Equal Protection Clause

Fourteenth Amendment (Equal Protection Clause): For one to file an equal protection claim, one has to prove that the “government intentionally discriminated against the plaintiff by classifying him or her for different treatment under the law than one similarly situated.” For the equal protection clause to be violated, a government has to group individuals in such a way that denies them certain rights or provides different treatment on the basis of traits they have no control over.

Even with the 14th amendment not all people were treated equally. As shown in document one on paper and de jure everyone was equal, however it was evident in many things that white males had advantages de facto and in society. For example, people may be denied jobs and housing and other services

Because of this language, the Fourteenth Amendment appears to be — and to some extent is — simply the application of the Fifth Amendment, and through selective incorporation, the rest of the Bill of Rights. To that end, the Fourteenth Amendment possesses a fortuitous expansion to the simple due process right: the right to equal protection of the laws. Laws that appear to violate the Equal Protection Clause thusly receive the same kind of scrutiny that other fundamental rights are given.

Constitution. This amendment was to help African Americans with citizens rights and equal representation. The U.S Constitution stated that the 14th amendment said “all person born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.” The 14th amendment provided African Americans that was born in the United States equal citizenship with other natives in the U.S. It also limited the power of states that they could not take away the rights of the citizens of the United States.

Substantive due process and equal protection require review of subastance of the law or other governmental action rather than review of the procedures used. When a law of action limits thelibeity of all individuals to do something it may violate substantive due process; when a law or action limits liberty of some individuals but not others then it may violate the equal protection clause. In this case because it’s only applying to motorcycle operators and their passenges than it raises some equal protection issues (Cross, Frank B. and Miller, L., 2012). This statue is more state interest to protect others and promote safety.

The Equal Protection Clause derives from the Fourteenth Amendment, which specifies “no state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws…” As a part of the Reconstruction Amendments, the aforementioned clause was meant to ensure racial equality in the Reconstruction Period and has been applied successfully against the affirmative action. Introduced in United States v. Carolene Products Co., the strict scrutiny has been applied to the cases, in which a fundamental constitutional rights have been infringed or a government action applies to a suspect classification (i.e. race, religion, national background). Specifically, in regards to Bakke v. Regents of University of California, the Supreme Court (“the Court”) concluded that, considering that the University of California, Davis received several Caucasian applicants for its special admission program in 1973 and 1974 and that none of the applicants received the admission to the program since the start, the program unfairly administered in favor of minority races and, therefore, violated the rights of the white applicants under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Furthermore, from Hopwood v. State of Texas, the Fifth Circuit Court ruled under strict scrutiny that, the affirmative action imposed by the University of Texas School of Law (“the law school”) violates the Fourteenth Amendment since neither the law school nor the University of Texas system has proved a proof of

The Equal Protection Clause is part of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The clause provides that no state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction "the equal protection of the laws". Two landmark 14th Amendment cases are Plessy v. Ferguson and Brown v. Board of Education. However, each case treated the 14th Amendment differently and this caused a different outcome for each court case.

The success and the approval by the necessary three-quarters of U.S states, the 14th Amendment guaranteed to the newly freed slaves protection and citizenship along with all its privileges. This amendment resolved any pre-Civil War concerns of the African American community’s citizenship by stating that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States are citizens of the United States and of the state in which they reside” (Primary Documents of American History, 2011). This amendment also reinsured that they had the equal rights and privileges of the rest of the citizens, and granted all these citizens the “equal protection of the laws” (Primary Documents of American History, 2011).

Although the Declaration of Independence stated that “All men are created equal,” the U.S Constitution denied minorities basic human rights, such as life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. With this, the line had been drawn. Skin color had now become the definite indicator of how race would be defined in future American society.

For centuries, the success of a democratic society has been measured by its commitment to equality, a resounding principle central to our nation’s founding. The Enlightenment-inspired language of the Declaration of Independence, namely the age-old axiom that “all men are created equal,” pervades our perception of the American creed. However, nearly a century passed before the Lockean principles espoused in the Declaration of Independence began to bear the force of law. Entitling American citizens to due process and equal protection of the law, the Fourteenth Amendment, perhaps the most transformative Amendment of all, has inspired the steady progression of American society. Nonetheless, while the Amendment serves as the chief legal force behind the democratic goal of equality, questions regarding its achievement of that goal

The Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1868 and the amendment was put in place to protect former slaves and their rights in life. The most important part of the amendment reads, “No state shall ‘deprive a person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor deny to any person… the equal protection of the laws.’” This simple statement has one of the most profound and incredible parts of the United States today. The equal protection of the laws show that there must be equal treatment for all citizens regardless of race, class, or gender. Although there has been many racial events happening after this amendment was passed this clause still stands to today and has helped shape the United States for the better. Having this clause in the Fourteenth Amendment protects the ‘little guy’ and makes sure that everyone has the same ability to do whatever everyone else is doing.

On a date that will be remembered forever as a step forward for our nation, July 28, 1868, the Fourteenth Amendment became part of the U.S. Constitution. The Fourteenth Amendment gave a new sense of hope and inspiration to a once oppressed people. It was conceived to be the foundation for restoring America to its great status and prosperity. The Amendment allowed “equal protection under the law”, no matter what race, religion, sex, sexual preference or social status. It was designed to protect the newly freed slaves. However, it only helped the white race.

What could be more important than the equality of rights for all American citizens? Women have tried without success for 80 years to be acknowledged as equals in our Constitution through an Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). Currently there is nothing in the United States Constitution that guarantees a woman the same rights as a man. The only equality women have with men is the right to vote. In order to protect women’s rights on the same level as men, I am in favor of an Equal Rights Amendment to the U.S. Constitution today.

The equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution was at first created to protect against racial discrimination, but the Supreme Court later expanded the clause to also providing equal treatment amongst different races. The clause says, “No state shall…deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws” (U.S. Constitution. Art./Amend. XIV, Sec. 1.) A person could not be discriminated upon solely because of his or her race and if the law treated a group of people differently, then a valid reason for the discrepancy of different treatment must exist. Racial minorities, but mainly women, have historically been subjected and made vulnerable to harsh restrictions on activities such as voting, attending college, and working as lawyers. These restrictions, based on stereotypes overlooked the actual capability and potential of each individual woman. For many cases dealing with discrimination of women, the Court looked to another important element of equal protection, which stated that unfair treatment couldn’t be based on immutable distinctions, such as race and gender, because those fixed distinctions are uncontrollable and unrelated to ability. In the case of Frontiero v. Richardson, 411 U.S. 677 (1973), the Supreme Court was just one vote short of adopting gender as a suspect classification. In United States v. Virginia, 518 U.S. 515 (1996), women rights supporters were very pleased with the Supreme Court’s ruling and remain

The Equal rights Amendment was proposed to set equality for every citizen no matter the sex. The amendment has three sections. The first one states “equality of rights under the law should not be denied by the U.S on the account of one's sex.” Section two says that “congress has the power to enforce this law.” Last but not least, section three says the amendment will take effect two years after ratification.