The Civil Right Act Of 1964

On April 19, 1866, the US Congress passed the first ever Civil Rights Act. It gave black Americans the right to own their own property, to have legal protection in business, and to take people to court. The act was also the first time that black Americans were called citizens of the United States. This meant that black Americans would have the same rights and privileges as all other US citizens. Another Civil Rights Act was passed in 1875. This act made it illegal to discriminate on the basis of race in public places, such as restaurants. In 1883, the Supreme Court ruled that the 1875 act was unconstitutional on the basis that businesses had the right to choose which customers they served and which they could ignore. This allowed businesses that provided public facilities to choose to exclude black people. On June 1, 1909, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) was formed. It became the most important civil rights organization fighting for the rights of black people in the United States. It is still active today and has a membership of about half a million. On May 17, 1954, the Supreme Court passed a judgment that changed the course of civil rights in the United States. In the case of Brown v. the Board of Education, the judges on the Supreme Court declared that racial segregation in education was unconstitutional and therefore against the law. This decision overturned the Plessy v. Ferguson case of 1896. Shortly after noon on Monday May 17,

President Lyndon B. Johnson and President John F. Kennedy made many notable advances to outlaw discrimination in America. They fought against discrimination on race, color, religion, and national origin. Although the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments outlawed slavery, provided for equal protection under the law, guaranteed citizenship, and protected the right to vote, individual states continued to allow unfair treatment of minorities and passed Jim Crow laws allowing segregation of public facilities. America would not be the country it is today without their effort to make this country better and of course without the help of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Before the Civil Rights Act of 1964, segregation in the United States was commonly practiced in many of the Southern and Border States. This segregation while supposed to be separate but equal, was hardly that. Blacks in the South were discriminated against repeatedly while laws did nothing to protect their individual rights. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 ridded the nation of this legal segregation and cleared a path towards equality and integration. The passage of this Act, while forever altering the relationship between blacks and whites, remains as one of history's greatest political battles.

In 1863, Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address defined the American government as an institution “of the people, by the people, [and] for the people”. Lincoln had an idealistic view of the government as an instrument for societal change. He, as well as the founding fathers, intended for the government to act in support of the people’s will or the majority rule. This democratic definition of the government has remained true throughout the course of American history. By placing all of its power on its citizens, the government itself did not decide the course of history but rather followed it. This follower mindset is seen through the government’s positive interactions with marginalized groups’ who in their attempts to overcome exclusion gained

The Civil Rights Act of 1964, a turning point in the Civil Rights Movement, was passed in order to ban discrimination in public places as well as strengthen the role of the federal government to end segregation in public places. Also included in this act was the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission which was established in order to ensure racial discrimination was not occurring within employment. The aspect of desegregation was not occurring rapidly in Southern states, such as Alabama. Not only was desegregation not occurring quickly under the Civil Rights Act of 1964 but also the act did not address any issues with voting rights among the African-American community. The civil rights movement grew strong in southern regions especially racially tense areas such as Selma. In the city of Selma as well as a variety of other southern regions, African-Americans were harassed when attempting to practice their fundamental rights of voting through poll taxes and literacy tests. In 1965, only 1% of African-Americans were registered to vote in Selma but 50% of Selma’s population was African-American. In order to address the lack of voting rights, Martin Luther King and the SNCC worked vigorously on setting up marches to overcome the injustice that was occurring in Selma. Due to the overly aggressive authorities in the South, a majority of the marches ended violently thus increasing public support for new legislation to ensure the basic right of voting to the African-American

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employment discrimination based on : Race, Color, Sex, Religion, and National Origin with respect to employment. “Specifically, it states that it shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer” (Dressler, 2015, p. 28). “It established the concept of protected classes; those individuals who are protected from discrimination by the legal system. It prohibits discrimination in all employment practices. Title VII makes it unlawful to limit or classify employees in any way that deprives them of employment opportunities or hampers their career progression when that classification is based on their protected status” (SHRM). Title VII also established the EEOC Commission (EEOC) and applies to employers with 15 or more employees and most labor unions.

Americans and even immigrants are afforded their basic civil rights based on the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The act, which was signed into law on July 2, 1964, declared all discrimination for any reason based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin will be deemed illegal in the United States (National Park Service, n.d.). When the act was enacted, people had to become more open minded; more accepting to the various cultures and backgrounds of individuals. Understanding that concept leads to the notion that there is and will be a diverse population within the United States. Diversity, as defined by the Cambridge dictionary, is the condition or fact of being different or varied (Cambridge Dictionary, n.d.). Diversity is also

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects classes from jobs discriminating against them based on their race, color, national origin, sex, and religion. It is unlawful for an employer to refuse to hire or to fire an individual because of their class. Title VII provided employment equality for minority people seeking jobs. The EEOC recognized certain classes that could not be discriminated against. The racial group includes, African American, Asian, Caucasian, Native American, and a Pacific Islander. Closely connected with racial discrimination is discrimination against someone’s color. “Color refers to the color or complexion of a person’s skin” (651, Cheeseman). Racial and color discrimination go against Title VII.

Title VII of the Civils Rights Act of 1964 is a U.S. federal law that prohibits employers from discriminating against employees on the basis of sex, race, color, national origin, and religion. Title V11 applies to private and public universities, local, state and federal governments, labor organizations and employment agencies. Today, the conversation surrounding discrimination has increasingly been based on race and gender and has emerged as an issues that many employers are trying to address in workforce development. Unfortunately, there are other groups that have similar attention or protection under U.S. laws and if so, they are still facing discrimination. LGBT employees are a group that has received minimal attention when it

Based on the incidents Kim experienced, her lawyer should examine her situation as it pertains to the employment protections and regulations within Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Title VII prohibits public and private employers from discriminating against employees based on national origin, race, color, religion, and gender. These anti-discrimination guidelines apply in every step of the employment process, from the initial recruitment and interviewing to terminating employment. In Kim’s case, her lawyer should examine both Kim’s allegations of employment discrimination and sexual harassment pursuant to Title VII regulations.

The United States is a country anchored on the principle of inclusivity and mutual respect. The country has a dark past characterized with instances of racial profiling and discrimination which culminated into civil unrests realized in the mid-20th century. Moving forward, the country adopted strategic frameworks that were to guide towards a new era devoid of discrimination. The aspect of political participation was one fundamental instrument that was subsequently integrated into the American social dynamics. The enactment of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 sought to empower the minority groups to participate in the electoral processes, and to eliminate the barriers that existed in the political landscape. Some of the achievements of the act

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a federal Law that prohibits employers from discriminating against employees on the grounds of sex, race, color, national origin and religion (www.aauw.org). Thus far in our lectures we have discussed the strategies used by various minority groups who have been discriminated against in violation of Title VII. There has been land mark decisions made from the hard fought fights by, African Americans, Women, Mexicans and Jewish alike. Their challenges of non-compliance and enforcement of Title VII brought successes that didn’t come without sacrifice, division and in some cases physical harm.

Across America there are close to thirty million small privately owned businesses that are run by owners. The businesses work on some of their own policies and the laws put down from government and federal laws. Many people today can get confused that the laws depress the second amendment and that it will take our rights away to bear arms. Most owners, or people managing a business, can choose whether or not to support and use these laws to keep firearms out of there business. Most just depend on the owners themselves. As with many problems faced by businesses they do have the right to deny patrons. If a customer is lacking hygiene for example a restaurant can tell them to leave, but because of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 you cannot be denied for being of a certain race. But recently due to the speculation and fear from most of the world, firearms are scaring a lot of people. The government has put in certain laws and restrictions to prevent this fear, and in some states it is legal to deny patrons carrying firearms openly. And that is why many businesses have the right to deny patrons openly carrying guns on their person.

Plaintiff Jocelyn Harkin (“Harkin” or “Plaintiff”) alleges that Starboard are culpable to her for violations of Title VII by discriminating against her based-on sex, [dkt. 1 at ¶223], and for retaliation for her utilizing her rights under Title VII, [id. 1 at ¶25], and for violating the Equal Pay Act [id. 1 at ¶27]. The Complaint provides no factual allegations that meet pleading standards of the foregoing federal statutes. Since she fails to allege any basis for imposing liability against Starboard under Title VII for retaliation or under the Equal Pay Act, Harkin’s complaints of retaliation and violations

According to the Legal Dictionary (2014), “The Wards Cove decision was severely criticized by Civil Rights leaders, who believed the Supreme Court had made disparate impact cases almost impossible to win” (p.1). The Civil Rights Act of 1991 was in effect. This act proposed that employees must have proof in showing that the employer committed a disparate impact crime. No longer would it allow the victims to argue against the company based on their own views. At the same time the owner must show evidence that there is a crime committed based on these findings. Title VII along with the Civil Rights Act would dismiss any further rulings on this matter. The Supreme Court has adjusted some of the compensation methods for the disparate impact theory. It is against the law for an employer to allow different standards, conditions, or terms of the job to their workers. This