The Equal Protection in the USA - Essay Example

? Equal Protection Equal Protection As people interact in any society, each should be accorded equal rights and privileges as other individuals unless there are pressing interests that dictate otherwise. This ensures that there is equal protection of individuals’ rights in such a society. The Equal Protection Clause The equal protection clause was part of the 14th amendment that got done to the constitution of the United States. The clause came into effect in 1868. It provides that no state in the country shall deny to any person the equal protection of the laws. In regard to this clause, the amendment acknowledges that all people get created equal and should be treated as such. The clause further acknowledges the three fundamental aspects of human beings as life, emancipation and search for happiness (Lee, 2003). It is worth seeking the background of equal protection in the US. The idea started back in 1766 when Thomas Jefferson and the American colonists declared the hidden truth about human equality. However, the meaning of this concept was never clearly understood by people at that time. Slavery got incorporated in all systems of the United States including its economy, political and community relationships. A constitution got drafted in the US that allowed slave masters to involve in the slave trade with black slaves getting regarded as personal property owned by slave masters (Peoples & Bailey, 2012). The fourteenth amendment of the US constitution provided the most fundamental civic rights in the history of the US in regard to equal protection by the law. Section I of the amendment states that all individuals born or who got naturalized in the United States are citizens of the country. The amendment further acknowledges that none of these citizens should be deprived of any rights provided in the amendment in respect to equal protection (Lee, 2003). It is worth noting that the amendment, however, provided occasions where this law cannot apply. For such an occasion to be granted by law, it must have a pressing national interest. The clause got applauded by black Americans for bringing equal voting rights in the country which were not previously provided. The clause got interpreted by the Supreme Court in the US in the 19th century. It, however, remained the center of civil rights movements during and after the Second World War. Black people in the US could enjoy their civic rights as it was the case with any other citizen. The law provided affirmative action that sought to promote equal treatment and concern for all races in the country (Lee, 2003). The equal protection clause came during a period referred to as the Reconstruction era in the US. During this period the South came under military occupation from the North. This resulted in black Americans realizing some short term benefits as a result of the situation (Peoples & Bailey, 2012). Black people could be elected to office in state governments as well as the federal government. Among some of the most famous accomplishments of the black people was one African American who managed to get a seat on the South Carolina Supreme Court. Race-Based Classifications Traditionally, race and nationality were the only classifications that could be made of people. Although, with time other approaches got adopted, classifications based on race have remained prevalent in America. In 1977, the Office of Budget Management issued the race and ethnic standards that were to be used for federal statistics and administrative reporting. Prior to issuing these standards, OMB sought public opinion on the standards and their efficiency in reflecting the national outlook and expectations of the people of United States. Since 1960’s the federal government has collected statistics on race and ethnicity during its census. This data has proved vital in addressing civic issues such as employment, voting rights, housing and mortgage lending, as well as healthcare services. However, this data has not always served its purpose efficiently. In recent times, the classification got criticized for not reflecting the country’s diversity. As a result, additional standards have been needed so that these standards reflect the country’s diversity. These changes will seek to address legislative and programmatic needs of these statistics (Peoples & Bailey, 2012). While these changes promise to be helpful in improving racial-based classifications in the United States, there is a need to ensure that they work according to the provisions of the concept of equal protection of law as stated in the equal protection clause. Setting the Stage for Equal Protection In order for the benefits of equal protection to be realized fully, both citizens and the federal government of the United States should seek to establish a common ground on which equal protection of all people by the constitution can be assessed. One factor that promotes equal protection in any society is the establishment of a common judicial system under which all citizens get treated equally. In the United States, the Supreme Court is the final and the highest court in the judicial system (Hames, 2013). Its decision is always final. The Judicial System in the United States can, therefore, be regarded as the most fundamental tool in ensuring equal protection of citizens. The second tool that can be used to set the stage for equal protection is the government. Government in this context gets used to refer to both the federal government and the states governments. Both governments should be seen to promote laws that give people freedom of identity. Laws that stress on the identity of people along discriminatory lines such as race should not under normal circumstances be adopted. This case should hold at all times unless there is a pressing interest to do otherwise. The citizens equally play an integral role in establishing and promoting equal protection of all people in any country. Civic education can help citizens change their attitude towards marginalized groups in society. Unless citizens acknowledge the importance of promoting equality in the society, the level of success of this idea will remain relatively low (Peoples & Bailey, 2012). Equality as a Constitution Value "Dred Scott v. Sandford" In the Dred Scott v. Snaford case, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that all African Americans could not be citizens and, therefore, lacked the capacity to take a case to a federal court (Hall, 2006). The judges further stated that the federal government could not regulate slavery in any of its states acquired after the creation of the United States. Although the decision was an attempt to stop a civil war, it ended up fuelling one. In the case, Dred Scott who was slave travelled with his master from Missouri, where he got born, to Illinois, which during this time was a free territory. Scott sought to be granted freedom by his master from the lower courts. However, when this case got to the Supreme Court, the decision got reversed on account that Scott was not a citizen of the United States and could not, therefore, sue his master in a federal court. What followed was a civil war that spread all over the United States as African Americans who got born in the US sought to be recognized constitutionally as citizens of the country. This series of civil wars necessitated the need to amend the federal constitution so as to recognize black people born in the US as citizens of the country. The above case played a vital role in bringing equality in the constitution of the United States. The fourteenth amendment of the federal constitution of the United States consequently overturned the ruling in the above case and gave black people born in the country equal citizenship rights as their white counterparts (Hames, 2013). Classifications that interfere with Fundamental Rights "Shapiro v. Thompson" As an addition to laws that classify people along racial lines, laws that deny fundamental rights to groups of people while providing these rights to other groups have been heavily criticized. However, it is worth noting that, for a group of people to claim to have been denied equal fundamental rights, there should be privileges that get enjoyed by other groups and, which the oppressed group does not get entitled to enjoy (Emanuel, 2008). In the case, Shapiro v. Thompson, the Supreme Court had to establish what a fundamental right to travel as per the provision of the United States’ laws could be taken to mean. The constitution of the US did not provide the right to travel. However, this privilege got provided in other rights found in the constitution. In the case, Vivian Marie Thompson had applied to get relief in the program, Aids to Families with Dependent Children. However, this application could not be granted since Vivian, who was a 19 year old mother of one child and pregnant with another, had moved from her residential place in Dorchester to Hartford. Her application for the aid could not be granted because she had not lived in that area for a time of more than a year prior to her application for the aid. This was one of the provisions for one to be given this aid. When the case got brought to the District court in the state, a bench of three judges ruled that the provision that one had to have stayed in the state for a period of more than one year prior to their application for aid was unconstitutional. This was because it interfered with the fundamental rights of individuals to travel in the country. The case addressed the required period of residence for an individual to access his or her rights in a new state. In their ruling, the judges stated that the Congress did not have the power to approve violation of the equal protection clause (Del, 2013). As such, all individuals living in a state got subjected to equal fundamental rights regardless of the time they had been in that state. This case illustrated how the clause on equal protection should be applied in regard to fundamental rights provided in the constitution of the United States. References Del, C. R. V. (2013). Criminal procedure: Law and practice. New York: Wiley. Emanuel, S. (2008). Constitutional law. Austin: Wolters Kluwer Law & Business. Hall, K. L. (2006). The Oxford companion to American law. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press. Hames, J. B., & Ekern, Y. (2013). Constitutional law: Principles and practice. Clifton Park, NY: Delmar Cengage Learning. Lee, F. G. (2003). Equal protection: Rights and liberties under the law. Santa Barbara, Calif. [u.a.: ABC-CLIO. Peoples, J. G., & Bailey, G. A. (2012). Humanity: An introduction to cultural anthropology. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. Read More