CF_notes_til_final - Constitutional Freedoms notes until...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Constitutional Freedoms notes until Final Equality Took a long time for 14 th amendment to have an effect; and actually be accepted and used by the state The Civil Rights Cases (1883) Civil Rights Act enacted to outlaw racial discrimination in places of public accommodation Outlaws public discrimination/ not private discrimination; the state cannot prohibit based on race but doesnt address private entities (so the CRA outlaws discrimination occurring privately) Even today the 14 th amendment only bars the government; does not outlaw private discrimination; private discrimination is regulated some other way by congress (interest in interstate commerce) Yick Wo v. Hopkins (1886) During California gold rush many people immigrated to the US (many Chinese) State law were laundry businesses had to be in non-wooden buildings Many Chinese laundry businesses where in wooden buildings Sues and says he is being discriminated against Supreme court sides with Yick Wo State action present; sympathetic to economic freedom Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) Jim Crow laws; laws that require segregation Separate accommodations based on race An interest group testing law; says that equal protection doesnt apply says it is alright to make distinctions among people if they are still treated equally dissent: Harlan: constitution should be color blind Two different interpretations of equal protection o one the state can sort ppl as long as they are equal Violate equal protection? there is a notion that one race is better than the other Separate but equal? thought of really as equal but separate Why do they need to be separate? abstractequal but separate is ok o equality must be respected o nothing wrong discriminating between races; just not against Sweat v. Painter (1950) Demonstrates some of the practical difficulty with separate but equal part of NAACP Sweat applied to University of Texas Law School; denied (blacks could not attend) sued arguing admitting others while denying him violated equal protection applied plessy doctrine; had to establish another law school for the blacks o new law school did not have all the same services o can be physically equal but cannot replicate the prestige/reputation of a school o notion of equality does not always work in practice; certain aspects critical to a university that cannot be replicated o separate schools in this case are generally unequal no matter how hard the state tries Court: gradually comes to accept in a few years that separate is not equal; does not completely do away with...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 04/14/2008 for the course POLI 195 taught by Professor Mcguire during the Fall '07 term at UNC.

Page1 / 8

CF_notes_til_final - Constitutional Freedoms notes until...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online