Citizens' Rights and Equal Rights

1. The Constitution lists the powers of and limits on the federal government, but the Bill of Rights lists the guaranteed freedoms of the people. List four rights, each from a different amendment, and explain each. Are the rights you have chosen absolute? What is the Lemon test? Explain. [MO2.1, MO2.3]

The First Amendment guarantees the freedom of speech, assembly, religion, the press and the right to petition the government for the redress of grievances; the Second Amendment guarantees the right to bear arms; the Fifth Amendment guarantees the right to due process and the right against self-incrimination; and, the Eighth Amendment guarantees protection from cruel and unusual punishments. None of these rights, though, are absolute and can be restricted depending on the circumstances. For instance, the First Amendment protections of free speech are limited in those cases where such speech represents a threat to public safety (e.g., yelling Fire in a crowded theater).

The Lemon test was established by the Supreme Court to determine whether a law or other government action might promote a particular religion in violation of the First Amendment. The Lemon test has three criteria: 1) The law or action must not result in excessive government entanglement with religion; 2) the law or action cannot inhibit or advance one particular religion over another; and, 3) the law or action must be justified by some secular purpose (Krutz, 2017, 4.2).

2. Consider the Brandenburg v. Ohio case (1969). What is the current test limiting free speech, what is symbolic speech, and is any speech protected? [MO2.1, MO2.3]

In the 1969 case of Brandenburg v. Ohio, the Supreme Court held that speech or writing that directly calls for imminent lawless action, meaning an illegal act that is about to occur, can be restricted. The Court also held that symbolic forms speech, such as wearing clothes with a political symbol or raising a clenched fist in the air, are provided the same protections as written or spoken communications. In sum, just advocating a hypothetical revolution or the use of symbolic speech is insufficient to justify suppression (Krutz, 2017, 4.2).

3. The due process clause has wide application. Explain procedural due process and its relationship to the exclusionary rule, unreasonable searches and seizure, the plain view exception, good faith exceptions, and other rights of the accused. [MO2.1, MO2.3]

Procedural due process requires that government officials must follow established legal procedures and provide individuals with notice and an opportunity to be heard when seeking to deprive them of life, liberty, or property. Part of procedural due process is the exclusionary rule which prohibits the use of evidence obtained through an unconstitutional search or seizure in court and Fourth Amendment protections prevent unreasonable searches and seizures. In addition, the plain view exception permits law enforcement authorities to seize...…action programs attempt to end both? Summarize Bakke v. California (1978). What impact did it have on affirmative action programs? [MO2.2, MO2.4]

De jure discrimination is overt such as actions taken by law enforcement authorities while de facto discrimination is origin-neutral discrimination such as segregated housing or educational facilities based on policies or laws that are not discriminatory on their face (Muller, 2017). In Bakke v. California, the Supreme Court upheld affirmative action and held that colleges and universities were permitted to take race into account when making admissions decisions but they could not set racial quotas since this would violate the Equal Protection Clause (Krutz, 2017, 5.2).

8. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 are milestones in the continuing struggle to promote equality within American society. Describe both pieces of legislation and their significance. [MO2.2, MO2.4]

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 prohibited any state from denying or otherwise abridging the right to vote based on individuals race. The Voting Rights Act is significant because it was perhaps the most powerful instrument for challenging racially discriminatory voting laws (Voting Rights Act, 2020, p. 862). Likewise, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which prohibited discrimination based on race, religion, sex or national origin was also significant because. By virtually every indicator, [it] was more effective than Brown and the lower courts enforcement of Brown in desegregating public schools (Gagnon, 2022,…