More broadly, rushing to sterilization—instead of providing proper rehabilitation of criminals and the ill, and showing compassion to the country’s most vulnerable—highlights the government’s lack of ethical means for achieving utopia. Interestingly, Justice Garrison limits his critique of involuntary sterilization to “unoffending but undesirable members.” He says nothing on criminal offenders, however. His silence on the matter could either represent admirable judicial discipline, or it could suggest that he feels criminals deserve the punishment. To be fair, the latter is more likely in this case; Garrison writes that “criminals and persons confined in penal institutions” simply do not amount to a “present concern.” The progressive era sought …show more content…
This departs greatly from the history of systematic exclusion of certain classes of people from dipping into the same font of rights. As the fourteenth amendment provides, “no state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” Well-established precedent demands that state statutes must follow several key guidelines. First, it “must not only bear alike upon all the individuals of [one] class.” Second, it “must bear some reasonable relation to the legislation.” Third, “mere classification” Fourth, the statute must not only follow “reasonable grounds” but also does not constitute “a mere arbitrary selection.” The New Jersey status makes the very “badge of inferiority” that Justice Brown dismissed as a “construct” in Plessy v. Ferguson stunningly apparent: the State physically marks and disfigures the mentality handicapped with sterilization. It explicitly distinguishes them from the rest of society, and plucks away a fundamental biological right. The Brown court deemed that “if one race be inferior to the other socially, the Constitution of the United States cannot put them upon the same plane,” leaving natural affinities to determine justice. Smith v. Board of Examiners attempts to push back on that notion, and Garrison takes an activist role in securing the rights of the disabled. As Harlan’s dissent in Plessy expresses that the fourteenth amendment should add “greatly to the dignity and glory of American citizenship, and to the security of personal liberty,” not letting classes slip through the cracks. Moreover, “in view of the Constitution, in the eye of the law, there is in this country no superior, dominant, ruling class of citizens.” Sterilization of those with physical handicaps demonstrates clear preference for fully healthy citizens, and elevates able-bodied people to
“ The Better Pick” “No matter how harsh your punishments, you’re not going to get an orderly society unless the culture is in favor of order” (Woon 183). In “Time to Assert American values,” by New York Times and “Rough Justice” by Alejandro Reyes, both passages argue for and against the punishment prescribed in the Michael Fay case. After carefully analyzing the two texts the reader realizes that the article “Rough Justice” has the most relevant and sufficient article to support these arguments because of the way the author uses a sustainable amount of evidence and facts to back up it’s claims, as well as, strong rhetorical appeals. One example of how “Rough Justice” has a stronger appeal to it than “Time to Assert American values,” is its
Marina Vinnichenko Term Paper: Court Case Gong Lum v. Rice Gong Lum v. Rice (1927) stands out as the case within which the U.S. Supreme Court explicitly extended the pernicious doctrine of “separate but equal”. In this case the issue was whether the state of Mississippi was required to provide a Chinese citizen equal protection of the law under the Fourteenth Amendment when he was taxed to pay for public education but was forced to send his daughter to a school for children of color. Mаrtha Lum, the child of the plаintiff of the case, was a citizen of the United States аnd a child of immigrants from China. She enrolled in and аttended the local public consolidated high school at the age of 9, but was told midway through her first day that
The Plessy vs Ferguson court case originated in 1892. On June 7, 1892, Homer Plessy was jailed for sitting in a white car of a Louisiana train. Despite his white complexion, Plessy was considered to be “octoroon” which meant that he was 7/8 white and 1/8 black. Plessy intentionally sat on the white car and announced himself a black. Plessy challenged the separate car act which required that all railroads operating in the state provide “equal but separate accommodations” for White and African-American passengers and prohibited passengers from entering accommodations other than those to which they had been assigned on the basis of their race.
In 1892, in Louisiana, a man who was one- eight black, Homer Plessy agreed with a group of Africa American take part in the test the constitutionality of Louisiana about the law which known as the Separate Car Act. Plessy bought a first- class ticked and board on the car for white people only in New Orleans. Also, Plessy refused to seat in the car for Africa- American which the state law required, so he was arrested and brought to court. In the Criminal Court, Plessy argued that the Fourteen Amendment prohibited racial segregation in front of judge John H. Ferguson who held the state law, and Plessy’s lawyer argued that the separate the transport car between citizens is violation Fourteen Amendment which should be not allow by legislation on
For nearly a century, the United States was occupied by the racial segregation of black and white people. The constitutionality of this “separation of humans into racial or other ethnic groups in daily life” had not been decided until a deliberate provocation to the law was made. The goal of this test was to have a mulatto, someone of mixed blood, defy the segregated train car law and raise a dispute on the fairness of being categorized as colored or not. This test went down in history as Plessy v. Ferguson, a planned challenge to the law during a period ruled by Jim Crow laws and the idea of “separate but equal” without equality for African Americans. This challenge forced the Supreme Court to rule on the constitutionality of segregation, and in result of the case, caused the nation to have split opinions of support and
By the 1950’s, America’s illusively plaid appearance was being disrupted by a growing multitude of problems: increasing visibility of poverty, rising frustrations from African American communities, and a growing angst concerning America’s position in the world. In response, the United States’ leaders sustained their constitutional promise to promote the general warfare of society, by confidently indorsing policies that directly attacked these problems-to the best of their ability. When President Lyndon Johnson, Kennedy’s successor, sworn into office, he believed in the active use of power and legislation. “Between 1963 and 1966, he compiled the most impressive legislative record of any president since Franklin Roosevelt” (Brinkley 784). Among
In chapter four of Freakonomics, Levitt and Dubner discuss the criminal activity occurring in the United states and what the possible causes are for the decrease of crime rate in the 1990’s. The authors bring up several theories as to why the crime rates have decreased such as policemen, stricter gun laws, drug market changes and even abortion laws. Levitt and Dubner do a really good job in explaining the different theories in the decrease of crimes. The authors also provide very interesting points that might make you think differently about something. Some factors may seem hard to believe but it can cause a great impact in society like abortion.
As current time and social status are being challenged and pushed, the Jim Crow Laws were implemented. These state and local laws were just legislated this year, 1877. New implemented laws mandate segregation in all public facilities, with a “separate but equal” status for African Americans. This may lead to treatment and accommodations that are inferior to those provided to white Americans, systematizing a number of economic, educational, and social disadvantages.
Police have faced armed white people that were threatening to shoot and the worst punishment they were given was arrest. While the criminals were yelling threats towards them, the police were trying to calm them down and get them to put down their weapons for even up to an hour long. There has been similar moments with non white people that were unarmed and causing no harm but still the police chose to shoot the offender for the slightest threat. The police need to keep everyone secure no matter what without considering a person 's ethnicity. Police are supposed to be heroes, grant us safety, and end the day with justice.
The disabled prisoner is considered the least taken cared for because no “special” rights were issued to them. Think about it a prisoner with no legs or no arms and they need assistance but the correction officer opens the cell doors he does not care at all. So around forty years ago president jimmy carter signed a document that stated “The Rehabilitation Act was created to apply to federal executive agencies “so in sort term that meant that disabled prisoners will receive care for all of those years with the disability. And now some but not “all” prisons give the prisoners assistance or give them prosthetics every day inmates who have this tragic disability are routinely denied their aid on a daily basis. Which makes that a nightmarish survival
The 14th Amendment right to equal protection as recognized under Baker v Carr designed on the surface to ensure fair participation in the democratic process, however, it is more so a check on the majority. As Baker v Carr introduces, the 14th Amendment does not cover all types of discrimination. For example, discrimination by the means of improper districting of a state, intentional or not, is not covered by the Constitution. However, what the 14th Amendment does do effectively is put a check on the majority will through rights. The majority rules and the only way to prevent this is through rights, which dictate what people are and are not allowed to do.
Ideally, being able to elect judges seems like a fair concept. Both parties present a field candidate and the voters decide which to choose; however, this system is flawed. Not only is it difficult for the people to obtain any real information about their candidates, there is also the issue of “…Texas justice being sold to the highest bidder.” As a result, many cases have been influenced because of these generous contributions to the candidates. Rather than electing judicial officials, Texas should adopt a system of having a governor, or the Senate, appoint its judges, then every few years, voters sustain the right to retain those judges if they so desire.
Women in the Progressive Era The Progressive Era was a time of change across America, a time when the country chose to reform into an industrialized urban country. Prosperity was widespread across America, so people turned to social issues to try to expand. Minorities in particular became a focus of this time period, and everyone tried to find a way to integrate them into society.
Racial inequality has plagued our society for centuries and has been described as a “black eye” on American history. It wasn’t until the passing of The Civil Rights Act of 1965 that minorities were given equal protection under the law. This was a crucial step on our society’s road to reconciling this injustice. However, the effects of past racial inequality are still visible to this day, and our society still wrestles with how to solve this issue. In 1965, President Lyndon B Johnson said: “You do not take a person who, for years, has been hobbled by chains and liberate him, bring him up to the starting line of a race and then say you are free to compete with all the others, and still just believe that you have been completely fair.
It was revealed by a survey carried out by National Consumer Council how unhappy and unsatisfactory people were with the Civil Justice System. The main weaknesses identified were that the system being too slow, too complicated for ordinary people to understand and too outdated and costly. In the continued criticism of the system Lord Woolf was appointed by the government who came up with suggestions and solutions to overcome these problems. As a result Civil Procedure Rules came into force on 26th April 1999 introducing different reforms to the system. The rationale of the reforms was to avoid litigation and promote settlement between the parties at dispute.