Lecture 5 POLS 207Outline of Last Lecture:Alternate Reasons for the 14 th AmendmentI. Reasons for the 14th AmendmentA. To “constitutionalize” the Civil Rights ActB. To “constitutionalize” the spirit of the Declaration of IndependenceOutline of Current Lecture:Alternate Reasons for the 14 th Amendment Part 2I. Was the 14th Amendment meant to correct a counter-revolutionary Constitution?A. Powerful central governmentB. Short-term majorities have their hands tiedC. No word on “fundamental rights”D. Allows slaveryE. Moral deficiencies?II. Judicial perspectives on interpretationA. Narrower interpretation – “Race”B. Broader interpretation – “Everyone”Current Lecture:The alternative explanation for why we have the Fourteenth Amendment views the 1789 Constitution as a “counter-revolution” meant to tamp down some of the revolutionary/independent feelings left over from the Revolutionary war. Why is it viewed this way? US Constitution creates powerful national government. It limits impact of short-term majorities – “Checks and balances” – it makes it hard for temporary movements/waves/ideas to take control of the country. Silent on “fundamental rights” – These were not the first concern; the National Bill of Rights was not added until 1791 (two years after ratification). It accommodates human slavery- “fugitive slave” clause (IV:2)- “3/5 rule” for representation (I:2)- 2/3 and 3/4 requirements for amending- In 1860: 19 free states, 15 slave (11 tried to secede in 1861)From this perspective:The 14th Amendment (together with 13th and 15th Amendments and the national Bill of Rights) was meant to correct “moral deficiencies” of the original 1789 Constitution*And restores James Madison's (failed) 1789 effort to include some prohibitions on the STATES (e.g. jury trial, conscience, speech and press) in the national Bill of RightsJudicial perspectives on how the 14 th Amendment should be interpreted and used: Narrower…”It’s all about race” (Amendment is “vehicle” for judiciary to deal with race)This is how it was seen from 1896 (Plessy v. Ferguson – “separate but equal” segregation) to 1954 (Brown v. Board of Education – overturned Plessy v. Ferguson). Two landmark cases that bookended this narrower way of viewing the Fourteenth Amendment.Should the Constitution be “color blind?” Broader..."It's MORE than just about race”This interpretation became the norm in 1925 with Gitlow v. New York, a case that reversed the earlier Barron v. Baltimore decision, and stated that the National Bill of Rights might could applyto the States as