-
Dred Scott v. Sandford
Dred Scott was a slave in the state of Missouri. After moving to Illinois, a free state, and returning to Missouri, he filed a suit for his freedom, saying that his residence in a free state made him free. His owner claimed that because he was a descendant of slaves, he was not a citizen, but property, and his freedom violated his Fifth Amendment right to property. -
Thirteenth Amendment
The Thirteenth Amendment came directly after the Civil War, and effectively ended all forms of involuntary slavery and indentured servitude in the United States (except in punishment after conviction for a crime). -
Fourteenth Amendment
Chiefly, It granted citizenship to everyone born and naturalized within the United States, and protects their life, liberty, and property from being removed without due process of law. Additionally, it also provides several other smaller protections from the government, and a few rules for states in the latter sections of the Amendment. -
Fifteenth Amendment
The Fifteenth Amendment prevents the denial of the right to vote on the basis of race or previous condition of servitude, and opened the opportunity for many former slaves to vote (although many southern states still created barriers until later). -
Poll Taxes
Poll Taxes were used by several states to suppress or simply limit the number of voters. It is just as it sounds, where eligible voters were required to pay a tax (varying in amount by state) in order to cast their vote. -
Plessy v. Fergusson
Plessy v. Fergusson upheld and more firmly established the earlier "Separate but Equal" standards used in support of racial segregation in the late 1800's and early-mid 1900's.It stemmed from a passenger refusing to sit in a Black-only train car. -
White Primaries
White Primaries were often used by southern states/parties, and operate exactly as the title suggests. They were banned by the Supreme Court in the States, but allowed by Parties, since they are technically private institutions. In 1944, this decision was overturned in a Texas case, although the ruling was only really applicable to Texas state law. Despite this, although they did linger into the 50's and 60's, their use did eventually die out, even in southern states. -
Nineteenth Amendment
Passed by Congress in 1919 and ratified in 1920, The Nineteenth Amendment finally granted women the right to vote, after suffrage movements had been pushing for it since the mid-1800's. -
Brown v. Board of Education
Brown v. Board of Education, a conglomerate of several similar cases, challenged the decision in Plessy v. Fergusson, after students were denied admittance in a White-Only school. They challenged that the facilities in either school were not nearly equal. The Supreme Court agreed, and struck down Plessy v. Fergusson, and outlawed segregation. -
Twenty-Fourth Amendment
The Twenty-Fourth Amendment prevented poll taxes, which had previously been used by some states to undermine the 15th Amendment, and limit voting in their states. -
Civil Rights Act of 1964
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 prevents discrimination on account of gender, race, religion, etc. It applies to things such as the hiring/firing of workers, as well as further banning things such as poll taxes and literacy tests while voting. -
Voting Rights Act of 1965
More directly than it's counterpart in 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 directly allowed for the enforcement of the Fifteenth Amendment, and completely outlawed literacy tests and poll taxes. -
Affirmative Action
Affirmative action laws are enforced by the government to help "level the playing field" for those usually disadvantaged due to factors such as race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. They usually have to do with equal opportunities in employment, education, and business. -
Reed v. Reed
This case involves two separated parents' dispute over the estate of their adopted son after he had passed away. The Idaho Probate Code specified that males ought to be preferred in the case of appointing administrators to estates. After the case, they Court ruled that this did violate the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection clause. -
Equal Rights Amendment
First introduced in 1972, The Equal Rights Amendment, or ERA for short, is an amendment to the Constitution that says equal rights under the law cannot be denied on account of sex. It was first introduced in 1972, but has not yet to be ratified by three-fourths of the states (although this seems to be disputed recently in Congress). -
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke
In this case, the Supreme Court herd a case challenging the use of racial "quotas" in the college admissions process. They ultimately said that such quotas were certainly unconstitutional, but that a schools use of "affirmative action" to accept more minorities was constitutional, under more checked circumstances. -
Bowers v. Hardwick
This case challenged the constitutionality anti-sodomy laws in Georgia. The court ultimately ruled that these laws were, in fact, constitutional, and that such actions are not protected under the constitution. -
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 is a act preventing discrimination on account of any disability, in a similar manner to the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It also creates accessibility requirements for most businesses. -
Motor Voter Act (The National Voter Registration Act of 1993)
The Motor Voter Act, as it is commonly known, set various voter registration requirements, both for citizens and for the states offering it. It ensured more opportunities for voters, and created voting standards still used today. -
Lawrence v. Texas
The details of this case are very similar to those in Bowers v. Hardwick, although here, the court ruled that such laws, this time in Texas, were unconstitutional under the 14th Amendment, and that the private lives of citizens cannot be invaded without due process. -
Obergefell v. Hodges
This case, a sort of collection of several similar cases, challenges the constitutionality of bans on same-sex marriages in several states, especially under the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court ruled in their favor, saying that such laws did violate Petitioners' right to liberty as noted in the Fourteenth Amendment
