Term
| What is Jeremy Waldron's argument that equality means equal political participation? |
|
Definition
| Jeremy Waldron argues that in order to have true equal protection, judicial review cannot exist. He admits that disagreement over rights are expected, and favors a proceduralist view in which only value-neutral procedures should allow the people to decide how they wish to be governed. Therefore, every decision should be made out of political participation, which leaves it in the hands of the people to decide what rights they will have. |
|
|
Term
| The majority holding in Holden v. Hardy? |
|
Definition
| In Holden vs. Hardy, the court upheld legislation that limited the working hours of miners as a legitimate exercise of police powers. The court held that regulating the working conditions of miners is part of the general welfare, as the dangerous working conditions of miners puts them at a disadvantage in negotiating contracts and they therefore have unequal bargaining power, allowing a regulation from the state to be fair. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Liberty of contract is the right for individuals to define the terms of their own contracts and engage in economic transactions without government interference. Government regulations are typically seen as infringements upon this right. This concept formed the basis of decisions made during the "Lochner era" in which the courts overrturned state laws of economic regulation because they denied liberty of contract. |
|
|
Term
| The meaning of "tiers of Scrutiny"? |
|
Definition
| Tiers of scrutiny was first introduced in "Footnote Four" of the landmark case, United States vs. Carolene Products Co, as a new expression of the judicial role in economic regulation. This formula states that matters legislation regarding economic regulation only be given "rational level scrutiny," the only requirement being that the legislation has a legitimate goal and is achieved by rational means. Matters of the bill of rights or discrimination against discrete minorities must be given "strict scrutiny," in which the state must show a compelling interest and that the law is narrowly tailored to meet that interest. Basically, this system is a way for the court to keep itself out of economic regulation. |
|
|
Term
| Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964? |
|
Definition
| Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 outlawed discrimination/segregation in hotels, motels, restaurants, theaters, and all other public accommodations engaged in interstate commerce. This legislation is considered landmark because it extended desegregation laws to privately owned business by way of the commerce clause rather than the 14th amendment. |
|
|
Term
| The majority holding in Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States? |
|
Definition
| Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States concerns a hotel located on an interstate highway in which the majority of its inhabitants were interstate travelers. After attempting to resist desegregation laws, the court held that the hotel must desegregate by way of the commerce clause, because discrimination burdens interstate commerce. Using the commerce clause, the case only needed rational level scrutiny, which was achieved by pointing out that discrimination impedes the travel of blacks, generates protests and disturbances that reduce businesses activity, and clogs the market. |
|
|
Term
| Gerald Rosenberg's argument in the Hollow Hope? |
|
Definition
| Rosenberg's argument in the Hollow Hope represents a "constrained court view" that challenges the "dynamic court view" that cases like Brown v. Board of Ed. have been instrumental in social change. Rosenberg argues that social change is not necessarily a direct result of the court, but the influence of the President, congress, and social protests. The court did not prick the conscious of white Americans, nor mobilize black Americans, the majority of which had never heard of the case. |
|
|
Term
| THe majority holding in Gideon v. Wainwright? |
|
Definition
| Gideon v. Wainwright overturned the decision in Betts vs. Brady, which leaves the appointment of counsel for state crimes to the state. This decision allowed Gideon to be re-tried as he was not properly represented during his trial. The court held that the 6th amendment guarantee of counsel (applied to the states by the 14th amendment) is a fundamental right and should not distinguish between capital and non-capital offenses. Therefore, the right to counsel was extended to all felonies. |
|
|
Term
| THe majority holding in Betts v. Brady? |
|
Definition
| Betts vs. Brady denied the right to counsel to indigent defendants being prosecuted by the state, holding that Betts did not have the right to be appointed counsel. The opinion of the court was that in a state case, it would be a violation of federalism for the court to require the appointment of counsel. The state reserves the right to give to its citizens the right to counsel, but it is not obligated to. |
|
|
Term
| The majority holding in Powell v. Alabama? |
|
Definition
| The majority in Powell vs. Alabama determined that defendants must be given the right to counsel, upon request, for capital offenses. The court held that the defendant's conviction violated the due process clause of the 14th amendment because counsel must be guaranteed to anyone who faces the possibility of a death sentence, whether in state or federal courts. |
|
|
Term
| "Business affected with a public interest?" |
|
Definition
| A business affected with a public interest is a business that affects the general safety and welfare of the public and is subject to police powers, in which the state is authorized to regulate the interest of public safety, health, and morals. The government can regulate business, property, and contract rights in the interest of the general welfare. A business is considered affected with the public interest and therefore subject to his regulation if it offers essential services or products to the community at large. |
|
|
Term
| One example of a judicial opinion that relies on a formal notion of equality? |
|
Definition
| A formal notion of equality looks at equal protection by the judiciary as only relevant if a violation of the text has occurred. Plessy v. Ferguson is an example of this view, because both races were being treated the same (separate but equal), there was no literal violation of a text. It doesn't take into consideration things like the impact of the decision, the psychological harm one race could endure, but merely focuses on whether or not there is a violation of a text, in which case there was not. |
|
|
Term
| One way to reconcile the Court's jurisprudence on economic questions with its jurisprudence in Brown? |
|
Definition
| One way to reconcile this difference in jurisprudence it to say that the 14th amendment only applies to race. Therefore, the court can step in to regulate in Brown because it applies to discrimination based on one's race. As it does not apply to economic matters, the court is able to back away and leave the regulation to the states. |
|
|
