...On May 18, 1896, the Supreme Court ruled in the case Plessy v. Ferguson that segregation on railway cars did not conflict with the 13th and 14th Amendments, causing many people since then to wonder why anyone would think segregation was constitutional. The argument that segregation complied with the 13th Amendment was simple enough; the 13th Amendment had abolished slavery and involuntary servitude, and the drivers of segregated railway cars technically were not forcing anyone to work as a slave (Plessy v. Ferguson, 1896). The 14th Amendment had determined who qualified as a U.S. citizen and had stated that all citizens should receive equal treatment, so segregationists argued that people of color could be treated as "equal...
Words: 351 - Pages: 2
...the issue of the constitutionality of gerrymandering. If referring to judicial precedent, there is a strong reason to argue that partisan gerrymandering should be allowed to exist, albeit not without limitations. Racial gerrymandering should be deemed unacceptable, which can be seen through the clear examples shown in this paper of the constitutional violations, particularly the 1st, 14th, and 15th Amendments. In Gill v. Whitford, Republicans sliced up Milwaukee because the minority presence in the city proved to greatly disadvantage their party when it came to electing candidates. In turn, the surrounding districts struggled to vote in Democratic representatives as it lost its concentration of minority voters. Clear racialized gerrymandering should be unconstitutional, whether or not it is “partisan gerrymandering.” On the other hand, Bensiek v. Lamone does not present any form of racial discrimination in its case. Political retaliation is cited in the argument as the motivation for gerrymandering, albeit this argument appears weak and unjustified. In a broad sense, both parties retaliate against one another in various...
Words: 1735 - Pages: 7
...After the September 11, 2001 attacks, the president was given the power to detain enemy combatants whom were against the United States. An enemy combatant is an “individual who, under the laws and customs of war, may be detained for the duration of an armed conflict”. The case Hamdi v. Rumsfeld 542 U.S. 507 has had an important impact on society. In Hamdi v. Rumsfeld 542 U.S. 507 the case focuses on an individual’s constitutional rights. The main arguments involving the case are: If the government violated Hamdi’s 5th amendment right and 14th amendment right to due process by holding him without allowing him access to an attorney. This was done only on the basis of the executive branch’s power to declare Hamdi as an enemy combatant and to lawfully make decisions during wartime....
Words: 1018 - Pages: 5
...liberties through the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments, just when they thought White America could evolve into an accepting and open-minded society, all efforts were shut down by the Jim Crow laws. That is where the Plessy v. Ferguson case starts, the Supreme Court’s endorsement...
Words: 1650 - Pages: 7
...The case Gregg vs Georgia all started when a man named Troy Leon Gregg was hitchhiking north in Florida with a 16 year old named Floyd Rayford Allen who only had 8 dollars between them. The two of them were given rides by two men named Fred Edward Simmons and Bob Durwood Moore. As they entered into Georgia the men stopped at a rest stop and Simmons and moore got outta the car Gregg told Allen “Were going to rob them” getting out and firing 3 shots causing Simmons and Moore to fall in a drainage ditch. Gregg quickly ran over to the men and shot them both in the head, took their money, jumped into the car and drove away. On November 24, 1973 Gregg was found driving Simmons car with 107 dollars, a pistol in his pocket and the bullets used to kill...
Words: 394 - Pages: 2
...individuals using facilities not designated for their race were criminally liable. Plessy had acted on behalf of a committee to purposely commit an offence in order to initiate a case that would stand against the Jim Crow laws –laws that mandated racial segregation. Justice John H. Ferguson (D) presided over...
Words: 561 - Pages: 3
...subsequently arrested under the Separate Car Act, passed by Louisiana in 1890. Plessy litigated against John Howard Ferguson, under the 14th Amendment Equal Protection Clause. Upon losing in the lower court, Plessy appealed to the Supreme Court. Plessy v Ferguson (1896), a landmark Supreme Court decision dealing with states’ rights, and whether or not they have the authority to make laws that publically segregate blacks from whites, ruled 7-1 in favor of Ferguson. The Court ruled that, because the Louisiana law was within state boundaries and because both of the cars were of equal quality, there was no violation of Plessy’s 14th amendment rights. The Supreme Court held that the 14th only made blacks as equal as whites, and had not made reference to segregation. As long as the segregation was equal, nothing had been violated. This case established the infamous separate-but-equal doctrine, fundamentally legalizing segregation. The majority opinion, held by justices Brown, Field, Gray, Shiras, White, Peckham, and joined by Fuller,...
Words: 642 - Pages: 3
...Introduction We should not reward parents who have their children in the US illegally. By granting their children citizenship we are inviting illegal immigrants to flock to our country for a free citizenship incentives. As closing proposition I would like to deconstruct the opposition’s arguments stating that EVERY SINGLE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS CHILD SHOULD BE GRANTED CITIZENSHIP. I would also like to crystalize my opening proposition’s remarks and in addition, construct some new arguments and offer some solutions. Granting citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants makes illegally crossing into America a goal Well over 300,000 babies are born in America EVERY YEAR to illegal immigrants. These parents sneak into America illegally. Totally ignoring our laws that we as LEGAL citizens are obligated to uphold. Totally undermining our citizenship by taking advantage of the benefits that America offers, all while not paying taxes and not adhering to our government. How do we punish these criminals? By granting their children immediate and full citizenship. They are afforded every benefit America has to offer. Food stamps, well fair, public education, healthcare, and every other government program we have. They almost will certainly be using these benefits because as an illegal immigrant you are not permitted to work in the US. It’s easy to see why immigrants are sneaking into America: if they establish themselves with a legal citizen baby they are afforded a better life here...
Words: 1194 - Pages: 5
...The first of the two principles is ‘jus soli’ (the law of the soils) where the place of a person’s birth naturally determines their citizenship according to the 14th Amendment and the common laws used in the U.S. The second principle in federal law pertains to ‘jus sanguinis’(the law of the bloodline) where a person born in the U.S can adopt the citizenship of one or both parents, subject to changes in the statutes that grant citizenship ("7 FAM 1110 Acquisition of U.S. Citizenship by Birth in the United States"). The federal government offers clarity on the situation by defining the regions or areas that warrant automatic citizenship allocation to newborns regardless of the parents nationality or citizenship...
Words: 1842 - Pages: 8
...Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961) was a very important case and turning point in our nation's history. It changed our legal system by extending the evidence exclusionary rule that was originally decided in Weeks v. United States, 232 U.S. 383 (1914). It also marked the final incorporation of the fourth amendment into the due process clause of the fourteenth. The exclusionary rule was created in Weeks which prevented the federal government from using evidence that is found during an illegal search without a warrant. Years later in Wolf v Colorado, 338 U.S. 25 (1949) the Supreme Court ruled that both state and local governments must obey the fourth amendment by getting a warrant before conducting a search. The court also said the exclusionary rule did not apply to the states allowing state prosecutors to use illegally seized evidence in trial. Mapp v. Ohio gave the Supreme Court the chance to overrule Wolf and apply the exclusionary rule to the states. Mapp v. Ohio was quite the interesting case. It started on May 23, 1957, when three Cleveland police officers arrived at Dolly Mapp's home regarding information suggesting that a person wanted for questioning in connection with a bombing was hiding in the house, and upon a large amount of paraphernalia in the home (Mapp v. Ohio). The officers demanded entrance but Ms. Mapp refused entrance to the home without a search warrant after telephoning her attorney (Mapp v. Ohio). They took surveillance of the house and arrived some...
Words: 1696 - Pages: 7
...Plessy v Ferguson Constitutional Issue Dispute over legality of segregated railroads cars in Louisiana due to the 1890 Separate Car Act, which was in violation of the 14th Amendment Main Arguments Plaintiff- Homer Plessy was denied his rights under the 13th and 14th amendments The 14th amendment guaranteed rights to all citizens, and Plessy was being deprived of life, liberty and happiness Defendant- Judge John Ferguson ruled the state has a right to regulate railroads in its own boundaries In the Louisiana Courts, the argument was based off the North’s laws about intermixing and segregation could not be changed Decision of the Court 7-1 The Court found that there was no violation of the Fourteenth Amendment in the Separate Car Act. Rather the decision to stay separate was for public policy Justice Brown wrote “We consider the underlying fallacy of the plaintiff's argument to consist in the assumption that the enforced separation of the two races stamps the colored race with a badge of inferiority” The Lone Dissenter, Justice Harlan, viewed the ruling as racist, and against American values He blasted the majority by explaining “There is no caste here. Our constitution is colorblind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens. In respect of civil rights, all citizens are equal before the...
Words: 1525 - Pages: 7
...An incident in 1892 involving an African American man Homer Plessy refused to sit in a Jim Crow car breaking a Louisiana law. In 1890 the law was put into play providing for “equal but separate accommodations for the white and colored races” on its railroads. Plessy brought before Judge John H. Ferguson of criminal court for New Orleans, who upheld the law. The law later challenged by the Supreme Court on the grounds that it conflicted within the thirteenth and fourteenth amendment. The court later said that the law did not conflict with the Thirteenth amendment. The Court avoided discussion of the protection granted by the clause in the Fourteenth Amendment that forbids the states to make laws depriving citizens of their “privileges or...
Words: 2489 - Pages: 10
...situation when debating the option of abortion. Life is valuable period. Regardless of whether there are good outcomes of abortion, or negative outcomes of abortion, I am against abortion. Regardless of what is going on in life, women know that the only way to not get pregnant is through the choice of abstinence, but they still choose to have sex. With this being a problem it makes abortion look really evil due to careless and selfish choices that women are making today. Abortion has been overthrown and battled in many courts with different cases and the procedure of abortion has granted because the right of the constitution protects the choices that women make with the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendment. The constitution protects the rights of women in many different ways including the choice of what women want to do with their bodies. These three amendments make abortion legal and create a bigger problem of diminishing this evil operation for the fact that abortion has been approved by judges all across America. In prior cases, such as Roe vs. Wade, argue that in the case of abortion, it is unconstitutional to take the rights of women away as a citizen and force women to birth a child. In the case of Roe vs. Wade, abortion was granted and deemed constitutional and this decision was based on the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendment. Although this is only one case, there are many...
Words: 3178 - Pages: 13
...traced back to the main concept of separate but equal, which was established by the Plessy vs. Ferguson case. Plessy vs. Ferguson was the main point that really brought the concept of separate but equal into light. The case was a debate on whether segregation was constitutional. In 1892 Homer Plessy refused to sit in a Jim Crow train car, which at the time was a train car that all African Americans were required to sit in, as they were not allowed to sit with the white people. This was against...
Words: 772 - Pages: 4
...using the name “Jane Roe” as an alias, filed suit at the district level against Henry Wade, the District Attorney for Dallas County, Texas, challenging the constitutionality of the Texas state laws prohibiting abortions and seeking an injunction against its enforcement, (in other words, the Appellant asked the court to forbid the district attorney from prosecuting anyone else under the Texas abortion law in the future). The district court ruled in favor of McCorvey, but ultimately failed to resolve the matter in a practical sense by refusing to issue an injunction to prevent the existing legislation from being enforced. Due to the district court’s refusal to enjoin future prosecutions for abortion, Roe and her attorneys appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court and the case was granted certiorari. By the time the case reached the Supreme Court, however, McCorvey had already given birth, but the Court entertained the case anyway, reasoning that if the traditional standards of mootness and the exclusion of advisory opinions were upheld, no pregnant Plaintiff could ever successfully litigate a similar claim before being precluded by mootness. Issues Presented: Do the Texas statutes improperly invade a right possessed by the Appellant, Jane Roe to terminate her pregnancy, embodied in the 14th Amendment’s Due Process Clause or among the rights reserved to the people by the 9th Amendment? SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT Firstly, should women have their own right to abortion or...
Words: 1358 - Pages: 6
