Abstract This paper provides an analysis of the landmark legal case Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States, which addressed the constitutionality of Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This powerful case arose from the Heart of Atlanta Motel owner refusing to serve African American patrons and bringing into question the constitutionality of the Act. The owner argued the Congress exceeded their authority under the Commerce Clause, and in doing so, violated his Fifth and Thirteen Amendment rights. The Justices of the Supreme Court unanimously agreed in favor of the State, which declared the Act “constitutional” and established the Congress power to regulate interstate commerce. Following the conclusion of the case, the ruling's implications …show more content…
(1964) In 1964 Title II of the Civil Rights Act passed, forbidding racial discrimination in hotels, inns, restaurants, and all other public accommodations engaged in interstate travel. Previously, these establishments could refuse service to potential customers based on the color of their skin. Following the passing of the act, the owner of the Heart of Atlanta Motel, Moreton Rolleston, filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, arguing the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was unconstitutional because the Congress would be exceeding their powers by regulating interstate commerce. The suit was filed on July 2nd, 1964, and on July 22nd, 1964 the District Court of Northern Georgia found the Act to be constitutional. Following the decision, Rolleston filed an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, which was heard on October 5th, 1964. On October 5th, Rolleston argued that the act exceeded the congress’ power given to them by the Commerce Clause in the constitution; therefore, making the act unconstitutional. Furthermore, Rolleston also argued that forcing him to accept African American patrons violated their Fifth Amendment rights by depriving them of the ability to run their business how they saw fit. Rolleston’s final argument stated that his thirteenth amendment rights were violated by this new act because he was now being forced to accommodate African Americans at his hotel, which would put them in involuntary servitude since he did not wish to serve them. In response to Rolleston’s argument, the State argued that requiring adequate accommodations for African Americans was related to travel, therefore Congress had the power to make and enforce these rulings under the Constitution's Commerce Clause. The State continued their argument, stating racial discrimination in places of public accommodation constitutes a burden and an obstruction to interstate travel. This burden and obstruction gives Congress
The conceptual foundation of the U.S. Constitution is that there is a checks and balance system within the government that was developed to ultimately protect the rights of the people. In Pembaur v. City of Cincinnati (1986), there is an ongoing string of rulings from multiple appeals, for multiple rulings, that derived from a single case. What is interesting to note is that the original charge in the case is not the same charge for the most recent ruling. The actual case that is being heard in the Supreme Court is for civil damages. Although the law is being followed in allowing for the checks and balances to take place, the history of this case took place over a period of nine years from 1977-1986. One could question the efficiency of public administration in delivering a timely decision. As each case reached a ruling, another appeal needed to be submitted for the new justification of the ruling. Many different actions were submitted for review based on the different findings for each new ruling. A mentioned previously, this process was completed over a nine year period, and in accordance
Although, there might be other significant legal issues surrounding the cases, I would like to describe the Scottsboro cases mainly focusing on the issues of effective counsel based on Carter’s (1979) book and U.S. Supreme Court’s rulings on Powell v. Alabama. Prior to pointing out the rulings on the right to effective counsel which ultimately reversed the case, the lower courts’ decisions and related circumstances need to be discussed briefly in order to comprehend the rationale of the nine justices’ opinions.
1868 marked a proud year for African Americans with the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment to Constitution. It proclaimed that “no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”1 This essentially color blinded government, and granted all citizens (a category which finally included African Americans) what is described in the document as indisputable equality.
President Andrew Johnson did not support it, but his veto was overridden. After the bill passed he refused to enforce the law in the South, causing little effect. On top of President Johnson’s lack of approval, it was undermined by anti-black organizations, and it helped women and Native Americans even less than it did for African Americans. Native Americans were excluded from being considered citizens even if they were born in the United States. Women gained the right to make and enforce contracts, purchase land, and more, but they were not given the right to vote for another fifty years. In theory this act should have resulted in better treatment of African American because it was making them separate but equal to white people, but in reality when it was put in action it did not follow through with its original intentions. Much like the in 1866, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was followed by incidents of resistance and violence, but despite the proceedings this act declared that all citizens despite race, sex, religion, or national origin were not to be discriminated against. Within the first few weeks, segregated establishments were open to black patrons, and Jim Crow laws were starting to end. The laws giving minorities their civil rights were being enforced. This bill not only encompassed African Americans, but it gave women more opportunities. By 1924 Native Americans
When the Government Stood Up For Civil Rights "All my life I've been sick and tired, and now I'm just sick and tired of being sick and tired. No one can honestly say Negroes are satisfied. We've only been patient, but how much more patience can we have?" Mrs. Hamer said these words in 1964, a month and a day before the historic Civil Rights Act of 1964 would be signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson. She speaks for the mood of a race, a race that for centuries has built the nation of America, literally, with blood, sweat, and passive acceptance. She speaks for black Americans who have been second class citizens in their own home too long. She speaks for the race that would be patient no longer that would be accepting no more. Mrs. Hamer speaks for the African Americans who stood up in the 1950's and refused to sit down. They were the people who led the greatest movement in modern American history - the civil rights movement. It was a movement that would be more than a fragment of history, it was a movement that would become a measure of our lives (Shipler 12). When Martin Luther King Jr. stirred up the conscience of a nation, he gave voice to a long lain dormant morality in America, a voice that the government could no longer ignore. The government finally answered on July 2nd with the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 is historically significant because it stands as a defining piece of civil rights legislation, being the first time the national government had declared equality for blacks. The civil rights movement was a campaign led by a number of organizations, supported by many individuals, to end discrimination and achieve equality for American Blacks (Mooney 776). The forefront of the struggle came during the 1950's and the 1960's when the feeling of oppression intensified and efforts increased to gain access to public accommodations, increased voting rights, and better educational opportunities (Mooney). Civil rights in America began with the adoption of the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments to the Constitution, which ended slavery and freed blacks in theory. The Civil Rights Acts of 1866 and 1875 were passed, guaranteeing the rights of blacks in the courts and access to public accommodation. These were, however, declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, who decided that the fourteenth did not protect blacks from violation of civil rights, by individuals.
...of religion, the freedom to assemble and civil rights such as the right to be free from discrimination such as gender, race, religion, and sexual orientation. Throughout history, African Americans have endured discrimination, segregation, and racism and have progressively gained rights and freedoms by pushing civil rights movement across America. This paper addressed several African American racial events that took place in our nation’s history. These events were pivotal and ultimately led to the establishment of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which outlawed discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The Civil Rights Act paved the way for future legislation that was not limited to African American civil rights and is considered a landmark piece of legislation that ending racism, segregation and discrimination throughout the United States.
The evolution of power gained by the Federal government can be seen in the McCuloch versus Maryland (1819) case. This case des...
Declared in the U.S. Constitution every American or should it be person, is guaranteed civil rights. Civil rights did not just consist of “freedom of speech and assembly,” but as well as “the right to vote, the right to equal protection under the law, and procedural guarantees in criminal and civil rights,” (Dawood). It was not until 1791, that the Bill of Rights was appended to the constitution, which helped clarify these rights to citizens. “Rights were eventually applied against actions of the state governments in a series of cases decide by the Supreme Court,” Dawood stated. In previous years (1790-1803), the Supreme Court had little say in decisions being made by government. As time went on the Supreme Court took on more responsibility and started making additional decisions, which in time helped minorities gain their civil rights. It took a couple of years, as a matter of fact till the 1900’s for the Supreme Court to get out of the “ideology of white supremacy and the practice of racism,” (Smith). Though the decisions of the Supreme Court were not all that appreciated in the beginning, following the 20th century the court really facilitated in the advancements of civil rights.
Before the Civil Rights Act of 1964, segregation in the United States was commonly practiced in many of the Southern and Border States. This segregation while supposed to be separate but equal, was hardly that. Blacks in the South were discriminated against repeatedly while laws did nothing to protect their individual rights. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 ridded the nation of this legal segregation and cleared a path towards equality and integration. The passage of this Act, while forever altering the relationship between blacks and whites, remains as one of history’s greatest political battles.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 forbid businesses connected with interstate commerce to discriminate when choosing its employees. If these businesses did not conform to the act, they would lose funds that were granted to them from the government. Another act that was passed to secure the equality of blacks was the Voting Rights Act of 1965. This act, which was readopted and modified in 1970, 1975, and 1982, contained a plan to eliminate devices for voting discrimination and gave the Department of Justice more power in enforcing equal rights. In another attempt for equal rights, the Equal Employment ...
Today, chickens born of pinpoint-focused genetics are raised by the millions in factory farms. The industrial frying chicken is physiologically adapted to gain weight so that it’s ready for the skillet in six weeks. Modern hybrid laying hens are so efficient that they don’t even think of sitting on eggs (Will).
... Civil Rights Act of 1964, which banned discrimination in employment practices and public accommodations.
Works Cited The "Civil Rights" Cornell University Law School, Inc. 2010. Web. The Web. The Web. 1 Apr. 2011.
This movement started in centuries-long attempts by African slaves to resist slavery. After the Civil War, American slaves were given basic civil rights. However, even though these rights were guaranteed under the Fourteenth Amendment, they were not federally enforced. The struggle these African-Americans faced to have their rights federally enforced carried into the next century. Through non-violent protests, the civil rights movement of the 1950 and 1960’s led to most public facilities being segregated by race in the southern states....
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employers from discriminating against applicants and employees because of their race, color, religion, sex or national origin. Religious Discrimination as part of the Civil Rights Act is the subject of this term paper.