Equal Protection Clause

2010:(2023), the Supreme Court held that race and ethnicity cannot be used in admissions decisions. In other words, preferential treatment based on race or ethnicity violates The Equal Protection Clause. Although "nothing in this opinion should be construed as prohibiting universities from considering an applicant's discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise," Chief Justice Roberts made it clear that "universities may not simply establish through application essays or other means the regime we hold unlawful today." Moreover, "what cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly." These opinions effectively ended affirmative action in schools. Although the scope and reach of these opinions are unknown, it is not uncommon for Supreme Court cases' rationale to be applied to similar or analogous facts or circumstances. 619:

Thirteenth Amendment the South began to institute Black Codes which were restrictive laws seeking to keep black Americans in a position of inferiority. The Fourteenth amendment was ratified by nervous Republicans in response to the rise of Black Codes. This ratification was irregular in many ways. First, there were multiple states that rejected the Fourteenth Amendment, but when their new governments were created due to reconstruction, these new governments accepted the amendment. There were also two states, Ohio and New Jersey, that accepted the amendment and then later passed resolutions rescinding that acceptance. The nullification of the two states' acceptance was considered illegitimate and both Ohio and New Jersey were included in those counted as ratifying the amendment.

686: 1893:, Congress enacted programs primarily to assist newly freed slaves who had personally been denied many advantages earlier in their lives, based on their former slave status, not necessarily their race or ethnicity. Such legislation was enacted by many of the same people who framed the Equal Protection Clause, though that clause did not apply to such federal legislation, and instead only applied to state legislation. However, now the Equal Protection Clause does apply to private universities and possibly other private businesses (particularly those who accept federal funds), in accordance with 916:

first known published count by a scholar), the Supreme Court interpreted the Fourteenth Amendment in 312 cases dealing with the rights of corporations but in only 28 cases dealing with the rights of African Americans. Thus, the Fourteenth Amendment was used primarily by corporations to attack laws that regulated corporations, not to protect the formerly enslaved people from racial discrimination. Granting rights under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to business corporations was introduced into Supreme Court jurisprudence through a series of sleights of hands.

1604:" policy in New York allows officers to stop anyone who they feel looks suspicious. Data from police stops shows that even when controlling for variability, people who are black and those of Hispanic descent were stopped more frequently than white people, with these statistics dating back to the late 1990s. A term that has been created to describe the disproportionate number of police stops of black people is "Driving While Black." This term is used to describe the stopping of innocent black people who are not committing any crime. 1995:—that the scrutiny the Court has applied in some cases is much less searching than true strict scrutiny, and that the Court has acted not as a principled legal institution but as a biased political one. On the other side, it is argued that the purpose of the Equal Protection Clause is to prevent the socio-political subordination of some groups by others, not to prevent classification; since this is so, non-invidious classifications, such as those used by affirmative action programs, should not be subjected to heightened scrutiny. 1376:(2007), the Court held that, if a school system became racially imbalanced due to social factors other than governmental racism, then the state is not as free to integrate schools as if the state had been at fault for the racial imbalance. This is especially evident in the charter school system where parents of students can pick which schools their children attend based on the amenities provided by that school and the needs of the child. It seems that race is a factor in the choice of charter school. 1018: 452: 44: 1246: 1584:; if a legislature wants to correct unintentional but racially disparate effects, it may be able to do so through further legislation. It is possible for a discriminating state to hide its true intention, and one possible solution is for disparate impact to be considered as stronger evidence of discriminatory intent. This debate, though, is currently academic, since the Supreme Court has not changed its basic approach as outlined in 784: 4766: 929:

the Court that he, as a member of the Committee that drafted this amendment to the Constitutional, knew that this is what the Committee had intended. Legal historians in the 20th Century examined the history of the drafting of the Fourteenth Amendment and found that Conkling had fabricated the notion that the Committee had intended the term "person" of the Fourteenth Amendment to encompass corporations. This

1597:(1987). In that case a black man was convicted of murdering a white police officer and sentenced to death in the state of Georgia. A study found that killers of whites were more likely to be sentenced to death than were killers of blacks. The Court found that the defense had failed to prove that such data demonstrated the requisite discriminatory intent by the Georgia legislature and executive branch. 640:

that knowing the evils and injustice the Fourteenth Amendment was meant to combat is key in our legal understanding of its implications and purpose. With the abridgment of the Privileges or Immunities clause, legal arguments aimed at protecting black American's rights became more complex and that is when the equal protection clause started to gain attention for the arguments it could enhance.

949:, drafted the "syllabus" (summary) of Supreme Court decisions and the "headnotes" that summarized key points of law held by the Court. These were published before each case as part of the official court publication communicating the law of the land as held by the Supreme Court. A headnote that Davis as court reporter published immediately preceding the court opinion in Santa Clara case stated: 3835:, Vol. 79, p. 685 (1991). Farber and Frickey point out that "only Chief Justice Hughes, Justice Brandeis, and Justice Roberts joined Justice Stone's footnote", and in any event "It is simply a myth ... that the process theory of footnote four in Carolene Products is, or ever has been, the primary justification for invalidating laws embodying prejudice against racial minorities." 1370:, or due to Congressional action, or due to societal change, the percentage of black students attending majority-black school districts decreased somewhat until the early 1980s, at which point that percentage began to increase. By the late 1990s, the percentage of black students in mostly minority school districts had returned to about what it was in the late 1960s. In 2106: 3280:, Justice Field had urged the Court to address precisely this issue by endorsing such corporate rights on Fourteenth Amendment grounds, and he harshly criticized his fellow justices for failing to do so. (Adam Winkler, "We the Corporations, How American Businesses Won Their Corporate Rights" (New York: Liveright Publishing Corporation, 2018) pp. 156-157) 2163:

opportunities in education, employment, and other areas. The U.S. Constitution makes a similar provision in the Fourteenth Amendment. It says that no state shall make or enforce any law that will "deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law." These provisions require the government to treat persons equally and impartially.

4514:(July 1, 2013): "There is another similarity between his opinion in Windsor and his earlier ones in Romer and Lawrence: the Supreme Court invalidated the law without using heightened scrutiny for sexual-orientation discrimination ... A law based on animus fails to meet even rational-basis review so there was no need to adopt a higher level of scrutiny." 1224:, from publishing any concurring opinion; Jackson's draft, which emerged much later (in 1988), included this statement: "Constitutions are easier amended than social customs, and even the North never fully conformed its racial practices to its professions". The Court set the case for re-argument on the question of how to implement the decision. In 3272:, the corporation that had filed these lawsuits, and, as a Supreme Court justice and federal appellate judge for years, had a pro-corporationist agenda. (Adam Winkler, "We the Corporations, How American Businesses Won Their Corporate Rights" (New York: Liveright Publishing Corporation, 2018) pp. 140-143.) Justice Field must have known that in the 1617: 1608:

doctrine heavily relies on the ability of neutral evaluative tools to engage in neutral selection procedures, racial biases indirectly permitted under the doctrine can have grave ramifications and result in 'uneven conditions.' ' These issues can be especially prominent in areas of public benefits, employment, and college admissions, etc.'

961:"MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE said: 'The Court does not wish to hear argument on the question of whether the provision in the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution which forbids a state to deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws applies to these corporations. We are all of the opinion that it does.'" 660:

to a member of one caste while another and a different measure is meted out to the member of another caste, both castes being alike citizens of the United States, both bound to obey the same laws, to sustain the burdens of the same Government, and both equally responsible to justice and to God for the deeds done in the body?

1398:(1954), has been interpreted as imposing some of the same restrictions on the federal government: "Though the Fifth Amendment does not contain an equal protection clause, as does the Fourteenth Amendment which applies only to the States, the concepts of equal protection and due process are not mutually exclusive." In 1488:". Strict scrutiny means that a challenged statute must be "narrowly tailored" to serve a "compelling" government interest, and must not have a "less restrictive" alternative. In contrast, rational basis scrutiny merely requires that a challenged statute be "reasonably related" to a "legitimate" government interest. 3228: (1886). John C. Bancroft was a former railway company president. In the summary of the case Bancroft wrote that the Court declared that it did not need to hear argument on whether the Equal Protection Clause protected corporations, because "we are all of the opinion that it does." Id. at 396. Chief Justice 1404:(2003) the Supreme Court added: "Equality of treatment and the due process right to demand respect for conduct protected by the substantive guarantee of liberty are linked in important respects, and a decision on the latter point advances both interests" Some scholars have argued that the Court's decision in 1975:, the Court invalidated Michigan's undergraduate admissions policy, on the grounds that unlike the law school's policy, which treated race as one of many factors in an admissions process that looked to the individual applicant, the undergraduate policy used a point system that was excessively mechanistic. 1863:

that the fundamental right to marry is guaranteed to same-sex couples by both the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and required all states to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples and to recognize same-sex marriages

1729:

Originally, the Fourteenth Amendment did not forbid sex discrimination to the same extent as other forms of discrimination. On the one hand, Section Two of the amendment specifically discouraged states from interfering with the voting rights of "males", which made the amendment anathema to many women

681:

Bingham said in a speech on March 31, 1871 that the clause meant no State could deny anyone "the equal protection of the Constitution of the United States ... any of the rights which it guarantees to all men", nor deny to anyone "any right secured to him either by the laws and treaties of the United

659:

It prohibits the hanging of a black man for a crime for which the white man is not to be hanged. It protects the black man in his fundamental rights as a citizen with the same shield which it throws over the white man. Ought not the time to be now passed when one measure of justice is to be meted out

577:

President Andrew Johnson vetoed the Civil Rights Act of 1866 amid concerns (among other things) that Congress did not have the constitutional authority to enact such a bill. Such doubts were one factor that led Congress to begin to draft and debate what would become the Equal Protection Clause of the

1766:

a suspect class. Many commentators have noted, however—and Justice Thurgood Marshall so notes in his partial concurrence—that the Court did appear to examine the City of Cleburne's denial of a permit to a group home for intellectually disabled people with a significantly higher degree of

1215:

To separate from others of similar age and qualifications solely because of their race generates a feeling of inferiority as to their status in the community that may affect their hearts and minds in a way unlikely ever to be undone ... We conclude that in the field of public education the doctrine

915:

In the decades after ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, the vast majority of Supreme Court cases interpreting the Fourteenth Amendment dealt with the rights of corporations, not with the rights of African Americans. In the period 1868–1912 (from ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment to the

622:

Many historians have argued that Fourteenth Amendment was not originally intended to grant sweeping political and social rights to the citizens but instead to solidify the constitutionality of the 1866 Civil rights Act. While it is widely agreed that this was a key reason for the ratification of the

1832:

While the courts have applied rational-basis scrutiny to classifications based on sexual orientation, it has been argued that discrimination based on sex should be interpreted to include discrimination based on sexual orientation, in which case intermediate scrutiny could apply to gay rights cases.

1206:

had already come before the Court. While Vinson was still Chief Justice, there had been a preliminary vote on the case at a conference of all nine justices. At that time, the Court had split, with a majority of the justices voting that school segregation did not violate the Equal Protection Clause.

928:

before the Supreme Court in 1882. In this case, the issue was whether corporations are "persons" within the meaning of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Conkling argued that corporations were included in the meaning of the term person and thus entitled to such rights. He told

1780:

constitutional amendment aimed at denying homosexuals "minority status, quota preferences, protected status or claim of discrimination." The Court rejected as "implausible" the dissent's argument that the amendment would not deprive homosexuals of general protections provided to everyone else but

668:

proposed the Fourteenth Amendment on June 13, 1866. A difference between the initial and final versions of the clause was that the final version spoke not just of "equal protection" but of "the equal protection of the laws". John Bingham said in January 1867: "no State may deny to any person the

639:

in which it was determined that a citizen's privileges and immunities were only ensured at the Federal level and that it was government overreach to impose this standard on the states. Even in this halting decision the Court still acknowledged the context in which the Amendment was passed, stating

467:

Though equality under the law is an American legal tradition arguably dating to the Declaration of Independence, formal equality for many groups remained elusive. Before passage of the Reconstruction Amendments, which included the Equal Protection Clause, American law did not extend constitutional

437:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall

1607:

In addition to concerns that a discriminating statute can hide its true intention, there have also been concerns that facially neutral evaluative and statistical devices that are permitted by decision-makers can be subject to racial bias and unfair appraisals of ability.' As the equal protection

774:

excluding blacks from serving on juries. Exclusion of blacks from juries, the Court concluded, was a denial of equal protection to black defendants, since the jury had been "drawn from a panel from which the State has expressly excluded every man of race." At the same time, the Court explicitly

643:

During the debate in Congress, more than one version of the clause was considered. Here is the first version: "The Congress shall have power to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper to secure ... to all persons in the several states equal protection in the rights of life, liberty, and

3232:

announced from the bench that the Court would not hear argument on the question whether the equal protection clause applied to corporations: "We are all of the opinion that it does." The background and developments from this utterance are treated in H. Graham, Everyman's Constitution--Historical

997:

as established precedent that the Fourteenth Amendment guaranteed equal protection of the law and due process rights for corporations, even though in the Santa Clara case the Supreme Court held or stated no such thing. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the clause was used to strike down

886:

that the statute in question had its origin in the purpose, not so much to exclude white persons from railroad cars occupied by blacks, as to exclude colored people from coaches occupied by or assigned to white persons ... n view of the Constitution, in the eye of the law, there is in this

1536:

Because inequalities can be caused either intentionally or unintentionally, the Supreme Court has decided that the Equal Protection Clause itself does not forbid governmental policies that unintentionally lead to racial disparities, though Congress may have some power under other clauses of the

779:

and other types of discrimination, saying that states "may confine the selection to males, to freeholders, to citizens, to persons within certain ages, or to persons having educational qualifications. We do not believe the Fourteenth Amendment was ever intended to prohibit this. ... Its aim was

720:

Marriage is a civil contract, and in that character alone is dealt with by the municipal law. The same right to make a contract as is enjoyed by white citizens, means the right to make any contract which a white citizen may make. The law intended to destroy the distinctions of race and color in

1881:

is the consideration of race, gender, or other factors, to benefit an underrepresented group or to address past injustices done to that group. Individuals who belong to the group are preferred over those who do not belong to the group, for example in educational admissions, hiring, promotions,

1684:

Harlan also relied on the fact that Section Two of the Fourteenth Amendment "expressly recognizes the States' power to deny 'or in any way' abridge the right of their inhabitants to vote for 'the members of the Legislature.'" Section Two of the Fourteenth Amendment provides a specific federal

605:

states were opposed to the Civil Rights Act, but in 1865 Congress, exercising its power under Article I, Section 5, Clause 1 of the Constitution, to "be the Judge of the ... Qualifications of its own Members", had excluded Southerners from Congress, declaring that their states, having rebelled

2162:

The basic intent of equal protection is to make sure that people are treated as equally as possible under our legal system. For example, it is to see that everyone who gets a speeding ticket will face the samEpocedures . A further intent is to ensure that all Americans are provided with equal

819:

dissented alone, saying, "I cannot resist the conclusion that the substance and spirit of the recent amendments of the Constitution have been sacrificed by a subtle and ingenious verbal criticism." Harlan went on to argue that because (1) "public conveyances on land and water" use the public

497:

and determined black men, whether free or in bondage, had no legal rights under the U.S. Constitution at the time. Currently, a plurality of historians believe that this judicial decision set the United States on the path to the Civil War, which led to the ratifications of the Reconstruction

618:

With the return to originalist interpretations of the Constitution, many wonder what was intended by the framers of the reconstruction amendments at the time of their ratification. The Thirteenth Amendment abolished slavery but to what extent it protected other rights was unclear. After the

369:, which guaranteed that all citizens would have the guaranteed right to equal protection by law. As a whole, the Fourteenth Amendment marked a large shift in American constitutionalism, by applying substantially more constitutional restrictions against the states than had applied before the 9056: 1197:

In 1954 the contextualization of the equal protection clause would change forever. The Supreme Court itself recognized the gravity of the Brown v Board decision acknowledging that a split decision would be a threat to the role of the Supreme Court and even to the country. When

644:

property." Bingham said about this version: "It confers upon Congress power to see to it that the protection given by the laws of the States shall be equal in respect to life and liberty and property to all persons." The main opponent of the first version was Congressman

1512:

argued for only one level of scrutiny, given that "there is only one Equal Protection Clause". The whole tiered strategy developed by the Court is meant to reconcile the principle of equal protection with the reality that most laws necessarily discriminate in some way.

3151: (1830), in which Chief Justice Marshall wrote: "The great object of an incorporation is to bestow the character and properties of individuality on a collective and changing body of men." Nevertheless, the concept of corporate personhood remains controversial. See 882:. All that was therefore required of the law was reasonableness, and Louisiana's railway law amply met that requirement, being based on "the established usages, customs and traditions of the people." Justice Harlan again dissented. "Every one knows," he wrote, 630:

Although the equal protection clause is one of the most cited ideas in legal theory, it received little attention during the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment. Instead the key tenet of the Fourteenth Amendment at the time of its ratification was the

933:

case was settled by the parties without the Supreme Court issuing an opinion however the Court's misunderstanding of the intention of the Amendment's drafters that had been created by Conkling's likely deliberate deception was never corrected at the time.

1133:, which educated blacks and whites at separate institutions. The Court (again through Chief Justice Vinson, and again with no dissenters) invalidated the school system—not because it separated students, but rather because the separate facilities were not 1475:

When the law lays an unequal hand on those who have committed intrinsically the same quality of offense and sterilizes one and not the other, it has made as invidious a discrimination as if it had selected a particular race or nationality for oppressive

610:" Congress—that permitted the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment by Congress and subsequently proposed to the states. The ratification of the amendment by the former Confederate states was imposed as a condition of their acceptance back into the Union. 1108:

had admitted McLaurin, an African-American, but had restricted his activities there: he had to sit apart from the rest of the students in the classrooms and library, and could eat in the cafeteria only at a designated table. A unanimous Court, through

837:

These provisions are universal in their application to all persons within the territorial jurisdiction, without regard to any differences of race, of color, or of nationality, and the equal protection of the laws is a pledge of the protection of equal

1743:, extending the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to protect women from sex discrimination, in situations where there is no rational basis for the discrimination. That level of scrutiny was boosted to an intermediate level in 1286:. Under these plans, parents could choose to send their children to either a formerly white or a formerly black school. Whites almost never opted to attend black-identified schools, however, and blacks rarely attended white-identified schools. 701:

ruled that the state's ban on mixed-race marriage violated the "cardinal principle" of the 1866 Civil Rights Act and of the Equal Protection Clause. Almost a hundred years would pass before the U.S. Supreme Court followed that Alabama case

736:

Likewise, some states were more favorable to women's legal status than others; New York, for example, had been giving women full property, parental, and widow's rights since 1860, but not the right to vote. No state or territory allowed

812:", according to which the guarantees of the Equal Protection Clause apply only to acts done or otherwise "sanctioned in some way" by the state. Prohibiting blacks from attending plays or staying in inns was "simply a private wrong". 1328:

basically ended the Supreme Court's major involvement in school desegregation; however, up through the 1990s many federal trial courts remained involved in school desegregation cases, many of which had begun in the 1950s and 1960s.

1120:

There is a vast difference—a Constitutional difference—between restrictions imposed by the state which prohibit the intellectual commingling of students, and the refusal of individuals to commingle where the state presents no such

7134: 4756: 4746: 3749:

Balkin, J. M.; Bruce A. Ackerman (2001). "Part II". What Brown v. Board of Education should have said : the nation's top legal experts rewrite America's landmark civil rights decision. et al. New York University Press. p.

2196:

Equal Protection refers to the idea that a governmental body may not deny people equal protection of its governing laws. The governing body state must treat an individual in the same manner as others in similar conditions and

1708:. There, the Supreme Court held that the different standards of counting ballots across Florida violated the equal protection clause. The Supreme Court used four of its rulings from 1960s voting rights cases (one of which was 623:

Fourteenth Amendment, many historians adopt a much wider view. It is a popular interpretation that the Fourteenth Amendment was always meant to ensure equal rights for all those in the United States. This argument was used by

505:

during such times. During the Civil War, many of the Southern states stripped the state citizenship of many whites and banished them from their state, effectively seizing their property. Shortly after the Union victory in the

3926:, 517 U.S. 620, 631 (1996): "the equal protection of the laws must coexist with the practical necessity that most legislation classifies for one purpose or another, with resulting disadvantage to various groups or persons." 1516:

Choosing the standard of scrutiny can determine the outcome of a case, and the strict scrutiny standard is often described as "strict in theory and fatal in fact". In order to select the correct level of scrutiny, Justice

1666:. Harlan quoted the congressional debates of 1866 to show that the framers did not intend for the Equal Protection Clause to extend to voting rights, and in reference to the Fifteenth and Nineteenth Amendments, he said: 1412:

has written that Congress never "required that the schools of the District of Columbia be segregated." According to that rationale, the segregation of schools in Washington D.C. was unauthorized and therefore illegal.

953:"The defendant Corporations are persons within the intent of the clause in section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment…, which forbids a state to deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." 1691:); for any discrimination in fundamental rights to be constitutional, the Court requires the legislation to pass strict scrutiny. Under this theory, equal protection jurisprudence has been applied to voting rights. 1978:

In these affirmative action cases, the Supreme Court has employed, or has said it employed, strict scrutiny, since the affirmative action policies challenged by the plaintiffs categorized by race. The policy in

1521:

urged the Court to identify rights as "fundamental" or identify classes as "suspect" by analyzing what was understood when the Equal Protection Clause was adopted, instead of based upon more subjective factors.

981:

in support of the proposition that corporations are entitled to equal protection of the law within the meaning of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Writing the opinion for the Court in

8046: 1720:

joined the majority of five—but only for the finding that there was an Equal Protection violation. Much more controversial was the remedy that the Court chose, namely, the cessation of a statewide recount.

1336:

is one of several reasons that have been cited to explain why equalized educational opportunity in the United States has fallen short of completion. In the view of various liberal scholars, the election of

9892: 1685:

response to such actions by a state: reduction of a state's representation in Congress. However, the Supreme Court has instead responded that voting is a "fundamental right" on the same plane as marriage (

8992: 1076:

case concerned a privately made contract that prohibited "people of the Negro or Mongolian race" from living on a particular piece of land. Seeming to go against the spirit, if not the exact letter, of

8984: 3264:

Adam Winkler, "We the Corporations, How American Businesses Won Their Corporate Rights" (New York: Liveright Publishing Corporation, 2018) pp. 154-156. Justice Field was a friend of railroad magnate

820:

highways, and (2) innkeepers engage in what is "a quasi-public employment", and (3) "places of public amusement" are licensed under the laws of the states, excluding blacks from using these services

9695: 4754: 4744: 4527: 5727: 9136: 5417: 648:

of New York, despite Bingham's public assurances that "under no possible interpretation can it ever be made to operate in the State of New York while she occupies her present proud position."

9104: 8960: 1712:) to support its ruling in Bush v. Gore. It was not this holding that proved especially controversial among commentators, and indeed, the proposition gained seven out of nine votes; Justices 1372: 9783: 9599: 5235: 1230:, decided in 1954, it was concluded that since the problems identified in the previous opinion were local, the solutions needed to be so as well. Thus the court devolved authority to local 9259: 6993: 5742: 5172: 1551:

a plot of land on which the plaintiff intended to build low-income, racially integrated housing. On the face, there was no clear evidence of racially discriminatory intent on the part of

6998: 5692: 7168: 1461:" (such as the right to procreation), and similarly more judicial scrutiny is also triggered if the purported victim of discrimination has been targeted because he or she belongs to a " 1211:

politician before joining the Court—was able to convince all eight associate justices to join his opinion declaring school segregation unconstitutional. In that opinion, Warren wrote:

8022: 5273: 993:, Justice Field, writing for the Court, thus took this point as established Constitutional law. In the decades that followed, the Supreme Court often continued to cite and to rely on 3807: 1282:, writing for a unanimous Court, rejected a "freedom-of-choice" school plan as inadequate. This was a significant decision; freedom-of-choice plans had been very common responses to 9433: 7400: 6407: 5540: 1559:, writing for the Court, stated, "Proof of racially discriminatory intent or purpose is required to show a violation of the Equal Protection Clause." Disparate impact merely has an 1347:(1973) that the Equal Protection Clause allows—but does not require—a state to provide equal educational funding to all students within the state. Moreover, the Court's decision in 689:

This drawing by E. W. Kemble shows a sleeping Congress with a broken Fourteenth Amendment. It makes the case that Congress ignored its constitutional obligations to Black Americans.

4755: 4745: 986:, Justice Field reasoned that a corporation is an association of its human shareholders and thus has rights under the Fourteenth Amendment just as the members of the association. 10024: 8968: 8228: 5642: 1353:(1925) allowed families to opt out of public schools, despite "inequality in economic resources that made the option of private schools available to some and not to others", as 946: 9096: 8282: 6837: 5412: 635:. This clause sought to protect the privileges and immunities of all citizens which now included black men. The scope of this clause was substantially narrowed following the 7390: 6359: 921: 1987:, passed muster because the Court deemed that they were narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling interest in diversity. On one side, critics have argued—including Justice 1833:

Other scholars disagree, arguing that "homophobia" is distinct from sexism, in a sociological sense, and so treating it as such would be an unacceptable judicial shortcut.

6963: 6374: 5712: 7820: 5245: 5129: 4929: 4861: 813: 63: 5697: 1734:

pointed out, the word "person" in the Equal Protection Clause was apparently chosen deliberately, instead of a masculine term that could have easily been used instead.

1242:

was actually a consolidation of four different cases from four different states.) The trial courts and localities were told to desegregate with "all deliberate speed".

5115: 1555:

planning commission. The result was racially disparate, however, since the refusal supposedly prevented mostly African-Americans and Hispanics from moving in. Justice

1501:", regarding gender discrimination. The Court may have added other tiers too, such as "enhanced rational basis" scrutiny, and "exceedingly persuasive basis" scrutiny. 1145: 337: 9916: 7107: 7047: 5893: 5100: 5090: 4007: 842:

Thus, the clause would not be limited to discrimination against African Americans, but would extend to other races, colors, and nationalities such as (in this case)

91: 5732: 2141: 1630:(1927) that the Fourteenth Amendment prohibited denial of the vote based on race. The first modern application of the Equal Protection Clause to voting law came in 1264:

did not begin in any significant way until the mid-1960s and then only to a small degree. In fact, much of the integration in the 1960s happened in response not to

362:... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." It mandates that individuals in similar situations be treated equally by the law. 9815: 8713: 7141: 7052: 7042: 5110: 5105: 5095: 5085: 1846:. No state statute was in question, and therefore the Equal Protection Clause did not apply. The Court did employ similar principles, however, in combination with 2441:

Hardy, David. "Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment As Reflected in the Print Media of 1866-68", Whittier Law Review, Vol. 30, p. 695 (2008-2009).

1756:" status (thus making a law that categorizes on that basis subject to greater judicial scrutiny) for groups other than racial minorities and religious groups. In 8689: 8126: 7032: 6829: 5065: 1825:. Notably, O'Connor's opinion did not claim to apply a higher level of scrutiny than mere rational basis, and the Court has not extended suspect-class status to 3628: 2771:

Resurrecting the Privileges or Immunities Clause and Revising the Slaughter-House Cases Without Exhuming Lochner: Individual Rights and the Fourteenth Amendment

10029: 8928: 8808: 7630: 7037: 7010: 5075: 5070: 5039: 5034: 2085: 2080: 1947:, the Court held that racial quotas are unconstitutional, but that educational institutions could legally use race as one of many factors to consider in their 1655: 511: 477: 400:

which legalized same-sex marriages, along with many other decisions rejecting discrimination against, and bigotry towards, people belonging to various groups.

355: 225: 9759: 9409: 8896: 8872: 8070: 8014: 7027: 6400: 5080: 5060: 5044: 3730: 3218: 3009: 1651: 1059:, since Lincoln did not have a law school, but was denied admission due solely to his race. The Supreme Court, applying the separate-but-equal principle of 515: 501:

Before and during the Civil War, the Southern states prohibited speech of pro-Union citizens, anti-slavery advocates, and northerners in general, since the

9703: 8768: 8094: 8062: 7426: 5637: 5011: 3141: 1457:

Whatever its precise origins, the basic idea of the modern approach is that more judicial scrutiny is triggered by purported discrimination that involves "

1343: 1169: 4524: 9735: 9647: 9591: 9505: 9497: 9393: 9291: 7355: 7146: 5888: 5016: 4980: 2124: 1643:

were so malapportioned (with some legislators representing ten times the number of residents as others) that they violated the Equal Protection Clause.

1480:

Until 1976, the Supreme Court usually ended up dealing with discrimination by using one of two possible levels of scrutiny: what has come to be called "

10014: 9876: 9251: 9120: 9040: 7974: 7451: 6797: 6292: 5722: 5617: 4985: 4965: 4955: 729:

actually required separate schools for blacks. However, some states (e.g. New York) gave local districts discretion to set up schools that were deemed

3289:

Adam Winkler, "We the Corporations, How American Businesses Won Their Corporate Rights" (New York: Liveright Publishing Corporation, 2018) pp. 156-157

3203:

Adam Winkler, "We the Corporations, How American Businesses Won Their Corporate Rights" (New York: Liveright Publishing Corporation, 2018) pp. 150-152

3194:

Adam Winkler, "We the Corporations, How American Businesses Won Their Corporate Rights" (New York: Liveright Publishing Corporation, 2018) pp. 128-136

9473: 9072: 8888: 8864: 8565: 7005: 6821: 5427: 4995: 4990: 4975: 4970: 4960: 4950: 1385: 1299: 414: 7446: 3861:

opinion (which clearly stated that both deprivation of fundamental rights as well as oppression of a particular race or nationality were invidious).

2210: 10034: 9775: 9767: 9385: 9187: 8976: 7480: 7213: 6956: 6393: 3872: 2855:, p. 253 (Palgrave Macmillan, Jan 17, 2004). The four of the original thirteen states are New Hampshire, Connecticut, New Jersey, and New York. Id. 1924: 1758: 205: 1882:

awarding of contracts, and the like. Such action may be used as a "tie-breaker" if all other factors are inconclusive, or may be achieved through

9425: 8848: 8142: 7929: 6421: 5818: 4919: 4899: 4854: 3154: 1539: 809: 215: 4798: 3123:

Adam Winkler, "We the Corporations, How American Businesses Won Their Corporate Rights" (New York: Liveright Publishing Corporation, 2018) p. xv

833:(1886). In it the word "person" from the Fourteenth Amendment's section has been given the broadest possible meaning by the U.S. Supreme Court: 8373: 7416: 7345: 7279: 6303: 4909: 4904: 4034:

Krieger, Linda Hamilton (1995). "The Content of Our Categories: A Cognitive Bias Approach to Discrimination and Equal Protection Opportunity".

673:..." By July 9, 1868, three-fourths of the states (28 of 37) ratified the amendment, and that is when the Equal Protection Clause became law. 422: 330: 9924: 9275: 9032: 8880: 8673: 7421: 6988: 5672: 4914: 4894: 4889: 1272:. The Supreme Court intervened a handful of times in the late 1950s and early 1960s, but its next major desegregation decision was not until 574:

and color ... full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of person and property, as is enjoyed by white citizens."

1971:, however, Justice O'Connor, writing for the Court, said she expected that in 25 years, racial preferences would no longer be necessary. In 808:

on land or water, theatres, and other places of public amusement." In its opinion, the Court explicated what has since become known as the "

741:

when the Equal Protection Clause took effect in 1868. In contrast, at that time African American men had full voting rights in five states.

606:

against the Union, could therefore not elect members to Congress. It was this fact—the fact that the Fourteenth Amendment was enacted by a "

6110: 5162: 3804: 694: 4569: 1670:

If constitutional amendment was the only means by which all men and, later, women, could be guaranteed the right to vote at all, even for

9727: 9639: 8266: 7518: 7156: 7129: 6949: 5823: 5622: 4501: 1850:

principles. The Court did not purport to use any level of scrutiny more demanding than rational basis review, according to law professor

8525: 7380: 5358: 4884: 4847: 3030:"Annotation 18 - Fourteenth Amendment: Section 1 – Rights Guaranteed: Equal Protection of the Laws: Scope and application state action" 1341:

in 1968 meant that the executive branch was no longer behind the Court's constitutional commitments. Also, the Court itself decided in

4612: 9751: 9283: 8298: 7621: 7558: 7350: 5597: 5567: 5353: 5318: 5298: 323: 185: 70: 1817:

sodomy as well, Texas's statute did not meet rational-basis review under the Equal Protection Clause; her opinion prominently cited

895:

Such "arbitrary separation" by race, Harlan concluded, was "a badge of servitude wholly inconsistent with the civil freedom and the

669:

equal protection of the laws, including all the limitations for personal protection of every article and section of the Constitution

7340: 7102: 5602: 1274: 738: 598:. It was the most influential of these men, John Bingham, who was the principal author and drafter of the Equal Protection Clause. 175: 1454:(1938) contained a footnote that was a critical turning point for equal protection jurisprudence, but that assertion is disputed. 9564: 8429: 8030: 7897: 7233: 7163: 6503: 5813: 2000: 1895: 1890: 1873: 1620:

Justice John Marshall Harlan II sought to interpret the Equal Protection Clause in the context of Section 2 of the same amendment

726: 391: 33: 8936: 8110: 7921: 7284: 6781: 5903: 5572: 5450: 4017:(2000). The Court has also interpreted federal statutory law as limiting the power of states to correct disparate effects. See 3964:"Accountable Algorithms (Ricci v. DeStefano: The Tensions Between Equal Protection, Disparate Treatment, and Disparate Impact)" 3378:

Karlan, Pamela S. (2009). "What Can Brown® do for You?: Neutral Principles and the Struggle over the Equal Protection Clause".

1450: 1425: 195: 180: 154: 5587: 3665:"Racial, Economic, and Linguistic Segregation: Analyzing Market Supports in the District of Columbia's Public Charter Schools" 2175: 1081:, the Court found that, although a discriminatory private contract could not violate the Equal Protection Clause, the courts' 564:. The Act provided that all persons born in the United States were citizens (contrary to the Supreme Court's 1857 decision in 8290: 7548: 7501: 6125: 5215: 5210: 5137: 4265: 4240: 3543: 3521: 3501: 3421: 3362: 3068: 2912: 2744: 2461: 2387: 2369: 2118: 571: 159: 3761: 1658:

redundant. Indeed, it was on this argument, as well as on the legislative history of the Fourteenth Amendment, that Justice

973:

Supreme Court Justice Stephen Field seized on this deceptive and incorrect published summary by the court reporter Davis in

627:

when he used the Fourteenth Amendment as the basis for his arguments to expand the protections afforded to black Americans.

9441: 9128: 9112: 9016: 7395: 7254: 6338: 5858: 5652: 3828: 468:

rights to black Americans. Black people were considered inferior to white Americans, and subject to chattel slavery in the

75: 3616:"entrenched the pattern of a two-tiered system of schooling, which sanctions private opt-outs from publicly run schools"). 200: 9024: 8134: 7475: 7365: 7305: 7070: 6485: 6234: 5853: 5445: 4212:

Van Alstyne, William. "The Fourteenth Amendment, the Right to Vote, and the Understanding of the Thirty-Ninth Congress",

2149: 1914: 502: 965:

In fact, the Supreme Court decided the case on narrower grounds and had specifically avoided this Constitutional issue.

9840: 9556: 9481: 8745: 7218: 6972: 5490: 3996: 1110: 1096: 387: 245: 149: 111: 3709: 2622:

Sumner, Charles, and Daniel Murray Pamphlet Collection. . Washington: S. & R. O. Polkinhorn, Printers, 1874. Pdf.

2129:

The equal protection clause guarantees the right of "similarly situated" people to be treated the same way by the law.

9900: 7840: 7151: 5833: 5195: 4870: 3791: 3639: 1964: 1948: 1640: 1035: 220: 58: 3782:

304 U.S. 144, 152 n.4 (1938). For a theory of judicial review based on Stone's footnote, see Ely, John Hart (1981).

2770: 376:

The meaning of the Equal Protection Clause has been the subject of much debate, and inspired the well-known phrase "

9719: 8589: 7506: 6333: 5677: 2030: 1705: 1208: 17: 8469: 8314: 7828: 7543: 7269: 7020: 6385: 5682: 5667: 4814: 3590:

Reynolds, Troy. "Education Finance Reform Litigation and Separation of Powers: Kentucky Makes Its Contribution,"

3251: 1601: 1165: 1063:, held that a State offering a legal education to whites but not to blacks violated the Equal Protection Clause. 632: 106: 3905:'There is Only One Equal Protection Clause': An Appreciation of Justice Stevens's Equal Protection Jurisprudence 1908: 403:

While the Equal Protection Clause itself applies only to state and local governments, the Supreme Court held in

9299: 8157: 7538: 7310: 7178: 6813: 6089: 3276:

case the Supreme Court explicitly declined to address the Constitutional issue because, in a companion case to

1044: 286: 142: 1789:

decision seemed to employ a markedly higher level of scrutiny than the nominally applied rational-basis test.

7941: 7680: 7614: 7563: 7370: 6508: 5863: 5803: 5392: 4413:

Farrell, Robert C. (1999). "Successful Rational Basis Claims in the Supreme Court from the 1971 Term Through

3847:, 316 U.S. 535 (1942). Sometimes the "suspect" classification strand of the modern doctrine is attributed to 1416:

The federal government has at times shared its power to discriminate against noncitizens with states through

900: 526: 311: 240: 2720: 1440:, much of modern equal protection jurisprudence originated in other cases, though not everyone agrees about 8697: 8549: 8501: 8242: 7857: 6353: 6151: 5582: 5455: 5260: 5142: 4942: 2521: 1537:

Constitution to address unintentional disparate impacts. This subject was addressed in the seminal case of

1349: 1235: 469: 3486:

political branches' engagement with the Supreme Court's commitment to desegregation (and vice versa), see

2262: 1576:(1976), and has been defended on the basis that the Equal Protection Clause was not designed to guarantee 9583: 8753: 8054: 7905: 7470: 7375: 6367: 6271: 6229: 6224: 5627: 5313: 5278: 3829:

Is Carolene Products Dead--Reflections on Affirmative Action and the Dynamics of Civil Rights Legislation

2693: 1552: 1508:

who argued for a "spectrum of standards in reviewing discrimination", instead of discrete tiers. Justice

1192: 1048: 1022: 665: 530: 382: 210: 96: 2238: 1293:, many Southern districts replaced freedom-of-choice with geographically based schooling plans; because 8705: 7335: 7300: 6581: 6455: 6321: 5768: 5737: 5460: 5225: 5220: 3849: 3255:, 337 U.S. 562, 576 (1949), have disagreed that corporations are persons for equal protection purposes. 1421: 3032:. FindLaw for Legal Professionals - Law & Legal Information by FindLaw, a Thomson Reuters business 9908: 9315: 9307: 8920: 8341: 8274: 7436: 7124: 6525: 6069: 5949: 5748: 5480: 5303: 5180: 5026: 4820: 4795: 4787: 4013: 3887: 3269: 1556: 870:

and mandated separate railway cars for members of the two races. The Court, speaking through Justice

759: 473: 3986: 3029: 1360:

American public school systems, especially in large metropolitan areas, to a large extent are still

9940: 9884: 9048: 8605: 8573: 8204: 7998: 7982: 7607: 7119: 7114: 7097: 6682: 6038: 5908: 5772: 5632: 5551: 5397: 5387: 5255: 4510: 4445:

Koppelman, Andrew (1994). "Why Discrimination against Lesbians and Gay Men is Sex Discrimination".

4001: 3963: 1842: 1763: 1269: 1149: 924:, which had drafted the Fourteenth Amendment, was the lawyer who argued an important case known as 804:

was at issue. The Act provided that all persons should have "full and equal enjoyment of ... inns,

801: 561: 366: 4322:

Pettinga, Gayle Lynn (1987). "Rational Basis with Bite: Intermediate Scrutiny by Any Other Name".

4120: 3174: 1207:

Warren, however, through persuasion and good-natured cajoling—he had been an extremely successful

685: 682:

States or of such State." At that time, the meaning of equality varied from one state to another.

10019: 9948: 9513: 9369: 8557: 7950: 7865: 7080: 5828: 5776: 5702: 5407: 5402: 5338: 5308: 5250: 4644:"Equality Talk: Antisubordination and Anticlassification Values in Constitutional Struggles over 2045: 2020: 1837: 1674:

officers, how can it be that the far less obvious right to a particular kind of apportionment of

1659: 1591:

For an example of how this rule limits the Court's powers under the Equal Protection Clause, see

1294: 1137:. They lacked "substantial equality in the educational opportunities" offered to their students. 1026: 896: 733:. In contrast, Iowa and Massachusetts flatly prohibited segregated schools ever since the 1850s. 418: 377: 281: 3513:

Judgment Days: Lyndon Baines Johnson, Martin Luther King, Jr., and the Laws That Changed America

1902:

Several important affirmative action cases to reach the Supreme Court have concerned government

1085:

of such a contract could; after all, the Supreme Court reasoned, courts were part of the state.

9179: 7511: 7238: 7085: 6901: 5991: 5510: 5435: 5382: 5333: 5157: 4484: 2351:

For details on the rationale for, and ratification of, the Fourteenth Amendment, see generally

2040: 1903: 1806: 1753: 1462: 1417: 1105: 1056: 602: 566: 560:

Because of the inequality imposed by Black Codes, a Republican-controlled Congress enacted the

489: 306: 137: 7599: 4498: 4295: 3110: 2992: 2977: 2895: 2851: 891:

here. Our Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens.

582:

who were under personal and legal attack in the former Confederacy. The effort was led by the

365:

A primary motivation for this clause was to validate the equality provisions contained in the

9868: 9711: 9679: 9267: 8816: 7764: 7656: 7360: 7173: 6789: 6463: 6435: 6198: 5577: 5545: 5376: 5205: 5152: 4253: 3734: 3222: 3145: 3013: 2962: 2931: 2788: 2148:. Carl Vinson Institute of Government at University of Georgia. July 30, 2004. Archived from 2065: 1498: 1485: 1216:

of "separate but equal" has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.

698: 636: 3301: 433:

The Equal Protection Clause is located at the end of Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment:

9860: 9607: 9457: 9350: 9155: 9088: 8597: 8533: 8413: 8250: 8078: 8038: 7990: 6751: 6734: 6597: 6343: 5898: 5612: 5607: 5562: 5535: 5485: 5230: 4783: 4771:

These audio files were created from a revision of this article dated 9 April 2006

4624: 3133: 2483:(1992). "Completing the Constitution: The Fourteenth Amendment and Constitutional Rights". 2055: 1930: 1859: 1409: 1304: 942: 816: 396: 1504:

All of this is known as "tiered" scrutiny, and it has had many critics, including Justice

1471:(1942), which involved depriving certain criminals of the fundamental right to procreate: 1072:(1948), the Court showed increased willingness to find racial discrimination illegal. The 8: 9791: 9743: 9687: 9623: 9615: 9548: 9465: 9401: 9064: 9008: 8952: 8944: 8581: 8461: 8445: 8322: 8102: 8086: 7780: 7664: 6861: 6845: 6805: 6702: 6326: 6115: 5843: 5707: 5495: 5440: 5343: 5200: 4164: 4036: 2060: 1577: 1572: 1467: 1309: 1160:, who in the 1930s first began to challenge racial discrimination in the federal courts. 697:, and the other states were divided on the issue in the Reconstruction era. In 1872, the 583: 271: 190: 4545: 2550:

Perry, Michael J. (1979). "Modern Equal Protection: A Conceptualization and Appraisal".

1543:(1977). In that case, the plaintiff, a housing developer, sued a city in the suburbs of 1484:" (when a suspect class or fundamental right is involved), or instead the more lenient " 438:

any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;

9852: 9671: 9663: 9489: 9449: 9417: 9334: 9203: 9195: 9163: 9080: 8904: 8856: 8832: 8800: 8721: 8665: 8657: 8509: 8405: 8220: 7889: 7804: 7733: 7644: 7583: 7459: 7259: 7223: 6885: 6869: 6743: 6663: 6643: 6028: 6012: 5873: 5687: 5662: 5647: 5557: 5525: 5515: 5475: 5465: 4706: 4669: 4652: 4592: 4195: 4140: 4101: 4063: 4019: 3737: 3684: 3573: 3411: 3387: 3321: 3246: 3225: 3016: 2917: 2749: 2657: 2605: 2567: 2500: 2334: 2326: 2291: 2230: 2179: 1936: 1878: 1826: 1687: 1678:

legislatures ... can be conferred by judicial construction of the Fourteenth Amendment?

1646:

It may seem counterintuitive that the Equal Protection Clause should provide for equal

1458: 1279: 1261: 1257: 1231: 1153: 1068: 863: 851: 829: 796: 730: 708: 507: 410: 370: 296: 291: 255: 230: 121: 101: 4684: 3148: 2757: 2637: 920:, a skillful lawyer and former powerful politicians who had served as a member of the 9987: 9979: 9932: 9655: 9529: 9243: 9000: 8840: 8824: 8775: 8761: 8737: 8493: 8477: 8437: 8365: 8306: 8006: 7913: 7849: 7796: 7688: 7315: 6941: 6893: 6710: 6589: 6447: 6348: 6094: 6079: 6059: 5933: 5808: 5787: 5759: 5363: 5190: 4680: 4643: 4454: 4426: 4391: 4351: 4331: 4261: 4236: 4121:"Comparative Review of Death Sentences: An Empirical Study of the Georgia Experience" 3787: 3688: 3539: 3517: 3511: 3497: 3490: 3417: 3358: 3166: 3106: 3098: 3064: 2457: 2383: 2365: 2338: 2114: 2050: 2035: 1919: 1918:(1989). But the most famous cases have dealt with affirmative action as practiced by 1854:. The four dissenting justices argued that the authors of the statute were rational. 1851: 1794: 1731: 1581: 1544: 1509: 1505: 1400: 1394: 1221: 1161: 1157: 1090: 546: 533:

following the war, with these laws severely restricting the rights of blacks to hold

405: 4839: 4225:

For criticisms as well as several defenses of the Court's decision, see Bush v. Gore

1809:'s opinion concurring in the judgment, however, she argued that by prohibiting only 9235: 9211: 8792: 8541: 8517: 8381: 7788: 7756: 7704: 7553: 7523: 7441: 7090: 7075: 6877: 6605: 5970: 5717: 5592: 5520: 5505: 5240: 5185: 5147: 4829: 4808: 4698: 4689: 4661: 4584: 4132: 4091: 4083: 4053: 4045: 3676: 3608: 3565: 3313: 3056: 2908: 2789:

Congress and the Fourteenth Amendment: Enforcing Liberty and Equality in the States

2740: 2649: 2597: 2559: 2492: 2318: 2222: 2183: 1709: 1626: 1616: 1593: 1531: 1100:, both decided in 1950, paved the way for a series of school integration cases. In 607: 595: 6415: 1636:(1962), where the Court ruled that the districts that sent representatives to the 1313:(1974), it set aside a lower court order that had required the busing of students 941:, which left a written legacy of corporate rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. 849:

In its most contentious Gilded Age interpretation of the Equal Protection Clause,

9057:

Northeastern Fla. Chapter, Associated Gen. Contractors of America v. Jacksonville

8649: 8389: 8258: 7812: 7772: 7696: 7228: 7203: 6853: 6255: 6203: 6084: 6043: 5954: 5878: 5782: 5764: 5500: 5470: 5328: 4802: 4531: 4505: 4465: 3904: 3811: 3265: 3213: 2480: 2358: 2075: 2070: 1988: 1983:, and a Harvard College admissions policy praised by Justice Powell's opinion in 1481: 1317: 1173: 917: 874:, ruled that the Equal Protection Clause had been intended to defend equality in 805: 753:

In the United States, 1877 marked the end of Reconstruction and the start of the

3606:. "Confronting the Seduction of Choice: Law, Education and American Pluralism", 2803: 2675: 1116:, said that Oklahoma had deprived McLaurin of the equal protection of the laws: 9799: 9631: 9377: 9342: 9219: 8729: 8485: 8397: 8166: 7672: 7465: 7431: 7385: 6773: 6759: 6193: 6172: 6156: 6120: 6064: 6033: 5848: 3922: 3532: 3229: 2025: 1772: 1745: 1717: 1518: 1493: 1113: 871: 867: 764: 645: 624: 591: 440:

nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws

4368:

Kuligowski, Monte. "Romer v. Evans: Judicial Judgment or Emotive Utterance?,"

3857:

did not involve the Fourteenth Amendment, and moreover it came later than the

3438:"Hesitating Between Two Worlds": The Civil Rights Odyssey of Robert H. Jackson 2993:

No Constitutional Right to Be Ladies: Women and the Obligations of Citizenship

2877:

Calabresi, Steven and Matthews, Andrea. "Originalism and Loving v. Virginia",

1256:

Partly because of that enigmatic phrase, but mostly because of self-declared "

757:. The first truly landmark equal protection decision by the Supreme Court was 10008: 9893:

Florida Prepaid Postsecondary Education Expense Board v. College Savings Bank

9521: 8912: 8784: 8453: 8421: 8349: 8212: 8118: 7966: 7881: 7573: 7568: 7496: 7264: 6298: 6219: 6177: 6146: 6074: 5996: 5868: 5838: 5754: 5657: 5368: 5323: 4458: 4430: 4395: 4355: 4335: 4249: 3680: 3483: 3355:

Origin of the Civil Rights Movements: Black Communities Organizing for Change

3170: 3102: 1647: 1632: 1338: 1180:

cases to litigate, selecting the best legal proving grounds for their cause.

768: 538: 250: 116: 4570:"Affirmative Action and the Legislative History of the Fourteenth Amendment" 2932:

Rehearsal for Reconstruction: Antebellum Origins of the Fourteenth Amendment

9807: 9171: 8357: 7712: 7533: 7274: 7208: 3603: 3237:

and American Constitutionalism (1968), chs. 9, 10, and pp. 566-84. Justice

2852:

Tell the Court I Love My Wife: Race, Marriage, and Law--An American History

1883: 1781:

rather would merely prevent "special treatment of homosexuals." Much as in

1739: 1713: 1696: 1662:(the grandson of the earlier Justice Harlan) relied on in his dissent from 1445: 1354: 1297:

was widespread, little integration was accomplished. In 1971, the Court in

1040: 904: 875: 859: 652: 587: 519: 494: 456: 3664: 2753:, Vol. 69, pp. 35-37 (1955). Bingham was speaking on February 27, 1866. 8681: 7958: 7873: 7745: 6250: 6130: 4639: 3340:

Scorpions: The Battles and Triumphs of FDR's Great Supreme Court Justices

2866:

What Comes Naturally: Miscegenation Law and the Making of Race in America

1465:" (such as a single racial group). This modern doctrine was pioneered in 1389: 1199: 879: 843: 827:

A few years later, Justice Stanley Matthews wrote the Court's opinion in

542: 276: 9137:

Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College

4199: 3939:, p. 282 (Kendall Hunt 2003) (attributing the phrase to Gerald Gunther). 3391: 2295: 1384:

By its terms, the clause restrains only state governments. However, the

1129:, the Court considered the constitutionality of Texas's state system of 9227: 5975: 4673: 4596: 4144: 4118: 4105: 4096: 4067: 4058: 3577: 3325: 3238: 2890: 2661: 2571: 2504: 2417:

The Supreme Court: The Personalities and Rivalries That Defined America

2353: 2330: 2234: 1847: 1799: 1176:

advocates, but part of their shrewdness lay in their careful choice of

1130: 1017: 754: 554: 484: 451: 301: 9105:

Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1

8961:

Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp.

4710: 4535:, No. 12-307, 2013 BL 169620, 118 FEP Cases 1417 (U.S. June 26, 2013). 4382:

Joslin, Courtney (1997). "Equal Protection and Anti-Gay Legislation".

4074:

Lawrence, Charles R. III (1987). "Reckoning with Unconscious Racism".

2609: 1928:(1978), and two companion cases decided by the Supreme Court in 2003, 1373:

Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1

1307:

as a remedy to segregation; three years later, though, in the case of

358:. The clause, which took effect in 1868, provides "nor shall any State 5883: 2827:, p. 232 (Johns Hopkins Press, 1908). For Bingham's full speech, see 2623: 1637: 887:

country no superior, dominant, ruling class of citizens. There is no

856: 550: 43: 4665: 4588: 4342:

Wadhwani, Neelum J. (2006). "Rational Reviews, Irrational Results".

4136: 4087: 4049: 3569: 3317: 3050:

For a summary of the social, political and historical background to

2653: 2563: 2496: 2322: 2226: 1767:

scrutiny than is typically associated with the rational-basis test.

1245: 744: 8023:

Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists

7578: 7528: 7169:

Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996

4702: 4538: 3155:"Personalizing the Impersonal: Corporations and the Bill of Rights" 2601: 1777: 1730:

when it was proposed in 1866. On the other hand, as feminists like

1560: 1362: 1226: 1052: 999: 783: 693:

Four of the original thirteen states never passed any laws barring

579: 534: 3450:

I Dissent: Great Opposing Opinions in Landmark Supreme Court Cases

2938:, p. 19 (Eric Anderson and Alfred A. Moss, eds., LSU Press, 1991). 2936:

The Facts of Reconstruction: Essays in Honor of John Hope Franklin

2309:

Swisher, Carl Brent (1957). "Dred Scott One Hundred Years After".

651:

Hale ended up voting for the final version, however. When Senator

5918: 5348: 3805:

Between the Tiers: The New(est) Equal Protection and Bush v. Gore

3469:(one on which this article relies for its assertions), see Brest 1701: 1563:

value; absent a "stark" pattern, "impact is not determinative."

771: 522: 6920:

interpreted the Impartial Jury Clause of the Sixth Amendment. **

3302:"The Constitution in the Supreme Court: The New Deal, 1931–1940" 8229:

Monell v. Department of Social Services of the City of New York

7629: 7588: 3063:. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 6 and pp. 69–70. 1802: 1548: 947:

Reporter of Decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States

903:

would eventually become more widely accepted, especially after

776: 578:

Fourteenth Amendment. Additionally, Congress wanted to protect

8283:

Inyo County v. Paiute-Shoshone Indians of the Bishop Community

4119:

Baldus, David C.; Pulaski, Charles; Woodworth, George (1983).

2638:"The Original Understanding of "Equal Protection of the Laws"" 1444:

other cases. Many scholars assert that the opinion of Justice

1055:. He applied for admission to the law school at the all-white 1968: 1525: 922:

United States Congressional Joint Committee on Reconstruction

888: 3022: 2829:

Appendix to the Congressional Globe, 42d Congress, 1st Sess.

2382:. Gaithersburg: Aspen Law & Business. pp. 241–242. 2007:

Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina

1724: 460: 3528:

For more on the debate summarized in the text, see, e.g.,

2896:

Reconstruction: America's Unfinished Revolution, 1863–1877

2360:

Reconstruction: America's Unfinished Revolution, 1863—1877

1886:, which allot a certain number of benefits to each group. 1798:(2003), the Court struck down a Texas statute prohibiting 1146:

National Association for the Advancement of Colored People

9917:

Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama v. Garrett

7821:

O'Gorman & Young, Inc. v. Hartford Fire Insurance Co.

4008:

Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama v. Garrett

3461:

For a comprehensive history of school desegregation from

937:

A second fraud occurred a few years later in the case of

899:

established by the Constitution." Harlan's philosophy of

27:

Guarantee of law protecting all persons equally in the US

8714:

Sipuel v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma

7142:

Voting Accessibility for the Elderly and Handicapped Act

4248: 3816:

University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law

1408:

should have been reached on other grounds. For example,

463:

was the principal framer of the Equal Protection Clause.

8127:

Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky, Inc.

2913:

The Original Understanding and the Segregation Decision

2745:

The Original Understanding and the Segregation Decision

1752:

The Supreme Court has been disinclined to extend full "

1125:

The present situation, Vinson said, was the former. In

991:

Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Company v. Beckwith

984:

Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Company v. Beckwith

979:

Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Company v. Beckwith

676: 10025:

Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution

8809:

Griffin v. County School Board of Prince Edward County

6971: 4186:

Barocas, Solon (2016). "Big Data's Disparate Impact".

3995:

Note that the Court has put significant limits on the

3534:

The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change?

2086:

McDonald v. Board of Election Commissioners of Chicago

2081:

Uniform Parental Rights Enforcement and Protection Act

998:

numerous statutes applying to corporations. Since the

725:

As for public schooling, no states during this era of

356:

Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution

8873:

United States v. Montgomery County Board of Education

8015:

City of Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health

4869: 3452:, pp. 133–151 (Mark Tushnet, ed. Beacon Press, 2008). 1029:" which were inspired by the Equal Protection Clause. 9704:

San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez

8769:

Davis v. County School Board of Prince Edward County

8095:

Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England

6483: 2588:

Boyd, William M. (1955). "The Second Emancipation".

2142:"Fair Treatment by the Government: Equal Protection" 1497:, the Court added another tier of scrutiny, called " 1379: 1344:

San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez

1172:, joined him. Both men were extraordinarily skilled 9592:

Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Co.

7147:

Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act

2676:"Constitution of the United States - We the People" 1836:In 2013, the Court struck down part of the federal 487:lacked many crucial legal protections. In the 1857 9252:Personnel Administrator of Massachusetts v. Feeney 9121:Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action 7975:Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. Danforth 6293:Notes of Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787 3937:Constitutional Government: The American Experience 3531: 3489: 2357: 1700:(2000). At issue was the controversial recount in 1694:A recent use of equal protection doctrine came in 977:and cited that case as precedent in the 1889 case 780:against discrimination because of race or color." 8889:Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education 8566:Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health 3556:, Racial Change, and the Civil Rights Movement". 1300:Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education 10006: 9768:City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, Inc. 8977:Regents of the University of California v. Bakke 7108:U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division 4796:Original Meaning of Equal Protection of the Laws 4370:Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development 3950:Civil Rights & Liberties in the 21st Century 3873:City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, Inc. 1963:as a precedent and the admissions policy of the 1925:Regents of the University of California v. Bakke 1759:City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, Inc. 8849:Green v. County School Board of New Kent County 8374:Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. 4384:Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review 4284:, pp. 91-92 (Infobase Publishing, Jan 1, 2009). 3214:Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad 2729:The Supreme Court in and of the Stream of Power 1805:on substantive due process grounds. In Justice 1540:Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Corp. 1164:, a former student of Houston's and the future 846:in the United States who are Chinese citizens. 6304:Bibliography of the United States Constitution 1260:" in the South to the desegregation decision, 1002:, however, such invalidations have been rare. 957:Davis added before the opinion of the Court: 800:(1883), in which the constitutionality of the 763:(1880). A black man convicted of murder by an 10030:History of voting rights in the United States 9925:Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs 9276:Michael M. v. Superior Court of Sonoma County 9033:Board of Education of Oklahoma City v. Dowell 8881:Alexander v. Holmes County Board of Education 8674:Cumming v. Richmond County Board of Education 7615: 7422:Disfranchisement after the Reconstruction era 6957: 6401: 4855: 3089:Myth: Justice Harlan and the Chinese Cases". 2963:Is This Any Way to Run a Democratic Election? 2456:. Cambridge: Belknap Press. pp. 99–252. 1183: 926:San Mateo County v. Southern Pacific Railroad 331: 8143:Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization 8047:Ohio v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health 7930:Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization 3243:Connecticut General Life Ins. Co. v. Johnson 2263:"Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1856)" 1140:All of these cases, as well as the upcoming 968: 9728:Massachusetts Board of Retirement v. Murgia 9640:Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections 8629: 8267:Will v. Michigan Department of State Police 7519:Democratic backsliding in the United States 7157:Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment Act 4488:, p. 55 (Cambridge University Press, 2004). 4258:The Vote: Bush, Gore, and the Supreme Court 4247:Another much-cited collection of essays is 3786:. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 2951:, p. 185 (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1984). 2804:"Ratification of Constitutional Amendments" 1220:Warren discouraged other justices, such as 1005: 8993:Crawford v. Los Angeles Board of Education 8526:Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermill 7622: 7608: 6964: 6950: 6408: 6394: 4862: 4848: 4282:Encyclopedia of Women's History in America 4112: 3899: 3897: 3083:For a skeptical evaluation of Harlan, see 2721:Clio and the Court: An Illicit Love Affair 2635: 2380:Processes of Constitutional Decisionmaking 1864:validly performed in other jurisdictions. 1526:Discriminatory intent and disparate impact 1025:opened in 1935, inscribed with the words " 503:Bill of Rights did not apply to the states 338: 324: 10015:Clauses of the United States Constitution 9752:New York City Transit Authority v. Beazer 9284:Mississippi University for Women v. Hogan 8299:Fitzgerald v. Barnstable School Committee 6434: 4567: 4444: 4095: 4057: 3797: 3529: 2731:(Kermit Hall ed., Psychology Press 2000). 2694:"Slaughterhouse Cases, 83 U.S. 36 (1872)" 2636:Frank, John P.; Munro, Robert F. (1950). 2288:The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education 2104: 1725:Sex, disability, and romantic orientation 910: 394:. The clause has also been the basis for 8985:Washington v. Seattle School Dist. No. 1 6360:Scene at the Signing of the Constitution 4765: 4341: 4321: 4293:Hymowitz, Carol and Weissman, Michaele. 4233:Bush v. Gore: the question of legitimacy 4230: 4162: 4073: 3538:. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 3233:Essays on the Fourteenth Amendment, the 3055: 2825:The Adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment 2715: 2713: 2522:"Coleman v. Miller, 307 U.S. 433 (1939)" 2454:We the People, Volume 2: Transformations 2451: 1737:In 1971, the U.S. Supreme Court decided 1615: 1275:Green v. School Board of New Kent County 1244: 1016: 995:Santa Clara v. Southern Pacific Railroad 975:Santa Clara v. Southern Pacific Railroad 939:Santa Clara v. Southern Pacific Railroad 794:The next important postwar case was the 782: 684: 655:introduced that final version, he said: 570:), and required that "citizens of every 450: 10035:United States equal protection case law 9696:Lehnhausen v. Lake Shore Auto Parts Co. 9565:Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. Ward 8430:Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleur 8031:Webster v. Reproductive Health Services 7898:Webster v. Reproductive Health Services 7164:National Voter Registration Act of 1993 7120:Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 6504:Racial discrimination in jury selection 4412: 4185: 4158: 4156: 4154: 4125:Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 4033: 3894: 3762:"Discriminatory Cooperative Federalism" 3636:Harvard University Civil Rights Project 3626: 3551: 3136:predates the Fourteenth Amendment. See 2479: 2308: 2208: 2001:Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard 1896:Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard 1874:Affirmative action in the United States 1650:; after all, it would seem to make the 14: 10007: 9839: 8937:Keyes v. School District No. 1, Denver 7732: 7643: 7401:United States Virgin Islands residents 6782:Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Company 4779:, and do not reflect subsequent edits. 4679: 4638: 4611:Schuck, Peter H. (September 5, 2003). 4610: 4485:Same Sex Marriage and the Constitution 4469:, 491 F.Supp. 381, 388, fn. 6 (1980), 4381: 4299:, p. 128 (Random House Digital, 2011). 3984: 3662: 3492:The Warren Court and American Politics 3409: 3377: 3352: 3299: 3245:, 303 U.S. 77, 85 (1938), and Justice 2902: 1762:(1985), the Court refused to make the 1451:United States v. Carolene Products Co. 1238:that had originally heard the cases. ( 1170:Associate Justice of the Supreme Court 586:of both houses of Congress, including 553:. Such codes also established harsher 9967: 9838: 8628: 8291:City of Rancho Palos Verdes v. Abrams 7731: 7642: 7603: 6945: 6482: 6433: 6389: 4843: 4260:. Chicago: Chicago University Press. 3968:University of Pennsylvania Law Review 3961: 3827:Farber, Daniel and Frickey, Philip. " 3759: 3152: 2884: 2801: 2710: 2583: 2581: 2549: 2545: 2543: 2541: 2516: 2514: 2475: 2473: 2377: 2352: 2257: 2255: 2211:"Equal Protection outside the Clause" 1867: 493:decision, the Supreme Court rejected 9017:Wygant v. Jackson Board of Education 8158:Section 1979 of the Revised Statutes 6994:House Electors Qualifications Clause 6339:Constitution Day and Citizenship Day 4817:, Heritage Guide to the Constitution 4235:. New Haven: Yale University Press. 4151: 3712:. Caselaw.lp.findlaw.com. 1954-05-17 3509: 3487: 3084: 2587: 1436:Despite the undoubted importance of 721:respect to the rights secured by it. 677:Early history following ratification 354:is part of the first section of the 9784:Kadrmas v. Dickinson Public Schools 9600:Quaker City Cab Co. v. Commonwealth 9025:City of Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co. 8135:June Medical Services, LLC v. Russo 8111:Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt 7922:Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt 6327:Rotunda for the Charters of Freedom 5854:Incorporation of the Bill of Rights 3612:, Vol. 120, p. 814, 819-820 (2011)( 2899:, pp. 321–322 (HarperCollins 2002). 2879:Brigham Young University Law Review 2450:See Foner (1988), passim. See also 2430:The Constitution and its Amendments 1915:City of Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co. 1857:In 2015, the Supreme Court held in 1426:Children's Health Insurance Program 855:(1896), the Supreme Court upheld a 24: 9557:Arlington County Board v. Richards 9482:Examining Board v. Flores de Otero 9260:Wengler v. Druggists Mut. Ins. Co. 8746:McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents 7631:United States Fourteenth Amendment 7391:Northern Mariana Islands residents 6973:Voting rights in the United States 5418:Drafting and ratification timeline 5163:District of Columbia Voting Rights 3997:congressional power of enforcement 3663:Jacobs, Nicholas (8 August 2011). 2624:https://www.loc.gov/item/12005313/ 2578: 2538: 2511: 2470: 2252: 2109:. In Schultz, David Andrew (ed.). 1431: 1097:McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents 745:Gilded Age interpretation and the 716:, the Alabama Supreme Court said: 549:, and to form legally enforceable 390:decision that helped to dismantle 25: 10046: 9901:Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents 9442:Takahashi v. Fish and Game Comm'n 7152:Federal Voting Assistance Program 4871:Constitution of the United States 4720: 4685:"When Victims Happen to Be Black" 4408:-like rational basis standard ... 4165:"Equal Protection Design Defects" 3404:For an exhaustive history of the 3342:, p. 145 (Hachette Digital 2010). 2981:, p. 212 (Interlink Books, 2001). 2949:Women and the American Experience 2378:Brest, Paul; et al. (2000). 2178:. Legal Information Institute at 1965:University of Michigan Law School 1380:Application to federal government 1036:Missouri ex rel. Gaines v. Canada 380:". This clause was the basis for 9720:Village of Belle Terre v. Boraas 9129:Fisher v. University of Texas II 8590:Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co. 7559:Ranked-choice voting in the U.S. 7476:Women's poll tax repeal movement 5274:Convention to propose amendments 4764: 4752: 4742: 3911:, Vol. 74, p. 2301, 2306 (2006). 3710:"FindLaw | Cases and Codes" 3496:. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press. 3306:University of Chicago Law Review 2978:A Traveller's History of the USA 2432:, Vol. 4, p. 8 (Macmillan 1999). 2111:The Encyclopedia of American Law 2031:Equal consideration of interests 1611: 824:an act sanctioned by the state. 42: 9434:Ohio ex rel. Clark v. Deckebach 9113:Fisher v. University of Texas I 8470:Moore v. City of East Cleveland 8315:Los Angeles County v. Humphries 7829:West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish 7103:U.S. Commission on Civil Rights 7021:Privileges or Immunities Clause 4631: 4603: 4560: 4517: 4491: 4476: 4437: 4404:Court applied a more 'active,' 4375: 4362: 4314: 4302: 4287: 4274: 4219: 4206: 4179: 4026: 3978: 3955: 3942: 3929: 3914: 3879: 3864: 3838: 3821: 3776: 3753: 3743: 3723: 3702: 3656: 3619: 3597: 3584: 3476: 3455: 3443: 3430: 3408:case from start to finish, see 3398: 3371: 3345: 3332: 3292: 3283: 3258: 3252:Wheeling Steel Corp. v. Glander 3206: 3197: 3188: 3126: 3117: 3077: 3044: 2999: 2984: 2969: 2954: 2941: 2924: 2871: 2868:, p. 58 (Oxford U. Press 2009). 2858: 2843: 2834: 2817: 2795: 2792:, p. 79 (Lexington Books 2013). 2780: 2763: 2734: 2686: 2668: 2629: 2616: 2444: 2435: 2422: 2409: 2209:Antieau, Chester James (1952). 2004:(2023), and its companion case 633:Privileges or Immunities Clause 613: 483:Even black Americans that were 419:equal protection under the laws 9300:J.E.B. v. Alabama ex rel. T.B. 7381:District of Columbia residents 7311:Multiple non-transferable vote 7234:Voter registration in the U.S. 7179:Election Assistance Commission 6999:Congressional Elections Clause 6814:J.E.B. v. Alabama ex rel. T.B. 5889:Separation of church and state 4447:New York University Law Review 3985:Herzog, Don (March 22, 2005). 3132:However, the legal concept of 3085:Chin, Gabriel J. (1996). "The 3061:The Strange Career of Jim Crow 2727:at p. 148 (1965) reprinted in 2396: 2364:. New York: Harper & Row. 2345: 2302: 2279: 2202: 2168: 2134: 2107:"Equal protection of the laws" 2098: 1202:became Chief Justice in 1953, 1156:graduate and law professor at 1045:Lincoln University of Missouri 421:of the federal government via 13: 1: 8969:Dayton Bd. of Ed. v. Brinkman 8174:McNeese v. Board of Education 7681:United States v. Wong Kim Ark 7564:National Voting Rights Museum 7174:Help America Vote Act of 2002 6690:Thiel v. Southern Pacific Co. 6509:Women in United States juries 5393:Virginia Ratifying Convention 4809:Equal Protection: An Overview 4296:A History of Women in America 3952:, pp. 337-338 (Pearson 2009). 3552:Klarman, Michael J. (1994). " 3530:Rosenberg, Gerald N. (1993). 2802:Mount, Steve (January 2007). 2286:"Dred Scott, 150 Years Ago". 2113:. Infobase. pp. 152–53. 2092: 1821:, and also relied in part on 1491:However, in the 1976 case of 1332:The curtailment of busing in 901:constitutional colorblindness 514:was proposed by Congress and 446: 312:Common good constitutionalism 8698:Hirabayashi v. United States 8550:DeShaney v. Winnebago County 8502:Logan v. Zimmerman Brush Co. 8243:Owen v. City of Independence 7858:Pierce v. Society of Sisters 7427:Timeline of women's suffrage 6675:Fair cross-section in venire 6569:Brownfield v. South Carolina 6354:National Constitution Center 6152:Daniel of St. Thomas Jenifer 5451:Assemble and Petition Clause 4227:: The Question of Legitimacy 3987:"Constitutional Rights: Two" 3516:. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 2921:, Vol. 69, pp. 35–37 (1955). 1909:Adarand Constructors v. Peña 1350:Pierce v. Society of Sisters 1144:case, were litigated by the 557:for blacks than for whites. 476:and the ratification of the 7: 9584:United States v. Cruikshank 8754:Brown v. Board of Education 8055:Planned Parenthood v. Casey 7906:Planned Parenthood v. Casey 7481:History of direct democracy 7471:Selma to Montgomery marches 7214:Initiatives and referendums 6225:Charles Cotesworth Pinckney 5279:State ratifying conventions 5216:Equal Opportunity to Govern 5211:Electoral College abolition 5138:Congressional Apportionment 4830:The Not So Definite Article 4821:Equal Protection (U.S. law) 4231:Ackerman, Bruce A. (2002). 4163:Feingold, Jonathon (2019). 3669:Education and Urban Society 3625:For data and analysis, see 3594:, Vol. 80 (1991): 309, 310. 3488:Powe, Lucas A. Jr. (2001). 3138:Providence Bank v. Billings 2996:, p. 133 (Macmillan, 1999). 2452:Ackerman, Bruce A. (2000). 2013: 1624:The Supreme Court ruled in 1366:segregated. Whether due to 1193:Brown v. Board of Education 1049:historically black colleges 1023:U.S. Supreme Court Building 989:In this Supreme Court case 666:39th United States Congress 383:Brown v. Board of Education 206:Right to keep and bear arms 10: 10051: 8706:Korematsu v. United States 7301:First-past-the-post voting 7071:U.S. Department of Justice 6582:Franklin v. South Carolina 6518:Racial exclusion in venire 6456:United States v. Armstrong 3850:Korematsu v. United States 3440:, p. 468 (ProQuest, 2007). 1871: 1706:2000 presidential election 1529: 1422:Welfare Reform Act of 1996 1392:guarantee, beginning with 1190: 216:Criminal procedural rights 9974: 9968: 9963: 9909:United States v. Morrison 9847: 9834: 9575: 9540: 9361: 9326: 9316:United States v. Skrmetti 9308:United States v. Virginia 9147: 8921:Guey Heung Lee v. Johnson 8641: 8637: 8624: 8342:Jacobson v. Massachusetts 8333: 8275:Gonzaga University v. Doe 8153: 7940: 7839: 7744: 7740: 7727: 7651: 7638: 7489: 7437:Woman Suffrage Procession 7409: 7328: 7293: 7247: 7196: 7189: 7125:Voting Rights Act of 1965 7061: 6979: 6733: 6674: 6526:Strauder v. West Virginia 6517: 6496: 6492: 6478: 6442: 6429: 6312: 6284: 6264: 6243: 6212: 6186: 6165: 6139: 6103: 6052: 6021: 6005: 5984: 5963: 5942: 5926: 5917: 5796: 5678:Privileges and Immunities 5491:Congressional enforcement 5426: 5413:Rhode Island ratification 5304:Articles of Confederation 5291: 5269: 5246:Parental Rights amendment 5171: 5128: 5053: 5025: 5004: 4941: 4937: 4928: 4877: 4823:, Encyclopædia Britannica 4014:United States v. Morrison 3888:United States v. Virginia 3818:, Vol. 4, p. 372 (2002) . 3740: (2003), at page 2482 3353:Morris, Aldon D. (1986). 3300:Currie, David P. (1987). 3270:Southern Pacific Railroad 2831:, p. 83 (March 31, 1871). 2775:Boston College Law Review 2419:, p. 79 (MacMillan 2007). 2105:Failinger, Marie (2009). 1278:(1968), in which Justice 969:The Supreme Court holding 760:Strauder v. West Virginia 474:Emancipation Proclamation 9941:United States v. Georgia 9885:City of Boerne v. Flores 9049:United States v. Fordice 8606:Williams v. Pennsylvania 8574:Washington v. Glucksberg 7376:American Samoa residents 7115:Civil Rights Act of 1960 7098:Civil Rights Act of 1957 6696:Ballard v. United States 6683:Glasser v. United States 5909:Unitary executive theory 5683:Privileges or Immunities 5398:New York Circular Letter 5388:Massachusetts Compromise 4656:(Submitted manuscript). 4568:Schnapper, Eric (1985). 4525:United States v. Windsor 4511:The National Law Journal 4280:Cullen-Dupont, Kathryn. 4127:(Submitted manuscript). 4002:City of Boerne v. Flores 3681:10.1177/0013124511407317 3410:Kluger, Richard (1977). 3357:. New York: Free Press. 3308:(Submitted manuscript). 2966:, p. 27 (CQ PRESS 2013). 2725:The Supreme Court Review 1959:, the Court upheld both 1843:United States v. Windsor 1770:The Court's decision in 1764:developmentally disabled 1704:in the aftermath of the 1420:. It has done so in the 1270:Civil Rights Act of 1964 1150:Charles Hamilton Houston 866:of blacks and whites on 802:Civil Rights Act of 1875 562:Civil Rights Act of 1866 525:. Subsequently, many ex- 367:Civil Rights Act of 1866 287:Political process theory 9949:Shelby County v. Holder 9514:Cabell v. Chavez-Salido 9370:Patsone v. Pennsylvania 8631:Equal Protection Clause 8558:Michael H. v. Gerald D. 7951:United States v. Vuitch 7866:Griswold v. Connecticut 7081:Enforcement Act of 1870 7016:Equal Protection Clause 5829:Dormant Commerce Clause 5673:Presidential succession 5408:Fayetteville Convention 5403:Hillsborough Convention 5339:Three-fifths Compromise 5319:Philadelphia Convention 5309:Mount Vernon Conference 5196:Campaign finance reform 4499:Justice Kennedy's World 3629:"Schools More Separate" 3482:For the history of the 3153:Mayer, Carl J. (1990). 2311:The Journal of Politics 2046:Equality before the law 2021:Economic egalitarianism 1838:Defense of Marriage Act 1570:was similar to that in 1295:residential segregation 1249:The Court that decided 1043:was a black student at 1027:Equal Justice Under Law 897:equality before the law 787:The Court that decided 518:by the states in 1865, 428: 378:Equal Justice Under Law 352:Equal Protection Clause 282:Substantive due process 9816:Armour v. Indianapolis 9180:Moritz v. Commissioner 8236:Procunier v. Navarette 8154:Civil rights liability 7942:Abortion jurisprudence 7086:Second Enforcement Act 6902:Flowers v. Mississippi 5992:William Samuel Johnson 5864:Nondelegation doctrine 5436:Admission to the Union 5383:Anti-Federalist Papers 5334:Connecticut Compromise 4834:Brown Political Review 4727:Listen to this article 4311:, 429 U.S. 190 (1976). 3962:Kroll, Joshua (2017). 3784:Democracy and Distrust 2041:Equal Rights Amendment 1754:suspect classification 1682: 1621: 1478: 1463:suspect classification 1418:cooperative federalism 1253: 1218: 1123: 1106:University of Oklahoma 1079:The Civil Rights Cases 1057:University of Missouri 1030: 963: 955: 945:, an attorney and the 911:Rights of Corporations 893: 840: 791: 723: 690: 662: 567:Dred Scott v. Sandford 490:Dred Scott v. Sandford 464: 444: 307:Strict constructionism 211:Right to trial by jury 201:Freedom of association 9869:Fitzpatrick v. Bitzer 9712:Richardson v. Ramirez 9680:Boddie v. Connecticut 9268:Kirchberg v. Feenstra 9097:Johnson v. California 8817:McLaughlin v. Florida 8205:O'Connor v. Donaldson 7765:Allgeyer v. Louisiana 7657:Slaughter-House Cases 7539:Elections in the U.S. 7396:Puerto Rico residents 7135:covered jurisdictions 6838:Johnson v. California 6830:Miller-El v. Cockrell 6790:Hernandez v. New York 6735:Peremptory challenges 6625:Patton v. Mississippi 6545:Gibson v. Mississippi 6464:United States v. Bass 6436:Selective prosecution 6199:Richard Dobbs Spaight 5668:Presidential Electors 5643:Original Jurisdiction 5583:Full Faith and Credit 5456:Assistance of Counsel 5377:The Federalist Papers 5206:Crittenden Compromise 4548:. Stanford University 4497:Chemerinsky, Erwin. " 4188:California Law Review 3833:California Law Review 3627:Orfield (July 2001). 3416:. New York: Vintage. 2215:California Law Review 2066:Equality of sacrifice 1906:—for instance, 1776:(1996) struck down a 1668: 1619: 1499:intermediate scrutiny 1486:rational basis review 1473: 1248: 1213: 1118: 1020: 959: 951: 884: 835: 810:state action doctrine 786: 718: 699:Alabama Supreme Court 688: 657: 555:criminal consequences 545:), and many forms of 454: 435: 423:reverse incorporation 417:nonetheless requires 9861:Katzenbach v. Morgan 9608:Breedlove v. Suttles 9458:Graham v. Richardson 9351:Obergefell v. Hodges 9156:Breedlove v. Suttles 9089:Grutter v. Bollinger 8929:Jefferson v. Hackney 8598:Obergefell v. Hodges 8534:Edwards v. Aguillard 8414:Epperson v. Arkansas 8251:Harlow v. Fitzgerald 8186:Jenkins v. McKeithen 8079:Mazurek v. Armstrong 8039:Hodgson v. Minnesota 7999:Bellotti v. Baird II 7991:Colautti v. Franklin 7746:Economic substantive 6752:Griffith v. Kentucky 6651:Eubanks v. Louisiana 6598:Patterson v. Alabama 6551:Smith v. Mississippi 6368:A More Perfect Union 6344:Constitution Gardens 6265:Convention Secretary 5927:Convention President 5899:Symmetric federalism 5894:Separation of powers 5628:Necessary and Proper 5623:Natural-born citizen 5568:Freedom of the Press 5506:Copyright and Patent 5496:Contingent Elections 5314:Annapolis Convention 4836:(November 16, 2012). 4811:, Cornell Law School 4788:More spoken articles 4546:"Affirmative Action" 4214:Supreme Court Review 3935:Curry, James et al. 3803:Goldstein, Leslie. " 3766:Villanova Law Review 3592:Kentucky Law Journal 3473:(2000), pp. 768–794. 3159:Hastings Law Journal 3134:corporate personhood 2849:Wallenstein, Peter. 2682:. 10 September 2020. 2056:Equality of autonomy 1931:Grutter v. Bollinger 1860:Obergefell v. Hodges 1656:Nineteenth Amendment 1547:that had refused to 1410:Michael W. McConnell 1320:, instead of merely 1187:and its consequences 1088:The companion cases 943:J. C. Bancroft Davis 817:John Marshall Harlan 695:interracial marriage 637:Slaughterhouse Cases 529:states then adopted 512:Thirteenth Amendment 478:Thirteenth Amendment 397:Obergefell v. Hodges 256:Comprehensible rules 226:Freedom from slavery 186:Freedom of the press 130:Government structure 92:Separation of powers 36:of the United States 9792:Gregory v. Ashcroft 9760:Mills v. Habluetzel 9744:Zablocki v. Redhail 9688:Eisenstadt v. Baird 9624:Oyama v. California 9616:Skinner v. Oklahoma 9549:Shapiro v. Thompson 9466:Sugarman v. Dougall 9410:Porterfield v. Webb 9402:Terrace v. Thompson 9065:Missouri v. Jenkins 9009:Hunter v. Underwood 8953:Milliken v. Bradley 8945:Norwood v. Harrison 8897:McDaniel v. Barresi 8582:Troxel v. Granville 8462:Mathews v. Eldridge 8446:Taylor v. Louisiana 8323:Connick v. Thompson 8103:Gonzales v. Carhart 8087:Stenberg v. Carhart 8071:Lambert v. Wicklund 7983:Bellotti v. Baird I 7781:Lochner v. New York 7665:Minor v. Happersett 6862:Snyder v. Louisiana 6846:Miller-El v. Dretke 6806:Georgia v. McCollum 6718:Holland v. Illinois 6703:Taylor v. Louisiana 6563:Tarrance v. Florida 6375:Worldwide influence 6116:Gunning Bedford Jr. 5844:Executive privilege 5824:Criminal sentencing 5747:Title of Nobility ( 5738:Taxing and Spending 5638:Oath or Affirmation 5598:House Apportionment 5461:Case or Controversy 5344:Committee of Detail 5236:"Liberty" amendment 5201:Christian amendment 4577:Virginia Law Review 4324:Indiana Law Journal 4076:Stanford Law Review 4037:Stanford Law Review 3845:Skinner v. Oklahoma 3760:Ayers, Ava (2020). 3729:Lawrence v. Texas, 3558:Virginia Law Review 3510:Kotz, Nick (2004). 3436:Shimsky, MaryJane. 2975:McInerney, Daniel. 2786:Glidden, William. 2680:launchknowledge.com 2642:Columbia Law Review 2552:Columbia Law Review 2481:Zuckert, Michael P. 2406:(2000), pp. 242–46. 2146:GeorgiaLegalAid.org 2061:Equality of outcome 1920:public universities 1807:Sandra Day O'Connor 1652:Fifteenth Amendment 1582:equal opportunities 1573:Washington v. Davis 1553:Arlington Heights's 1468:Skinner v. Oklahoma 1334:Milliken v. Bradley 1310:Milliken v. Bradley 880:social arrangements 584:Radical Republicans 498:Amendments. 272:Living Constitution 191:Freedom of assembly 176:Freedom of religion 9853:Civil Rights Cases 9841:Enforcement Clause 9672:Oregon v. Mitchell 9664:Williams v. Rhodes 9490:Nyquist v. Mauclet 9450:Hernandez v. Texas 9335:Bowers v. Hardwick 9327:Sexual orientation 9204:Stanton v. Stanton 9196:Geduldig v. Aiello 9164:Goesaert v. Cleary 9081:Gratz v. Bollinger 8905:Palmer v. Thompson 8857:Hunter v. Erickson 8833:Loving v. Virginia 8801:Anderson v. Martin 8722:Shelley v. Kraemer 8666:Plessy v. Ferguson 8658:Yick Wo v. Hopkins 8510:Kolender v. Lawson 8406:Loving v. Virginia 8221:Imbler v. Pachtman 8198:Wood v. Strickland 8063:Leavitt v. Jane L. 7890:Bowers v. Hardwick 7805:Buchanan v. Warley 7734:Due Process Clause 7645:Citizenship Clause 7584:Voter registration 7460:Give Us the Ballot 7356:Transgender people 7260:Grandfather clause 7224:Provisional ballot 6886:Felkner v. Jackson 6870:Rivera v. Illinois 6744:Batson v. Kentucky 6664:Vasquez v. Hillery 6657:Coleman v. Alabama 6644:Hernandez v. Texas 6484:Discrimination in 6422:criminal procedure 6029:William Livingston 6013:Alexander Hamilton 5819:Criminal procedure 5814:Constitutional law 5749:Foreign Emoluments 5713:State of the Union 5698:Self-Incrimination 5688:Recess appointment 5481:Compulsory Process 5143:Titles of Nobility 4828:Naderi, Siavash. " 4801:2011-07-09 at the 4681:Carter, Stephen L. 4653:Harvard Law Review 4530:2015-04-27 at the 4504:2013-07-09 at the 4419:Indiana Law Review 4020:Ricci v. DeStefano 3909:Fordham Law Review 3810:2016-03-04 at the 3247:William O. Douglas 3235:Conspiracy Theory, 3006:Yick Wo v. Hopkins 2930:Finkelman, Paul. " 2918:Harvard Law Review 2769:Curtis, Michael. " 2750:Harvard Law Review 2180:Cornell Law School 2176:"Equal Protection" 2127:on July 24, 2020. 1991:in his dissent to 1937:Gratz v. Bollinger 1879:Affirmative action 1868:Affirmative action 1827:sexual orientation 1688:Loving v. Virginia 1622: 1459:fundamental rights 1280:William J. Brennan 1258:massive resistance 1254: 1154:Harvard Law School 1069:Shelley v. Kraemer 1031: 878:, not equality in 862:that required the 852:Plessy v. Ferguson 830:Yick Wo v. Hopkins 806:public conveyances 797:Civil Rights Cases 792: 731:separate but equal 709:Loving v. Virginia 691: 508:American Civil War 465: 411:Due Process Clause 392:racial segregation 292:Judicial restraint 251:Right to candidacy 138:Legislative branch 34:Constitutional law 10002: 10001: 9998: 9997: 9988:Trump v. Anderson 9980:Gold Clause Cases 9959: 9958: 9933:Tennessee v. Lane 9830: 9829: 9826: 9825: 9736:Trimble v. Gordon 9656:Levy v. Louisiana 9648:Rinaldi v. Yeager 9530:Bernal v. Fainter 9506:Ambach v. Norwick 9498:Foley v. Connelie 9394:Crane v. New York 9292:Lehr v. Robertson 9244:Caban v. Mohammed 9001:Palmore v. Sidoti 8841:Lee v. Washington 8825:Reitman v. Mulkey 8776:Gebhart v. Belton 8762:Briggs v. Elliott 8738:Sweatt v. Painter 8620: 8619: 8616: 8615: 8494:Parratt v. Taylor 8478:Duren v. Missouri 8438:Arnett v. Kennedy 8366:Powell v. Alabama 8307:Ashcroft v. Iqbal 8192:Scheuer v. Rhodes 8007:H. L. v. Matheson 7914:Lawrence v. Texas 7850:Meyer v. Nebraska 7797:Coppage v. Kansas 7723: 7722: 7689:Perez v. Brownell 7597: 7596: 7544:Electoral College 7366:African Americans 7324: 7323: 7316:One man, one vote 7285:Voter suppression 6939: 6938: 6935: 6934: 6928:were civil cases. 6912: 6911: 6894:Foster v. Chatman 6724:Berghuis v. Smith 6711:Duren v. Missouri 6590:Norris v. Alabama 6575:Rogers v. Alabama 6533:Virginia v. Rives 6474: 6473: 6448:McCleskey v. Kemp 6383: 6382: 6349:Constitution Week 6334:Independence Mall 6322:National Archives 6280: 6279: 6095:Gouverneur Morris 6080:Thomas Fitzsimons 6060:Benjamin Franklin 5934:George Washington 5834:Enumerated powers 5809:Concurrent powers 5804:Balance of powers 5633:No Religious Test 5573:Freedom of Speech 5364:Independence Hall 5287: 5286: 5191:Bricker amendment 5124: 5123: 4805:, Federalist Blog 4757: 4747: 4482:Gerstmann, Evan. 4372:, Vol. 12 (1996). 4267:978-0-226-21307-1 4242:978-0-300-09379-7 4169:Temple Law Review 3903:Fleming, James. " 3545:978-0-226-72703-5 3523:978-0-618-08825-6 3503:978-0-674-00683-6 3423:978-0-394-72255-9 3364:978-0-02-922130-3 3070:978-0-19-514690-5 3057:Woodward, C. Vann 2909:Bickel, Alexander 2840:requires citation 2777:, Vol. 38 (1997). 2741:Bickel, Alexander 2463:978-0-674-00397-2 2389:978-0-7355-1250-4 2371:978-0-06-091453-0 2152:on March 20, 2020 2120:978-1-4381-0991-6 2051:Equality feminism 2036:Equal opportunity 1852:Erwin Chemerinsky 1795:Lawrence v. Texas 1732:Victoria Woodhull 1641:state legislature 1586:Arlington Heights 1568:Arlington Heights 1510:John Paul Stevens 1506:Thurgood Marshall 1401:Lawrence v. Texas 1395:Bolling v. Sharpe 1222:Robert H. Jackson 1166:Solicitor General 1162:Thurgood Marshall 1158:Howard University 1091:Sweatt v. Painter 706:) in the case of 547:personal property 406:Bolling v. Sharpe 348: 347: 196:Right to petition 181:Freedom of speech 168:Individual rights 122:Tiers of scrutiny 97:Individual rights 16:(Redirected from 10042: 9965: 9964: 9877:Dellmuth v. Muth 9836: 9835: 9236:Parham v. Hughes 9212:Edwards v. Healy 9041:Freeman v. Pitts 8796:(M.D. Ala. 1956) 8793:Browder v. Gayle 8639: 8638: 8626: 8625: 8542:Turner v. Safley 8518:Hudson v. Palmer 8382:NAACP v. Alabama 7841:Right to privacy 7789:Muller v. Oregon 7757:Mugler v. Kansas 7742: 7741: 7729: 7728: 7705:Rogers v. Bellei 7640: 7639: 7624: 7617: 7610: 7601: 7600: 7554:Electoral system 7549:Electoral reform 7524:Disfranchisement 7512:Native Americans 7502:Campaign finance 7447:U.S. suffragists 7442:Silent Sentinels 7371:Native Americans 7194: 7193: 7091:Ku Klux Klan Act 7076:Enforcement Acts 6966: 6959: 6952: 6943: 6942: 6878:Thaler v. Haynes 6798:Trevino v. Texas 6637:Avery v. Georgia 6631:Cassell v. Texas 6606:Hale v. Kentucky 6539:Neal v. Delaware 6494: 6493: 6480: 6479: 6431: 6430: 6418:equal protection 6410: 6403: 6396: 6387: 6386: 6230:Charles Pinckney 6039:William Paterson 5971:Nathaniel Gorham 5924: 5923: 5703:Speech or Debate 5531:Equal Protection 5241:Ludlow amendment 5226:Flag Desecration 5221:Federal Marriage 5186:Blaine amendment 5148:Corwin Amendment 4939: 4938: 4935: 4934: 4864: 4857: 4850: 4841: 4840: 4815:Equal Protection 4778: 4776: 4768: 4767: 4759: 4758: 4749: 4748: 4736: 4734: 4728: 4715: 4714: 4690:Yale Law Journal 4677: 4660:(5): 1470–1547. 4635: 4629: 4628: 4623:. Archived from 4613:"Reflections on 4607: 4601: 4600: 4574: 4564: 4558: 4557: 4555: 4553: 4542: 4536: 4521: 4515: 4495: 4489: 4480: 4474: 4462: 4441: 4435: 4434: 4410: 4379: 4373: 4366: 4360: 4359: 4350:: 801, 809–811. 4344:Texas Law Review 4339: 4318: 4312: 4306: 4300: 4291: 4285: 4278: 4272: 4271: 4254:Epstein, Richard 4246: 4223: 4217: 4210: 4204: 4203: 4183: 4177: 4176: 4160: 4149: 4148: 4116: 4110: 4109: 4099: 4071: 4061: 4044:(6): 1161–1248. 4030: 4024: 3994: 3982: 3976: 3975: 3959: 3953: 3946: 3940: 3933: 3927: 3918: 3912: 3901: 3892: 3883: 3877: 3868: 3862: 3842: 3836: 3825: 3819: 3801: 3795: 3780: 3774: 3773: 3757: 3751: 3747: 3741: 3727: 3721: 3720: 3718: 3717: 3706: 3700: 3699: 3697: 3695: 3660: 3654: 3653: 3651: 3650: 3644: 3638:. Archived from 3633: 3623: 3617: 3609:Yale Law Journal 3601: 3595: 3588: 3582: 3581: 3549: 3537: 3527: 3507: 3495: 3480: 3474: 3459: 3453: 3447: 3441: 3434: 3428: 3427: 3402: 3396: 3395: 3386:(6): 1049–1069. 3380:Duke Law Journal 3375: 3369: 3368: 3349: 3343: 3336: 3330: 3329: 3296: 3290: 3287: 3281: 3262: 3256: 3210: 3204: 3201: 3195: 3192: 3186: 3185: 3183: 3182: 3173:. Archived from 3130: 3124: 3121: 3115: 3114: 3081: 3075: 3074: 3048: 3042: 3041: 3039: 3037: 3026: 3020: 3003: 2997: 2990:Kerber, Linda. 2988: 2982: 2973: 2967: 2960:Wayne, Stephen. 2958: 2952: 2945: 2939: 2928: 2922: 2906: 2900: 2888: 2882: 2875: 2869: 2862: 2856: 2847: 2841: 2838: 2832: 2821: 2815: 2814: 2812: 2810: 2799: 2793: 2784: 2778: 2767: 2761: 2738: 2732: 2719:Kelly, Alfred. " 2717: 2708: 2707: 2705: 2704: 2690: 2684: 2683: 2672: 2666: 2665: 2633: 2627: 2620: 2614: 2613: 2585: 2576: 2575: 2558:(6): 1023–1084. 2547: 2536: 2535: 2533: 2532: 2518: 2509: 2508: 2477: 2468: 2467: 2448: 2442: 2439: 2433: 2426: 2420: 2415:Rosen, Jeffrey. 2413: 2407: 2400: 2394: 2393: 2375: 2363: 2349: 2343: 2342: 2306: 2300: 2299: 2290:(55): 19. 2007. 2283: 2277: 2276: 2274: 2273: 2259: 2250: 2249: 2247: 2246: 2237:. Archived from 2206: 2200: 2199: 2193: 2191: 2186:on June 22, 2020 2182:. Archived from 2172: 2166: 2165: 2159: 2157: 2138: 2132: 2131: 2123:. Archived from 2102: 1819:City of Cleburne 1813:sodomy, and not 1783:City of Cleburne 1710:Reynolds v. Sims 1627:Nixon v. Herndon 1594:McClesky v. Kemp 1532:Disparate impact 739:women's suffrage 672: 596:Thaddeus Stevens 409:(1954) that the 361: 340: 333: 326: 236:Equal protection 221:Right to privacy 160:Local government 155:State government 143:Executive branch 46: 30: 29: 21: 18:Equal protection 10050: 10049: 10045: 10044: 10043: 10041: 10040: 10039: 10005: 10004: 10003: 9994: 9970: 9955: 9843: 9822: 9571: 9536: 9474:In re Griffiths 9418:Webb v. O'Brien 9357: 9322: 9143: 9073:Texas v. Lesage 8865:Hadnott v. Amos 8650:Pace v. Alabama 8633: 8612: 8390:Hoyt v. Florida 8329: 8259:Felder v. Casey 8155: 8149: 7936: 7835: 7813:Adams v. Tanner 7773:Holden v. Hardy 7747: 7736: 7719: 7697:Afroyim v. Rusk 7647: 7634: 7628: 7598: 7593: 7485: 7405: 7320: 7289: 7255:Electoral fraud 7243: 7239:Voting in space 7229:Recall election 7204:Absentee ballot 7185: 7063: 7057: 6981: 6975: 6970: 6940: 6931: 6908: 6854:Rice v. Collins 6822:Purkett v. Elem 6767:Ford v. Georgia 6729: 6670: 6557:Carter v. Texas 6513: 6488: 6470: 6438: 6425: 6414: 6384: 6379: 6314: 6308: 6276: 6272:William Jackson 6260: 6256:Abraham Baldwin 6239: 6208: 6204:Hugh Williamson 6182: 6161: 6135: 6126:Richard Bassett 6099: 6085:Jared Ingersoll 6048: 6044:Jonathan Dayton 6017: 6001: 5980: 5959: 5955:Nicholas Gilman 5938: 5913: 5879:Reserved powers 5859:Judicial review 5792: 5588:General Welfare 5511:Double Jeopardy 5422: 5349:List of Framers 5329:New Jersey Plan 5283: 5265: 5261:Victims' Rights 5181:Balanced budget 5167: 5120: 5049: 5021: 5000: 4924: 4873: 4868: 4803:Wayback Machine 4792: 4791: 4780: 4774: 4772: 4769: 4762: 4753: 4743: 4738: 4732: 4731: 4730:(2 parts, 4729: 4726: 4723: 4718: 4666:10.2307/4093259 4640:Siegel, Reva B. 4636: 4632: 4608: 4604: 4589:10.2307/1073012 4572: 4565: 4561: 4551: 4549: 4544: 4543: 4539: 4532:Wayback Machine 4522: 4518: 4506:Wayback Machine 4496: 4492: 4481: 4477: 4466:Fricke v. Lynch 4442: 4438: 4380: 4376: 4367: 4363: 4319: 4315: 4307: 4303: 4292: 4288: 4279: 4275: 4268: 4243: 4224: 4220: 4216:, p. 33 (1965). 4211: 4207: 4184: 4180: 4161: 4152: 4137:10.2307/1143133 4117: 4113: 4088:10.2307/1228797 4050:10.2307/1229191 4031: 4027: 3983: 3979: 3960: 3956: 3947: 3943: 3934: 3930: 3919: 3915: 3902: 3895: 3884: 3880: 3869: 3865: 3843: 3839: 3826: 3822: 3812:Wayback Machine 3802: 3798: 3781: 3777: 3758: 3754: 3748: 3744: 3728: 3724: 3715: 3713: 3708: 3707: 3703: 3693: 3691: 3661: 3657: 3648: 3646: 3642: 3631: 3624: 3620: 3602: 3598: 3589: 3585: 3570:10.2307/1073592 3546: 3524: 3504: 3481: 3477: 3460: 3456: 3448: 3444: 3435: 3431: 3424: 3403: 3399: 3376: 3372: 3365: 3350: 3346: 3338:Feldman, Noah. 3337: 3333: 3318:10.2307/1599798 3297: 3293: 3288: 3284: 3266:Leland Stanford 3263: 3259: 3211: 3207: 3202: 3198: 3193: 3189: 3180: 3178: 3131: 3127: 3122: 3118: 3091:Iowa Law Review 3082: 3078: 3071: 3049: 3045: 3035: 3033: 3028: 3027: 3023: 3004: 3000: 2989: 2985: 2974: 2970: 2959: 2955: 2947:Woloch, Nancy. 2946: 2942: 2929: 2925: 2907: 2903: 2889: 2885: 2876: 2872: 2864:Pascoe, Peggy. 2863: 2859: 2848: 2844: 2839: 2835: 2823:Flack, Horace. 2822: 2818: 2808: 2806: 2800: 2796: 2785: 2781: 2768: 2764: 2739: 2735: 2718: 2711: 2702: 2700: 2692: 2691: 2687: 2674: 2673: 2669: 2654:10.2307/1118709 2634: 2630: 2621: 2617: 2586: 2579: 2564:10.2307/1121988 2548: 2539: 2530: 2528: 2520: 2519: 2512: 2497:10.2307/3330348 2478: 2471: 2464: 2449: 2445: 2440: 2436: 2428:Newman, Roger. 2427: 2423: 2414: 2410: 2401: 2397: 2390: 2372: 2350: 2346: 2323:10.2307/2127194 2307: 2303: 2285: 2284: 2280: 2271: 2269: 2261: 2260: 2253: 2244: 2242: 2227:10.2307/3477928 2207: 2203: 2189: 2187: 2174: 2173: 2169: 2155: 2153: 2140: 2139: 2135: 2121: 2103: 2099: 2095: 2090: 2076:Social equality 2071:Racial equality 2016: 1989:Clarence Thomas 1876: 1870: 1727: 1614: 1534: 1528: 1482:strict scrutiny 1434: 1432:Tiered scrutiny 1386:Fifth Amendment 1382: 1289:In response to 1195: 1189: 1015: 971: 918:Roscoe Conkling 913: 751: 679: 670: 616: 580:white Unionists 449: 431: 415:Fifth Amendment 359: 344: 150:Judicial branch 76:Judicial review 35: 28: 23: 22: 15: 12: 11: 5: 10048: 10038: 10037: 10032: 10027: 10022: 10020:Egalitarianism 10017: 10000: 9999: 9996: 9995: 9993: 9992: 9984: 9975: 9972: 9971: 9961: 9960: 9957: 9956: 9954: 9953: 9945: 9937: 9929: 9921: 9913: 9905: 9897: 9889: 9881: 9873: 9865: 9857: 9848: 9845: 9844: 9832: 9831: 9828: 9827: 9824: 9823: 9821: 9820: 9812: 9804: 9800:Vacco v. Quill 9796: 9788: 9780: 9776:Clark v. Jeter 9772: 9764: 9756: 9748: 9740: 9732: 9724: 9716: 9708: 9700: 9692: 9684: 9676: 9668: 9660: 9652: 9644: 9636: 9632:Oyler v. Boles 9628: 9620: 9612: 9604: 9596: 9588: 9579: 9577: 9573: 9572: 9570: 9569: 9561: 9553: 9544: 9542: 9538: 9537: 9535: 9534: 9526: 9518: 9510: 9502: 9494: 9486: 9478: 9470: 9462: 9454: 9446: 9438: 9430: 9422: 9414: 9406: 9398: 9390: 9386:Heim v. McCall 9382: 9378:Truax v. Raich 9374: 9365: 9363: 9359: 9358: 9356: 9355: 9347: 9343:Romer v. Evans 9339: 9330: 9328: 9324: 9323: 9321: 9320: 9312: 9304: 9296: 9288: 9280: 9272: 9264: 9256: 9248: 9240: 9232: 9224: 9220:Craig v. Boren 9216: 9208: 9200: 9192: 9188:Kahn v. Shevin 9184: 9176: 9168: 9160: 9151: 9149: 9145: 9144: 9142: 9141: 9133: 9125: 9117: 9109: 9101: 9093: 9085: 9077: 9069: 9061: 9053: 9045: 9037: 9029: 9021: 9013: 9005: 8997: 8989: 8981: 8973: 8965: 8957: 8949: 8941: 8933: 8925: 8917: 8909: 8901: 8893: 8885: 8877: 8869: 8861: 8853: 8845: 8837: 8829: 8821: 8813: 8805: 8797: 8789: 8781: 8780: 8779: 8772: 8765: 8750: 8742: 8734: 8730:Perez v. Sharp 8726: 8718: 8710: 8702: 8694: 8690:Smith v. Texas 8686: 8678: 8670: 8662: 8654: 8645: 8643: 8635: 8634: 8622: 8621: 8618: 8617: 8614: 8613: 8611: 8610: 8602: 8594: 8586: 8578: 8570: 8562: 8554: 8546: 8538: 8530: 8522: 8514: 8506: 8498: 8490: 8486:Parham v. J.R. 8482: 8474: 8466: 8458: 8450: 8442: 8434: 8426: 8418: 8410: 8402: 8398:Oyler v. Boles 8394: 8386: 8378: 8370: 8362: 8354: 8346: 8337: 8335: 8331: 8330: 8328: 8327: 8319: 8311: 8303: 8295: 8287: 8279: 8271: 8263: 8255: 8247: 8239: 8233: 8225: 8217: 8209: 8201: 8195: 8189: 8183: 8180:Pierson v. Ray 8177: 8171: 8167:Monroe v. Pape 8162: 8160: 8151: 8150: 8148: 8147: 8139: 8131: 8123: 8115: 8107: 8099: 8091: 8083: 8075: 8067: 8059: 8051: 8043: 8035: 8027: 8019: 8011: 8003: 7995: 7987: 7979: 7971: 7963: 7955: 7946: 7944: 7938: 7937: 7935: 7934: 7926: 7918: 7910: 7902: 7894: 7886: 7878: 7870: 7862: 7854: 7845: 7843: 7837: 7836: 7834: 7833: 7825: 7817: 7809: 7801: 7793: 7785: 7777: 7769: 7761: 7752: 7750: 7738: 7737: 7725: 7724: 7721: 7720: 7718: 7717: 7709: 7701: 7693: 7685: 7677: 7673:Elk v. Wilkins 7669: 7661: 7652: 7649: 7648: 7636: 7635: 7627: 7626: 7619: 7612: 7604: 7595: 7594: 7592: 7591: 7586: 7581: 7576: 7571: 7566: 7561: 7556: 7551: 7546: 7541: 7536: 7531: 7526: 7521: 7516: 7515: 7514: 7504: 7499: 7493: 7491: 7487: 7486: 7484: 7483: 7478: 7473: 7468: 7466:Freedom Summer 7463: 7456: 7455: 7454: 7444: 7439: 7434: 7432:Suffrage Hikes 7429: 7424: 7419: 7413: 7411: 7407: 7406: 7404: 7403: 7398: 7393: 7388: 7386:Guam residents 7383: 7378: 7373: 7368: 7363: 7358: 7353: 7348: 7343: 7338: 7332: 7330: 7326: 7325: 7322: 7321: 7319: 7318: 7313: 7308: 7306:Gerrymandering 7303: 7297: 7295: 7291: 7290: 7288: 7287: 7282: 7277: 7272: 7267: 7262: 7257: 7251: 7249: 7245: 7244: 7242: 7241: 7236: 7231: 7226: 7221: 7216: 7211: 7206: 7200: 7198: 7191: 7187: 7186: 7184: 7183: 7182: 7181: 7171: 7166: 7161: 7160: 7159: 7154: 7144: 7139: 7138: 7137: 7132: 7122: 7117: 7112: 7111: 7110: 7105: 7095: 7094: 7093: 7088: 7083: 7073: 7067: 7065: 7059: 7058: 7056: 7055: 7053:26th Amendment 7050: 7048:24th Amendment 7045: 7043:23rd Amendment 7040: 7038:19th Amendment 7035: 7033:17th Amendment 7030: 7028:15th Amendment 7025: 7024: 7023: 7018: 7011:14th Amendment 7008: 7003: 7002: 7001: 6996: 6985: 6983: 6980:Constitutional 6977: 6976: 6969: 6968: 6961: 6954: 6946: 6937: 6936: 6933: 6932: 6930: 6929: 6913: 6910: 6909: 6907: 6906: 6898: 6890: 6882: 6874: 6866: 6858: 6850: 6842: 6834: 6826: 6818: 6810: 6802: 6794: 6786: 6778: 6774:Powers v. Ohio 6770: 6764: 6760:Teague v. Lane 6756: 6748: 6739: 6737: 6731: 6730: 6728: 6727: 6721: 6715: 6707: 6699: 6693: 6687: 6678: 6676: 6672: 6671: 6669: 6668: 6660: 6654: 6648: 6640: 6634: 6628: 6622: 6616: 6613:Smith v. Texas 6610: 6602: 6594: 6586: 6578: 6572: 6566: 6560: 6554: 6548: 6542: 6536: 6530: 6521: 6519: 6515: 6514: 6512: 6511: 6506: 6500: 6498: 6490: 6489: 6486:jury selection 6476: 6475: 6472: 6471: 6469: 6468: 6460: 6452: 6443: 6440: 6439: 6427: 6426: 6416:United States 6413: 6412: 6405: 6398: 6390: 6381: 6380: 6378: 6377: 6372: 6364: 6356: 6351: 6346: 6341: 6336: 6331: 6330: 6329: 6318: 6316: 6310: 6309: 6307: 6306: 6301: 6296: 6288: 6286: 6282: 6281: 6278: 6277: 6275: 6274: 6268: 6266: 6262: 6261: 6259: 6258: 6253: 6247: 6245: 6241: 6240: 6238: 6237: 6232: 6227: 6222: 6216: 6214: 6213:South Carolina 6210: 6209: 6207: 6206: 6201: 6196: 6194:William Blount 6190: 6188: 6187:North Carolina 6184: 6183: 6181: 6180: 6175: 6169: 6167: 6163: 6162: 6160: 6159: 6157:Daniel Carroll 6154: 6149: 6143: 6141: 6137: 6136: 6134: 6133: 6128: 6123: 6121:John Dickinson 6118: 6113: 6107: 6105: 6101: 6100: 6098: 6097: 6092: 6087: 6082: 6077: 6072: 6067: 6065:Thomas Mifflin 6062: 6056: 6054: 6050: 6049: 6047: 6046: 6041: 6036: 6034:David Brearley 6031: 6025: 6023: 6019: 6018: 6016: 6015: 6009: 6007: 6003: 6002: 6000: 5999: 5994: 5988: 5986: 5982: 5981: 5979: 5978: 5973: 5967: 5965: 5961: 5960: 5958: 5957: 5952: 5946: 5944: 5940: 5939: 5937: 5936: 5930: 5928: 5921: 5915: 5914: 5912: 5911: 5906: 5904:Taxation power 5901: 5896: 5891: 5886: 5881: 5876: 5871: 5866: 5861: 5856: 5851: 5849:Implied powers 5846: 5841: 5836: 5831: 5826: 5821: 5816: 5811: 5806: 5800: 5798: 5797:Interpretation 5794: 5793: 5791: 5790: 5785: 5780: 5762: 5757: 5752: 5745: 5740: 5735: 5730: 5725: 5720: 5715: 5710: 5705: 5700: 5695: 5693:Recommendation 5690: 5685: 5680: 5675: 5670: 5665: 5660: 5655: 5650: 5645: 5640: 5635: 5630: 5625: 5620: 5615: 5610: 5605: 5600: 5595: 5590: 5585: 5580: 5578:Fugitive Slave 5575: 5570: 5565: 5560: 5555: 5548: 5546:Excessive Bail 5543: 5538: 5533: 5528: 5523: 5518: 5513: 5508: 5503: 5498: 5493: 5488: 5483: 5478: 5473: 5468: 5463: 5458: 5453: 5448: 5446:Appropriations 5443: 5438: 5432: 5430: 5424: 5423: 5421: 5420: 5415: 5410: 5405: 5400: 5395: 5390: 5385: 5380: 5373: 5372: 5371: 5366: 5361: 5356: 5351: 5346: 5341: 5336: 5331: 5326: 5316: 5311: 5306: 5301: 5295: 5293: 5289: 5288: 5285: 5284: 5282: 5281: 5276: 5270: 5267: 5266: 5264: 5263: 5258: 5256:Single subject 5253: 5248: 5243: 5238: 5233: 5228: 5223: 5218: 5213: 5208: 5203: 5198: 5193: 5188: 5183: 5177: 5175: 5169: 5168: 5166: 5165: 5160: 5155: 5150: 5145: 5140: 5134: 5132: 5126: 5125: 5122: 5121: 5119: 5118: 5113: 5108: 5103: 5098: 5093: 5088: 5083: 5078: 5073: 5068: 5063: 5057: 5055: 5051: 5050: 5048: 5047: 5042: 5037: 5031: 5029: 5027:Reconstruction 5023: 5022: 5020: 5019: 5014: 5008: 5006: 5002: 5001: 4999: 4998: 4993: 4988: 4983: 4978: 4973: 4968: 4963: 4958: 4953: 4947: 4945: 4943:Bill of Rights 4932: 4926: 4925: 4923: 4922: 4917: 4912: 4907: 4902: 4897: 4892: 4887: 4881: 4879: 4875: 4874: 4867: 4866: 4859: 4852: 4844: 4838: 4837: 4825: 4824: 4818: 4812: 4806: 4781: 4770: 4763: 4761: 4760: 4750: 4739: 4725: 4724: 4722: 4721:External links 4719: 4717: 4716: 4703:10.2307/796412 4697:(3): 420–447. 4630: 4627:on 2005-09-09. 4602: 4583:(5): 753–798. 4559: 4537: 4516: 4490: 4475: 4473:627 F.2d 1088 4436: 4415:Romer v. Evans 4374: 4361: 4313: 4309:Craig v. Boren 4301: 4286: 4273: 4266: 4250:Sunstein, Cass 4241: 4218: 4205: 4194:(3): 671–732. 4178: 4150: 4131:(3): 661–753. 4111: 4082:(2): 317–388. 4025: 3977: 3954: 3948:Domino, John. 3941: 3928: 3923:Romer v. Evans 3913: 3893: 3878: 3863: 3837: 3820: 3796: 3775: 3752: 3742: 3722: 3701: 3675:(1): 120–141. 3655: 3618: 3596: 3583: 3544: 3522: 3502: 3475: 3454: 3442: 3429: 3422: 3413:Simple Justice 3397: 3370: 3363: 3351:See generally 3344: 3331: 3312:(2): 504–555. 3291: 3282: 3257: 3230:Morrison Waite 3205: 3196: 3187: 3125: 3116: 3076: 3069: 3043: 3021: 2998: 2983: 2968: 2953: 2940: 2923: 2901: 2883: 2870: 2857: 2842: 2833: 2816: 2794: 2779: 2762: 2733: 2709: 2685: 2667: 2648:(2): 131–169. 2628: 2615: 2602:10.2307/272626 2577: 2537: 2510: 2469: 2462: 2443: 2434: 2421: 2408: 2395: 2388: 2370: 2344: 2317:(2): 167–183. 2301: 2278: 2251: 2221:(3): 362–377. 2201: 2197:circumstances. 2167: 2133: 2119: 2096: 2094: 2091: 2089: 2088: 2083: 2078: 2073: 2068: 2063: 2058: 2053: 2048: 2043: 2038: 2033: 2028: 2026:Egalitarianism 2023: 2017: 2015: 2012: 1891:Reconstruction 1869: 1866: 1773:Romer v. Evans 1746:Craig v. Boren 1726: 1723: 1660:John M. Harlan 1613: 1610: 1602:Stop and Frisk 1578:equal outcomes 1566:The result in 1530:Main article: 1527: 1524: 1519:Antonin Scalia 1494:Craig v. Boren 1433: 1430: 1381: 1378: 1188: 1182: 1114:Fred M. Vinson 1014: 1004: 970: 967: 912: 909: 872:Henry B. Brown 765:all-white jury 750: 743: 727:Reconstruction 704:Burns v. State 678: 675: 646:Robert S. Hale 625:Charles Sumner 615: 612: 592:Charles Sumner 448: 445: 430: 427: 346: 345: 343: 342: 335: 328: 320: 317: 316: 315: 314: 309: 304: 299: 294: 289: 284: 279: 274: 266: 265: 261: 260: 259: 258: 253: 248: 243: 238: 233: 228: 223: 218: 213: 208: 203: 198: 193: 188: 183: 178: 170: 169: 165: 164: 163: 162: 157: 152: 146: 145: 140: 132: 131: 127: 126: 125: 124: 119: 114: 109: 104: 99: 94: 86: 85: 81: 80: 79: 78: 73: 67: 66: 61: 53: 52: 48: 47: 39: 38: 26: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 10047: 10036: 10033: 10031: 10028: 10026: 10023: 10021: 10018: 10016: 10013: 10012: 10010: 9990: 9989: 9985: 9982: 9981: 9977: 9976: 9973: 9966: 9962: 9951: 9950: 9946: 9943: 9942: 9938: 9935: 9934: 9930: 9927: 9926: 9922: 9919: 9918: 9914: 9911: 9910: 9906: 9903: 9902: 9898: 9895: 9894: 9890: 9887: 9886: 9882: 9879: 9878: 9874: 9871: 9870: 9866: 9863: 9862: 9858: 9855: 9854: 9850: 9849: 9846: 9842: 9837: 9833: 9818: 9817: 9813: 9810: 9809: 9805: 9802: 9801: 9797: 9794: 9793: 9789: 9786: 9785: 9781: 9778: 9777: 9773: 9770: 9769: 9765: 9762: 9761: 9757: 9754: 9753: 9749: 9746: 9745: 9741: 9738: 9737: 9733: 9730: 9729: 9725: 9722: 9721: 9717: 9714: 9713: 9709: 9706: 9705: 9701: 9698: 9697: 9693: 9690: 9689: 9685: 9682: 9681: 9677: 9674: 9673: 9669: 9666: 9665: 9661: 9658: 9657: 9653: 9650: 9649: 9645: 9642: 9641: 9637: 9634: 9633: 9629: 9626: 9625: 9621: 9618: 9617: 9613: 9610: 9609: 9605: 9602: 9601: 9597: 9594: 9593: 9589: 9586: 9585: 9581: 9580: 9578: 9574: 9567: 9566: 9562: 9559: 9558: 9554: 9551: 9550: 9546: 9545: 9543: 9539: 9532: 9531: 9527: 9524: 9523: 9522:Plyler v. Doe 9519: 9516: 9515: 9511: 9508: 9507: 9503: 9500: 9499: 9495: 9492: 9491: 9487: 9484: 9483: 9479: 9476: 9475: 9471: 9468: 9467: 9463: 9460: 9459: 9455: 9452: 9451: 9447: 9444: 9443: 9439: 9436: 9435: 9431: 9428: 9427: 9426:Frick v. Webb 9423: 9420: 9419: 9415: 9412: 9411: 9407: 9404: 9403: 9399: 9396: 9395: 9391: 9388: 9387: 9383: 9380: 9379: 9375: 9372: 9371: 9367: 9366: 9364: 9360: 9353: 9352: 9348: 9345: 9344: 9340: 9337: 9336: 9332: 9331: 9329: 9325: 9318: 9317: 9313: 9310: 9309: 9305: 9302: 9301: 9297: 9294: 9293: 9289: 9286: 9285: 9281: 9278: 9277: 9273: 9270: 9269: 9265: 9262: 9261: 9257: 9254: 9253: 9249: 9246: 9245: 9241: 9238: 9237: 9233: 9230: 9229: 9225: 9222: 9221: 9217: 9214: 9213: 9209: 9206: 9205: 9201: 9198: 9197: 9193: 9190: 9189: 9185: 9182: 9181: 9177: 9174: 9173: 9169: 9166: 9165: 9161: 9158: 9157: 9153: 9152: 9150: 9146: 9139: 9138: 9134: 9131: 9130: 9126: 9123: 9122: 9118: 9115: 9114: 9110: 9107: 9106: 9102: 9099: 9098: 9094: 9091: 9090: 9086: 9083: 9082: 9078: 9075: 9074: 9070: 9067: 9066: 9062: 9059: 9058: 9054: 9051: 9050: 9046: 9043: 9042: 9038: 9035: 9034: 9030: 9027: 9026: 9022: 9019: 9018: 9014: 9011: 9010: 9006: 9003: 9002: 8998: 8995: 8994: 8990: 8987: 8986: 8982: 8979: 8978: 8974: 8971: 8970: 8966: 8963: 8962: 8958: 8955: 8954: 8950: 8947: 8946: 8942: 8939: 8938: 8934: 8931: 8930: 8926: 8923: 8922: 8918: 8915: 8914: 8913:Coit v. Green 8910: 8907: 8906: 8902: 8899: 8898: 8894: 8891: 8890: 8886: 8883: 8882: 8878: 8875: 8874: 8870: 8867: 8866: 8862: 8859: 8858: 8854: 8851: 8850: 8846: 8843: 8842: 8838: 8835: 8834: 8830: 8827: 8826: 8822: 8819: 8818: 8814: 8811: 8810: 8806: 8803: 8802: 8798: 8795: 8794: 8790: 8787: 8786: 8785:Lucy v. Adams 8782: 8778: 8777: 8773: 8771: 8770: 8766: 8764: 8763: 8759: 8758: 8756: 8755: 8751: 8748: 8747: 8743: 8740: 8739: 8735: 8732: 8731: 8727: 8724: 8723: 8719: 8716: 8715: 8711: 8708: 8707: 8703: 8700: 8699: 8695: 8692: 8691: 8687: 8684: 8683: 8679: 8676: 8675: 8671: 8668: 8667: 8663: 8660: 8659: 8655: 8652: 8651: 8647: 8646: 8644: 8640: 8636: 8632: 8627: 8623: 8608: 8607: 8603: 8600: 8599: 8595: 8592: 8591: 8587: 8584: 8583: 8579: 8576: 8575: 8571: 8568: 8567: 8563: 8560: 8559: 8555: 8552: 8551: 8547: 8544: 8543: 8539: 8536: 8535: 8531: 8528: 8527: 8523: 8520: 8519: 8515: 8512: 8511: 8507: 8504: 8503: 8499: 8496: 8495: 8491: 8488: 8487: 8483: 8480: 8479: 8475: 8472: 8471: 8467: 8464: 8463: 8459: 8456: 8455: 8454:Goss v. Lopez 8451: 8448: 8447: 8443: 8440: 8439: 8435: 8432: 8431: 8427: 8424: 8423: 8422:In re Winship 8419: 8416: 8415: 8411: 8408: 8407: 8403: 8400: 8399: 8395: 8392: 8391: 8387: 8384: 8383: 8379: 8376: 8375: 8371: 8368: 8367: 8363: 8360: 8359: 8355: 8352: 8351: 8350:Zucht v. King 8347: 8344: 8343: 8339: 8338: 8336: 8332: 8325: 8324: 8320: 8317: 8316: 8312: 8309: 8308: 8304: 8301: 8300: 8296: 8293: 8292: 8288: 8285: 8284: 8280: 8277: 8276: 8272: 8269: 8268: 8264: 8261: 8260: 8256: 8253: 8252: 8248: 8245: 8244: 8240: 8237: 8234: 8231: 8230: 8226: 8223: 8222: 8218: 8215: 8214: 8213:Paul v. Davis 8210: 8207: 8206: 8202: 8199: 8196: 8193: 8190: 8187: 8184: 8181: 8178: 8175: 8172: 8169: 8168: 8164: 8163: 8161: 8159: 8152: 8145: 8144: 8140: 8137: 8136: 8132: 8129: 8128: 8124: 8121: 8120: 8119:Azar v. Garza 8116: 8113: 8112: 8108: 8105: 8104: 8100: 8097: 8096: 8092: 8089: 8088: 8084: 8081: 8080: 8076: 8073: 8072: 8068: 8065: 8064: 8060: 8057: 8056: 8052: 8049: 8048: 8044: 8041: 8040: 8036: 8033: 8032: 8028: 8025: 8024: 8020: 8017: 8016: 8012: 8009: 8008: 8004: 8001: 8000: 7996: 7993: 7992: 7988: 7985: 7984: 7980: 7977: 7976: 7972: 7969: 7968: 7967:Doe v. Bolton 7964: 7961: 7960: 7956: 7953: 7952: 7948: 7947: 7945: 7943: 7939: 7932: 7931: 7927: 7924: 7923: 7919: 7916: 7915: 7911: 7908: 7907: 7903: 7900: 7899: 7895: 7892: 7891: 7887: 7884: 7883: 7882:Doe v. Bolton 7879: 7876: 7875: 7871: 7868: 7867: 7863: 7860: 7859: 7855: 7852: 7851: 7847: 7846: 7844: 7842: 7838: 7831: 7830: 7826: 7823: 7822: 7818: 7815: 7814: 7810: 7807: 7806: 7802: 7799: 7798: 7794: 7791: 7790: 7786: 7783: 7782: 7778: 7775: 7774: 7770: 7767: 7766: 7762: 7759: 7758: 7754: 7753: 7751: 7749: 7743: 7739: 7735: 7730: 7726: 7715: 7714: 7710: 7707: 7706: 7702: 7699: 7698: 7694: 7691: 7690: 7686: 7683: 7682: 7678: 7675: 7674: 7670: 7667: 7666: 7662: 7659: 7658: 7654: 7653: 7650: 7646: 7641: 7637: 7632: 7625: 7620: 7618: 7613: 7611: 7606: 7605: 7602: 7590: 7587: 7585: 7582: 7580: 7577: 7575: 7574:Secret ballot 7572: 7570: 7569:Redistricting 7567: 7565: 7562: 7560: 7557: 7555: 7552: 7550: 7547: 7545: 7542: 7540: 7537: 7535: 7532: 7530: 7527: 7525: 7522: 7520: 7517: 7513: 7510: 7509: 7508: 7505: 7503: 7500: 7498: 7497:Ballot access 7495: 7494: 7492: 7488: 7482: 7479: 7477: 7474: 7472: 7469: 7467: 7464: 7461: 7457: 7453: 7450: 7449: 7448: 7445: 7443: 7440: 7438: 7435: 7433: 7430: 7428: 7425: 7423: 7420: 7418: 7415: 7414: 7412: 7408: 7402: 7399: 7397: 7394: 7392: 7389: 7387: 7384: 7382: 7379: 7377: 7374: 7372: 7369: 7367: 7364: 7362: 7359: 7357: 7354: 7352: 7349: 7347: 7344: 7342: 7339: 7337: 7334: 7333: 7331: 7327: 7317: 7314: 7312: 7309: 7307: 7304: 7302: 7299: 7298: 7296: 7294:Vote dilution 7292: 7286: 7283: 7281: 7280:Voter ID laws 7278: 7276: 7273: 7271: 7268: 7266: 7265:Literacy test 7263: 7261: 7258: 7256: 7253: 7252: 7250: 7246: 7240: 7237: 7235: 7232: 7230: 7227: 7225: 7222: 7220: 7219:Postal voting 7217: 7215: 7212: 7210: 7207: 7205: 7202: 7201: 7199: 7195: 7192: 7188: 7180: 7177: 7176: 7175: 7172: 7170: 7167: 7165: 7162: 7158: 7155: 7153: 7150: 7149: 7148: 7145: 7143: 7140: 7136: 7133: 7131: 7128: 7127: 7126: 7123: 7121: 7118: 7116: 7113: 7109: 7106: 7104: 7101: 7100: 7099: 7096: 7092: 7089: 7087: 7084: 7082: 7079: 7078: 7077: 7074: 7072: 7069: 7068: 7066: 7060: 7054: 7051: 7049: 7046: 7044: 7041: 7039: 7036: 7034: 7031: 7029: 7026: 7022: 7019: 7017: 7014: 7013: 7012: 7009: 7007: 7006:1st Amendment 7004: 7000: 6997: 6995: 6992: 6991: 6990: 6987: 6986: 6984: 6978: 6974: 6967: 6962: 6960: 6955: 6953: 6948: 6947: 6944: 6927: 6923: 6919: 6915: 6914: 6904: 6903: 6899: 6896: 6895: 6891: 6888: 6887: 6883: 6880: 6879: 6875: 6872: 6871: 6867: 6864: 6863: 6859: 6856: 6855: 6851: 6848: 6847: 6843: 6840: 6839: 6835: 6832: 6831: 6827: 6824: 6823: 6819: 6816: 6815: 6811: 6808: 6807: 6803: 6800: 6799: 6795: 6792: 6791: 6787: 6784: 6783: 6779: 6776: 6775: 6771: 6768: 6765: 6762: 6761: 6757: 6754: 6753: 6749: 6746: 6745: 6741: 6740: 6738: 6736: 6732: 6725: 6722: 6719: 6716: 6713: 6712: 6708: 6705: 6704: 6700: 6697: 6694: 6691: 6688: 6685: 6684: 6680: 6679: 6677: 6673: 6666: 6665: 6661: 6658: 6655: 6652: 6649: 6646: 6645: 6641: 6638: 6635: 6632: 6629: 6626: 6623: 6620: 6619:Hill v. Texas 6617: 6614: 6611: 6608: 6607: 6603: 6600: 6599: 6595: 6592: 6591: 6587: 6584: 6583: 6579: 6576: 6573: 6570: 6567: 6564: 6561: 6558: 6555: 6552: 6549: 6546: 6543: 6540: 6537: 6534: 6531: 6528: 6527: 6523: 6522: 6520: 6516: 6510: 6507: 6505: 6502: 6501: 6499: 6495: 6491: 6487: 6481: 6477: 6466: 6465: 6461: 6458: 6457: 6453: 6450: 6449: 6445: 6444: 6441: 6437: 6432: 6428: 6423: 6419: 6411: 6406: 6404: 6399: 6397: 6392: 6391: 6388: 6376: 6373: 6370: 6369: 6365: 6362: 6361: 6357: 6355: 6352: 6350: 6347: 6345: 6342: 6340: 6337: 6335: 6332: 6328: 6325: 6324: 6323: 6320: 6319: 6317: 6311: 6305: 6302: 6300: 6299:Jacob Shallus 6297: 6295: 6294: 6290: 6289: 6287: 6283: 6273: 6270: 6269: 6267: 6263: 6257: 6254: 6252: 6249: 6248: 6246: 6242: 6236: 6235:Pierce Butler 6233: 6231: 6228: 6226: 6223: 6221: 6220:John Rutledge 6218: 6217: 6215: 6211: 6205: 6202: 6200: 6197: 6195: 6192: 6191: 6189: 6185: 6179: 6178:James Madison 6176: 6174: 6171: 6170: 6168: 6164: 6158: 6155: 6153: 6150: 6148: 6147:James McHenry 6145: 6144: 6142: 6138: 6132: 6129: 6127: 6124: 6122: 6119: 6117: 6114: 6112: 6109: 6108: 6106: 6102: 6096: 6093: 6091: 6088: 6086: 6083: 6081: 6078: 6076: 6075:George Clymer 6073: 6071: 6070:Robert Morris 6068: 6066: 6063: 6061: 6058: 6057: 6055: 6051: 6045: 6042: 6040: 6037: 6035: 6032: 6030: 6027: 6026: 6024: 6020: 6014: 6011: 6010: 6008: 6004: 5998: 5997:Roger Sherman 5995: 5993: 5990: 5989: 5987: 5983: 5977: 5974: 5972: 5969: 5968: 5966: 5964:Massachusetts 5962: 5956: 5953: 5951: 5948: 5947: 5945: 5943:New Hampshire 5941: 5935: 5932: 5931: 5929: 5925: 5922: 5920: 5916: 5910: 5907: 5905: 5902: 5900: 5897: 5895: 5892: 5890: 5887: 5885: 5882: 5880: 5877: 5875: 5872: 5870: 5869:Plenary power 5867: 5865: 5862: 5860: 5857: 5855: 5852: 5850: 5847: 5845: 5842: 5840: 5839:Equal footing 5837: 5835: 5832: 5830: 5827: 5825: 5822: 5820: 5817: 5815: 5812: 5810: 5807: 5805: 5802: 5801: 5799: 5795: 5789: 5786: 5784: 5781: 5778: 5774: 5770: 5766: 5763: 5761: 5760:Trial by Jury 5758: 5756: 5753: 5750: 5746: 5744: 5741: 5739: 5736: 5734: 5731: 5729: 5726: 5724: 5721: 5719: 5716: 5714: 5711: 5709: 5706: 5704: 5701: 5699: 5696: 5694: 5691: 5689: 5686: 5684: 5681: 5679: 5676: 5674: 5671: 5669: 5666: 5664: 5661: 5659: 5656: 5654: 5651: 5649: 5646: 5644: 5641: 5639: 5636: 5634: 5631: 5629: 5626: 5624: 5621: 5619: 5616: 5614: 5613:Ineligibility 5611: 5609: 5608:Import-Export 5606: 5604: 5601: 5599: 5596: 5594: 5591: 5589: 5586: 5584: 5581: 5579: 5576: 5574: 5571: 5569: 5566: 5564: 5563:Free Exercise 5561: 5559: 5556: 5554: 5553: 5552:Ex Post Facto 5549: 5547: 5544: 5542: 5539: 5537: 5536:Establishment 5534: 5532: 5529: 5527: 5524: 5522: 5519: 5517: 5514: 5512: 5509: 5507: 5504: 5502: 5499: 5497: 5494: 5492: 5489: 5487: 5486:Confrontation 5484: 5482: 5479: 5477: 5474: 5472: 5469: 5467: 5464: 5462: 5459: 5457: 5454: 5452: 5449: 5447: 5444: 5442: 5439: 5437: 5434: 5433: 5431: 5429: 5425: 5419: 5416: 5414: 5411: 5409: 5406: 5404: 5401: 5399: 5396: 5394: 5391: 5389: 5386: 5384: 5381: 5379: 5378: 5374: 5370: 5369:Syng inkstand 5367: 5365: 5362: 5360: 5357: 5355: 5352: 5350: 5347: 5345: 5342: 5340: 5337: 5335: 5332: 5330: 5327: 5325: 5324:Virginia Plan 5322: 5321: 5320: 5317: 5315: 5312: 5310: 5307: 5305: 5302: 5300: 5297: 5296: 5294: 5290: 5280: 5277: 5275: 5272: 5271: 5268: 5262: 5259: 5257: 5254: 5252: 5251:School Prayer 5249: 5247: 5244: 5242: 5239: 5237: 5234: 5232: 5229: 5227: 5224: 5222: 5219: 5217: 5214: 5212: 5209: 5207: 5204: 5202: 5199: 5197: 5194: 5192: 5189: 5187: 5184: 5182: 5179: 5178: 5176: 5174: 5170: 5164: 5161: 5159: 5156: 5154: 5151: 5149: 5146: 5144: 5141: 5139: 5136: 5135: 5133: 5131: 5127: 5117: 5114: 5112: 5109: 5107: 5104: 5102: 5099: 5097: 5094: 5092: 5089: 5087: 5084: 5082: 5079: 5077: 5074: 5072: 5069: 5067: 5064: 5062: 5059: 5058: 5056: 5052: 5046: 5043: 5041: 5038: 5036: 5033: 5032: 5030: 5028: 5024: 5018: 5015: 5013: 5010: 5009: 5007: 5003: 4997: 4994: 4992: 4989: 4987: 4984: 4982: 4979: 4977: 4974: 4972: 4969: 4967: 4964: 4962: 4959: 4957: 4954: 4952: 4949: 4948: 4946: 4944: 4940: 4936: 4933: 4931: 4927: 4921: 4918: 4916: 4913: 4911: 4908: 4906: 4903: 4901: 4898: 4896: 4893: 4891: 4888: 4886: 4883: 4882: 4880: 4876: 4872: 4865: 4860: 4858: 4853: 4851: 4846: 4845: 4842: 4835: 4831: 4827: 4826: 4822: 4819: 4816: 4813: 4810: 4807: 4804: 4800: 4797: 4794: 4793: 4789: 4785: 4751: 4741: 4740: 4712: 4708: 4704: 4700: 4696: 4692: 4691: 4686: 4682: 4675: 4671: 4667: 4663: 4659: 4655: 4654: 4649: 4647: 4641: 4634: 4626: 4622: 4618: 4616: 4606: 4598: 4594: 4590: 4586: 4582: 4578: 4571: 4563: 4547: 4541: 4534: 4533: 4529: 4526: 4520: 4513: 4512: 4507: 4503: 4500: 4494: 4487: 4486: 4479: 4472: 4468: 4467: 4460: 4456: 4452: 4448: 4440: 4432: 4428: 4424: 4420: 4416: 4409: 4407: 4403: 4397: 4393: 4389: 4385: 4378: 4371: 4365: 4357: 4353: 4349: 4345: 4337: 4333: 4329: 4325: 4317: 4310: 4305: 4298: 4297: 4290: 4283: 4277: 4269: 4263: 4259: 4255: 4251: 4244: 4238: 4234: 4228: 4222: 4215: 4209: 4201: 4197: 4193: 4189: 4182: 4174: 4170: 4166: 4159: 4157: 4155: 4146: 4142: 4138: 4134: 4130: 4126: 4122: 4115: 4107: 4103: 4098: 4093: 4089: 4085: 4081: 4077: 4069: 4065: 4060: 4055: 4051: 4047: 4043: 4039: 4038: 4029: 4022: 4021: 4016: 4015: 4010: 4009: 4004: 4003: 3998: 3992: 3988: 3981: 3973: 3969: 3965: 3958: 3951: 3945: 3938: 3932: 3925: 3924: 3917: 3910: 3906: 3900: 3898: 3890: 3889: 3882: 3875: 3874: 3867: 3860: 3856: 3852: 3851: 3846: 3841: 3834: 3830: 3824: 3817: 3813: 3809: 3806: 3800: 3793: 3792:0-674-19637-6 3789: 3785: 3779: 3771: 3767: 3763: 3756: 3746: 3739: 3736: 3732: 3726: 3711: 3705: 3690: 3686: 3682: 3678: 3674: 3670: 3666: 3659: 3645:on 2007-06-28 3641: 3637: 3630: 3622: 3615: 3611: 3610: 3605: 3604:Minow, Martha 3600: 3593: 3587: 3579: 3575: 3571: 3567: 3563: 3559: 3555: 3547: 3541: 3536: 3535: 3525: 3519: 3515: 3514: 3505: 3499: 3494: 3493: 3485: 3479: 3472: 3468: 3464: 3458: 3451: 3446: 3439: 3433: 3425: 3419: 3415: 3414: 3407: 3401: 3393: 3389: 3385: 3381: 3374: 3366: 3360: 3356: 3348: 3341: 3335: 3327: 3323: 3319: 3315: 3311: 3307: 3303: 3295: 3286: 3279: 3275: 3271: 3267: 3261: 3254: 3253: 3248: 3244: 3240: 3236: 3231: 3227: 3224: 3220: 3216: 3215: 3209: 3200: 3191: 3177:on 2007-02-06 3176: 3172: 3168: 3164: 3160: 3156: 3150: 3147: 3143: 3139: 3135: 3129: 3120: 3112: 3108: 3104: 3100: 3096: 3092: 3088: 3080: 3072: 3066: 3062: 3058: 3053: 3047: 3031: 3025: 3018: 3015: 3011: 3007: 3002: 2995: 2994: 2987: 2980: 2979: 2972: 2965: 2964: 2957: 2950: 2944: 2937: 2933: 2927: 2920: 2919: 2914: 2910: 2905: 2898: 2897: 2892: 2887: 2880: 2874: 2867: 2861: 2854: 2853: 2846: 2837: 2830: 2826: 2820: 2805: 2798: 2791: 2790: 2783: 2776: 2772: 2766: 2759: 2756: 2752: 2751: 2746: 2742: 2737: 2730: 2726: 2722: 2716: 2714: 2699: 2695: 2689: 2681: 2677: 2671: 2663: 2659: 2655: 2651: 2647: 2643: 2639: 2632: 2625: 2619: 2611: 2607: 2603: 2599: 2595: 2591: 2584: 2582: 2573: 2569: 2565: 2561: 2557: 2553: 2546: 2544: 2542: 2527: 2523: 2517: 2515: 2506: 2502: 2498: 2494: 2490: 2486: 2482: 2476: 2474: 2465: 2459: 2455: 2447: 2438: 2431: 2425: 2418: 2412: 2405: 2399: 2391: 2385: 2381: 2376:, as well as 2373: 2367: 2362: 2361: 2355: 2348: 2340: 2336: 2332: 2328: 2324: 2320: 2316: 2312: 2305: 2297: 2293: 2289: 2282: 2268: 2264: 2258: 2256: 2241:on 2019-10-13 2240: 2236: 2232: 2228: 2224: 2220: 2216: 2212: 2205: 2198: 2185: 2181: 2177: 2171: 2164: 2151: 2147: 2143: 2137: 2130: 2126: 2122: 2116: 2112: 2108: 2101: 2097: 2087: 2084: 2082: 2079: 2077: 2074: 2072: 2069: 2067: 2064: 2062: 2059: 2057: 2054: 2052: 2049: 2047: 2044: 2042: 2039: 2037: 2034: 2032: 2029: 2027: 2024: 2022: 2019: 2018: 2011: 2009: 2008: 2003: 2002: 1996: 1994: 1990: 1986: 1982: 1976: 1974: 1970: 1966: 1962: 1958: 1954: 1950: 1946: 1941: 1939: 1938: 1933: 1932: 1927: 1926: 1921: 1917: 1916: 1911: 1910: 1905: 1900: 1898: 1897: 1892: 1887: 1885: 1880: 1875: 1865: 1862: 1861: 1855: 1853: 1849: 1845: 1844: 1839: 1834: 1830: 1828: 1824: 1820: 1816: 1812: 1808: 1804: 1801: 1797: 1796: 1790: 1788: 1784: 1779: 1775: 1774: 1768: 1765: 1761: 1760: 1755: 1750: 1748: 1747: 1742: 1741: 1735: 1733: 1722: 1719: 1715: 1711: 1707: 1703: 1699: 1698: 1692: 1690: 1689: 1681: 1680: 1677: 1673: 1667: 1665: 1661: 1657: 1653: 1649: 1648:voting rights 1644: 1642: 1639: 1635: 1634: 1633:Baker v. Carr 1629: 1628: 1618: 1612:Voting rights 1609: 1605: 1603: 1598: 1596: 1595: 1589: 1587: 1583: 1580:, but rather 1579: 1575: 1574: 1569: 1564: 1562: 1558: 1554: 1550: 1546: 1542: 1541: 1533: 1523: 1520: 1514: 1511: 1507: 1502: 1500: 1496: 1495: 1489: 1487: 1483: 1477: 1472: 1470: 1469: 1464: 1460: 1455: 1453: 1452: 1447: 1443: 1439: 1429: 1427: 1423: 1419: 1414: 1411: 1407: 1403: 1402: 1397: 1396: 1391: 1387: 1377: 1375: 1374: 1369: 1365: 1364: 1358: 1356: 1352: 1351: 1346: 1345: 1340: 1339:Richard Nixon 1335: 1330: 1327: 1323: 1319: 1316: 1312: 1311: 1306: 1302: 1301: 1296: 1292: 1287: 1285: 1281: 1277: 1276: 1271: 1267: 1263: 1259: 1252: 1247: 1243: 1241: 1237: 1233: 1232:school boards 1229: 1228: 1223: 1217: 1212: 1210: 1205: 1201: 1194: 1186: 1181: 1179: 1175: 1171: 1167: 1163: 1159: 1155: 1151: 1147: 1143: 1138: 1136: 1132: 1128: 1122: 1117: 1115: 1112: 1111:Chief Justice 1107: 1103: 1099: 1098: 1093: 1092: 1086: 1084: 1080: 1075: 1071: 1070: 1064: 1062: 1058: 1054: 1050: 1047:, one of the 1046: 1042: 1038: 1037: 1028: 1024: 1019: 1013: 1009: 1003: 1001: 996: 992: 987: 985: 980: 976: 966: 962: 958: 954: 950: 948: 944: 940: 935: 932: 927: 923: 919: 908: 906: 902: 898: 892: 890: 883: 881: 877: 873: 869: 865: 861: 858: 854: 853: 847: 845: 839: 834: 832: 831: 825: 823: 818: 815: 811: 807: 803: 799: 798: 790: 785: 781: 778: 773: 770: 769:West Virginia 767:challenged a 766: 762: 761: 756: 748: 742: 740: 734: 732: 728: 722: 717: 715: 711: 710: 705: 700: 696: 687: 683: 674: 667: 661: 656: 654: 649: 647: 641: 638: 634: 628: 626: 620: 611: 609: 604: 599: 597: 593: 589: 585: 581: 575: 573: 569: 568: 563: 558: 556: 552: 548: 544: 540: 539:real property 536: 532: 528: 524: 521: 517: 513: 509: 504: 499: 496: 492: 491: 486: 481: 479: 475: 471: 462: 458: 453: 443: 441: 434: 426: 424: 420: 416: 412: 408: 407: 401: 399: 398: 393: 389: 388:Supreme Court 385: 384: 379: 374: 372: 368: 363: 357: 353: 341: 336: 334: 329: 327: 322: 321: 319: 318: 313: 310: 308: 305: 303: 300: 298: 295: 293: 290: 288: 285: 283: 280: 278: 275: 273: 270: 269: 268: 267: 263: 262: 257: 254: 252: 249: 247: 246:Voting rights 244: 242: 239: 237: 234: 232: 229: 227: 224: 222: 219: 217: 214: 212: 209: 207: 204: 202: 199: 197: 194: 192: 189: 187: 184: 182: 179: 177: 174: 173: 172: 171: 167: 166: 161: 158: 156: 153: 151: 148: 147: 144: 141: 139: 136: 135: 134: 133: 129: 128: 123: 120: 118: 117:Equal footing 115: 113: 112:Republicanism 110: 108: 105: 103: 100: 98: 95: 93: 90: 89: 88: 87: 83: 82: 77: 74: 72: 69: 68: 65: 62: 60: 57: 56: 55: 54: 50: 49: 45: 41: 40: 37: 32: 31: 19: 9986: 9978: 9947: 9939: 9931: 9923: 9915: 9907: 9899: 9891: 9883: 9875: 9867: 9859: 9851: 9814: 9808:Bush v. Gore 9806: 9798: 9790: 9782: 9774: 9766: 9758: 9750: 9742: 9734: 9726: 9718: 9710: 9702: 9694: 9686: 9678: 9670: 9662: 9654: 9646: 9638: 9630: 9622: 9614: 9606: 9598: 9590: 9582: 9563: 9555: 9547: 9528: 9520: 9512: 9504: 9496: 9488: 9480: 9472: 9464: 9456: 9448: 9440: 9432: 9424: 9416: 9408: 9400: 9392: 9384: 9376: 9368: 9349: 9341: 9333: 9314: 9306: 9298: 9290: 9282: 9274: 9266: 9258: 9250: 9242: 9234: 9226: 9218: 9210: 9202: 9194: 9186: 9178: 9172:Reed v. Reed 9170: 9162: 9154: 9135: 9127: 9119: 9111: 9103: 9095: 9087: 9079: 9071: 9063: 9055: 9047: 9039: 9031: 9023: 9015: 9007: 8999: 8991: 8983: 8975: 8967: 8959: 8951: 8943: 8935: 8927: 8919: 8911: 8903: 8895: 8887: 8879: 8871: 8863: 8855: 8847: 8839: 8831: 8823: 8815: 8807: 8799: 8791: 8783: 8774: 8767: 8760: 8752: 8744: 8736: 8728: 8720: 8712: 8704: 8696: 8688: 8680: 8672: 8664: 8656: 8648: 8630: 8604: 8596: 8588: 8580: 8572: 8564: 8556: 8548: 8540: 8532: 8524: 8516: 8508: 8500: 8492: 8484: 8476: 8468: 8460: 8452: 8444: 8436: 8428: 8420: 8412: 8404: 8396: 8388: 8380: 8372: 8364: 8358:Buck v. Bell 8356: 8348: 8340: 8321: 8313: 8305: 8297: 8289: 8281: 8273: 8265: 8257: 8249: 8241: 8235: 8227: 8219: 8211: 8203: 8197: 8191: 8185: 8179: 8173: 8165: 8141: 8133: 8125: 8117: 8109: 8101: 8093: 8085: 8077: 8069: 8061: 8053: 8045: 8037: 8029: 8021: 8013: 8005: 7997: 7989: 7981: 7973: 7965: 7957: 7949: 7928: 7920: 7912: 7904: 7896: 7888: 7880: 7872: 7864: 7856: 7848: 7827: 7819: 7811: 7803: 7795: 7787: 7779: 7771: 7763: 7755: 7713:Saenz v. Roe 7711: 7703: 7695: 7687: 7679: 7671: 7663: 7655: 7534:Election law 7452:Publications 7361:Young adults 7275:Voter caging 7209:Early voting 7197:Voter access 7064:and agencies 7062:Federal laws 7015: 6925: 6921: 6917: 6900: 6892: 6884: 6876: 6868: 6860: 6852: 6844: 6836: 6828: 6820: 6812: 6804: 6796: 6788: 6780: 6772: 6766: 6758: 6750: 6742: 6723: 6717: 6709: 6701: 6695: 6689: 6681: 6662: 6656: 6650: 6642: 6636: 6630: 6624: 6618: 6612: 6604: 6596: 6588: 6580: 6574: 6568: 6562: 6556: 6550: 6544: 6538: 6532: 6524: 6462: 6454: 6446: 6417: 6366: 6358: 6291: 6090:James Wilson 6053:Pennsylvania 5950:John Langdon 5708:Speedy Trial 5550: 5530: 5441:Appointments 5375: 5158:Equal Rights 5054:20th century 4833: 4694: 4688: 4657: 4651: 4645: 4633: 4625:the original 4620: 4614: 4605: 4580: 4576: 4562: 4550:. Retrieved 4540: 4523: 4519: 4509: 4493: 4483: 4478: 4470: 4464: 4450: 4446: 4439: 4422: 4418: 4414: 4405: 4401: 4399: 4390:: 225, 240. 4387: 4383: 4377: 4369: 4364: 4347: 4343: 4327: 4323: 4316: 4308: 4304: 4294: 4289: 4281: 4276: 4257: 4232: 4229:, edited by 4226: 4221: 4213: 4208: 4191: 4187: 4181: 4172: 4168: 4128: 4124: 4114: 4079: 4075: 4041: 4035: 4028: 4018: 4012: 4011:(2001), and 4006: 4000: 3990: 3980: 3971: 3967: 3957: 3949: 3944: 3936: 3931: 3921: 3916: 3908: 3886: 3881: 3871: 3866: 3858: 3854: 3853:(1944), but 3848: 3844: 3840: 3832: 3823: 3815: 3799: 3783: 3778: 3769: 3765: 3755: 3745: 3725: 3714:. Retrieved 3704: 3692:. Retrieved 3672: 3668: 3658: 3647:. Retrieved 3640:the original 3635: 3621: 3613: 3607: 3599: 3591: 3586: 3564:(1): 7–150. 3561: 3557: 3553: 3533: 3512: 3491: 3478: 3470: 3466: 3462: 3457: 3449: 3445: 3437: 3432: 3412: 3405: 3400: 3383: 3379: 3373: 3354: 3347: 3339: 3334: 3309: 3305: 3294: 3285: 3277: 3273: 3260: 3250: 3242: 3234: 3212: 3208: 3199: 3190: 3179:. Retrieved 3175:the original 3162: 3158: 3137: 3128: 3119: 3094: 3090: 3086: 3079: 3060: 3051: 3046: 3034:. Retrieved 3024: 3019: (1886). 3005: 3001: 2991: 2986: 2976: 2971: 2961: 2956: 2948: 2943: 2935: 2926: 2916: 2904: 2894: 2886: 2878: 2873: 2865: 2860: 2850: 2845: 2836: 2828: 2824: 2819: 2809:February 24, 2807:. Retrieved 2797: 2787: 2782: 2774: 2765: 2754: 2748: 2736: 2728: 2724: 2701:. Retrieved 2697: 2688: 2679: 2670: 2645: 2641: 2631: 2618: 2596:(1): 77–86. 2593: 2589: 2555: 2551: 2529:. Retrieved 2525: 2491:(2): 69–91. 2488: 2484: 2453: 2446: 2437: 2429: 2424: 2416: 2411: 2403: 2398: 2379: 2359: 2347: 2314: 2310: 2304: 2287: 2281: 2270:. Retrieved 2266: 2243:. Retrieved 2239:the original 2218: 2214: 2204: 2195: 2188:. Retrieved 2184:the original 2170: 2161: 2154:. Retrieved 2150:the original 2145: 2136: 2128: 2125:the original 2110: 2100: 2006: 2005: 1999: 1997: 1992: 1984: 1980: 1977: 1972: 1960: 1956: 1952: 1951:process. In 1944: 1942: 1935: 1929: 1923: 1913: 1907: 1901: 1894: 1888: 1877: 1858: 1856: 1841: 1835: 1831: 1822: 1818: 1815:heterosexual 1814: 1810: 1793: 1791: 1786: 1782: 1771: 1769: 1757: 1751: 1744: 1740:Reed v. Reed 1738: 1736: 1728: 1697:Bush v. Gore 1695: 1693: 1686: 1683: 1679: 1675: 1671: 1669: 1663: 1645: 1631: 1625: 1623: 1606: 1599: 1592: 1590: 1585: 1571: 1567: 1565: 1557:Lewis Powell 1538: 1535: 1515: 1503: 1492: 1490: 1479: 1474: 1466: 1456: 1449: 1446:Harlan Stone 1441: 1437: 1435: 1415: 1405: 1399: 1393: 1383: 1371: 1367: 1361: 1359: 1357:has put it. 1355:Martha Minow 1348: 1342: 1333: 1331: 1325: 1324:a district. 1321: 1314: 1308: 1298: 1290: 1288: 1283: 1273: 1265: 1255: 1250: 1239: 1236:trial courts 1225: 1219: 1214: 1203: 1196: 1184: 1177: 1141: 1139: 1134: 1126: 1124: 1119: 1101: 1095: 1089: 1087: 1082: 1078: 1073: 1067: 1065: 1060: 1041:Lloyd Gaines 1034: 1032: 1011: 1007: 994: 990: 988: 983: 978: 974: 972: 964: 960: 956: 952: 938: 936: 930: 925: 914: 905:World War II 894: 885: 876:civil rights 860:Jim Crow law 850: 848: 844:legal aliens 841: 836: 828: 826: 821: 795: 793: 788: 758: 752: 746: 735: 724: 719: 713: 707: 703: 692: 680: 663: 658: 653:Jacob Howard 650: 642: 629: 621: 617: 614:Ratification 600: 588:John Bingham 576: 565: 559: 537:, including 500: 495:abolitionism 488: 485:not enslaved 482: 470:slave states 466: 457:John Bingham 455:Congressman 439: 436: 432: 404: 402: 395: 386:(1954), the 381: 375: 364: 351: 349: 235: 8733:(Cal. 1948) 8682:Lum v. Rice 7959:Roe v. Wade 7874:Roe v. Wade 7748:due process 7507:Citizenship 7248:Vote denial 6251:William Few 6131:Jacob Broom 6111:George Read 5985:Connecticut 5919:Signatories 5769:Legislative 5743:Territorial 5663:Presentment 5648:Origination 5603:Impeachment 5558:Extradition 5526:Engagements 5516:Due Process 5466:Citizenship 5153:Child Labor 4463:; see also 4097:10125/65975 4059:10125/66110 3278:Santa Clara 3274:Santa Clara 3268:, owner of 3036:23 November 2891:Foner, Eric 2354:Foner, Eric 1912:(1995) and 1904:contractors 1561:evidentiary 1390:due process 1268:but to the 1262:integration 1234:and to the 1200:Earl Warren 1131:law schools 1083:enforcement 864:segregation 543:real estate 531:Black Codes 527:Confederate 297:Purposivism 277:Originalism 241:Citizenship 231:Due process 102:Rule of law 10009:Categories 9228:Orr v. Orr 7351:Foreigners 7190:State laws 7130:amendments 6982:provisions 6363:(painting) 6315:and legacy 6173:John Blair 6022:New Jersey 5976:Rufus King 5874:Preemption 5788:War Powers 5723:Suspension 5541:Exceptions 5231:Human Life 5130:Unratified 4930:Amendments 4784:Audio help 4775:2006-04-09 3991:Left2Right 3716:2012-08-13 3694:28 October 3649:2008-07-16 3239:Hugo Black 3181:2007-02-24 2758:transcript 2703:2018-11-10 2698:Justia Law 2531:2018-11-30 2526:Justia Law 2402:See Brest 2272:2018-11-10 2267:Justia Law 2245:2019-07-08 2093:References 1949:admissions 1872:See also: 1848:federalism 1811:homosexual 1800:homosexual 1476:treatment. 1209:Republican 1191:See also: 755:Gilded Age 520:abolishing 472:until the 447:Background 302:Textualism 107:Federalism 84:Principles 64:Amendments 9541:Residency 6989:Article I 5884:Saxbe fix 5773:Executive 5728:Take Care 5718:Supremacy 5593:Guarantee 5521:Elections 5292:Formation 5005:1795–1804 4459:0028-7881 4431:0019-6665 4396:0017-8039 4356:0040-4411 4336:0019-6665 3855:Korematsu 3689:144814662 3171:0017-8322 3103:0021-0552 2339:154345582 1638:Tennessee 1318:districts 1303:approved 1174:appellate 1148:. It was 931:San Mateo 868:railroads 857:Louisiana 551:contracts 541:(such as 371:Civil War 9362:Alienage 7633:case law 7579:Suffrage 7529:Election 7417:Timeline 7329:By group 7270:Poll tax 6926:Edmonson 6785:(1991)** 6692:(1946)** 6424:case law 6166:Virginia 6140:Maryland 6104:Delaware 6006:New York 5783:Vicinage 5777:Judicial 5501:Contract 5471:Commerce 5359:Printing 5173:Proposed 4885:Preamble 4878:Articles 4799:Archived 4786: · 4683:(1988). 4642:(2004). 4552:April 6, 4528:Archived 4502:Archived 4406:Cleburne 4256:(2001). 4200:24758720 4005:(1997), 3808:Archived 3484:American 3467:Milliken 3465:through 3392:20684748 3059:(2001). 2356:(1988). 2296:25073625 2190:July 24, 2156:July 24, 2014:See also 1899:(2023). 1778:Colorado 1749:(1976). 1664:Reynolds 1654:and the 1424:and the 1363:de facto 1326:Milliken 1227:Brown II 1102:McLaurin 1053:Missouri 1039:(1938), 1006:Between 1000:New Deal 775:allowed 749:decision 603:Southern 535:property 516:ratified 59:Articles 51:Overview 8757:(1954) 7490:Related 7410:History 6918:Glasser 6686:(1942)* 6497:History 6313:Display 6285:Related 6244:Georgia 5765:Vesting 5733:Takings 5618:Militia 5476:Compact 5428:Clauses 5354:Signing 5299:History 4773: ( 4735:minutes 4674:4093259 4615:Grutter 4597:1073012 4471:vacated 4453:: 197. 4425:: 357. 4330:: 779. 4145:1143133 4106:1228797 4068:1229191 4023:(2009). 3891:(1996). 3859:Skinner 3578:1073592 3326:1599798 3165:: 577. 3111:1121505 3097:: 151. 2881:(2012). 2662:1118709 2572:1121988 2505:3330348 2485:Publius 2331:2127194 2235:3477928 1993:Grutter 1981:Grutter 1953:Grutter 1889:During 1702:Florida 1672:federal 1549:re-zone 1545:Chicago 1406:Bolling 1315:between 1074:Shelley 814:Justice 772:statute 523:slavery 413:of the 71:History 9991:(2024) 9983:(1935) 9952:(2013) 9944:(2006) 9936:(2004) 9928:(2003) 9920:(2001) 9912:(2000) 9904:(2000) 9896:(1999) 9888:(1997) 9880:(1989) 9872:(1976) 9864:(1966) 9856:(1883) 9819:(2012) 9811:(2000) 9803:(1997) 9795:(1991) 9787:(1988) 9779:(1988) 9771:(1985) 9763:(1982) 9755:(1979) 9747:(1978) 9739:(1977) 9731:(1976) 9723:(1974) 9715:(1974) 9707:(1973) 9699:(1973) 9691:(1972) 9683:(1971) 9675:(1970) 9667:(1968) 9659:(1968) 9651:(1966) 9643:(1966) 9635:(1962) 9627:(1948) 9619:(1942) 9611:(1937) 9603:(1928) 9595:(1886) 9587:(1876) 9568:(1985) 9560:(1977) 9552:(1969) 9533:(1984) 9525:(1982) 9517:(1982) 9509:(1979) 9501:(1978) 9493:(1977) 9485:(1976) 9477:(1973) 9469:(1973) 9461:(1971) 9453:(1954) 9445:(1948) 9437:(1927) 9429:(1923) 9421:(1923) 9413:(1923) 9405:(1923) 9397:(1915) 9389:(1915) 9381:(1915) 9373:(1914) 9354:(2015) 9346:(1996) 9338:(1986) 9319:(2024) 9311:(1996) 9303:(1994) 9295:(1983) 9287:(1982) 9279:(1981) 9271:(1981) 9263:(1980) 9255:(1979) 9247:(1979) 9239:(1979) 9231:(1979) 9223:(1976) 9215:(1975) 9207:(1975) 9199:(1974) 9191:(1974) 9183:(1972) 9175:(1971) 9167:(1948) 9159:(1937) 9140:(2023) 9132:(2016) 9124:(2014) 9116:(2013) 9108:(2007) 9100:(2005) 9092:(2003) 9084:(2003) 9076:(1999) 9068:(1995) 9060:(1993) 9052:(1992) 9044:(1992) 9036:(1991) 9028:(1989) 9020:(1986) 9012:(1985) 9004:(1984) 8996:(1982) 8988:(1982) 8980:(1978) 8972:(1977) 8964:(1977) 8956:(1974) 8948:(1973) 8940:(1973) 8932:(1972) 8924:(1971) 8916:(1971) 8908:(1971) 8900:(1971) 8892:(1971) 8884:(1969) 8876:(1969) 8868:(1969) 8860:(1969) 8852:(1968) 8844:(1968) 8836:(1967) 8828:(1967) 8820:(1964) 8812:(1964) 8804:(1964) 8788:(1955) 8749:(1950) 8741:(1950) 8725:(1948) 8717:(1948) 8709:(1944) 8701:(1943) 8693:(1940) 8685:(1927) 8677:(1899) 8669:(1896) 8661:(1886) 8653:(1883) 8609:(2016) 8601:(2015) 8593:(2009) 8585:(2000) 8577:(1997) 8569:(1990) 8561:(1989) 8553:(1989) 8545:(1987) 8537:(1987) 8529:(1985) 8521:(1984) 8513:(1983) 8505:(1982) 8497:(1981) 8489:(1979) 8481:(1979) 8473:(1977) 8465:(1976) 8457:(1975) 8449:(1975) 8441:(1974) 8433:(1974) 8425:(1971) 8417:(1968) 8409:(1967) 8401:(1962) 8393:(1961) 8385:(1958) 8377:(1950) 8369:(1932) 8361:(1927) 8353:(1922) 8345:(1905) 8326:(2011) 8318:(2010) 8310:(2009) 8302:(2009) 8294:(2005) 8286:(2003) 8278:(2002) 8270:(1989) 8262:(1988) 8254:(1982) 8246:(1980) 8238:(1978) 8232:(1978) 8224:(1976) 8216:(1976) 8208:(1975) 8200:(1975) 8194:(1974) 8188:(1969) 8182:(1967) 8176:(1963) 8170:(1961) 8156:under 8146:(2022) 8138:(2020) 8130:(2019) 8122:(2018) 8114:(2016) 8106:(2007) 8098:(2006) 8090:(2000) 8082:(1997) 8074:(1997) 8066:(1996) 8058:(1992) 8050:(1990) 8042:(1990) 8034:(1989) 8026:(1986) 8018:(1983) 8010:(1981) 8002:(1979) 7994:(1979) 7986:(1976) 7978:(1976) 7970:(1973) 7962:(1973) 7954:(1971) 7933:(2022) 7925:(2016) 7917:(2003) 7909:(1992) 7901:(1989) 7893:(1986) 7885:(1973) 7877:(1973) 7869:(1965) 7861:(1925) 7853:(1923) 7832:(1937) 7824:(1931) 7816:(1917) 7808:(1917) 7800:(1915) 7792:(1908) 7784:(1905) 7776:(1898) 7768:(1897) 7760:(1887) 7716:(1999) 7708:(1971) 7700:(1967) 7692:(1958) 7684:(1898) 7676:(1884) 7668:(1875) 7660:(1873) 7589:Voting 7346:Felons 6905:(2019) 6897:(2015) 6889:(2011) 6881:(2010) 6873:(2009) 6865:(2008) 6857:(2006) 6849:(2005) 6841:(2005) 6833:(2003) 6825:(1995) 6817:(1994) 6809:(1992) 6801:(1992) 6793:(1991) 6777:(1991) 6769:(1991) 6763:(1989) 6755:(1987) 6747:(1986) 6726:(2010) 6720:(1990) 6714:(1979) 6706:(1975) 6698:(1946) 6667:(1986) 6659:(1967) 6653:(1958) 6647:(1954) 6639:(1953) 6633:(1950) 6627:(1947) 6621:(1942) 6615:(1940) 6609:(1938) 6601:(1935) 6593:(1935) 6585:(1910) 6577:(1904) 6571:(1903) 6565:(1903) 6559:(1900) 6553:(1896) 6547:(1896) 6541:(1881) 6535:(1880) 6529:(1880) 6467:(2002) 6459:(1996) 6451:(1987) 6371:(film) 5755:Treaty 5658:Postal 5653:Pardon 4711:796412 4709: 4672: 4621:Jurist 4595: 4457: 4429: 4394: 4354: 4334: 4264: 4239: 4198: 4143: 4104: 4072:, and 4066: 3999:. See 3974:: 692. 3876:(1985) 3790: 3687: 3614:Pierce 3576: 3550:, and 3542: 3520: 3508:, and 3500: 3471:et al. 3420: 3390: 3361: 3324: 3169: 3109: 3101: 3087:Plessy 3067: 3054:, see 3052:Plessy 2934:", in 2660: 2610:272626 2608: 2590:Phylon 2570: 2503: 2460: 2404:et al. 2386: 2368: 2337: 2329: 2294: 2233: 2117: 1884:quotas 1803:sodomy 1785:, the 1718:Breyer 1714:Souter 1322:within 1305:busing 1127:Sweatt 1104:, the 1061:Plessy 1008:Plessy 789:Plessy 777:sexism 747:Plessy 671: 594:, and 510:, the 360: 264:Theory 9969:Other 9576:Other 8334:Other 7341:Women 6922:Thiel 4707:JSTOR 4670:JSTOR 4646:Brown 4593:JSTOR 4573:(PDF) 4402:Romer 4196:JSTOR 4141:JSTOR 4102:JSTOR 4064:JSTOR 3733: 3685:S2CID 3643:(PDF) 3632:(PDF) 3574:JSTOR 3554:Brown 3463:Brown 3406:Brown 3388:JSTOR 3322:JSTOR 3249:, in 3241:, in 3221: 3144: 3012: 2658:JSTOR 2606:JSTOR 2568:JSTOR 2501:JSTOR 2335:S2CID 2327:JSTOR 2292:JSTOR 2231:JSTOR 1985:Bakke 1973:Gratz 1969:dicta 1967:. In 1961:Bakke 1957:Gratz 1945:Bakke 1840:, in 1823:Romer 1787:Romer 1676:state 1600:The " 1442:which 1438:Brown 1368:Brown 1291:Green 1284:Brown 1266:Brown 1251:Brown 1240:Brown 1204:Brown 1185:Brown 1178:which 1142:Brown 1135:equal 1012:Brown 889:caste 838:laws. 714:Burns 712:. In 8642:Race 6924:and 6420:and 4637:See 4609:See 4566:See 4554:2012 4455:ISSN 4443:See 4427:ISSN 4400:The 4392:ISSN 4352:ISSN 4332:ISSN 4320:See 4262:ISBN 4237:ISBN 4032:See 3920:See 3885:See 3870:See 3788:ISBN 3772:(1). 3750:168. 3735:U.S. 3696:2013 3540:ISBN 3518:ISBN 3498:ISBN 3418:ISBN 3359:ISBN 3298:See 3223:U.S. 3167:ISSN 3146:U.S. 3107:SSRN 3099:ISSN 3065:ISBN 3038:2013 3014:U.S. 2811:2007 2458:ISBN 2384:ISBN 2366:ISBN 2192:2020 2158:2020 2115:ISBN 1955:and 1934:and 1716:and 1168:and 1152:, a 1121:bar. 1094:and 1021:The 1010:and 664:The 608:rump 601:The 572:race 461:Ohio 429:Text 350:The 9148:Sex 7336:Men 4920:VII 4900:III 4832:", 4699:doi 4662:doi 4658:117 4585:doi 4508:", 4417:". 4192:104 4133:doi 4092:hdl 4084:doi 4054:hdl 4046:doi 3972:165 3907:", 3831:", 3814:", 3738:598 3731:539 3677:doi 3566:doi 3314:doi 3226:394 3219:118 3149:514 3017:356 3010:118 2915:", 2911:. " 2773:", 2755:See 2747:", 2743:. " 2723:", 2650:doi 2598:doi 2560:doi 2493:doi 2319:doi 2223:doi 1998:In 1943:In 1792:In 1448:in 1388:'s 1066:In 1051:in 1033:In 822:was 480:. 459:of 10011:: 5775:/ 5771:/ 5116:27 5111:26 5106:25 5101:24 5096:23 5091:22 5086:21 5081:20 5076:19 5071:18 5066:17 5061:16 5045:15 5040:14 5035:13 5017:12 5012:11 4996:10 4915:VI 4905:IV 4895:II 4733:48 4705:. 4695:97 4693:. 4687:. 4678:; 4668:. 4650:. 4619:. 4591:. 4581:71 4579:. 4575:. 4451:69 4449:. 4423:32 4421:. 4411:; 4398:. 4388:32 4386:. 4348:84 4346:. 4340:; 4328:62 4326:. 4252:; 4190:. 4173:91 4171:. 4167:. 4153:^ 4139:. 4129:74 4123:. 4100:. 4090:. 4080:39 4078:. 4062:. 4052:. 4042:47 4040:. 3989:. 3970:. 3966:. 3896:^ 3770:65 3768:. 3764:. 3683:. 3673:45 3671:. 3667:. 3634:. 3572:. 3562:80 3560:. 3384:58 3382:. 3320:. 3310:54 3304:. 3217:, 3163:41 3161:. 3157:. 3142:29 3140:, 3105:. 3095:82 3093:. 3008:, 2893:. 2712:^ 2696:. 2678:. 2656:. 2646:50 2644:. 2640:. 2604:. 2594:16 2592:. 2580:^ 2566:. 2556:79 2554:. 2540:^ 2524:. 2513:^ 2499:. 2489:22 2487:. 2472:^ 2333:. 2325:. 2315:19 2313:. 2265:. 2254:^ 2229:. 2219:40 2217:. 2213:. 2194:. 2160:. 2144:. 1940:. 1922:: 1829:. 1588:. 1428:. 907:. 590:, 442:. 425:. 373:. 7623:e 7616:t 7609:v 7462:" 7458:" 6965:e 6958:t 6951:v 6916:* 6409:e 6402:t 6395:v 5779:) 5767:( 5751:) 4991:9 4986:8 4981:7 4976:6 4971:5 4966:4 4961:3 4956:2 4951:1 4910:V 4890:I 4863:e 4856:t 4849:v 4790:) 4782:( 4777:) 4737:) 4713:. 4701:: 4676:. 4664:: 4648:" 4617:" 4599:. 4587:: 4556:. 4461:. 4433:. 4358:. 4338:. 4270:. 4245:. 4202:. 4175:. 4147:. 4135:: 4108:. 4094:: 4086:: 4070:. 4056:: 4048:: 3993:. 3794:. 3719:. 3698:. 3679:: 3652:. 3580:. 3568:: 3548:. 3526:. 3506:. 3426:. 3394:. 3367:. 3328:. 3316:: 3184:. 3113:. 3073:. 3040:. 2813:. 2760:. 2706:. 2664:. 2652:: 2626:. 2612:. 2600:: 2574:. 2562:: 2534:. 2507:. 2495:: 2466:. 2392:. 2374:. 2341:. 2321:: 2298:. 2275:. 2248:. 2225:: 702:( 339:e 332:t 325:v 20:)

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Knowledge

Equal Protection Clause

Index