The 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution attempted to guarantee “equal protection of the laws” to all people in the jurisdiction of the United States. This means that no person shall be discriminated under the law. This Equal Protection clause does not require identical treatment in all circumstances. Equal protection of the laws, like due process, is a constitutional guarantee of fair treatment for all persons, regardless of sex, race, national origin, religion, or political views.
Fourteenth Amendment has contributed to racial equality by the Equal Protection clause. The clause was a deciding factor in cases that involved racism. Though it sometimes limited rights, the Equal Protection clause eventually became a key element to justice. Lum vs. Rice (1927) was a Supreme Court case where the Mississippi education board did not allow a nine year old girl to attend the
The Fourteenth amendment of the United States of America has had a major impact on modern society and has helped continued to progress society forward in the attribute That is the equal protection clause. This section “prohibits states from denying any person within its territory the equal protection of laws” (Legal Information Institute). That is what really represents what the Fourteenth amendment. This doesn’t mean that representatives being appointed by the population of that state isn't important
or property without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” This part of the Fourteenth Amendment is talking about the equal protect clause. It states, “No matter the race or gender, you will be protected by the law” and is a very important part of the constitution of 1868. The clause has also helped secure court cases. First, “equal protection of the laws” means that everyone, no matter race or gender, will be protected by the law.
the same rights, privileges, and protections to all citizens.The Citizenship Clause granted citizenship to all persons born or naturalized in the United States. The Due Process Clause declared that states may not deny any person "life, liberty or property, without due process of law”. Equal Protection clause, developed in 1868, states that no state shall deny to any person within its control “the equal protection of the laws”. Everyone should be considered equal. No one should be treated differently
the University of Texas with the claim that the University had violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 13th Amendment. The main question that arose in the question was, “does the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment permit the consideration of race in undergraduate admissions decisions”. The overall decision of the Supreme Court was that the University of Texas hadn’t violated the Equal Protection Clause, and in fact that they were permitted to consider race in the admissions process
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
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. In the Plessy v. Ferguson case, the statute of Louisiana, acts of 1890, c. 111
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
Women are twice as likely as men to avoid incarceration if convicted of a crime. Whether or not this is fair, though, is highly debated. Some politicians argue that women’s prisons be abolished all together, while Men’s Rights Activists push for equal sentencing for comparable crimes. It has been proven that judges tend to give women less time in prison, or no incarceration at all, and the reasons for this support the imbalance in sentencing. Though many view women’s tendency to receive lighter punishments