CIVIL LIBERTIES VS.

CIVIL RIGHTSA COMPARISON

BYELISABETH KELLY, STUDENT #238716

COLUMBIA SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY

A DEFINITION OF CIVIL LIBERTIES & HOW THESE RIGHTS ARE PROTECTED ON A FEDERAL & STATE LEVEL• CIVIL LIBERTIES AND CIVIL RIGHTS ARE TERMS WHICH HAVE BEEN USED

INTERCHANGEABLY• CIVIL LIBERTIES REFER TO THE SPECIFIC FUNDAMENTAL INDIVIDUAL

RIGHTS TO PROTECTION FROM UNFAIR GOVERNMENTS• FUNDAMENTAL INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS, AS OUTLINED WITHIN THE BILL OF

RIGHTS, HAVE BEEN CHALLENGED ON MANY VARIOUS LEVELS AS THE COUNTRY HAS GROWN AND ADVANCED SINCE THE FIRST TEN AMENDMENTS WERE ADDED

• ORIGINALLY, U.S. CITIZENS WERE PROTECTED ON THE FEDERAL LEVEL HOWEVER, STATE AUTHORITIES WHERE NOT REQUIRED TO UPHOLD THE BILL OF RIGHTS.

• SLOWLY AND IN STAGES, THE INDIVIDUAL STATES HAVE AGREED TO UPHOLD THE BILL OF RIGHTS

CIVIL LIBERTIES ARE DIVIDED INTO TWO BROAD AREAS:• FREEDOMS AND RIGHTS GUARANTEED BY THE FIRST AMENDMENT

• RELIGION• SPEECH• PRESS• ASSEMBLY AND PETITION

• LIBERTIES AND RIGHTS ASSOCIATED WITH CRIME AND DUE PROCESS

*NOTE: CIVIL RIGHTS ARE ALSO PROTECTED BY THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT WHICH PROTECTS VIOLATION OF RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES BY STATE GOVERNMENTS.

BILL OF RIGHTS FIRST TEN CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS

•Freedom of Speech, Press, Assembly & ReligionFirst Amendment

•The Right to Bear ArmsSecond Amendment•Restrictions on Quartering Soldiers Without Owner ConsentThird Amendment

•Unreasonable Search and Seizure and Probable Cause for ArrestFourth Amendment

•Self-incrimination, Double Jeopardy, Due processFifth Amendment

•Counsel and Prompt and Reasonable ProceedingsSixth Amendment

•The Rights to Civil TrialSeventh Amendment

•Cruel & Unusual Punishment and BailEighth Amendment•Enumeration clauseNinth Amendment•Balance of National & State PowerTenth Amendment

The overwhelming majority of court decisions that define American civil liberties are based on the Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments added to the Constitution in 1791.

Note:Civil rights are also protected by the Fourteenth Amendment, which protects violation of rights and liberties by the state governments .

TWO CASES INVOLVING CIVIL LIBERTIES TAKEN BY THE SUPREME COURT • ASHCROFT V. THE AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION (2003)

• ARGUMENT: THE ACLU AND ONLINE PUBLISHERS OF PORNOGRAPHY SOUGHT PROTECTION UNDER THEIR FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH AFTER CONGRESS PASSED THE ONLINE CHILD PROTECTION ACT (OCPA) TO PREVENT MINORS FROM ACCESSING PORNOGRAPHY ONLINE

• VERDICT:  THE AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION (ACLU) AND ONLINE PUBLISHERS SUED IN FEDERAL COURT TO PREVENT ENFORCEMENT OF THE ACT, ARGUING THAT IT VIOLATED THE FREE SPEECH CLAUSE OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT. THE DISTRICT COURT AGREED. ON APPEAL, A THIRD CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS PANEL AFFIRMED

• EDWARDS V. SOUTH CAROLINA (1962)• ARGUMENT: THE 187 PETITIONERS IN THIS CASE, ALL OF WHOM WERE BLACK, ORGANIZED A MARCH TO

THE SOUTH CAROLINA STATE HOUSE GROUNDS IN WHICH SMALL GROUPS OF FIFTEEN WOULD WALK IN AN OPEN PUBLIC AREA PROTESTING THE POLICIES OF SEGREGATION IN THEIR STATE. THE MARCH WAS PEACEFUL, DID NOT BLOCK PEDESTRIAN OR VEHICULAR TRAFFIC, AND WAS CONDUCTED IN AN ORDERLY FASHION ON PUBLIC PROPERTY. A GROUP OF APPROXIMATELY THIRTY POLICE OFFICERS CONFRONTED THE GROUP AND ORDERED ITS MEMBERS TO DISPERSE OR TO SUBMIT TO ARREST. THE MARCHERS DID NOT DISPERSE, AND INSTEAD BEGAN SINGING RELIGIOUS AND PATRIOTIC SONGS LIKE THE STAR SPANGLED BANNER. THEY WERE ARRESTED AND LATER CONVICTED ON A CHARGE OF BREACH OF THE PEACE.

• VERDICT: THE COURT HELD THAT THE ARRESTS AND CONVICTIONS VIOLATED THE RIGHTS OF THE MARCHERS UNDER THE FIRST AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENTS. THE COURT EMPHASIZED THAT A STATE CANNOT "MAKE CRIMINAL THE PEACEFUL EXPRESSION OF UNPOPULAR VIEWS" AS SOUTH CAROLINA ATTEMPTED TO DO HERE.

ONE CASE INVOLVING CIVIL LIBERTIES RULED ON BY THE SUPREME COURT WITHIN THE LAST 2 YEARS• OBERGEFELL ET AL. V. HODGES, DIRECTOR, OHIO DEPARTMENT

OF HEALTH, ET AL. (2015)• ARGUMENT: SAME SEX MARRIAGE SHOULD BE UPHELD UNDER THE

FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS TO INDIVIDUAL DIGNITY AND DUE PROCESS

• VERDICT: THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT REQUIRES A STATE TO LICENSE A MARRIAGE BETWEEN TWO PEOPLE OF THE SAME SEX AND TO RECOGNIZE A MARRIAGE BETWEEN TWO PEOPLE OF THE SAME SEX WHEN THEIR MARRIAGE WAS LAWFULLY LICENSED AND PERFORMED OUT-OF-STATE. ADDITIONALLY, THE FUNDAMENTAL LIBERTIES PROTECTED BY THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT’S DUE PROCESS CLAUSE EXTEND TO CERTAIN PERSONAL CHOICES CENTRAL TO INDIVIDUAL DIGNITY AND AUTONOMY, INCLUDING INTIMATE CHOICES DEFINING PERSONAL IDENTITY AND BELIEFS

ONE CIVIL LIBERTIES LEADER WITHIN THE LAST FIVE YEARS• ANTHONY MCLEOD KENNEDY IS AN ASSOCIATE JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT

OF THE UNITED STATES WHO WAS APPOINTED BY PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN IN 1988

• NO UNION IS MORE PROFOUND THAN MARRIAGE, FOR IT EMBODIES THE HIGHEST IDEALS OF LOVE, FIDELITY, DEVOTION, SACRIFICE, AND FAMILY. IN FORMING A MARITAL UNION, TWO PEOPLE BECOME SOMETHING GREATER THAN ONCE THEY WERE. AS SOME OF THE PETITIONERS IN THESE CASES DEMONSTRATE, MARRIAGE EMBODIES A LOVE THAT MAY ENDURE EVEN PAST DEATH. IT WOULD MISUNDERSTAND THESE MEN AND WOMEN TO SAY THEY DISRESPECT THE IDEA OF MARRIAGE. THEIR PLEA IS THAT THEY DO RESPECT IT, RESPECT IT SO DEEPLY THAT THEY SEEK TO FIND ITS FULFILLMENT FOR THEMSELVES. THEIR HOPE IS NOT TO BE CONDEMNED TO LIVE IN LONELINESS, EXCLUDED FROM ONE OF CIVILIZATION’S OLDEST INSTITUTIONS. THEY ASK FOR EQUAL DIGNITY IN THE EYES OF THE LAW. THE CONSTITUTION GRANTS THEM THAT RIGHT.

CIVIL RIGHTS

DEFINITION OF CIVIL RIGHTS & DISCUSSION OF HOW THESE RIGHTS ARE PROTECTED ON A STATE & FEDERAL LEVEL• CIVIL RIGHTS REFER TO POSITIVE ACTIONS OF GOVERNMENT SHOULD

TAKE TO CREATE EQUAL CONDITIONS FOR ALL AMERICANS WITHOUT PREJUDICE

• THE TERM "CIVIL RIGHTS" IS OFTEN ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROTECTION OF MINORITY GROUPS, SUCH AS AFRICAN AMERICANS, HISPANICS, AND WOMEN.

• THE GOVERNMENT COUNTERBALANCES THE "MAJORITY RULE" TENDENCY IN A DEMOCRACY THAT OFTEN FINDS MINORITIES OUTVOTED.

• NATIONALLY, CIVIL RIGHTS ARE ALSO PROTECTED BY THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT WHICH PROTECTS VIOLATIONS BY THE STATE GOVERNMENTS.

TWO CASES INVOLVING CIVIL RIGHTS TAKEN BY THE SUPREME COURT FROM 1800-2005• BROWN V. BOARD OF EDUCATION TOPEKA (1954)

• ARGUMENT: A BLACK CHILD, CAROL BROWN WAS REFUSED ADMISSION TO A ALL-WHITE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AND WAS FORCED TO WALK TWELVE BLOCKS FURTHER AWAY TO A PREDOMINATELY BLACK SCHOOL.

• VERDICT: IN A UNANIMOUS DECISION, THE SUPREME COURT RULED THAT RACIAL SEGREGATION OF PUBLIC SCHOOLS “GENERATES [AMONG BLACK CHILDREN] A FEELING OF INFERIORITY AS TO THEIR STATUS IN THE COMMUNITY THAT MAY AFFECT THEIR HEARTS AND MINDS IN A WAY UNLIKELY EVER TO BE UNDONE

• LAU V. NICHOLS (1974)• ARGUMENT: PLACING PUBLIC SCHOOL CHILDREN FOR WHOM ENGLISH IS A SECOND

LANGUAGE IN REGULAR CLASSROOMS WITHOUT SPECIAL ASSISTANCE VIOLATES THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT BECAUSE IT DENIES THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO OBTAIN A PROPER EDUCATION

• VERDICT: THE SUPREME COURT AGREED UNANIMOUSLY IN FAVOR OF THE ARGUMENT. HOWEVER, THE DID NOT MAKE BILINGUAL INSTRUCTION MANDATORY IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS.

ONE CASE INVOLVING CIVIL RIGHTS RULED ON BY THE SUPREME COURT IN THE LAST 2 YEARS

• FAIR HOUSING ACT IN TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING & COMMUNITY AFFAIRS V. INCLUSIVE COMMUNITIES PROJECT (2015)• ARGUMENT: WHETHER OR NOT THE PROPOSED INCLUSIVE COMMUNITIES

PROJECT INDICATES HOUSING POLICIES THAT HAVE A DISPROPORTIONATE IMPACT ON RACIAL MINORITIES AND WOMEN VIOLATE THE ANTI-DISCRIMINATION PROVISION OF THE FEDERAL FAIR HOUSING ACT (FHA).

• VERDICT: THE COURT UPHELD THE FAIR HOUSING ACT (FHA) STATUES WHICH PROHIBIT PRACTICES THAT HAVE A DISCRIMINATORY IMPACT WITHOUT THE NEED TO PROVE DISCRIMINATORY INTENT.

ONE LEADER OF CIVIL RIGHTS CAUSES WITHIN THE LAST 5 YEARS

• SHERIFF LUPE VALDEZ IS SERVING HER THIRD TERM FOR THE CITIZENS OF DALLAS COUNTY. SHE TOOK THE RANK OF THE HIGHEST RANKING LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER IN THE COUNTY ON JANUARY 1, 2005.

• SHERIFF VALDEZ IS THE ONLY HISPANIC FEMALE SHERIFF IN THE UNITED STATES AND ONLY ONE OF FOUR FEMALE SHERIFFS IN TEXAS.

• SHERIFF VALDEZ IS ONE OF EIGHT CHILDREN OF MIGRANT FARM WORKERS. AS A YOUNG CHILD, SHE LEARNED STRONG WORK ETHICS. SHE WORKED UP TO TWO JOBS AT A TIME TO PUT HERSELF THROUGH COLLEGE, EARNING A BACHELOR’S DEGREE IN BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION FROM BETHANY NAZARENE COLLEGE, NOW SOUTHERN NAZARENE UNIVERSITY. SHE LATER EARNED A MASTER OF ARTS IN CRIMINOLOGY AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT ARLINGTON.

REFERENCES THE AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION (ACLU) THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT ONLINE DALLAS COUNTY SHERRIFF’S OFFICE DENNIS PARKER, DIRECTOR, ACLU RACIAL JUSTICE PROGRAM JOHN SCHWARTZ, REPORTER FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES THE OYEZ PROJECT, CHICAGO-KENT COLLEGE OF LAW THOMAS PATTERSON, AUTHOR OF THE AMERICAN DEMOCRACY ELEVENTH

EDITION