caseand similar cases filed in Virginia, Delaware, andSouth Carolina. In a unanimous decision in Brownv. Board of Education of Topeka, the Court over-ruled the separate but equal doctrine. This deci-sion marked the beginning of a long, difficultbattle to desegregate the public schools.


Critical Thinking The Fourteenth Amendment, ratified in 1868, was passed to protect the rights of formerly enslaved persons. However, it was not until 1964 that racial segregation in places of public accommodation was made illegal. What civil rights act eliminated voting qualifications such as passing a literacy test?

Year Act Major Provisions

Bans discrimination in places of public accommodation(declared unconstitutional in 1883)

Makes it a federal crime to prevent a person from voting in a federal election

Bans wage discrimination based on race, sex, color, religion, ornational origin

Bans discrimination in places of public accommodation, federally fundedprograms, and private employment; authorizes Justice Department to bringschool integration suits

Allows federal registrars to register voters and ensure that those registeredcan exercise their right to vote without qualifications

Bans discrimination in employment based on age

Bans racial discrimination in sale or rental of housing

Forbids discrimination based on sex by universitiesand colleges receiving federal aid

Bans housing discrimination based on sex

Bans discrimination in employment, transportation, public accommodations,and telecommunications against persons with physical or mental disabilities

Civil Rights Act

Civil Rights Act

Equal Pay Act

Civil Rights Act

Voting Rights Act

Age Discrimination Act

Civil Rights Act, Title VIII

Higher Education Act, Title IXHousing and Community Development ActAmericans with Disabilities Act

1875

1957

1963

1964

1965

1967

1968

1972

1974

1990

Selected Major Civil Rights LegislationSelected Major Civil Rights Legislation

406-411 CH14S4-860053 12/1/04 11:16 PM Page 409

The Brown decision established a precedent forthe Court which guided many other legal rulings.Even though the Court had clearly ruled againstsegregation, housing patterns in many areas createdsegregated school districts that were largely eitherAfrican American or white. The Court’s remedyto this situation came in the case of Swann v.Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education (1971).Again unanimously, the Court declared that chil-dren should be bused to schools outside theirneighborhoods to combat these housing patternsand ensure integrated schools.

The Civil Rights Movement After theBrown decision, many African Americans andwhites worked together to end segregationthrough the civil rights movement. Throughoutthe United States, but mostly in the South, AfricanAmericans deliberately and peacefully broke lawssupporting racial segregation. Some held “sit-ins”at restaurant lunch counters that served onlywhites. When arrested for breaking segregationlaws, they were almost always found guilty. Theycould then appeal, challenging the constitutional-ity of the laws.

The most important leader of the civil rightsmovement was Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. ABaptist minister, King led nonviolent protestmarches and demonstrations against segregation.He understood the importance of using the courtsto win equal rights and sought to stir the nation’sconscience.

New Civil Rights Laws Influenced by thecivil rights movement, Congress began to passcivil rights laws. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 andother laws sought to ensure voting rights andequal job opportunities. President Lyndon John-son said, “Passage of this bill and of the 1965 civilrights law . . . profoundly altered the politics ofcivil rights and the political position of Southernblacks.”

Sect ion 4 Re v iewSect ion 4 Re v iewSect ion 4 AssessmentSect ion 4 Assessment

Constitutional Interpretations Find informationabout the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Voting RightsAct of 1965, Equal Employment Opportunities Act of 1972, Education Amendment of 1972, Voting Rights Act of 1975, and Americans withDisabilities Act of 1990. Prepare an information-al brochure that describes these acts.

Checking for Understanding1. Main Idea Use the graphic organizer below to

analyze why the Supreme Court overturned theseparate but equal doctrine and what effects followed that decision.

2. Define rational basis test, suspect classification, fundamental right, discrimination,Jim Crow laws, separate but equal doctrine, civil rights movement.

3. Identify racial discrimination, segregation.4. List three guidelines or tests the Supreme

Court uses in its judgment of cases involvingequal protection under the law.

Critical Thinking5. Checking Consistency Was Chief Justice Earl

Warren’s opinion in Brown v. Board of Educationof Topeka consistent with Justice Harlan’s dissenting opinion in Plessy v. Ferguson?Explain your answer.


Cause Effect/Cause EffectBrown v.Board ofEducation

The Warren Legacy Earl Warrenserved as California governor before beingappointed Chief Justice of the United Statesin 1953. To send a strong message to thenation, he forged a consensus among fellowjustices in Brown v. Board of Education. Morethan any court, the Warren Court championedthe rights of individual citizens.

406-411 CH14S4-860053 12/1/04 11:16 PM Page 410

411

Background of the CaseOn December 22, 1994, Charles Apprendi fired

several gunshots into an African American family’shome in Vineland, New Jersey. Apprendi confessed to the shooting and stated that he did not want thefamily in the neighborhood “because they are blackin color.” Later Apprendi took back his statement.

Apprendi was accused of four different shootingsand of unlawful possession of weapons. During theplea agreement stage, the state reserved the right to request a harsher sentence for the December 22shooting on the grounds that it was committed because the victims were members of a minoritygroup. At the evidence hearing, the judge ruled that Apprendi’s December 22 shooting was motivated byracial prejudice and sentenced Apprendi to 12 years,which exceeded the usual 10-year maximum for suchan offense. Apprendi claimed that the extended sentence violated his rights under the FourteenthAmendment and argued that the amendment’s dueprocess clause requires that bias in a hate crime beproved to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.

Apprendi’s appeal eventually reached the NewJersey Supreme Court, which upheld the decisions of the lower courts. The case was taken before theUnited States Supreme Court in March 2000.

The Constitutional IssueDuring the 1990s, many Americans became

increasingly alarmed over violent crimes whose victims were singled out as members of a certaingroup. State legislatures responded by passing hatecrime laws to protect minorities. These laws providefor extended sentences when a court determinesthat a convicted person committed his or her crime because of prejudice.

Hate crime laws were passed with good inten-tions. However, establishing that prejudice is a crimi-nal’s main motive proved difficult in most cases. Thejudge in the Apprendi case made his decision basedon the “preponderance of evidence.” Because judges,not juries, often choose a sentence from a range of punishments prescribed for a certain crime, it seemsto be a reasonable way to proceed in determiningwhether or not a crime is a hate crime.

On the other hand, the crime for which the juryconvicted Apprendi was not designated a hate crimein the indictment. The jury did not decide beyond areasonable doubt that he was motivated by preju-dice. Apprendi’s case raised the issue of whether ajudge has the power under the Constitution to makedecisions that greatly increase a sentence.

Questions to Consider1. Which amendment specifies trial by jury as part

of the due process of law?2. How might a Supreme Court decision in Charles

Apprendi’s favor affect other cases in which extended sentences have been handed down?

You Be the JudgeDoes the deterrent posed by hate crime laws

justify the use of the “preponderance of evidence”standard rather than the “proof beyond a reasonabledoubt” standard? Is a defendant denied his or herrights if a judge, not a jury, decides on an extendedsentence?

Debating the CaseDebating the Case

The Fourteenth Amend-ment requires that an accused person receive due process when tried for

breaking a state law. How does this affect the enforcement of hate crimelaws, which require harsher punishments for crimes motivated by prej-udice? The Court faced this issue in the case of Apprendi v. New Jersey.

Apprendi v. New Jersey, 2000

CASES TO DEBATE

406-411 CH14S4-860053 12/1/04 11:17 PM Page 411

Changing ideas, social conditions, andtechnology will always create new issuesfor civil liberties. Key issues today involveaffirmative action, discrimination against

women, the right to know about governmentactions, privacy, and the fight against terrorism.

Affirmative ActionIn the 1960s a new approach to dealing withdiscrimination developed through affirma-

tive action programs. Affirmative action refers togovernment policies that directly or indirectly givea preference to minorities, women, or the physi-cally challenged in order to make up for pastdiscrimination caused by society as a whole. Affir-mative action is used in hiring and promotions,government contracts, admission to schools andtraining programs, and many other areas. Most af-firmative action programs are required by federalgovernment regulations or court decisions. Otherprograms are voluntary efforts.

Use in Education One of the most importantapplications of affirmative action has been inhigher education. In 1978 the Supreme Courtruled that colleges and universities could take raceinto account when admitting students, as long asthey did not use a strict quota system that set asidea certain number of slots to minority candidates(Regents of the University of California v. Bakke1).Since then, many institutions of higher learninghave adjusted their admissions policies to guar-antee diversity on their campuses.

In the mid-1990s, however, opponents ofaffirmative action began organizing to end suchprograms. In 1995 the University of California’sBoard of Regents voted to end the university’suse of race in its admissions policy. The push to

Challenges for Civil LibertiesS e c t i o n 5S e c t i o n 5

Senators Act to Protect Privacy WASHINGTON D.C., JULY 11, 2001

The Senate Commerce

Committee hardly ques-

tioned whether an Internet

privacy bill was necessary

today, instead focusing on

what shape that bill should

take. Chairman Fritz Hollings

of South Carolina and former

chairman John McCain of

Arizona both vowed to reintroduce privacy bills they

had submitted separately last year. Their proposals dif-

fered on whether companies should be required to get

permission before sharing customer data—known as

“opt-in”—or whether they should be free to exploit

the data unless customers ask them not to—known as

“opt-out.” North Carolina Senator John Edwards took

the occasion to unveil a bill that would limit the com-

mercial uses of location information from cell phones

and other mobile devices.

Browsing the Internet


Reader’s Guide

Key Termsaffirmative action, security classification system,transcript

Find Out■ What are the issues involved when the Supreme

Court deals with affirmative action cases?■ How does the reasonableness standard apply

in cases of sex discrimination?

Understanding ConceptsPublic Policy How has government addressed thejoint responsibilities of citizens’ right to know andright to privacy?

See the following footnoted materials in the ReferenceHandbook:1. Regents of the University of California v. Bakke case

summary, page 764.

412-421 CH14S5-860053 12/1/04 11:21 PM Page 412

end affirmative action at the university was led byWard Connerly, an African American board mem-ber and business owner who strongly believed thataffirmative action treats people unequally. Connerlythen led the campaign for Proposition 209—anamendment to California’s constitution that bannedthe state from giving preferential treatment on thebasis of race, gender, ethnicity, or national origin.After Californians voted in favor of Proposition209 in 1996, citizens in other states stepped uptheir efforts to ban affirmative action programs.

Twenty-five years after the Bakke ruling, affir-mative action faced another challenge that went tothe Supreme Court. In Grutter v. Bollinger1, 2003),the Court upheld an admissions policy at the Uni-versity of Michigan that gave preference to minori-ties who applied to its law school. The Court notedthat the Michigan law school program treated raceas a “plus factor” to be taken into account alongwith other characteristics of applicants such asspecial talents, extracurricular activities, and theirhometown.

In presenting its decision in Grutter, the Courtendorsed the idea that universities have a specialmission in American society that justifies someconsideration of race in admissions. Universities,the Court reasoned, must be open to all races in

order to provide diverse, well-trained graduates forthe military, business, and many other Americaninstitutions.

At the same time, the Court has made it clearthat not all forms of affirmative action in collegeadmissions are acceptable. In the same year as theGrutter case, the Court heard another case involv-ing the University of Michigan, this time dealingwith undergraduate admissions. In Gratz v.Bollinger2, the Court struck down an affirmativeaction program that used a point system to auto-matically give extra points to minority applicants.

Other Uses The Supreme Court’s attitudetowards affirmative action in areas outside highereducation has been less clear. In Johnson v. Trans-portation Agency, Santa Clara County, California3

(1987), for example, the Court upheld a plan by thetransportation department to move women intohigh-ranking positions, thus supporting affirmativeaction in promotions. In Richmond v. J.A. CrosonCo.4 (1989), however, the Court said that a plan


See the following footnoted materials in the Reference Handbook:1. Grutter v. Bollinger case summary, page 759.2. Gratz v. Bollinger case summary, page 759.3. Johnson v. Transportation Agency, Santa Clara County,

California case summary, page 760.4. Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co. case summary, page 764.

Equality vs. FreedomAllan Bakke (right) receivedhis degree in 1982, after theSupreme Court ordered themedical school of the Univer-sity of California to admit him in 1978. Diane Joyce(left) gained a promotionfrom laborer to road dis-patcher by invoking agovernment affirmativeaction policy. Do youthink that fairness in education, hiring,and promotion can be accomplishedthrough affirmativeaction?

Remedying Past Discrimination

412-421 CH14S5-860053 12/1/04 11:21 PM Page 413

setting aside 30 percent of city contracts for minoritycompanies was unconstitutional. In 1995, in AdarandConstructors, Inc. v. Peña1, the Court addressed affir-mative action in federal programs. It overturnedearlier decisions supporting affirmative action whenit held that federal programs classifying people byrace are unconstitutional, even when the purpose isto expand opportunities for minorities.

An Ongoing Debate The policy of affirmativeaction has caused much disagreement. Its support-ers argue that minorities and women have been sohandicapped by past discrimination that they suf-fer from disadvantages not shared by white males.Supporters also argue that increasing the numberof minorities and women in desirable jobs is suchan important social goal that it should be takeninto account when judging a person’s qualifica-

tions for a job, school application, or promotion.Therefore, supporters claim,simply stopping discrim-ination is not enough; government has the respon-sibility to actively promote equality for minorities.

Opponents claim that any discrimination basedon race or gender is wrong, even to correct past in-justices. They argue that merit should be the onlybasis for making decisions on jobs, promotions, andschool admissions. Some opponents have used theterm reverse discrimination to describe situationswhere qualified individuals lose out to others chosenbecause of their race, ethnicity, or gender. The na-tion’s heated debate over affirmative action continuesto the present.

Discrimination Against WomenWomen finally won the right to vote withthe Nineteenth Amendment in 1920. In re-

cent decades new challenges to discriminationagainst women have been raised in such areas asemployment, housing, and credit policies.

If persons believe they have beentreated unfairly because of gen-der, race, color, national origin,

religion, or disability, they can makea formal complaint that their civilrights have been violated.

The complaint must be in writing,be signed and dated, and include yourname, address, and phone number.It must include the name and ad-dress of the person or establishmentthat is the subject of the complaint.The complaint must describe the actand the type of discrimination (gen-der, race, and so on). It must includethe date and place the act occurredand the names, addresses, andphone numbers of any witnesses. Noother documents are necessary.

Generally, a complaint must befiled with the appropriate agency

within 180 days of the discrimina-tion it alleges. Discrimination in employment, education, housing,credit, and public services are handled by various state or federalgovernment agencies. The Complaints Referral Office of theU.S. Commission on Civil Rights in Washington, D.C., gives adviceon where to file a complaint.

Activity1. Investigate the state or

federal agencies that handlevarious civil rights complaints.Use the telephone directory to list which agencies are concerned with the follow-ing areas: employment, hous-ing, credit, education, public facilities.

2. Create an imaginary civil rightscomplaint following the guide-lines above. Include the nameand address of the agency whereyou would file your complaint.

Filing a CivilRights Complaint

articipatingI N G O V E R N M E N T

articipatingI N G O V E R N M E N T

Making a civil rights complaint


See the following footnoted materials in the ReferenceHandbook:1. Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Peña case summary,

page 754.

412-421 CH14S5-860053 12/1/04 11:22 PM Page 414

The Supreme Court’s Position Prior to the1970s, the Supreme Court generally ruled that lawsdiscriminating against women did not violate theequal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amend-ment. In theory, many of these laws were designed toprotect women from night work, overtime work,heavy lifting, and “bad elements” in society. In prac-tice, they often discriminated against women. In the1950s, for example, the Court upheld an Ohio lawforbidding any woman other than the wife ordaughter of a tavern owner to work in a bar.

Reed v. Reed In 1971 the Supreme Court forthe first time held that a state law was unconstitu-tional because it discriminated against women. InReed v. Reed, the Court ruled that a law that auto-matically preferred a father over a mother as ex-ecutor of a son’s estate violated the equalprotection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment:

“To give a mandatory preference to mem-bers of either sex over members of the other. . . is to make the very kind of arbitrarylegislative choice forbidden by theEqual Protection Clause.”—Chief Justice Warren Burger, 1971

Reasonableness Standard TheReed decision created a new standard forjudging constitutionality in gender dis-crimination cases. The Supreme Courtsaid any law that classifies people on thebasis of gender “must be reasonable, notarbitrary, and must rest on some ground ofdifference.” That difference must serve“important governmental objectives” andbe substantially related to those objectives.

In addition, in 1977 the Court saidthat treating women different-ly from men (or vice versa) isunconstitutional when basedon no more than “old notions”about women and “the role-typing society has long imposedon women.”

Substantial Interest Standard Since theReed decision, federal courts have allowed some dis-tinctions based on gender, while they have invalidat-ed others. All of the following prohibited actionsresult from Supreme Court decisions that bar dis-tinctions based on gender: (1) States cannot setdifferent ages at which men and women becomelegal adults. (2) States cannot set different ages atwhich men and women are allowed to purchase al-cohol. (3) States cannot exclude women from ju-ries. (4) Employers cannot require women to takea pregnancy leave from work. (5) Girls cannot bekept off Little League baseball teams. (6) Privateclubs and community service groups cannot ex-clude women from membership. (7) Employersmust pay women monthly retirement benefitsequal to those paid to men. (8) States cannot barwomen from state-supported military colleges.

The following permitted actions are based onSupreme Court decisions that allow differences basedon gender: (1) All-boy and all-girl public schools areallowed as long as enrollment is voluntary and quali-ty is equal. (2) A state can give widows a property taxexemption not given to widowers. (3) A state mayprohibit women from working in all-male prisons.(4) Hospitals may bar fathers from the delivery room.

Social ReformA member of theCongressionalUnion, founded bysuffragist Alice Paul,demands suffragefrom PresidentWoodrow Wilson in 1919. Why doyou think the right to vote wasso important towomen?

The NationalWoman Suf-frage Publish-ing Companyendorseswomen’s rightto vote.

The Fight for the Right to Vote

412-421 CH14S5-860053 12/1/04 11:22 PM Page 415

Congressional Action Congress has passedmany laws protecting women from discrimina-tion. The Civil Rights Act of 1964, for example,banned job discrimination based on gender.In 1972 the Equal Employment Opportunity Act strengthened earlier laws by prohibiting gender discrimination in activities ranging fromhiring and firing to promotion, pay, and workingconditions.

In 1976 Congress acted to give women equalopportunities in education and school sports. Whenamending the Omnibus Education Act of 1972,Congress required all schools to give boys and girlsan equal chance to participate in sports programs.Schools, however, may maintain separate teams forboys and girls, especially in contact sports.

In 1991 the Civil Rights and Women’s Equityin Employment Act required employers to justify

any gender distinctions in hiring to job perfor-mance and “business necessity.”

Citizens’ Right to KnowThe right of citizens and the press to knowwhat their government is doing is an essen-

tial part of democracy. Citizens cannot make intel-ligent judgments about the government’s actionsunless they have adequate information. Govern-ment officials, however, are often reluctant to shareinformation about their decisions and policies.

The national government’s security classifica-tion system, operating since 1917, provides thatinformation on government activities related tonational security and foreign policy may be keptsecret. Millions of government documents areclassified as secret each year and made unavailableto the public.

The Freedom of Information Act In 1966Congress passed the Freedom of Information Actrequiring federal agencies to provide citizens ac-cess to public records on request. Exemptions arepermitted for national defense materials, confi-dential personnel and financial data, and law en-forcement files. People can sue the government fordisclosure if they are denied access to materials.

The Sunshine Act Before 1976 many govern-ment meetings and hearings were held in secret.Such closed sessions made it difficult for the press,citizens’ groups, lobbyists, and the public to keep aneye on governmental decisions. In the Sunshine Actof 1976, Congress helped correct that situation by re-quiring that many meetings be open to the public.

The law applies to about 50 federal agencies,boards, and commissions. Meetings these agencieshold must be open to the public, and at least oneweek’s advance notice must be given. Some closedmeetings are allowed, but in that case a transcript,or summary record, of the meeting must be madeavailable. People may sue to force public disclosureof the proceedings of a meeting, if necessary.

Citizens’ Right to PrivacyThe Constitution does not mention a spe-cific right to privacy. In 1965, however, in

the case of Griswold v. Connecticut, the Supreme


Women in the Armed Forces Although manywomen have enlisted in the armed forces, theSupreme Court ruled in 1981 that Congress couldexclude women from the draft. Why would theCourt allow Congress to exclude women fromthe draft?

Reasonable Distinctions

412-421 CH14S5-860053 12/1/04 11:22 PM Page 416

Court ruled that personal privacy is one of therights protected by the Constitution. The Courtsaid that specific guarantees in the First, Third,Fourth, and Fifth Amendments created an area ofprivacy that is protected by the Ninth Amendmentand is applied to the states by the due processclause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

In decisions since Griswold, such as Roe v.Wade1 (1973), Reno v. Condon2 (2000), andLawrence v. Texas (2003), the Court has recognizedthe right to privacy in personal matters such aschild rearing, abortion, and personal relationswithin the confines of the home. The Court hasalso held that the right to personal privacy is limi-ted when the state has a “compelling need” toprotect society.

Internet Issues Widespread use of the Internetis creating many new challenges to the right to pri-vacy. One concern is online surveillance by the gov-ernment. The FBI, for example, has developed apowerful new wiretapping technology known as“Carnivore.” The system can readily intercept thefull content of e-mail flowing through the Internetor target particular words or phrases in messagessent by anyone on a network.

Online privacy is also being threatened by theability of Web sites and hackers to gather informa-tion about people as they “surf” the Web. Marketers,for instance, can create a personal profile that may

include your age, income, recent purchases, musicpreferences, and political party affiliation. Moreand more, such personal information is beingcollected in “data warehouses” where it is for sale tobusinesses, current or potential employers, ornearly anyone else willing to pay for it.

Terrorism and the USA Patriot Act Waror other national emergencies create tension in ademocracy between the need to maintain individ-ual rights and the need to implement strongmeasures to protect the nation’s security. The USAPatriot Act, passed quickly by Congress in responseto the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, hasgreatly increased the federal government’s power todetain, investigate, and prosecute people suspectedof terrorism. The law allows federal agencies tomonitor Internet messages, to tap phones withapproval only from a secret foreign intelligencecourt, and to seize a person’s library and other pri-vate records without showing “probable cause” asnormally required in criminal investigations. Thelaw also broadens the scope of who could beconsidered a terrorist, allows the FBI to share evi-dence collected in criminal probes, and gives theattorney general sweeping new powers to detainand deport people.

Privacy and Information Control

W hat legal recourse does a person havewho is the subject of unwelcome publicitythat does not involve physical injury or

trespass? One of the difficulties that the law hasin providing a right to privacy is that it often con-flicts with the First Amendment rights of freespeech and press. The Supreme Court has notgenerally supported the right to privacy for publicfigures. Private citizens have sometimes been suc-cessful in recovering damages for invasion of priva-cy when the press prints false statements about

them. Another difficulty in theissue of information control isthe failure of the law to keeppace with the electronic revolu-tion that enables a host ofdata collectors to access andrecord personal information.

Who Knows What? Invite a businessperson,police officer, or government official to class toshare information on this topic. Discuss the limitsthat should apply to protect private citizens.

A C T I V I T YA C T I V I T Yarticipating

I N G O V E R N M E N T articipating

I N G O V E R N M E N T

Celebrities some-times face unwel-come publicity.

See the following footnoted materials in the Reference Handbook:1. Roe v. Wade case summary, page 764.2. Reno v. Condon case summary, page 764.

417

412-421 CH14S5-860053 12/1/04 11:23 PM Page 417

Debate Over the Act The American peoplestrongly supported the Patriot Act at the time of itspassage. Later on, however, concerns arose overwhether the Act poses a threat to civil liberties.Many legal experts have noted that provisions inthe law could lead to changes in some of the mostbasic principles of the American legal system, suchas the right to a jury trial, the privacy of attorney-client communications, and protections againstpreventive detention. By 2004 more than 140 citiesand towns across the country had passed resolu-tions critical of the Patriot Act. During congres-sional hearings on the law, one House member toldAttorney General John Ashcroft, “No prosecutor in modern history has been granted the power you now hold.” Ashcroft has strongly defended the Patriot Act, declaring, “Our actions are firmlyrooted in the Constitution, secure in historical and judicial precedent and consistent with the laws passed by Congress.”

In 2002 a portion of the Patriot Act survived acourt challenge when a special federal appealscourt overturned attempts to limit new sur-veillance tactics being used under the law. Theattorney general called the decision “a victory forliberty, safety and the security of Americans.” Therewill be more challenges, however, as civil libertiesgroups and others continue to question whetheractions taken under the law are constitutional.

Personal Privacy Information on this customermay be dispatched through credit card use to var-ious companies. In what circumstances mightthe collection of information about citizensconflict with the individual’s right to privacy?

Privacy and Credit Cards


Checking for Understanding1. Main Idea Use a graphic organizer like the

one below to list arguments for and against affirmative action programs.

2. Define affirmative action, security classificationsystem, transcript.

3. Identify reverse discrimination.4. How does the Supreme Court apply the reason-

ableness standard in judging discriminationagainst women?

5. What is the key provision of the Freedom of Information Act?

Critical Thinking6. Checking Consistency Review the lists of deci-

sions barring distinctions based on gender anddecisions allowing differences based on genderdescribed on pages 415 and 416. Are there anydecisions from the second list that you believeto be inconsistent with the first list? Explain.


For Against

Public Policy Find out about the Equal CreditOpportunity Act (1974). Find out the origins,the main purpose, and the basic provisions of both the Fair Credit Reporting Act and theEqual Credit Opportunity Act. Analyze and present your information in a chart.

412-421 CH14S5-860053 12/1/04 11:23 PM Page 418

Outlining may be used as a starting point for a writer. The writer begins with the roughshape of the material and gradually fills in

the details in a logical manner. You may also useoutlining as a method of note taking and organiz-ing information you read.

Learning the Skill

There are two types of outlines—formal andinformal. An informal outline is similar to takingnotes. You write only words and phrases needed toremember ideas. Under the main ideas, jot downrelated but less important details. This kind of out-line is useful for reviewing material before an exam.

A formal outline has a standard format. Mainheads are labeled with Roman numerals, sub-heads with capital letters, and details with Arabicnumerals. Each level should have at least two en-tries and should be indented from the level above.All entries use the same grammatical form,whether phrases or complete sentences.

When outlining written material, first read thematerial to identify the main ideas. Then identifythe subheads. Place details supporting or explain-ing subheads under the appropriate head.

Practicing the Skill

Study this partial outline; then answer thequestions that follow.

I. Immigrants and aliensA. Classifying aliens

1. Resident alien2. Non-resident alien3. Refugee4. Illegal alien

B. Rights of aliens1. Bill of Rights guarantees2. Cannot vote, travel freely

II. Immigration policyA. Growth of restrictions

1. First federal immigration law, 18822. Immigration restrictions

B. National origins quotas1. Immigration Act of 19242. Immigrants from northern and

western Europe favored

1. Is this a formal or informal outline?2. What are the two main topics in this outline?3. If you were to add two facts about the Immi-

gration Act of 1924, where would you placethem?

419

1920s passenger liner

Outlining

▲

Application ActivityApplication Activity

The Glencoe SkillbuilderInteractive Workbook, Level 2provides instruction and practicein key social studies skills.

Following the guidelines above, preparean outline for Section 2 of Chapter 14.

412-421 CH14S5-860053 12/1/04 11:24 PM Page 419

• A person who is born on American soil, born to a parentwho is a United States citizen, or naturalized is a U.S. citizen.

• A person can lose citizenship through expatriation, by beingconvicted of certain crimes, or through denaturalization.

• Responsibilities of citizens include knowing about rights andlaws, participating in political life, and voting.

Citizenship• The Supreme Court uses three tests—rational basis,

suspect classifications, and fundamental rights—to determine violations of equal protection.

• Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954) overruledthe separate-but-equal doctrine.

• Civil-rights movements throughout the 1960s and 1970ssought to end segregation and discrimination.

Equal Protection of the Law

• Fourth Amendment protects people from unreasonablesearches and seizures.

• Fifth Amendment protects people from self-incrimination andfrom double jeopardy (being tried twice for the same crime).

• Sixth Amendment guarantees the right to legal counsel.• Eighth Amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishment.

Rights of the Accused• Affirmative action debate over whether minorities should be

compensated for past injustices continues.• Efforts to stop discrimination against women in employment,

housing, and credit policies continue.• Citizens’ right to know sometimes clashes with government’s

need for security.• Citizens’ right to privacy sometimes clashes with state’s

need to protect society.

Challenges for Civil Liberties

Reviewing Key TermsMatch the following terms with the descriptions below.

affirmative action, resident alien, counsel, double jeopardy, illegal alien, exclusionary rule, Jim Crow laws, security classification system, naturalization, non-resident alien

1. a person may not be retried for the same crime2. the process of gaining citizenship3. person from a foreign country who expects to

stay in the United States for a short, specifiedperiod of time

4. person from a foreign country who establishespermanent residence in the United States

5. person who comes to the United States without legal permits

6. an attorney7. keeps illegally obtained evidence out of court8. laws that discriminated against African

Americans9. policy giving preference to minorities

10. how government documents are kept secret

Recalling Facts1. How did the Constitution address the issue of

citizenship?2. What is the difference between an immigrant

and an alien?3. What are the three basic sources of United

States citizenship?4. What items must be included in a legal search

warrant?5. List the three Miranda rules.

Assessment and ActivitiesChapter 14Chapter 14

Self-Check Quiz Visit the United States Government:Democracy in Action Web site at gov.glencoe.com andclick on Chapter 14—Self-Check Quizzes to preparefor the chapter test.

GOVERNMENT

412-421 CH14S5-860053 12/1/04 11:25 PM Page 420


UnderstandingConcepts

1. Constitutional InterpretationsHow did the FourteenthAmendment expand citizen-ship in the United States?

2. Civil Rights Why did the Courtrule that wiretapping without awarrant was an illegal searchand thus a violation of theFourth Amendment?

Critical Thinking1. Describe the circumstances in

which collecting informationabout citizens and consumers conflicts with the individual’sright to privacy.

2. Making Generalizations Howdid the Escobedo and Mirandacases extend protectionagainst self-incrimination andforced confessions?

3. Predicting Consequences Use agraphic organizer like the onebelow to show what mighthappen if there were no formal procedures forbecoming an American citizen.

Analyzing Primary SourcesJane Addams was a prominent social reformer andadvocate for woman suffrage. In a 1906 newspapereditorial, Addams discussed her arguments for giv-ing women the vote. Read the excerpt and answerthe questions that follow.

“Logically, [the] electorate should be made up of thosewho . . . in the past have at least attempted to care forchildren, to clean houses, to prepare foods, to isolate thefamily from oral dangers, those who have traditionallytaken care of that side of life which inevitably becomes thesubject of municipal consideration and control as soon asthe population is congested. . . . These problems must besolved, if they are solved at all, not from the military pointof view, not even from the industrial point of view, butfrom a third . . . the human welfare point of view.”

Interpreting Political Cartoons Activity


Chapter 14Chapter 14

1. Who are the people grouped on the left of the cartoon?2. What is the meaning of the comment made by the person

on the right?3. How is “illegal immigrants” being defined by the cartoonist?

1. What is the basis of Jane Addams’ argumentfor giving women the vote?

2. Can you see any problems with grantingwomen the vote based on these reasons? Whydo you suppose, using the reasons listedabove, that it took so long for women to getthe right to vote?

Participating in Local GovernmentFind out about or visit one ofthe citizenship classes offeredto immigrants in your community.Find out what material is covered in courses designed to prepare immi-grants for becoming United States citizens. Whatobstacles do immigrants have to overcome to besuccessful in these classes? Who sponsors andpays for these classes? Share your findings withthe class in a brief oral presentation.

Cause EffectNo naturalization

412-421 CH14S5-860053 12/1/04 11:26 PM Page 421

Chapter 14: Citizenship and Equal Justice

Documents

Transcript of Chapter 14: Citizenship and Equal Justice