The Constitutional Court Book By Jack Fruchtman Jr.

The Fifth, Thirteenth, and Fourteenth amendment were implemented to protect American citizens. The declaration says “all men are created equal” (Jacobus, 412), these amendments are in place to protect our rights and keep us safe. The Fifth Amendment states that no person shall “….Be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law….” (Jacobus, 412) However even though we have these laws here to protect us, discrimination plagued our country and did not grant rights to certain groups of minorities because of skin color, race, or religion. Throughout our history there were many instances of this unfairness, for example “Jones v. Alfred H. Mayer Company.” (Jacobus, 412) This case was a huge breakthrough in the fight against segregation, saying that any form of discrimination is a “badge of slavery,” (Jacobus, 412) and therefore violates the Thirteenth Amendment. “The Supreme Court stated that in enforcing the Civil Rights Act of 1866, Congress is empowered under the Thirteenth

The court decision on Roe Vs Wade violated the due process clause of 14th amendment. The 14th Amendment says that no states are allowed to take away the privacy rights of its citizens. The court said that the taxes law violated the due process clause of the 14th amendment.

“The due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment does not incorporate, as such, the specific guarantees found in the Sixth Amendment, although a denial by a State of rights or privileges specifically embodied in that and others of the first eight amendments may, in certain circumstances, or in connection with other elements, operate,

Plessy argued that the segregation law violated the Equal Protection clause of the fourteenth amendment as well as the

Millions of people go to court to fight for something they believe in or disagree with, but don't get their voices heard. The constitution made amendments to ensure fairness and it's not right if we don't have those fairnesses. In Brown v board of education and Plessy v Ferguson they were fighting to have rights and fairness, but Plessy v Ferguson got their rights heard right away and the Brown v board of Education didn't get there voices heard in till many years after they went to court. In the 1890's Plessy got on the wrong train car and decided he didn't want to move. The authorities said that Plessy would have to pay $25 or go to jail for 20 days, so when he refused they put him in jail. This violated the 14th amendment because, its unequal that white children had better things. In 1950-1951 segregation was a big problem even with little kids going to different schools just because of the

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws” (U.S. Const. amend. XIV). Based on its Due Process and Equal Protection Clause, this amendment helped end segregation in our schools and establish equity for all. This was seen through the landmark case Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954). Where the case was heard by the Supreme Court and questioned “Does the segregation of public education based solely on race violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?” (Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 1954). In this case it was the court’s opinion that “Separate but equal educational facilities for racial minorities is inherently unequal violating the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment” (Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka,

“The law was challenged in the Supreme Court on grounds that it conflicted with the 13th and 14th Amendments...Plessy’s violation of the local law was actually a challenge to..laws separating the races. Following the Civil War, three amendments to the U.S. Constitution,...seemed to promote racial equality.” (Robert McNamara). While the 13th amendment abolished slavery, the 14th amendment included citizenship rights and equal protection of the laws, forbidding states to restrict simple rights of citizens. And the 15th amendment granted black men the right to vote. “The Court endorsed the "separate but equal" doctrine, ignoring the fact that blacks had practically no power to make sure that their "separate" facilities were really "equal" to those of whites. It was not until the 1950s and the 1960s that the Supreme Court began to reverse Plessy... and later cases abolished the separate but equal doctrine in other areas affecting civil rights as well.” (Encyclopedia, Plessy v. Ferguson

Mark Gibney wrote a review about the book "Strangers to the Constitution: Immigrants, Borders, and Fundamental Law" by Gerald L. Neuman. On his review, Gibney addresses what he has found important and what he believes the author should have written. Gibney begins his review pointing out that immigration is undoubtedly close the supreme law of the land, the United States Constitution. The book brings to light the fact that immigration has been on for a long time. It is to reveal who is given the benefit to have a precious protection under the constitution. Is it only for American citizens that are living in the United States of America? What about the ones beyond the borders, or the ones that hold an illegal status inside of the U.S?

In each of the cases, African American minors had been denied admittance to certain public schools based on laws allowing public education to be segregated by race. They argued that such segregation violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The plaintiffs were denied relief based on the precedent set by Plessy v. Ferguson, which established the “separate but equal” doctrine that stated separate facilities for the races was constitutional as long as the facilities were “substantially equal.” In the case arising from Delaware, the Supreme Court of Delaware ruled that the African American students had to be admitted to the white public schools because of their higher quality

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” In their argument of the case, Plessy and his Lawyer argued that segregated facilities violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment. As a fully participating citizen, he should not have been denied any rights of citizenship and should not have been required to give up any public rights or access. In The Atlantic World and the Road to Plessy v. Ferguson, Rebecca Scott discussed this idea of public rights[4]. For many years prior to Plessy’s arrest, this demand for civil and public rights was a crucial part of reconstruction and the beliefs of the free black population in New Orleans. These people wanted to be treated with dignity and have equal access to public accommodations and transportation.

Jeffery Rosen’s novel, The Supreme Court: The Personalities and Rivalries that Defined America follows the history of the Supreme Court of the United States through both personal and philosophical rivalries that shaped the transformation of laws and our lives. Rosen shows us the rivalries between justices and their ideologies and how their ideologies have shaped our laws today. Starting in 1952 with President Harry S Truman and ending fifty four years later with the presidency of George W. Bush, Rosen takes and shapes the novel through the eyes of the justices. The novel, The Nine: Inside the Secret World of the Supreme Court by Jeffery Toobin, an acclaimed legal analyst at CNN shows us a deeper look at the most secret legal body of

The need for judges to use moral argument is greatest, Dworkin argues, where the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses are concerned. The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments forbid government to deprive people of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, and the Fourteenth Amendment requires that states accord people equal protection of the laws. The abstract concept of equal protection "does not itself make clear whether states can segregate schools by race, or whether they must spend the same amount per pupil on public education in different school districts across the state." (127) Moral argument is necessary.

On July 9, 1868, the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified stating “All persons 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; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” Since then this amendment has continued to play a divisive role in criminal procedures throughout history. The amendment guarantees the right to fairness in decisions made in a

a. Section 1. “No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

The 14th amendment of the United States Constitution states that any state shall not “deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws" (Legal).