48
The Constitution and Bill of Rights: Equal Protection
The Constitution and Bill of Rights: Equal Protection
The Courts, the Constitution, and Bill of Rights: Equal Protection
Designed by Marshall Croddy
Written by Keri Doggett
Constitutional Rights Foundation 601 South Kingsley Dr. Los Angeles, CA 90005
213-487-5590 Fax 213-386-0459 www.crf-usa.org [email protected]
Special thanks to John Kronstadt, member of CRF Board of Directors, for inspiration and input.
© 2003 Constitutional Rights Foundation
The Constitution and Bill of Rights: Equal Protection and
Gratz v. Bollinger: A U.S. Supreme Court Case Overview This PowerPoint lesson contains two presentations: The Constitution and the Bill of Rights: Equal Protection and Gratz v. Bollinger: A Supreme Court Case. The lesson begins with The Constitution and Bill of Rights: Equal Protection presentation to introduce and provide background on the concept of equal protection under the law. Using animated graphics, this presentation provides a visual medium to accompany the teacher’s oral narrative. It is designed to provide flexibility for teachers to focus on key concepts most appropriate for their courses and students. The PowerPoint lesson also includes a moot court activity, Gratz v.Bollinger: A Supreme Court Case. In this activity, students apply their knowledge about the 14th Amendment equal protection clause as they prepare for and present a mini-moot court case. The PowerPoint presentation provides graphics and sound effects. The talking points for this presentation provide teachers with procedures for conducting the activity using the slides as cues for the students. A student handout is included to help students prepare for the case. Getting Started 1. Place the CD in the CD reader of your computer.
2. This presentation was developed using PowerPoint 97. If PowerPoint isn't already
running on your computer, launch it now.
3. In PowerPoint click on File and then Open from the menu bar.
4. Navigate to the drive assigned to the CD reader. The two presentations will be listed in the Open dialog box (Equal Protection Presentation.ppt and Michigan Equal Protection Activity.ppt).
5. Select the presentation you want to open and double click or click on Open in the dialog box to open your selection.
6. Once the presentation is opened, click on Slide Show and then View Show on the menu bar to start the presentation.
Suggested Presentation Strategy 1. Preview the two presentations: The Constitution and the Bill of Rights: Equal Protection
and Gratz v. Bollinger: A Supreme Court Case and review the talking points for each. 2. Prepare a narrative presentation to accompany The Constitution and the Bill of Rights
based on your interests and student needs. You may want to provide additional depth on specific topics.
3. Following the presentation, explain to students that they are going to have a chance to
participate as attorneys and justices in a Supreme Court case. 4. Using PowerPoint, guide students through the activity, Gratz v. Bollinger. Step-by-step
procedures are included in the talking points. You may want to explain that the case is named after the students who were applying to get into the University of Michigan, Jennifer Gratz and Patrick Hamacher, and the President of the University of Michigan, Lee Bollinger.
Tips for Conducting a Moot Court Activity
The quickest and easiest method for assigning roles is to leave the students seated where they are and divide the room into three sections, with the students sitting in each section taking one of the roles: justices, attorneys for the appellant, attorneys for the respondent. Counting off by 3s is another quick method, but the students will have to physically regroup. If you choose to use the Participatory Method described below, the class will need to be divided into groups of seven students each. . In either case, there should be two attorneys for each side. One can be in charge of presenting the arguments, the other in charge of answering questions from the justices. Two methods for conducting the moot court activity: A. Time-Efficient Method
Students work with others within their attorney/justice groups to prepare for the case. A few minutes before the moot court is to start, the teacher asks each group to select a team of attorneys and justices to present the case in front of the class. After the presentation and decision, the teacher asks the other student attorneys what arguments they might have included, and the other justices how they might have decided the case differently.
B. Participatory Method
Divide the class into groups of seven students. Within each group, assign three students to play justices, two will be attorneys for the appellant, and two will be attorneys for the respondent. All of the justices, and each set of attorneys then regroup to help each other prepare and work with any outside resource people available. When it is time for the courts to be in session, the students return to their original groups of seven and present the case. Each set of justices deliberates and decides its own case. Then each set shares its decision and rationale with the rest of the class. The students who were attorneys discuss the most compelling and weakest arguments they think they made.
Gratz v. Bollinger: A Supreme Court Case
This information will help you prepare for the Supreme Court hearing. Arguments Made in Lower Courts Take a look at the arguments each side made in the lower courts. This could help you think about arguments and questions you might use.
Attorneys for the Students (Gratz): • The admissions policy is a violation of the 14th Amendment because it does not
treat all students equally. • The students were not as competitive as others based on race or ethnicity. Minority
students were more competitive because they got extra points. • The students were denied the opportunity to compete for admission on an equal
basis.
Attorneys for University of Michigan (Bollinger): • The system makes it more fair for all students, even those who did not have the
same opportunities earlier in life and in high school as others, to have a chance to attend this school.
• The university has the right to ensure that its student body is diverse. This is
important for to the quality of education for all our students. • Though the system gives points to certain racial and ethnic groups, it also gives the
same amount of points to athletes or disadvantaged students. The question before the court:
Does the University of Michigan’s use of racial and ethnic preferences violate the 14th Amendment?
Student Handout Michigan 2 Pages
To Prepare for the Case: Attorneys for the students (Gratz): Create arguments to convince the justices that
the university’s admissions policy is not fair to all students and violates the 14th Amendment.
Attorneys for the University (Bollinger): Create arguments to convince the
justices that the admissions policy is fair to all students and does not violate the 14th Amendment.
Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court: Create at least three questions to ask each
side to help you determine the case. Rules of Oral Argument 1. Attorneys for the students will present first. 2. Attorneys for the university will present second. 3. Justices will ask questions of both sides during the arguments. The Justices’ Decision 1. After oral arguments, the justices meet and discuss the case. 2. Then they vote. 3. The justices will explain the reasons for the decision.
1
The Courts, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights:Equal Protection
© 2003 Constitutional Rights Foundation, Los Angeles, 2002. All rights reserved.
2
In 1776, the American colonists decided to declare their independence from England.
Thomas Jefferson, a young lawyer from Virginia, was asked to write a Declaration of Independence to inform the English and other nations about this decision.
In the Declaration, Jefferson wrote...
We hold these truths to be self-evident…
that all men are created equal...
On slide: In 1776, the American...
Click 1: Thomas Jefferson… + graphic.
Click 2: In the Declaration…
We hold… + graphic.
Click to next slide.
3
But in spite of Jefferson’s words, not all Americans were equal.
In fact, about 1/5 of all the people in America were slaves.
The question of slavery would haunt America throughout its history.
On slide: But in spite…
Click 1: In fact…+ graphic.
Click 2: The question… + graphic.
Click to next slide.
4
Here, questions about slavery came up and arguments broke out..
After the Revolutionary War was won, the founders gathered to draft a Constitution to form a new
government.
On slide: All text and graphics.
Click to next slide.
5
It became clear that the Southern states would never join the new United States of America if slavery were outlawed
by the Constitution.
Both sides made compromises about
slavery to try to unite the states. The issue of slavery was finally
left open...
an issue that future generations would have to deal with.
On slide: All text and graphics.
Ask: Does this look like the United States to you? Why do you think there are so many states missing?
Explain: This is what the United States looked like in 1790. The dark blue states represent the anti-slavery states. These were the 7 colonies that were “free”. The darker gray states represent the6 original slave colonies. In 1790, the light blue and light gray areas were not yet states, but territories.
6
Throughout the early 1800s people in the Northern states voiced their beliefs that slavery should be abolished. They were called abolitionists. The abolitionist movement grew.
Every time a new state wanted to join the union, big arguments broke out about whether the state should be a free or slave state. Things were getting worse
between the Northern and Southern states.
On slide: Throughout… + graphics.
Click 1: Every time…
Click 2: Things were getting worse…
Click to next slide.
7
In 1857 the Supreme Court decided a case of a runaway slave named Dred Scott.
Dred Scott was suing for his freedom, but the court held that the Constitution protected slavery and that African Americans were not citizens protected by the Constitution.
The Southern states pressured the federal government to pass stronger laws for the capture of runaway slaves.
This decision made the abolitionists very angry.
It left no room for compromise.
On slide: The Southern states…
Click 1: In 1857, the Supreme… + graphic.
Click 2: Dred Scott was suing…
Click 3: This decision…
It left no room…
Click to next slide.
8
Then, in 1860, Abraham Lincoln was elected President...
This caused most of the Southern states to leave the Union.
Electoral Map of 1860. Lincoln carried red states.
The nation was pushed closer to civil war.
...by the Northern states.
On slide: The nation was pushed…
Click 1: Then, in 1860… + graphics.
Click 2: Map caption + …by the Northern states.
Click 3: This caused…
Ask the students to notice the green, red, and brown states on the map. Point out which states voted for and against Lincoln.
Click to next slide.
9
By April, 1861, war broke out among the Northern and Southern states.
On slide: Graphic.
Click 1: By April…
Click to next slide.
10
In 1863, President Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation, which freed the slaves in the rebel states.
On slide: All text and graphics.
Click to next slide.
11
After four bloody years of civil war, the South was defeated.
On slide: Graphic.
Click 1: After four bloody years…
Click to next slide.
12
“Slavery…shall not exist within the United States or any place subject to
their jurisdiction.”
13th Amendment (1865)
14th Amendment (1868)
All people born or naturalized in the U.S. are citizens.All citizens must be treated equally under the law.
Due process of law for all.
Sometimes called the “Civil War Amendments.”
After the Civil War ended, Congress passes three new Amendments to the Constitution.
On slide: After the Civil War… + Sometimes called…
Click 1: 13th Amendment + text + graphic.
Click 2: 14th Amendment + text + graphic.
Click to next slide.
13
Right to vote cannot be denied based on “race, color, or previous…servitude.”
15th Amendment (1870)
On slide: 15th Amendment + graphic.
Click 1: Right to vote…
Click to next slide.
14
And 50 years later another equal protection Amendment was added...
19th Amendment (1920)
Women’s rightto vote.
On slide: And later… + frame graphic.
Click 1: 19th Amendment + photo.
Click 2: Women’s right to vote.
Click to next slide.
15
Federal troops stayed in the South until 1877 and made sure these new laws were enforced.
But after that, unfortunately, new laws were passed in the South that denied many of the rights that the former slaves had won, like the right to vote.
These laws became known as “Jim Crow Laws.”
On slide: Federal troops…
Click 1: But after that… + graphic.
Click 2: These laws became…
Click to next slide.
16
In 1896, the case of Plessy v. Ferguson came before the Supreme Court challenging the Jim Crow laws.
Homer Plessy had been convicted of sitting in the “white” section of a train. The Supreme Court ruled that Plessy’s conviction would stand.
The court held that it was not a violation of the Constitution to have separate facilities for different races as long as the facilities were equal.
This became known as the “separate but equal” rule.
On slide: In 1896…
Homer Plessy had…
Click 1: The court held… + graphics.
This became known…
Click to next slide.
17
It was not until 1954 that the Supreme Court overturned the separate but equal doctrine in
one of its most famous cases...
Brown v. Board of Education
The court’s ruling on this case made it illegal to segregate public schools.
On slide: Black background.
Click 1: It was not until…
Click 2: Brown v. Board + graphics.
The court’s ruling…
Click to next slide.
Brown v. Board (1954) held that separate but equal schools for blacks and whites violated equal protection of the laws.
18
segregated public facilities,
job discrimination,
and ensured voting rights for all citizens.
Later, laws passed by Congress ended...
On slide: Photo.
Click 1: Later, laws passed…
Click 2: Job discrimination.
Click 3: Segregated public facilities + graphics +
and ensured…
Click to next slide.
19
The struggle for equality has been an important part of America’s history.
The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the Constitution were created to right the wrongs of slavery.
But it is important to remember that these amendments apply to all citizens.
They ensure equal protection of the law for people of all racial, ethnic, and religious groups.
Today, there are still struggles for equal protection. It is up to the courts to uphold the
Constitution and the Bill of Rights as they hear cases dealing with discrimination.
On slide: The struggle…
Click 1: The 13th, 14th….
Click 3: But it is… + graphics.
Click 4: They ensure… + graphics.
Click 5: Today, there are… + graphics.
Click to next slide.
20
© 2003 Constitutional Rights Foundation, Los Angeles, 2002. All rights reserved..
Designed by Marshall CroddyWritten by Keri Doggett
Graphic Design and Production by Keri Doggett
The Courts, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights: Equal Protection
Special thanks to John Kronstadt, member of CRF Board of Directors, for inspiration and input.
1
Gratz v. Bollinger
A Supreme Court Case
© 2003 Constitutional Rights Foundation, Los Angeles, CA All rights reserved.
2
Making sure that all people are treated equally under the law isimportant in our country. The U.S. Supreme Court has decided
many cases to improve the treatment and equal protection of women, people of different races and ethnic groups, and people
with different physical and mental abilities.
Cases continue to come before the Supreme Court that raise complicated questions about equality.
Today, you are going to take the roles of Supreme Court justices and attorneys to hear an equal protection case. This case is about a college accepting or denying student admissions based on race.
On Slide: Making sure... + stick people graphic.
Click 1: Cases continue…
Click 2: Today, you are… + court graphic.
Click to next slide.
3
In 1978 the Supreme Court decided the case of California v. Bakke.
To prepare for the case, you will need some background about a couple of other equal protection cases that were decided.
In this case, the University of California
was concerned that there were very few African
American, Mexican American or
disadvantaged students in its medical school.
On slide: To prepare…
Click 1: Rest of text + graphics.
Click to next slide.
Notes: California v. Bakke (1978) was about the UC Davis medical school holding spaces for minority students.
4
To make sure that more minority and disadvantaged students were accepted, the university set up a
special admissions program. The medical school saved some slots that only minority or disadvantaged
students could apply for.
Special Applications Everyone Else
On slide: All text and graphics.
Click to next slide.
5
The Supreme Court ruled that having a special admissions program based on race was
unconstitutional under the
“…No state shall make or enforce any laws which shall abridge the privileges… 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…the equal protection of the laws.”
14th Amendment
On slide: The Supreme Court ruled…
Click 1: 14th Amendment.
Click 2: “…No state…
Ensure that the students understand why the court found the policy unconstitutional.
Click to next slide.
6
The court decided that schools cannot accept or deny students based only on race or ethnicity. Everyone has to have an equal shot at getting in.
But the court also said that having diverse student populations in our universities and colleges is very important to our democracy.
Universities should do their best to have students from different racial and ethnic backgrounds, but they must do it without violating the Constitution.
On slide: The court decided… + graphic.
Click 1: But the court also said…
Click 2: Universities should do…
Ask: Why do you think the court said that it is important for universities to have students from different racial and ethnic backgrounds? (To ensure diversity in professions like law, medicine, etc. and to promote diverse points of view and tolerance among college students.)
Do you think it is important? Why or why not?
Click to next slide.
7
For the last 25 years, colleges throughout the country designed their admissions programs based on the Bakke
decision.
On slide: All text and graphics.
Click to next slide.
8
In 2003, two cases came before the Supreme Court dealing with college admissions. Both cases were about admissions at the University of Michigan.
In the first case, Grutter v. Bollinger, Barbara Grutter applied to get into Michigan’s law school. Grutter was Caucasian and had a high grade-point average and high test scores.
Grutter was not accepted, but other students with lower grades and test scores were. She took the director of admissions to court.
On slide: Purple background.
Click 1: In 2003…
Click 2: In the first case…
Click 3: Grutter was not accepted… + graphic.
Click to next slide.
9
The university argued that:
Having students from diverse backgrounds is important to providing a good law school education to all of their students.
Every qualified applicant is judged on an individual basis.
The law school looks for students who are most likely to succeed and contribute different ideas and experiences. Race or ethnicity is only one of the factors that is considered a plus.
The law school also values other forms of diversity, including life experiences of individuals.
On slide: The university argued… + graphic.
Click 1: Having students from diverse…
Click 2: The law school looks for…
Click 3: The law school also values…
Click 4: Every qualified…
Click to next slide.
10
The Supreme Court agreed with the university.
In the second case, Gratz v. Bollinger, two students, both Caucasian, applied to get into the University of Michigan’s
Literature, Science and Arts program. Both were high school graduates with good test scores and grade-point averages.
The court held that the law school’s admission program did not violate the 14th Amendment.
On slide: The Supreme Court agreed…
Click 1: Photo + The court held…
Click 2: In the second case…
You may need to explain the difference between the law school, and the undergraduate program at Michigan. The Literature, Science, and Arts program was Michigan’s “liberal arts” program. Middle school students may not understand the difference between a graduate school and the general undergraduate program.
Click to next slide.
11
The university had a system for trying to ensure a racially and ethnically diverse student body.
The admissions department received over 13,000 applications each year, and could accept under 4,000 students. Each application was read and scored using a mathematical system.
test scores,
high school grades,
leadership and high school activities,
and ethnicity/race.
The system awarded points to applicants based on many factors including...
Every African-American, Hispanic, and Native American application
automatically got 20 points.
On slide: The university had a system…
Click 1: The admissions department… + graphic.
Click 2: The system awarded…
Click 3: test scores,
Click 4: high school grades,
Click 5: leadership…
Click 6: and ethnicity/race.
Click 7: Every African-American….
Click to next slide.
Notes: 20 points were automatically awarded to applications from people of those three groups. A prospective student athlete could earn 20 points, as could an economically disadvantaged student. No applicant could be awarded the 20 extra points in more than one category. In other words, an African-American athlete would only qualify for 20 points total.
12
Jennifer Gratz and Patrick Hamacher did not have enough points for admission, but if they had received the points given to the three minority groups, they would have been accepted.
They took the admissions director to court, and the case ended up in the U.S. Supreme Court in 2003.
You are going to participate in this Supreme Court case.
On slide: Jennifer Gratz and Patrick Hamacher… + graphic +
They took the admissions...
Click 1: You are going…
Click to next slide.
13
The question before the court:
Does the University of Michigan’s use of racial
preferences violate the 14th Amendment?
On slide: The question before the court… + graphic.
Click 1: Does the University…
Click to next slide.
14
Both sides presented oral arguments and briefs to the appeals courts.
The admissions policy is a violation of the 14th Amendment because it does not treat all students equally.
The students were not as competitive as others based on race or ethnicity. Minority students were more competitive because they got extra points.
Attorneys for the students presented this argument:
The students were denied the opportunity to compete for admissions on an equal basis.
On slide: Both sides presented…
Attorneys for… + graphic.
Click 1: The admissions policy…
Click 2: The students were not…
Click 3: The students were denied…
Ensure that the students understand each argument.
Click to next slide.
15
The university has a right to ensure that its student body is diverse. It is important to the quality of education for all students.
The University of Michigan’s lawyers presented this argument to the appeals court:
The system makes it more fair for all students to have a chance to attend this school, even those who did not have the same opportunities earlier in life and in high school as others.
Though the system gives points to certain racial and ethnic groups, it also gives the same amount of points to athletes or disadvantaged students.
On slide: The University of Michigan…
Click 1: The system makes…
Click 2: The university has a right…
Click 3: Though the system gives…
Ensure that the students understand each argument.
Click to next slide.
16
Attorneys for the university.
Attorneys for the students (Gratz).
Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court.
You will take the roles of:
On slide: You will take...
Click 1: Justices… + graphic.
Click 2: Attorneys for the students… + graphic.
Click 3: Attorneys for university. + graphic.
PAUSE to get students into groups.
1. Divide the class into three sections. Assign each section one of the roles:
Justices
Attorneys for the students (Gratz)
Attorneys for the university (Bollinger)
2. Distribute Handout 1 to each student and explain that each group will work together to prepare to present the case of Gratz v. Bollinger.
Click to next slide.
17
To prepare for the case...
Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court: Create at least three questions to ask each side to help you determine the case.
Attorneys for University of Michigan: Create arguments to convince the court that the admissions system is fair and necessary to provide a diverse student population.
Attorneys for the students: Create arguments to convince the justices that the admission policy is not fair to Gratz and Hamacher or other students who are not African-American, Hispanic, or Native American.
Decide who will represent your group to perform the moot court.
On slide: All text.
PAUSE to assign tasks:
1. As you present the instructions for each group, ask the students if they have questions.
2. Review the questions before the court and remind students that the case should focus on these issues.
3. Tell the students how much time they have to prepare their arguments and questions. Circulate among the groups and help them prepare.
When the groups are almost finished preparing, click to next slide.
18
Rules for the Oral Argument
1. Attorneys for the students (Gratz) will present first.
2. Attorneys for the University of Michigan (Bollinger)will present second.
3. Justices will ask questions of both sides during the arguments.
The Justices’ Decision1. After oral arguments, the justices meet and discuss the
case. 2. Then they vote.3. The justices will explain the reasons for the decision.
On slide: All text.
PAUSE to provide final preparation time (3 minutes) and conduct moot courts.
1. After the students have had time to prepare, present the Rules for Oral Argument.
2. Explain that the attorneys for the students present first because they are the party appealing the case from the lower court.
3. Have each side choose two or three people to make its presentation. Give each side a set amount of time for the presentation, e.g. 2 minutes. Don’t count as part of the 2 minutes the time each takes to answer questions from judges.
3. After the oral arguments, ask the justices to discuss, out loud, their thoughts about the case. Explain that this is always done behind closed doors, but that you are interested in hearing their rationale.
4. Ask the justices to take a vote.
5. Ask the rest of the class if they agree or disagree with the decision. Ask students to give reasons why.
After the justices have decided, click to next slide.
19
The Supreme Court Decision: Gratz v. Bollinger, 2003
We conclude...that the University’s use of race in its current freshman admissions policy...violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Justice Rehnquist wrote the court’s majority decision. He talked about the difference between Michigan’s Law School case and the Gratz case.
The law school case was upheld because each student who applied was considered individually. Everyone had a more equal chance of getting in based on his or her individual strengths. Being a member of a particular racial or ethnic group might be a plus, but other life experiences could be just as important.
On slide: All text.
1. Share the actual Supreme Court decision with the class.
Click to next slide.
20
In the Gratz case, the undergraduate admissions system automatically gave preference to three minority groups based only on race and ethnicity.
The system’s mathematical formula did not allow for individual strengths and weaknesses.
The U.S. Supreme Court found the system unconstitutional because it did not treat individuals from different racial and ethnic groups equally.
From The Record, University of Michigan’s newspaper, 9/2003
A new process for undergraduate admissions will gather more information about student applicants and include multiple levels of highly individualized
review. The new process, announced Aug. 28, was developed over the past several weeks in order to
comply with the June 23 ruling by the Supreme Court of the United States.
On slide: All text except newspaper quote.
Click 1: From The Record… + boxed quotation.
1. Compare the arguments the students made with the actual decision.
2. Point out the connections between the Constitution and amendments that were written a long time ago, Supreme Court decisions, and how these things can impact our lives today.
3. Congratulate the students on their participation.
21
© 2003 Constitutional Rights Foundation, Los Angeles, CA
All rights reserved..
Designed by Marshall CroddyWritten by Keri Doggett
Graphic Design and Production by Keri Doggett
Gratz v. Bollinger: A Supreme Court Case
Special thanks to John Kronstadt, member of CRF Board of Directors, for inspiration and input.
