CIVIL RIGHTS

Scott v. Sanford (1857) 

 Facts of the Case: Dred Scott was a slave in Missouri. From 1833 to 1843, he resided in Illinois (a free state) and in an area of the Louisiana Territory, where slavery was forbidden by the Missouri Compromise of 1820. After returning to Missouri, Scott sued unsuccessfully in the Missouri courts for his freedom, claiming that his residence in free territory made him a free man. Scott then brought a new suit in federal court. Scott's master maintained that no pure-blooded Negro of African descent and the descendant of slaves could be a citizen in the sense of Article III of the Constitution.

Constitutional Question: Was Dred Scott free or a slave?

Decision: Dred Scott was a slave. Under Articles III and IV no one but a citizen of the United States could be a citizen of a state. Slaves were property, and he had no rights because he was not a citizen. The Supreme Court reached the conclusion that no person descended from an American slave had ever been a citizen for Article III purposes. The Court then held the Missouri Compromise unconstitutional, hoping to end the slavery question once and for all.

*This case is known as the Dred Scott Decision. This was the most famous case of the Taney era.

Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)   

Facts of the Case: The state of Louisiana enacted a law which stated that there were separate railway cars for blacks and whites, and when Homer Adoph Plessy sat in the white section of the car, he was arrested for refusing to move.

Constitutional Question: Is Louisiana's law mandating racial segregation on its trains an unconstitutional infringement on both the privileges and immunities and the equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment?

Decision:The state law is within constitutional boundaries because it satisfied the separate-but-equal clause as long as blacks and whites were equal. Segregation does not in itself constitute unlawful discrimination.

Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954)   

Facts of the Case: African American children were being denied entrance into public schools attended by Caucasian children.

Constitutional Question: Does the segregation of children in public schools solely on the basis of race deprive the minority children of the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the 14th Amendment?

Decision: Segregation of minorities impedes their ability to learn and grow. their separation is interpreted as a sign of inferiority. It was decided that this separation deprived minority children of the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the 14th Amendment.

Brown v. Board of Education II (1955)

Facts of the Case: After Brown I declared racial discrimination unconstitutional, the Court requested further argument on the issue of relief, due to the embedded nature of racial discrimination in public schools.

Constitutional Question: What means should be used to implement the principles announced in Brown I?

Decision: Local solutions were used, implemented by local courts that originally heard school segregation cases. They were to use principles in the first Brown decision. Warren urged the local courts to promptly issue solutions "with all deliberate speed."

Baker v. Carr (1962)

  Facts about the Case: Charles Baker and other citizens of Tennessee alleged that a law from 1901 regarding the apportioning of seats in the General Assembly was being ignored. The suit went into detail about Tennessee's efforts dealing with reapportionment, and how they ignored significant economic growth and population shifts.

 Constitutional Question: Does the Supreme Court have jurisdiction over legislative appointments?

   Decision: The Court held that such questions weren't present in this case and that legislative apportionment was jusiciable. The Court provided many examples where it had intervened to correct constitutional violations within state administration. The conclusion was that the Fourteenth Amendment merited judicial evaluation.  

Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States (1964)

Facts about the case: The Heart of Atlanta Motel was charged with violating title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by not accepting Black Americans into their motel. Title II forbade racial discrimination by places of public accommodation if their operations affected commerce.

Constitutional Question: Did the U.S., by passing Title II of the Civil Rights Act, deprive motels like the Heart of Atlanta of their right to chooe their own customers?

Decision: The Court decided that The Commerce Clause allowed Congress to regulate local commerce. The Court held in favor of the United States.

Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg County Board of Education (1971)

FACTS: After Brown v. Board of Education, schools were still segregated (Approximately 14,000 black students attended schools that were either totally black or 99% black. Lower courts tried to examine many possibilities for a solution, but the case eventually reached the Supreme Court.

QUESTION: Were federal courts constitutionally authorized to oversee and produce remedies for state-imposed segregation?

DECISION: In a unanimous decision, the Court held that once violations of previous mandates directed at desegregating schools had occurred, the scope of district courts' equitable powers to remedy past wrongs were broad and flexible.

Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978)

Facts of the Case: Allan Bakke, a thirty-year old white man, had twice applied to the University of California and was rejected both times. He contended that he was rejected based on race; sixteen seats out of one hundred were reserved for minorities according to affirmative action laws. He was much better qualified than those accepted in his place.

Constitutional Question: Did the University of California violate the Fourteenth Ammendment equal protection clause, and the Civil Rights Act of 1964, by practicing an affirmative action policy that twice rejected Bakke?

Decision: The rigid use of racial quotas was ruled as unconstitutional.

Boy Scouts of America v. Jim Dale (2000)

  Facts of the Case: The Boy Scouts of America rejected the membership of assistant troop leader, Jim Dale, after finding out that he was a homosexual. Dale filed suit saying that the decision violated the New Jersey statute stating that discrimination on the basis of sexuality in places of public accommodation is illegal.

 Constitutional question: Does the public accommodations law violate the Boy Scouts' First Amendment right of expressive association to not allow homosexual troop leaders?

 Decision: The Supreme Court decided that yes the law does violate the Boy Scouts' First Amendment right because they are a private organization.

Gratz v. Bollinger (2003)

FACTS: In 1995, Jennifer Gratz applied to the University of Michigan's College of Literature, Science and the Arts with an adjusted GPA of 3.8 and ACT score of 25. In 1997, Patrick Hamacher applied to the University with an adjusted GPA of 3.0, and an ACT score of 28. Both were denied admission and attended other schools. The University admits that it uses race as a factor in making admissions decisions because it serves a "compelling interest in achieving diversity among its student body."

QUESTION: Does the University of Michigan's use of racial preferences in undergraduate admissions violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment or Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

DECISION: The court decided yes. The Court held that the University of Michigan's use of racial preferences in undergraduate admissions violates both the Equal Protection Clause and Title VI