Lecture 6 POLS 207Outline of Last 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”Outline of Current Lecture:Alternate Reasons for the 14 th Amendment Part 3I. Narrow interpretation of why we have the 14th AmendmentA. Way for the judiciary to deal with race/ethnicitya. Plessy v. Fergusonb. Brown v. Board of EducationII. Broader interpretation for why we have the 14th AmendmentA. Rights and liberties for everyone, not just minoritiesa. Gitlow v. New Yorkb. Barron v. BaltimoreCurrent Lecture:At the time of its passage some Republicans thought that the 13th Amendment called for the equal treatment of all free persons. This wasn’t the case however, seeing as how the 13th was adopted in 1865 and many free persons were not treated equally for a long time after that, one of the most obvious examples being women. They were free, but had no right to vote until 1920.How was the 14th Amendment to be interpreted in terms of racial equality?  Narrow interpretation: 14 th is a vehicle for the judiciary to deal with raceSCOTUS helped to clarify this; in 1896 they ruled that even with the 14th Amendment’s prohibition on states denying racial equality that didn’t mean that you couldn’t continue tomake “racial and ethnic distinctions” for purposes of school segregation, train seating, and otheruses of public space. This case was PLESSY V. FERGUSON, and it essentially stated that as long asthe facilities were “equal,” they could be segregated without violating the 14th Amendment.**So, starting in 1896 with Plessy v. Ferguson, there is a judicial regime that says “separate but equal is okay,” and with that decision the Supreme Court gave its blessing to the Jim Crow laws that were beginning to develop (particularly in the South). In 1954, in Brown vs. Board of Education, Plessy v. Ferguson was OVERTURNED. BROWN V. BOARD OF EDUCATION WAS A VERYIMPORTANT CASE – One of top ten in our history. There was tremendous backlash in the South when this decision was handed down. There were 21 states in 1954 that either mandated racial segregation or allowed it at the local governments’ discretionBrown did not hold that the United States Constitution is “color blind,” moreover; the Supreme Court has NEVER held this position. They have always left room for affirmative action.In 1967 with the Loving decision, interracial marriages were declared constitutional and protected under the “equal protection” clause.*Note* In the Brown era, it was mostly political liberals who argued for a color blind constitution (making no distinction between race) and conservatives argued against it. By the late 60s, early 70s this situation had flipped and was no longer the case. Conservatives now argue for a color blind constitution and liberals argue against it. This partly has to do with how the different parties feel about affirmative action.Affirmative action became a thing around this time (Race could be considered when determining employment, admission to Universities, pay raises, etc.). “Racial/ethnic/gender distinctions are okay if it benefits those minorities.”For the most part liberals support affirmative action measures and conservatives do not. Be watching for an upcoming ruling on the Fisher v. University of Texas case currently before the Supreme Court. This case deals with the effects affirmative action has on Caucasians. Broader judicial perspective on the 14 th Amendment:Holds that the Amendment is NOT purely race/ethnic based. It’s a vehicle for the court to identify/apply a variety of fundamental rights and liberties to everyone, not just minorities. This broader view is how the law it typically interpreted today. This interpretation became the norm in 1925 with Gitlow v. New York (reversed Barron v. Baltimore). Gitlow was a “seditionist.” His case reached the Supreme Court, where it resulted in the overturning of Barron v. Baltimore (which basically stated that the National bill of rights did not apply to state governments, only the national government). Gitlow “muses” that the Bill of Rights could/should/might apply to State governments.“Incorporation” refers to incorporating a limitation on state/local government via the 14th Amendment.  Though the relationship between the states and the national government changed tremendously as a result of the Great Depression and New Deal (everyone agrees on this), surprisingly enough the Constitution really wasn’t amended much during this time. It was only amended twice in the thirties, in ‘33 we changed presidential term of office with the 20th Amendment and with the 21st Amendment we repealed Prohibition.But going back a little, let’s look at the Sixteenth Amendment (1913) “The Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.”Why is Federal Income Tax a cash cow for the government?1) It is progressive in its structure. As your income rises, not only are you paying more tax dollars, the percentage of your income that is collected for tax rises as well (your tax raterises)!2) If your economy is growing and citizens’ incomes are rising annually (which should be the case in any healthy economy) then government tax revenue increases constantly. This brings us back to the point that the national government simply has a lot more money at its disposal than any state does, and therefore has more