This Article is written by Naman Jain, Intern under Legal Vidhiya
Introduction
It can be said that the equal protection clause is at the heart of the 14th Amendment. However, this amendment was passed after the Civil War in an attempt to correct some of the injustices that led to the Civil War, such as racial inequality and slavery. Slavery is specifically addressed in the 13th Amendment, but inequality is addressed here. Racism and racism remain at the heart of the Equal Protection Clause, but unfair government classification (picking on one group or another) can be a significant problem.
Modern unconstitutional analysis of equal protection claims requires several steps within a larger framework. First, it should be determined whether the government has taken any action in this matter or not. Federal, state, or local governments may not be able to discriminate, but your neighbors are not subject to such restrictions. Actions must be taken. However, a government classification does not necessarily mean that a violation of the Equal Protection Clause has occurred. The selected group should be the so-called “suspicious class”.
These are generally groups that have been discriminated against throughout history. If such a group is not identified, the court may not find that the Equal Protection Clause has been violated. We will conduct our investigation respectfully. This low-level standard of review is known as “reasonable ground review” and is discussed further below. But when the state classification identifies classes that are questionable, courts are likely to take a step called “scrutiny.” Or the most cautious criterion of judicial review. In this case, the court will question whether the government’s purpose in classifying suspects is compelling and whether the actions taken are fully consistent with that purpose.
If the answer to any of these two questions is negative, the classification is a constitutional violation of the Equal Protection Clause. Some of the actions of the government can easily be placed in this format. Today, if a local government singles out African Americans and bans them from working as firefighters, it would almost certainly be considered unconstitutional. Even if governments try to propose goals that are not racially motivated, such comprehensive action may not be narrowly designed with compelling goals.
Racial Discrimination
Racism is a serious human rights issue in the United States and intersects with all domestic issues covered by Human Rights Watch. Violent crime, the failed war on drugs, prosecution and bail policies that force people to plead guilty, surveillance of certain groups such as Muslim political activists and other ethnic or religious minorities, and the criminalization of immigrants; such as scapegoating immigration policy, or ensuring that asylum seekers and refugees are treated differently based on their country of origin. Human Rights Watch documents, investigates, and analyzes human rights violations, including racism, for “purpose or effect.” This means violations that result in racial inequalities without the intent to discriminate. All forms of racism
The move toward racial equality in the United States has not always been easy. It is clear that before the Civil War, when slavery was still legal in many parts of the country, African Americans were not treated with the dignity that all people are owed. Racism has been a deep-rooted problem in the United States since its founding. Refers to the unfair treatment of individuals or groups based on race or ethnicity. This takes many forms and can occur in a variety of areas, including education, employment, housing, criminal justice, and health care.
Types of Racial Discrimination
- In Education, racism occurs when students of color are denied access to quality education, racially harassed, or subjected to various disciplinary actions.
- In Employment, racism can manifest in many ways, including discriminatory hiring practices, low wages for workers of colour, and discrimination in promotions and job assignments. People of colour are often underrepresented in management and leadership positions, limiting opportunities for career advancement and financial mobility.
- In Housing, racism occurs when people of color are denied access to certain areas or subjected to discriminatory rental and lending practices.
- Racism is widely documented in the criminal justice system. People of color are more likely than white people to be arrested, convicted, and given harsher sentences for similar crimes. This is due to systematic bias in policing, prosecution, and punishment, and the disproportionate impact of poverty and other social determinants of health on communities of color.
- In Health Care, racism can manifest in many forms, including bias in medicine and research, unequal access to health care, and inequities in health status. People of color are more susceptible to chronic disease and have higher mortality rates than whites due to systemic barriers to access to quality care.
- Racism is not only a moral issue but also a legal issue The United States has enacted various laws, such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964, to protect individuals from racial discrimination. However, despite these laws, racism remains a significant problem in the United States. Addressing this problem requires significant efforts to change attitudes, policies, and practices in different parts of society.
14th Amendment
According to Section 1, all persons born or naturalized in the United States are citizens of the United States and of the state in which they reside. In addition, it prohibits states from enacting laws that would impair the privileges and immunities of US citizens. Third, it prevented the government from depriving life, liberty, or property without due process and equal protection of the law.
This amendment defines a citizen as any person born or naturalized in the United States. Thus, it made African Americans citizens of the United States and the infamous Supreme Court ruling in Dred Scott v. Rejected Sandford. The Supreme Court has ruled that “free African blacks” brought to the United States and sold as slaves are not citizens under the United States Constitution.
It also prohibits states alone from enacting laws that may deprive a person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, and makes equal protection laws available to states. in the U.S. v. (1988) The Thirteenth Amendment contains no requirement for state action and currently gives Congress the power to enact laws prohibiting private discrimination outside the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment.
The Fourteenth Amendment is intended to recognize and protect fundamental rights that have long been recognized under the common law system. The Fourteenth Amendment guaranteed citizenship specifically to blacks and generally guaranteed equal protection to all under the law. This is very important as it ensures ‘equity’ and ‘due process’.Despite the 14th Amendment’s protections against racial discrimination, discrimination and inequality based on race continue to be a significant issue in the United States. However, the amendment has been a critical tool in fighting against such discrimination and advancing civil rights for all citizens.
Some Sections Discussed In the 14th Amendment
Section 1
All persons born, naturalized, and subject to the jurisdiction of the United States are citizens of the United States and of the country in which they reside. No state has made any law abridging the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States. No government shall deprive a person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. Nor does it deny equal protection to anyone under the rule of law.
Section 2
The representative was to count the entire population of each state, except uncultivated India, and divide them among the several states according to their number. A 21-year-old male resident of the country, if he has the right to vote. For the purpose of electing elected executive and judicial officers or members of the legislature of the state, none of the following shall be included: Citizens of the United States or, in ordinary language, the principal whose representative, except in case of rebellion or other crime, is under 21 years of age in In this country, the number of male citizens corresponds to the total number of male citizens.
Section 3
No person who has been a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elected President and Vice President, or who has been sworn as a Senator under the United States or any State, serves in the civil or military service. As a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of a state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer, has engaged in rebellion or sedition against the Constitution of the United States. Position, or give help or comfort to his enemies. But Congress can remove such barriers by a two-thirds vote of each house.
Section 4
It cannot be questioned that the public debt of the United States is authorized by law, including such debts as recognition, payment of pensions, and encouragement of services for the suppression of insurrection. No government shall be responsible for the loss or emancipation of any slave who has been in rebellion against the United States or who has supported the rebellion. However, all such commitments, obligations, and claims are illegal and void.
Section 5
The Council will have the right to implement the provisions of this article by relevant articles.
Rejection of the Dred Scott Case
It should be noted that US politics is an extreme case of federalism, as each state has its own constitution, separate from the federal constitution. Therefore, US citizens have dual citizenship. This means that they are citizens of their state as well as citizens of the United States of America. On the other hand, Indians do not have such a state citizenship system.
This decision in the Dred Scott case is very important because by overturning the decision in the Dred Scott case, this amendment made black slaves/citizens of the United States. In Dred Scott, Chief Justice Taney ruled that only two types of people could be granted US citizenship.
- Caucasians who were born in the United States as descendants of people who were recognized as citizens in some states at the time of the adoption of the Constitution and subsequently became citizens of the United States.
- Those born outside the United States who have now immigrated to the United States and become naturalized there.
Due Process
It should be noted that US politics is an extreme case of federalism, as each state has its own constitution, separate from the federal constitution. Therefore, US citizens have dual citizenship. This means that they are citizens of that state and citizens of the United States of America. On the other hand, Indians do not have such a state citizenship system.
This decision is very important when it comes to Scott’s pain. Because the amendment made black slaves/citizens of the United States by reversing the decisions in the Dred Scott case. In Dred Scott, Chief Justice Taney ruled that only two types of US citizenship could be granted.
A white person born in the United States who is a descendant of those who were recognized as citizens in some state at the time of the adoption of the Constitution and subsequently became citizens of the United States. Born outside the United States, currently immigrated to the United States and naturalized there.
Equal Protection of Law
The main purpose of the 14th Amendment was to grant citizenship to freed slaves. This was done not only by declaring them citizens but by treating them equally and prohibiting the government from abridging their “privileges and immunities.”
Equal protection of the law prohibits governments from discriminating against individuals. This means that the law must not discriminate against similarly situated persons, that the protection of the law is equally afforded, and that similarly situated persons are not discriminated against from the protection of the law. They are similar.
Equal protection of the law, apart from the abolition of slavery, is another step toward Thomas Jefferson’s idea that “all men are created equal”.
Conclusion
The passage of the Fourteenth Reconstruction Amendment gave federal courts the power to intervene whenever a state threatened the constitutional rights of its citizens. However, the amendment’s immediate goals were not immediately realized until the Civil Rights Movement. The Black Code and Jim Crow laws, aimed at maintaining white control over blacks, thwarted this process. This prevented African Americans from achieving full citizenship and equality.
Therefore, the federal and state governments failed to guarantee the rights guaranteed to former slaves by changing the constitution, especially in southern states that did not want to end slavery. The construction can only be assessed as a failure. It further contributed to the disenfranchisement of black Americans and led to the rise of white supremacists such as the Ku Klux Klan. Even today, discrimination against African Americans is widespread. However, newer generations are clamoring to show the extent of discrimination and violence against black people, as demonstrated by the 2020 “I Can’t Breathe” protests in the United States following the death of George Floyd. I advocate ending it. Discrimination against Black community/society
Case Laws
- Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) 163 U.S. 537 – This case upheld the constitutionality of “separate but equal” segregation in public facilities, including transportation. It was later overturned by Brown v. Board of Education.
- Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) 381 U.S. 479 – This case struck down a Connecticut law that prohibited the use of contraceptives, finding that it violated the right to privacy protected by the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment.
- Loving v. Virginia (1967) 388 U.S. 1 – This case overturned state laws that prohibited interracial marriage, finding that they violated the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the 14th Amendment.
- Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978) 438 U.S. 265 – This case addressed affirmative action policies in higher education and held that race could be a factor in admissions decisions, but that strict racial quotas were unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.
- United States v. Windsor (2013) 570 U.S. 744 – This case struck down the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which defined marriage as between a man and a woman, finding that it violated the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the 14th Amendment
- Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436 – This case established the “Miranda warning,” which requires law enforcement officers to inform individuals of their constitutional rights, including the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney. The Supreme Court found that the Fifth Amendment’s protection against self-incrimination and the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment required such warnings.
- Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) 372 U.S. 335 – This case established the right to counsel for indigent defendants in criminal trials, finding that the Sixth Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment required such counsel.
- Lawrence v. Texas (2003) 539 U.S. 558 – This case struck down a Texas law that criminalized consensual same-sex sexual conduct, finding that it violated the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment’s protection of liberty and privacy.
- Plyler v. Doe (1982) 457 U.S. 202 – This case addressed the education of undocumented immigrant children, finding that denying them access to public education violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.
- Hamdi v. Rumsfeld (2004) 542 U.S. 507 – This case addressed the detention of a U.S. citizen as an “enemy combatant” in the context of the “war on terror,” finding that such detention violated the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment and that the citizen had a right to challenge the detention.
These cases further demonstrate the critical role that the 14th Amendment has played in shaping American law and protecting individual rights and liberties.
Reference
http://constitutionallawreporter.com/amendment-14-01/equal-protection-clause/
https://www.hrw.org/united-states/racial-discrimination
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv
https://www.pbs.org/tpt/slavery-by-another-name/watch/
https://www.jstor.org/stable/41708159?seq=
0 Comments