State College Area School District / State College Area ...
AP US Government Review
Merritt
Foundations
• John Locke Purpose of government is to protect life, liberty and property
• Federalist Papers – Madison Federalist 10 and 51
o Control the effect of factions and control the power of the national government
▪ Separation of Power, Checks and Balances, and Bill of Rights
Implied Powers – Powers not specifically enumerated
• Derived from Supremacy Clause (Article VI) McCullough v. Maryland
Constitutional safeguards – Delegates reflection of cynical view of government
• Separation of Power
• Checks and Balances
• Bill of Rights added 1791 as part of a deal
Formal and informal ways to amend the Constitution
• Formal
o 2/3 vote in each house of Congress or national convention called by Congress at request of 2/3 of state legislatures
o Ratification ¾ of state legislatures or special state ratifying convention
o President has NO formal role in amending process
• Informal
o Judicial interpretation – Marbury v. Madison
o Political practice – the growth and influence of political parties
o Presidential actions – Executive order, Executive agreements
Federalism
• Dual - ends approximately 1930
o McCullough v. Maryland implied powers
o Gibbons v. Ogden Elastic Clause use of Commerce Clause
o USe of Commerce Clause recently struck down @@@@@Case
• Cooperative 1930-present
o Creative – mainly in the area of civil rights and environmental areas
o Coercive – unfunded mandates and preemption
• Federal grant system Categorical v. Block
• Unfunded mandates
Advantages and disadvantages of Federalism
1. Advantages
• More opportunities for individual political participation
• More access to government
• Allows for individual states to act in their own best interest
• Allows for more political party opportunity – grass roots
• Allows for a great diversity of public opinion
• State and localities serve as testing grounds for controversial or critical issues
2. Disadvantage
• The diversity of states creates 50 different responses to similar issues
• Slow and cumbersome
• Duplication of services
• Confusion of which level an issue belongs
• Fear of preemption by National government
• Over 86,000 different governments
Democratic and Interest Group Theory
• Democratic theory
o Equality in voting
o Effective participation
o Popular sovereignty
o All have equal rights – opportunity v. outcome
o Personal liberty
• Elite theory
• Pluralism
• Hyperpluralism
Electoral College
o Arguments for
o Majority necessary gives the country a President with a clear majority
o All states count
o Arguments against
o “Faithless” electors
o Depression of voter turnout
o Results may be opposite of popular vote – minority president
Executive
o White House staff – Most significant advisors the president has: See him on a daily basis, travel with, interact
o Power “
1. Enumerated Article II
o Treaty
o Nomination
o Commander in Chief
o Pardon
o Veto
2. Implied – “Executive authority is vested….”
o Executive orders, Executive agreements, Executive privilege
o Strengths
o Influence of political agenda
o Speak directly to the citizens
o Deploy troops for 60 days – Gulf of Tonkin Resolution 1964 v. War Powers Act 1973
o Make treaties
o Nominate ambassadors, judges, etc.
o Convene and adjourn Congress
o Veto Legislation
o Pardon power
o Weaknesses
o Cannot declare war
o No Presidential budget – Must rely on legislature (House of Representatives) for funding
o Impeachment
o Complex issues – can not be informed on all issues
o Excessive media attention
o Impeachment House Draws up Articles of impeachment, Senate conducts trial need 2/3 majority, Chief Justice is the Presiding judge
o Veto Power – President can veto legislative actions, may be overridden with a 2/3 majority of both houses of Congress
o Line item veto – President can “line out” sections of bills he does not like
• Originally aimed at spending bills declared Unconstitutional 1997 Clinton v. NYC
Bureaucracy – all the governmental agencies
1. Independent Regulatory agencies
a. ICC, OSHA, NLRB, FTC, SEC
2. Cabinet
3. Independent executive agencies – Serve a narrow scope and function than other agencies, not regulation, more administrative
a. GSA, NASA, NSF
4. Government corporations
a. Amtrak, US Postal service
o Weber – Characteristics of bureaucracy
o Hierarchical authority structure
o Task specialization
o Extensive rules
o Clear goals
o Merit principle
o Impersonal
o Unique American bureaucratic characteristics
o Divided supervision
o Close public scrutiny – transparency
o Regulation rather than public ownership
o Problems of the bureaucracy
o Red tape
o Agencies can work in conflict
o Duplication of services
o Growth of agencies
o Waste – spending more than necessary
o Bureaucratic power checks
o Creation of agency by Congress
o Statutory (legal) restrictions/requirements
o Authorization v. Appropriations
o Congressional oversight
o Executive and Bureaucracy
o Conflict based on political agendas
o Executive micromanagement/increased oversight by executive
o Executive can restructure/reorganize departments
o Legislative oversight of Bureaucracy
o Funding
o Rewrite authorizing legislation
o Hold hearings
Legislative - House of Representatives and Senate
Most of the governments work takes place in the committees
o Most bills introduced in committee never leave
o Committee types
o Standing – Foreign affairs, judiciary, appropriations, ways and means
o Conference – used to settle differences on bills
o Joint – Both house together
o Select – Specific purpose – Committee on taxation
1. Older and more experience are normally the committee leaders
2. House very specific rules Senate more laid back
3. House has a Rules Committee – very powerful – determines the length of time a bill will be open for debate and consideration, can allow open rules or closed rules
a. Open rule – bills may be debated on floor of House
b. Closed Rule – No amendments allowed
c. Discharge petition – majority of House may ask for a discharge of any bill blocked in committee
4. Senate no rules committee – normally unlimited debate until cloture call
a. 60% of Senators must vote to end debate
b. Filibuster – To talk an issue to death: Usually done to block legislation
c. Hold – Senator may put a hold on any bill. Bill does not leave committee until hold is released
5. Incumbency factor – Incumbents win at about the 95% rate
• More well known – name recognition
• Credit claiming
• Weak opponents: Since running against an incumbent is daunting many good candidates refuse or choose not to run
• Franking privilege: Congressman have unlimited mail budgets as long as the mailing does not advocate voting a specific way
• Case work
• Free press
• Normally have party support
6. Senate campaigns more expensive and intense than House
7. Redistricting – every 10 years after the census, last census 2000, Pa. lost 2 seats in the House, Southwest and south gaining seats, sun belt
o Gerrymandering – redistricting in such a way to protect specific seats for a party
8. Why is Congress so slow
o Committee system, compromises difficult to reach, threat of veto, overrides difficult
9. Supreme Court cases that impact election of legislators
o Bush v. Gore 2000 – 5-4 decision forbidding a hand recount of Florida’s ballots
1. Justices voted along party line
o McConnell v. FEC – Upheld prohibition of national parties raising or spending soft money to pay for electioneering; electioneering spending must be disclosed to FEC; minors allowed to contribute to political campaigns
o Buckley v. Valeo 1976 Unlimited spending by candidates using their own $$ is Constitutional; Exception Presidential candidates who receive accept public funding
Judiciary
1. Dual court system – National and State levels
• Within each level 3 parts
• National
- District
- Appellate
- Supreme Court
2. Cases start at the lowest level
a. Most settled at the District level
b. Cases may be appealed to the appellate level for only procedural issues or challenges to Constitutional rulings no new evidence introduced
c. Supreme Court usually hears about 90 cases annually
1. Writ of Certiorari – SC grants a case to be heard
2. Rule of 4 – if 4 of the justices want to hear a case, the case is heard
3. Original jurisdiction – Very few cases are OJ at the SC level
o Cases dealing with the President
o Conflicting rulings from district courts
o Cases between states
3. Marbury v. Madison Judicial review – Unwritten amendment to Constitution
4. Judicial Precedent – Stare Decisis – Let the ruling stand: The practice of following ` previously decide case law
5. Judicial Activism v. Judicial Restraint
• The belief that judges use their position to legislate
• Warren Court 1953-1969 – Brown v. Board – Activism?
• Arguments for activism –
o Courts can fix a pressing need left unmet by the political process
o Constitutional issues arise not addressed by the Constitution
o Constitution is too vague, must have room for interpretation
• Arguments for restraint
o Justices should rule on existing law
6. Executive and Judiciary appointments
• Must have a 60 member majority or get a nominee to a vote
• Justices that are too far right or left usually are not confirmed
• Presidential considerations in nominee selection
o Experience
o Political leanings
o Judicial record
Political parties – Serve as linkage from citizens to the government
1. Grown weaker since 1970
o More voters identify themselves as independents
o Less direct control of Congress
o Reform – more restriction on funding
o More diverse voters with cross cutting allegiances
3rd Parties
• Name recognition difficult
• State laws make it difficult for 3rd parties to get on ballot
• Often denied debates with other major party candidates
• Lack strong organizational/cohesive party backing
• Very grass roots organized
• Often times issues co-opted by major party
Elections and Campaigns
1. Political participation
• The primary way most citizens participate is through voting
• Other ways: protests, civil disobedience, letter writing, contacting legislators, special interest groups
• Party dealignment – gradual moving away from a specific political party
• Party realignment – majority of electorate switch party affiliation – rare occurrence, most typically associated with a crisis, 1860, 1932
• Party dominance –
o Federalists – 1810
o Democrats – 1804 - 1860 Jacksonian Democracy 1828
o Republican – 1860 – 1932
o Democratic – 1932-1968
o Mixed 1968 – present
2. Primaries – open v. closed
3. Two party dominance – see 3rd parties above
4. Voter turnout – usually about 50% in general Presidential elections, much lower in midterm, off year and primary elections
5. Who votes: 18-24 year olds least likely to vote; middle class, well educated, church going vote in greater numbers
• Political efficacy – the belief that an individual can change the political system
• Political culture – general set of values widely shared within a society
• Political ideology – set of ideas and principles that explain how the society should work and offers a blueprint for a specific societal order
Interest Groups
• Methods
o Electioneering
o Litigation
o Lobbying
o Grass roots organizing
o Going public – media campaigns either r for a specific candidate or issue advocacy
• Effectiveness
o Size
o Intensity
o Funding
• Special Interest Groups – Issue focused organizations, lobby lawmakers on behalf of their cause
• PAC’s – Political Action Committees – the political wing of a special interest group, usually support a candidate based on issues
• 527’s – Similar to PACS but unregulated by the FEC, run issue and candidate advocacy advertising, usually act independent of a specific interest group, focus on defeating candidates for political rather issue reasons
Political Participation
• US well known for low voter turnout – usually in the mid 40% to 50% range
• Europe averages mid 70%
• Most Americans follow political campaigns over 80%
• 73% of Americans say they voted in 2000 Pres election yet only 50% did
Who participates
• Education – the more education, the more likely to vote
• Religious involvement – as religious involvement increases so does participation
• Race and Ethnicity – Whites vote in higher % than blacks and Latinos
• Age – 18-24 year least likely to vote; the 45 year old and above vote in largest %
• Gender – since 1992 women vote in larger # than men, but PS’s say rate is =
• 2 Party system – Lower competition lower voter turnout; rates increase greatly during Presidential elections
• Since all people fit in various demographics, cross cutting cleavages form :
Would a 45 year old black female, regular church goer, with a PhD be more or less likely to vote than a white male, with a high school dropout, heathen, 23 year old
Expanding Suffrage
• 1830’s property restrictions lifted
• 15th Amendment
Jim Crow Laws – attempts to limit black voters: in place through the 1960s; Plessey v. Ferguson – Separate but = IS Constitutional
Civil Rights Act 1964 and Voting Rights Act 1965 – Kills Jim Crow
Commerce clause
• Women’s Suffrage 19th Amendment 1919
• 26th Amendment 1971 – 18 year olds allowed to vote
Voter Turnout
• Measured 2 ways
Proportion of registered voters that vote v. % of eligible voters that vote
• The 1st method reflects a much higher turnout
• More likely to vote if registered
• US is very low compared to other democracies – England 75%, Italy and Australia 90%
Voter Registration:
• States determine voter eligibility, no state allowed to impose more than a 30 day waiting period
• “Motor-Voter” – allows citizens to register when getting or renewing their driver’s license
Low voter turnout:
• Difficulty/process of absentee voting
• The vast number of offices
• Weekday v. weekend/holiday voting
• Weak Political parties
Americans tend to participate in large numbers beyond the traditional voting; campaign contribution, community involvement, political volunteers, contacting public officials
Questions:
1. Why would over 70% of US citizens say they voted in the last Presidential election, when in reality it was only approximately 50%
2. Is low voter turnout a “Bad” thing?
3. Why do younger citizens vote in smaller numbers than older citizens? How do you propose to increase voter turnout for the 18-24 year old demographic?
4. Do you believe 527s increased the vote or did citizens recognize the significance of voting?
Elections and Campaigns
• Over 500,000 elective offices nationwide
• Campaigns are longer and more expensive than in previous years
Functions of elections
• Allows for political participation
• Legitimizes positions of power
Guidelines for elections
• Constitution sets broad parameters for elections
Sets terms for elected office
House 2 years
Senate 6 years
President 4 years, no more than 2 terms
• Sets date for national elections
Tuesday after the 1st Monday in November
Role of Political Parties
• Compared to other democracies, party in US less important: the candidate is responsible for announcing, campaigning, collecting signatures, and fund raising
• Party influence greatly declined since 19th century
- Direct election of Senators 17th amendment
- Nominating conventions v. party caucuses (no more smoked filled rooms)
- New campaigning techniques, internet, email, cell phones, computers, etc. have made candidates much less dependent on party
- Much less “Straight ticket” voting, now more split ticket
Winner take all
• Candidate who wins the most votes – wins: In most elections a plurality is all that is required not a majority
• Single member districts
- Nearly insures a 2 party system since US does not operate a Proportional system
- Limits multiple parties
Primaries and General elections
• Primary – Reform from 19th century allowing more citizen participation
- Primary used to select the party’s candidates
• Closed Primary – Only party members are allowed to vote in their party’s primary (most)
• Open Primary – Voters choose for which party’s candidates to vote (only a few states)
• Blanket Primary – Can select different candidates for each office from both parties
• More people vote in General elections than in primaries 50% of eligible v. 25% eligible
Congressional v. Presidential elections
• Congressional Regional or statewide
• House elections less competitive: Strong incumbency advantage
• Fewer voters vote in midterm elections averages 36% Mid term voters more activist and ideological than Presidential year votes
• Presidential popularity affects mid terms positively or negatively – Coattail effect
• Congress people have much more personal contact with constituents
• President relies on mass media
• Congress people can deny responsibility: Blame President or other members
Campaign and election reform
• Reform Act of 1974
- all contributions over $100 must be disclosed
- No foreign contributions
- Individual contributions limited to $1,000/candidate, $20,000 to a national party, and $5,000 to a PAC
- PACs are allowed: contributions not to exceed $5,000 to a candidate and $15,000 to a national party
- Federal matching funds provided to major candidates; only funds allowed after conventions
• 1976 Buckley v. Valeo: No limit on personal spending for your own campaign
- Ross Perot 1992 and 1996
• Soft Money - $ not specified for a candidate but given to party for “Party building”
• Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act 2002
- Banned soft $ to national parties
- Limited campaign ads by interest groups
- Raised individual contributions to $2,000, and maximum to al candidates to $95,000 over a two year election cycle
• Bush v. Gore: Showed the problems of multiple ballot methods
527’s
• 2002 restrictions led to 527’s
• Not a special interest or PAC: Independent but partisan groups raised significant amounts of $ for both parties; ran negative campaign ads - can not say “do not vote for” or “vote for” candidate X
• In 2004 527’s raised characters issues – Swift Boat Veterans
Critical realignment elections
• Realignment – Significant shift in the way a large group of voters from 1 party to another
• Realignment occurs because of significant issues: Primarily economic or social
• Election of 1860: Slavery divided the Democrats; 4 candidates; Republicans win; creates a North – South split
- Republicans will dominate national politics until 1932
• Election of 1896: Economic realignment Democratic split: Farmer v. Laborer; former democratic supporting laborers realign with Republicans: continues Republican dominance
• Election of 1932: Depression and citizen reaction to a perceived Republican inefficiency
- New Deal Coalition: Farmers, urban workers, northern blacks, southern whites
- Democrats will dominate until 1960s’
Dealignment: Recently voters less likely to affiliate with either party
• 2004 election: alignment according to Red/Blue, primarily North/South, Urban/Rural
- New alliance highly religious w/out regard to religious affiliation – mainly voting Republican
Questions:
1. Should any restrictions be placed on campaign contributions? Are campaign donations a form of free speech?
2. Should there be a national standard for ballots? Would this be a an infringement on states rights?
3. The primary season is a long, expensive process. Should the US go to a 1 day or 1 week super primary system?
Political Parties
• Recent pride in “independent” status; avoid labels like staunch Republican or loyal democrat
• Parties appear quickly during GWs 1st term
• 2004 may have reversed the anti label ideology
Political Party functions
• Connecting citizens to government: Linkage function – connecting a large population to the governments at all levels
• Increases Political efficacy - the ability of a citizen to influence or be influenced by the government
• Running candidates for office: Parties help fund and organize candidates
• Informing the public: Provide voters information on policy and candidates issues
• Organize government: Coordinate governmental policy; provides cohesion among 50 disparate states
Why 2 party system
• Consensus of values: Most Americans agree on broad political ideas, concepts and values
- In general limited range of beliefs v. Europe w/significant range of political beliefs
• History
• Winner take all system – single member district, pluralist electoral system; no proportion
• Organization of 2 party system
Grass roots organization: Strong state and local organization
- National chairman and committee
- National convention every 4 years to nominate Presidential candidate
- Congressional campaign committee to assist incumbents and challengers
- Broad ideological base to appeal to a large group: “Large umbrella or Big tent”
Historical development
• Federalists v. Anti Federalists 1790’s – 1810’s 2 party
• Era of Good Feelings 1816-1824 1 party
• Jacksonian Democracy 1828-mid 1800s 2 party emergence of Whigs
- Beginning of Democratic Party
- Universal manhood suffrage
- Nominating conventions
• Whigs few successes: Harrison and Taylor; no ideological coherence
• North south tension: Emergence of Republican Party will dominate through 1932
- End of Democratic dominance
- Characterized by Laissez Faire economic policy
• 2nd Democratic Era 1932 - 1968
- Beginning of cooperative federalism
- More national government involvement in economy and states; Court Packing plan
• Era of Divided government
- 1968 - ? : Gridlock? Executive and Legislative Branch of differing parties for extended
• Republican hold on Presidency 1969 – 1993
- Republicans begin to use more professional approach, consultants, electronic media, highly structured and organized
- Democrats begin a period of Grass roots organizing
- Reputation of leaderless, disorganized, and directionless – Lack vision
Minor parties/3rd Parties
• Why 3rd parties do not win
- Often not taken seriously
- Issues they represent are co opted by major parties
- Funding is difficult
- Dominance of 2 parties
- “Winner take all” system, single member district
Party Power: Realignment v. Dealignment
• Straight ticket v. Split ticket voting
• 2004
- Red v. Blue, West, Midwest, and Northeast v. Rest of nation
- Stronger party identification
- Breakup of the Solid South – Republicans gain control of Southern states
- National security and religion play significant role; creation of new religious alliance
Questions:
1. Is the dominance of a 2 party system antithetical to the true essence of democracy
2. What is the most significant factor causing party realignment/dealignment? Do you agree that the 2004 election was a realignment?
Interest Groups
Interest group – Organization of people who enter the political process to achieve a goal
• About 2/3 of Americans belong to interest groups
• The practical application of Madison’s “Factions” in Federalist 10
Parties, Interest groups, PACs, and 527s
• All attempt to influence government policy making
Parties v. Interest groups
• Parties work through the electoral process; Parties run candidates – IGs and PACS support candidates
• Parties generate and support a broad spectrum of policies – IGs and PACS very specific policy issues
PACS and 527s
• PACS are the political arm of interest groups, legally entitled to raise voluntary funds to candidates or parties
• The number of PACS has grown rapidly since 1974
• 527s not regulated by Federal Election Commission
Pluralism v. Elitism v. Hyperpluralism
The growth of Interest Groups
• K Street
• Lobbyists
• General interest groups v. specific
Types of membership
• Individual v. Organizational
• Individual – Sierra Club, NAACP, AFL-CIO, NOW, AARP, Christian Coalition
• Organizational – National Council of Education, National League of Cities, NMA
Types of IGs
• Economic – profits, prices and wages
- Labor Unions – In decline
- Agricultural groups – Not as powerful as used to be
- Business groups – US Chamber of Commerce, Pharmaceutical lobby: over 200 million
spent on lobbying in 2000
- Professional groups – AMA, AAUP, NEA, ABA: Attempt to influence policy on issues specific to their professions
Consumer and Public Interest Groups
• Ralph Nader
• PIRGs, Common Cause – Electoral reform, League of Women Voters
• Environmental interests – Sierra Club, Audubon Society
Sometimes Interest Groups are in Conflict: Economic IGs are in conflict with environmental or consumer groups.
How IGs work
• Lobbying
- contacting Government officials
- Meeting and socializing
- Lunches
- Testifying at Congressional hearings
- Lobbyists can provide expert testimony and information to Congressman which sometimes Congressman do not have time to get on their own
• Electioneering
- Supporting candidates via $
- PACs help pay costs of candidates sympathetic to their issue
• Litigation
- IGs will sue to bring their issue to the fore
- Successful in Civil Rights legislation of 1950s and 60s
- Brown v. Board I and II
- Amicus Curiae briefs – Friends of the court: Written arguments to courts supporting a particular cause, issue or case
- Class Action suits – similar plaintiffs file as one large group: Brown v. Board
• Appealing to the Public
- Beef: It is what’s for dinner
- Pharmacy
- NRA
Ratings game
• IGs rate candidates on issues that are important to them
IG $$
• Foundation grants – Ford Foundation, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, EDF
• Federal Grants and contracts
• Direct Solicitation – Individuals make contributions directly to a cause: NAACP, NRA, ACLU
Effective Interest Groups
• Size – AARP
- Free Rider – The larger the group - more likely members will think others will do work
• Intensity – Single issues groups are most intense: Gun control, Pro choice/life
• Financial resources – Fund raising is critical
Revolving Door
• Government officials often times end up working for IGs that once lobbied them
Questions:
1. Are IGs dangerous to a democratic society or is it simply as Madison predicted in Federalist 10?
2. Is there too much $$$ in Washington? Do lobbyists have too much influence?
3. Does an IG need all 3 parts to be effective? Consider the AARP v. NRA
Public Opinion
Measuring public opinion – Relatively new science
• Gallup Poll 1932
• Today CNN, Fox, CBS, USA Today, NYT all sponsor polls
• Representative Sample
- Random Sampling Usually 1000 – 1500 respondents = a +/- 3% error rate
• 1936 Literary Digest Poll fiasco – See notes handout
• Respondents knowledge – Must allow for respondents lack of knowledge
• Careful and objective wording – Cautious of loaded questions or words
- Question can be yes/no or list of strength responses
• Cost v. Accuracy – Call in polls are not reliable but are cheap
• Variance between samples – Sampling error
Factors that influence Political Attitudes
• Political socialization – Lifelong process whereby an individual gains their opinion and beliefs
1. Family – Most significant influence on beliefs: Correlation between parents political beliefs and children – Not as strong recently – Growth of independents
2. Gender – “Gender Gap” Women are more likely to vote Democratic, although may be in decline – 2004 48% of women voters voted Republican
- Women vote more often than men
3. Married v. Unmarried – Married more likely to vote Republican: Wide disparity
4. Religion – See notes handout – Rise of fundamentalism 2004
5. Education – The higher the ed level more likely to vote Conservative, although a college ed tends to make citizens more liberal in their political, economic, and social views
6. Social Class – the strong links that used to exist no longer do: No clear connection between social class and voting patterns
7. Race and Ethnicity – Most groups tend to vote Democratic, exception Cuban – Americans who vote in large numbers for Republicans: strongest affiliation is blacks who overwhelmingly vote Democratic 90%, decrease from previous years
8. Geographic Region – Coasts tend to be more liberal: Maybe a more urban/rural split
• Solid South no longer Democratic: Civil Rights issues have become social, moral and security issues
Push polling – Polls intentionally designed to make voters think a specific way
• Results are not generally recorded, really have no meaning, poll is only intended to make voters react
• John McCain 2000 SC primary; 2002 Ga. Senate election Max Cleeland
Questions:
1. Do politicians place too much emphasis on polling?
2. In what ways may polls be misleading? What is critical for polls to be effective?
Civil Liberties
• Personal rights and freedoms that the government cannot abridge, either by law, constitution, or judicial interpretation
• Limits power of government over the individual
Incorporation Doctrine
• The protections of the 14th Amendment extend also to the citizens within the state
Barron v. Baltimore 1833 – National power limited
14th Amendment 1868
• Gitlow v. NY 1925 – Free speech extends to citizens within the state
• Near v. Minnesota 1931 - Free press and Due Process extends to states
1st Amendment
• Freedom of Religion
Establishment and Free Exercise
Engel v. Vitale 1962 – No school prayer
• Lemon Test
1. Secular purpose
2. Neither advances nor prohibits religion
3. cannot foster excessive government entanglement with religion
• 10 Commandments – Unconstitutional in school – no secular purpose
• Voluntary bible study and religious education OK as along as other non religious options are available
Free Exercise
• When secular law conflicts with religious practice – Free exercise is often denied
Free Speech
• Obscenity, libel, lewdness, and fighting words are NOT protected
• Alien and Sedition Acts sunset prior to Constitutional ruling
• War times – Extraordinary circumstances
Civil War – Lincoln arrests newspaper editors
Sedition prosecutions common through 1910s
Schenk v. US 1919 – Clear and Present Danger – NOT protected
• 1969 – Direct incitement – Government prove a likelihood of imminent harm to be limited
• NYT v. Sullivan 1964 – public figures must prove “actual malice” to prove libel and slander
New Problems for SC – Internet speech and pornography
Symbolic speech – Tinker v. Des Moines 1969
Prior Restraint – NYT v. US 1971 – NYT could not be stopped from printing secret documents
2nd Amendment
• US v. Miller 1939 – limitations placed on Automatic weapons and sawed off shotguns
• Last time SC directly ruled on 2nd Amendment
• Recently ruled provisions of Brady Bill waiting periods and background checks as unconstitutional
• Violates State Sovereignty
Rights of criminal defendants 4th, 5th , 6th , and 8th
• 4th Search and seizure
Unreasonable search and seizure
• Warrantless Searches
1. Plain view
2. areas of immediate control
3. airports
4. hot pursuit
5. exigent circumstance
6. open fields
7. consent
8. stop and frisk – Terry law
Weeks v. US 1914 – Exclusionary rule “Fruit of the forbidden tree” illegally obtained evidence is inadmissible
• Good Faith exceptions
Mapp v. Ohio – Incorporation Doctrine for illegal searches
5th amendment – Miranda v. Arizona 1966
6th Amendment – Gideon v. Wainwright 1963 Lawyer necessity not luxury - Incorp Doc
8th Amendment – Furman v. Georgia 1972 – DP uncon if arbitrary and capricious
Gregg v. Georgia 1976 – Georgia DP is Constitutional
• Court reluctant to overrule state decisions
• Exceptions
1. Age
2. Mental ability
Privacy rights
• Abortion Roe v. Wade 1973 States cannot outlaw, can limit and restrict
• Right to Die
• Homosexuality – Bowers v. Hardwick and Lawrence/Gardner v. Texas
Supreme Court Cases You need to know
Check for case summaries
FEDERALISM
Federalism Court Cases Practice Quiz
• Marbury v. Madison - 1803
Was Marbury entitled to his appointment to the federal bench? Was his lawsuit the correct way to get it? And, was the Supreme Court the place for Marbury to get the relief he requested?
• McCulloch v. Maryland - 1819
The case presented two questions: Did Congress have the authority to establish the Bank of the United States? Did the Maryland law unconstitutionally interfere with congressional powers?
• Gibbons v. Ogden - 1824
Did the State of New York exercise authority in a realm reserved exclusively to Congress, namely, the regulation of interstate commerce?
• Humphrey's Executor v. United States – 1935
Did section 1 of the Federal Trade Commission Act unconstitutionally interfere with the executive power of the President?
• United States v. Nixon – 1974
Is the President's right to safeguard certain information, using his "executive privilege" confidentiality power, entirely immune from judicial review?
• U.S. Term Limits v. Thornton - 1995
Can states alter those qualifications for the U.S. Congress that are specifically enumerated in the Constitution? Are states qualified to set term limits on members of the United States Congress?
• Clinton v. Jones - 1997
Is a serving President, for separation of powers reasons, entitled to absolute immunity from civil litigation arising out of events which transpired prior to his taking office?
• Printz v. United States - 1997
Using the Necessary and Proper Clause of Article I as justification, can Congress temporarily require state law enforcement officials to regulate handgun purchases by performing those duties called for by the Brady Bill's handgun applicant background-checks?
CIVIL LIBERTIES COURT CASES
Religious Freedom: Establishment Clause
• Engel v. Vitale (1962)
The Court ruled all school-sanctioned prayer in public schools unconstitutional. Abington School District v. Schempp (1963) The Court struck down a Pennsylvania law requiring that each public school day open with Bible reading.
• Wallace v. Jaffree (1985)
The Court overturned a state law setting aside a minute for “voluntary prayer” in public schools.
• Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow (2004)
Does Michael Newdow have standing to challenge as unconstitutional a public school district policy that requires teachers to lead willing students in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance? Does a public school district policy that requires teachers to lead willing students in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance, which includes the words "under God," violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment?
Religious Freedom: Free Exercise Clause
• Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972)
The Court ruled that Amish adolescents could be exempt from a state law compelling school attendance
• Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah (1993)
The Court found laws passed by four Florida cities banning animal sacrifice were targeted at the Santeria religion, which employs animal sacrifice in prayer, and as such the laws were unconstitutional.
• Cantwell v. Connecticut (1940)
The Court began applying the Free Exercise Clause to the states and recognized an absolute freedom of belief. Incorporation
• Van Orden v. Perry (2005)
Does a Ten Commandments monument on the grounds of a state capitol building violate the First Amendment's establishment clause, which barred the government from passing laws "respecting an establishment of religion"?
Freedom of Expression – General
• Schenck v United States (1919)
During World War I, Mr. Schenck mailed fliers to draftees urging them to peacefully protest the draft. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote that the First Amendment did not protect Schenck since, during wartime, such expression would create a clear and present danger.
• Gitlow v New York (1925)
The Supreme Court applied protection of free speech to the states (incorporation).
• West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943)
The Court ruled the West Virginia School Board’s policy requiring students and teachers to recite the pledge of allegiance unconstitutional.
• Tinker v. Des Moines (1969)
The Supreme Court ruled that wearing black armbands to protest the Vietnam War was “pure speech,” or symbolic speech, thus protected by the First Amendment. The principal’s right to forbid conduct that substantially interfered with school discipline was outweighed by the students’ right to free expression.
• Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969)
The Supreme Court held that the First Amendment protected Mr. Brandenburg’s speech advocating violence at a Ku Klux Klan rally.
• Miller v. California (1973)
This case set forth rules for obscenity prosecutions, but also gave states and localities flexibility in determining what is obscene. The four dissenters argued even the most general attempt to define obscenity for the entire nation was outside the scope of the Court’s power.
• Texas v. Johnson (1989)
The Supreme Court protected flag-burning as symbolic speech: “Government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable.”
• Reno v. ACLU (1997)
The Supreme Court held that the 1996 Communications Decency Act was unconstitutional, since it was overly broad and vague in its regulation of speech on the internet, and it attempted to regulate indecent speech, which is protected.
Freedom of Expression – Campaign Finance
• Buckley v. Valeo (1976)
This campaign finance case disallowed limits on campaign expenditures, but permitted “reasonable restrictions” on individual, corporate and group contributions to candidates. The Supreme Court recently upheld the $1,000 limit.
• Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee v. FEC (1996)
The Supreme Court ruled that campaign spending by political parties on behalf of congressional candidates may not be limited, as long as the parties work independently of the candidates.
Freedom of the Press
• John Peter Zenger trial (1735)
Zenger was a printer, publisher, editor and journalist whose indictment, trial and acquittal on sedition and libel charges was an important contributing factor to the development of the freedom of the press in America. Although this court case occurred during the colonial period of American history, it remains one of the landmark cases in our nation’s legal history.
• Near v. Minnesota (1931)
This case struck down a statute authorizing the state to seek injunctions against routine publishers of malicious or defamatory information, extending protection of freedom of the press to the states (incorporation).
• New York Times v. Sullivan (1964)
The Court stated that the First Amendment protected all statements about public officials, unless the speaker lies with the intent to defame. This case overturned a judgment awarding damages to an Alabama policeman after the New York Times ran a critical ad.
• New York Times v. United States (1971)
This case lifted a temporary injunction against publication of leaked information, since such publication would not cause an “inevitable, direct and immediate” event imperiling the safety of American forces; often referred to as the Pentagon Papers case.
• Hustler v. Falwell (1988)
Ruled the First Amendment prohibits public figures from recovering damages for intentional infliction of emotional harm, without showing the publication contained a false statement of fact made with actual malice.
• Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier - 1988
Did a high school principal's deletion of the articles from the school newspaper violate the students' rights under the First Amendment?
Right to Assemble and Petition the Government
• Hurley v. Irish American Gay Group of Boston - 1995
Did a Massachusetts State Court's mandate to Boston's Veterans' Council, requiring it to include GLIB members in its parade, violate the Council's free speech rights as protected by the First and Fourteenth Amendments?
• Boy Scouts of America v. Dale - 2000
Does the application of New Jersey's public accommodations law violate the Boy Scouts' First Amendment right of expressive association to bar homosexuals from serving as troop leaders?
• Dejonge v Oregon (1937)
This case extended to the states the federal protection of the right to peaceably assemble for lawful discussion.
• Village of Skokie vs. National Socialist Party / Smith v. Collin (1978)
The Supreme Court ruled that the National Socialist (Nazi) Party could not be prohibited from marching peacefully, simply because of the content of their message.
• Schenck v. Pro-Choice Network of Western New York (1997)
The Supreme Court overturned a fifteen-foot “floating buffer” around patients leaving or entering an abortion clinic; though, “fixed buffers” were permitted since they protected the government’s interest in public safety.
CIVIL RIGHTS COURT CASES
Civil Rights Court Cases Practice Quiz
Discrimination Based on Race
• Dred Scott v. Sandford - 1857
After residing in a “free” state for ten years, then returning to Missouri with his owner, was Dred Scott free or slave?
• Plessy v. Ferguson - 1896
Was Louisiana's law mandating racial segregation on its trains an unconstitutional infringement on both the privileges and immunities and the equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment?
• Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas - 1954
Did the segregation of children in public schools solely on the basis of race deprive the minority children of the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the 14th Amendment?
• Korematsu v. United States - 1944
Did the President and Congress go beyond their war powers by implementing exclusion and restricting the rights of Americans of Japanese descent?
Discrimination Based on Gender
• Craig v. Boren – 1976
Did an Oklahoma statute violate the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause by establishing different drinking ages for men and women?
• United States v. Virginia - 1996
Does Virginia's creation of a women's-only academy, as a comparable program to a male-only academy, satisfy the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause?
• Frontiero v. Richardson - 1973
Did a federal law, requiring different qualification criteria for male and female military spousal dependency, unconstitutionally discriminate against women thereby violating the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause?
Affirmative Action
• Regents of the University of California v. Bakke - 1978
Did the University of California violate the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause, and the Civil Rights Act of 1964, by practicing an affirmative action policy that resulted in the repeated rejection of Bakke's application for admission to its medical school?
• Adarand Constructors v. Pena - 1995
Is the presumption of disadvantage based on race alone, and consequent allocation of favored treatment, a discriminatory practice that violates the Fifth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause?
• Grutter v. Bollinger - 2003
Did the University of Michigan Law School's use of racial preferences in student admissions violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment or Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964?
Discrimination Based On Sexual Orientation
• Bowers v. Hardwick - 1986
Does the Constitution confer a fundamental right upon homosexuals to engage in consensual sodomy, thereby invalidating the laws of many states which make such conduct illegal?
• Romer v. Evans - 1996
Did Amendment 2 of Colorado's State Constitution, forbidding the extension of official protections to those who suffer discrimination due to their sexual orientation, violate the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause?
• Lawrence v. Texas - 2003
Did the criminal convictions of John Lawrence and Tyron Garner under the Texas "Homosexual Conduct" law, which criminalizes sexual intimacy by same-sex couples, but not identical behavior by different-sex couples, violate the Fourteenth Amendment guarantee of equal protection of laws? Did their criminal convictions for adult consensual sexual intimacy in the home violate their vital interests in liberty and privacy protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment? Should Bowers v. Hardwick (1986) be overruled?
Birth Control And Abortion
• Griswold v. Connecticut - 1965
Does the Constitution protect the right of marital privacy against state restrictions on a couple's ability to be counseled in the use of contraceptives?
• Roe v. Wade - 1973
Does the Constitution embrace a woman's right to terminate her pregnancy by abortion?
• Planned Parenthood v. Casey - 1992
Can a state require women who want an abortion to obtain informed consent, wait 24 hours, and, if minors, obtain parental consent, without violating their right to abortions as guaranteed by Roe v. Wade?
Right To Die
• Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Dept. of Health - 1990
Did the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment permit Cruzan's parents to refuse life-sustaining treatment on their vegetated daughter's behalf?
• Vacco v. Quill - 1997
Did New York's ban on physician-assisted suicide violate the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause by allowing competent terminally ill adults to withdraw their own lifesaving treatment, but denying the same right to patients who could not withdraw their own treatment and could only hope that a physician would do so for them?
• Washington v. Glucksberg - 1997
Did Washington's ban on physician assisted-suicide violate the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause by denying competent terminally ill adults the liberty to choose death over life?
• Gonzales v. Oregon - 2006
Did the Controlled Substances Act authorize the attorney general to ban the use of controlled substances for physician-assisted suicide in Oregon?
Power Of Congress To Enforce Civil Rights
• Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States - 1964
Did Congress, in passing Title II of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, exceed its Commerce Clause powers by depriving motels, such as the Heart of Atlanta, of the right to choose their own customers?
CRIMINAL RIGHTS COURT CASES
Criminal Rights Court Cases Practice Quiz
Rights of Adolescents
• In re: Gault - 1967
Were the procedures used to commit 15-year-old Gerald Francis Gault to a prison facility constitutionally legitimate under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?
• New Jersey v. T.L.O. - 1985
T.L.O. was a fourteen-year-old girl accused of smoking in the girls' bathroom of her high school. A principal at the school questioned her and searched her purse, yielding a bag of marijuana and other drug paraphernalia. Did the search violate the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments?
Freedom From Unreasonable Search And Seizure
• Mapp v. Ohio - 1961
Were the confiscated materials protected by the First Amendment? (May evidence obtained through a search in violation of the Fourth Amendment be admitted in a state criminal proceeding?)
• Katz v. United States - 1967
Does the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures require the police to obtain a search warrant in order to wiretap a public pay phone?
• Vernonia School District v. Acton -1995
Does random drug testing of high school athletes violate the reasonable search and seizure clause of the Fourth Amendment?
• Board of Education v. Earls - 2002
Was the Student Activities Drug Testing Policy, adopted by the Tecumseh, Oklahoma School District,, which required all students who participate in competitive extracurricular activities to submit to drug testing, consistent with the Fourth Amendment?
Right To An Attorney
• Gideon v. Wainwright - 1963
Did the state court's failure to appoint counsel for Gideon violate his right to a fair trial and due process of law as protected by the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments?
• Escobedo v. Illinois - 1964
Was Escobedo denied the right to counsel as guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment?
• Miranda v. Arizona – 1966
Does the police practice of interrogating individuals without notifiying them of their right to counsel and their protection against self-incrimination violate the Fifth Amendment?
Capital Punishment
• Furman v. Georgia - 1972
Does the imposition and carrying out of the death penalty in these cases – Furman v. Georgia, Jackson v. Georgia and Branch v. Texas - constitute cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments?
• Gregg v. Georgia - 1976
Is the imposition of the death sentence prohibited under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments as "cruel and unusual" punishment?
• Penry v. Johnson - 2001
Was a Texas trial court's supplemental instruction on mitigating evidence of mental retardation under the state's "special circumstances" for sentencing in capital murder cases to a jury constitutionally adequate? Does the admission into evidence of statements from a psychiatric report based on an uncounseled interview with the defendant violate the Fifth Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination?
• Roper v. Simmons - 2005
Does the execution of minors violate the prohibition of "cruel and unusual punishment" found in the Eighth Amendment and applied to the states through the incorporation doctrine of the 14th Amendment?
Cruel and Unusual Punishment in Non-Capital Cases
• Harmelin v. Michigan - 1991
Is a statutorily mandated sentence that does not allow for consideration of mitigating factors a violation of the Eighth Amendment's protection against cruel and unusual punishments?
Extra-Legal Jury Influences, Pretrial Publicity
• Sheppard v. Maxwell - 1966
What threshold must be crossed before a trial is said to be so prejudicial, due to context and publicity, as to interfere with a defendant's Fifth Amendment due process right to a fair trial?
Criminal Procedure
• Powell v. Alabama (1932)
The Supreme Court ruled that the indigent of society, when charged with a capital crime, must be given competent counsel, at the expense of the citizens.
• Betts v. Brady (1942)
Betts was indicted for robbery and detained in a Maryland jail. Prior to his trial, he asked for counsel to represent him. This request was denied and he was soon convicted. While incarcerated, Betts filed a habeas corpus petition in the lower courts. After they rejected his petitions, he filed a certiorari petition with the Supreme Court, which agreed to hear his case. Bett argued that his 6th Amendment right to a fair trial was violated because of his lack of counsel. The State of Maryland held that most states did not require the appointment of counsel in non-capital cases and the circumstances of this particular case did not require it. Although the Court found in favor of Betts, it decided that the right to counsel must be decided on a case- by-case basis. This ruling was upheld for 20 years until it was overturned by Gideon v. Wainwright in 1963.
• Mapp v. Ohio (1961)
The Supreme Court ruled that all evidence obtained by searches and seizures, in violation of the Constitution, is inadmissible in a state court. This is known as the “exclusionary rule.”
• Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
The Supreme Court overturned Betts v. Brady and required that any indigent, accused of a felony must be given an attorney at the public’s expense.
• Escobedo v. Illinois (1964)
The Supreme Court extended the “exclusionary rule,” to also include any unconstitutionally obtained confessions. The Court said that once questioning reaches past a “general inquiry” the suspect has the right to have an attorney present.
• Miranda v. Arizona (1966)
The Supreme Court ruled that since the police had not informed Mr. Miranda of his Constitutional rights, Miranda’s conviction must be overturned.
• Dickerson v. USA (2000)
The Supreme Court ruled that Congress could not pass a law that would contradict a Supreme Court ruling. They cited Marbury v. Madison, as the source of their power. Judicial Review gave the Supreme Court final say on an act’s constitutionality. Justices writing in dissent called the ruling the “ . . . Pyramid of judicial arrogance.”
• United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Coop (2001)
Medical marijuana case: Does a medical necessity exception to the Controlled Substances Act's prohibition on the manufacture and distribution of various drugs, including marijuana, exist?
• Blakely v. Washington (2004)
Does a fact (other than a prior conviction) necessary to increase a sentence beyond the statutory standard range need to be proved by a jury and beyond a reasonable doubt?
• Rasul v. Bush - 2004
Do United States courts have jurisdiction to consider legal appeals filed on behalf of foreign citizens held by the United States military in Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, Cuba?
• Hamdi v. Rumsfeld - 2004
Did the government violate Hamdi's Fifth Amendment right to Due Process by holding him indefinitely, without access to an attorney, based solely on an Executive Branch declaration that he was an "enemy combatant" who fought against the United States? Does the separation of powers doctrine require federal courts to defer to Executive Branch determinations that an American citizen is an "enemy combatant"?
• Raich v. Gonzales - 2005
Does the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 801) exceed Congress' power under the commerce clause as applied to the intrastate cultivation and possession of marijuana for medical use?
SECOND AMENDMENT COURT CASES
• United States v. Cruikshank (1876)
In this case, the Supreme Court recognized the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
• Lewis v. United States (1980)
The case determined whether the provision of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 that prohibits the possession of firearms by convicted felons (codified in 18 U.S.C. 922(g) in 1986) violated the Second Amendment The Court acknowledged that among the rights denied to convicted felons was the right to bear arms.
• United States v. Verdugo-Urquirdez (1990)
The Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the phrase “the people” means the same in the Second Amendment as it does in the First, Fourth, Ninth amendments, and as it does in the Preamble of the U. S. Constitution. The reference to “the people" means all citizens and legal aliens while in the United States.
PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS/EMINENT DOMAIN/TAKINGS CLAUSE COURT CASES
• Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (2002)
Does a moratorium on development imposed during the process of devising a comprehensive land-use plan constitutes a per se taking of property requiring compensation under the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause?
• Kelo v. City of New London (2005)
Does a city violate the Fifth Amendment's takings clause if the city takes private property and sells it for private development, with the hopes the development will help the city's bad economy? By “takings,” this generally refers to “eminent domain.” Eminent domain is the right of a government or municipal quasi-public body to acquire private property for public use. Property is acquired through a court action called condemnation, in which the court determines the use is a public use and decides the price or compensation to be paid to the owner.
SELECTIVE INCORPORATION COURT CASES
The following portions of the Bill of Rights have been incorporated against state governments:
• Freedom of Speech, Gitlow v. New York (1925)
• Freedom of the Press, Near v. Minnesota (1931)
• Right to Counsel in Capital Cases, Powell v. Alabama (1932)
• Freedom of Assembly, DeJonge v. Oregon (1937)
• Free Exercise of Religion, Cantwell v. Connecticut (1940)
• No Established National Religion, Everson v. Board of Ed. (1947)
• Ban on Unreasonable Search and Seizure, Wolf v. Colorado (1949)
• No Evidence from Illegal Searches, Mapp v. Ohio (1961)
• No Cruel and Unusual Punishment, Robinson v. California (1962)
• Right to Counsel in all Felony Cases, Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
• No Self-Incrimination, Malloy v. Hogan (1964)
• Right to Confront Adverse Witnesses, Pointer v.Texas (1965)
• Right to Impartial Jury, Parker v. Gladden (1966)
• Right to Obtain Defense Witnesses, Washington v. Texas (1967)
• Right to Speedy Trial, Klopfer v. North Carolina (1967)
• No Double Jeopardy, Benton v. Maryland (1968)
• Right to Counsel for Imprisonable Misdemeanors, Argersinger v. Hamlin (1972)
• Right to Notice of Accusation, Rabe v. Washington (1972)
Terms, Concepts, Cases, and everything else…
1. Litigation – Going to court to contest an issue; used by special interests
2. Plea Bargain – agreement to avoid a trial and possible tougher sentencing
3. Incorporation Doctrine – The application of specific parts of the Bill of Rights to the states:
• Parts of the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th
4. Roe v. Wade – 1973 Supreme Court ruling that state bans on abortions are Unconstitutional; state could limit/restrict but not outlaw
5. Clear and Present Danger test – Schenk v. US: Speech can be limited if it is shown to propose a clear and present danger to the security of the US
6. Amicus Curiea Brief – “Friend of the Court” brief filed by groups or citizens who have an interest in, but not a legal standing in a case: Used by special interests and any group with an opinion on a legal matter
7. Per Curiam Decision – A decision rendered by the entire Supreme Court, rather than by an individual justice
8. 14th Amendment – Civil War Amendment 1868: extends the many of the provisions of the Bill of Rights to the states
9. Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act – First binding constraint on federal spending, placed caps on federal spending, created the first balanced budget
10. Civil Rights Act 1964 – Made racial discrimination in public places, theatres, restaurants, hotels, illegal Employers must provide equal employment opportunities; Federal funding for projects could be cut if discrimination was evident; extension of commerce clause, example of Cooperative Federalism
11. Voting Rights Act – Removed all state barriers to voting: End of literacy tests, grandfather clause, poll taxes
12. Equal Pay Act – Prohibits wage discrimination between men and women doing an equal job, in substantially same establishment
13. Equal Rights Act – Was proposed but not ratified, that would guarantee equal rights regardless of sex
14. Title IX – 1973 – Prohibits sex discrimination in education; normally extends to athletics
15. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) 1990 – Federal law that requires public places to be handicap accessible, including schools, has been defined as physical and mental disability
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related download
- trouble getting a permit issued
- richmond county school system
- september 2016 aauw west chester chester county pa
- second first annual session of year
- state college area school district state college area
- resolution letter tufts university massachusetts
- final draft 8 9 weblogs at harvard
- april 30 2007 meeting minutes
- political penguins home
- criminal procedure grand jury law and practice
Related searches
- tea area school district sd
- tea area school district calendar
- scranton area school district pa
- scranton area school district employment
- elgin area school district u46
- california area school district employment
- hazleton area school district code
- california area school district facebook
- downingtown area school district employment
- downingtown area school district careers
- downingtown area school district downingtown
- downingtown area school district calendar