Historical Significance of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 In 1964, the United States passed one of its strongest civil rights laws in history, the Civil Rights Act. The act bans discrimination because of a person's color, race, national origin, religion, or sex. It primarily protects the rights of African Americans and other minorities. Major features of the Civil Rights Act include the freedom to vote and use hotels, restaurants, theaters, parks, and all other public places. The law also encouraged the desegregation of public schools and authorized the withdrawal of federal funds from programs practicing discrimination.
According to Bowles, 2012, slavery began the civil war which led to further violence which in turn led to segregation. But just because this was the end of slavery, does not mean that the military leaders nor politicians can change the ingrained cultural beliefs of a people. The country was split between the North and the South; Northern white and in the Southern Blacks. African-Americans such as Malcolm X, Rosa Parks, and even more recent Barrack Obama have made significant steps to improve and even stop segregation. According to Bowles, 2011, American History 1865 to present End of Isolation, The Black Codes codified some of these feelings into law when in 1865 southern state governments created legislation that restricted and controlled the lives of the ex-slaves.
The Civil Rights Movement was a time during the 1950’s and 1960’s to eliminate segregation and gain equal rights. In order to determine whether the Civil Rights movement was able to create change in America, one must assess the extent to which social and political was changed by the movement. Socially, people were separated and treated unequally depending on their race. Politically, to bring justice to race equality by passing the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Voting Rights Act within the nation. Thus, the Civil Rights movement was able to create significant social and political change in America.
The tradition of liberalism includes “the values of equality, individualism, protection of religious freedom, and democracy (Hartz, 3)”. However, earlier years of American society indicate that Hartz theory contradicts the inequality and hate faced by women, blacks, and minority groups. Hartz’s belief that America could never become a victim of socialism and feudalism, made him conclude that individual freedom, equality, and democracy was part of American society and there was no way America could escape
The reason that they are not today is because of popular sovereignty. He argued that each state has the right to determine whether or not they shall be a free or slave state. The federal government does not have or deserve the right to restrict slavery. If popular sovereignty were in action, then perhaps all of the states would eventually abolish slavery as the other states before them had. Douglas reaffirms that slavery is mentioned in the constitution; which means that the act of slavery is protected in the constitution.
Double Jeopardy Aissata Sy Kaplan University Double Jeopardy Many of the amendments concern individuals’ right and liberties. Under many of the amendments we as the people are protected from the government. Who know what it would be for us, if the government have all the power to control our lives and they can use power however they like. I think that our founding father did great job with the constitution of the United States, they make sure the power of the government is not over the control. The fifth amendment of the United States constitutions give an individual right from being prosecuted twice for substantially on the crime.
The fourteenth amendment has been used to successfully used to fight against segregation and discrimination because while states have dominion over those peoples and those facilities within their confines they cannot discriminate against those people because those people are in large, part of the United States, and those in the United States have uninalienble rights granted to them by the Constitution that no state can take away. Martin Luther King’s nonviolent acts of direct civil disobedience held a large impact on the civil rights movement. He showed that you could directly take action against laws you thought were unjust in a civil peaceful manner of descent. In 1896 Justice John Harlan spoke out against segregation saying that “Our Constitution is color-blind and neither knows nor tolerates classes among its citizens.” The Constitution should be blind to the color of your skin, to your religion, to your gender, and anything else that tries to label you in a way other than U.S. citizen. In regards to the economy the role of gender should not apply, but it usually does though not usually through intentional discrimination.
The Federalists favoured a strong central government and Democratic Republicans defended the rights of the individual states.In this context many Americans feared that a powerful central government would violate the basic liberties of the American people, and therefore in 1791, the Congress added the first 10 amendments to the Constitution. These are known as the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights guaranteed freedom of religion, a free press, freedom of speech, the right of citizens to bear arms, protection against illegal house searches, the right to a fair trial by jury and protection against cruel and unusual
Due Process Due process refers to the rights that the federal government must respect in terms of individual citizens according to the law. Due process goes further to provide some level of protection from the state (Roach, 1999). Judges must uphold due process by accurately interpreting the laws so that the rights of individual citizens are protected. Procedural due process falls under the rights afforded to American citizens under the Fourteenth Amendment. This ensures that those standing trial receive a fair trial which includes the ability to appear before a judge (Roach, 1999).
All laws are created to serve a purpose, these purposes may vary, some are formed to protect the personal rights and properties of citizens, other laws were enacted to serve a particular political interest. Within this paper i will attempt to present the differing viewpoints regarding why and how the anti-terrorist laws subvert the rule of law and how its procedures can be assumed to be a source of dysfunction in a society. The fundamental principles of laws are to protect and serve justice within a state. The entails equality and equity for everyone within a state regardless of their political beliefs, economic status, and ethnic background. In order to fully understand the nature of any law, it must be carefully questioned.