Chapter 21 Civil Rights Review Worksheet—ANSWERS

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more

Name: ___ANSWERS________ Date: _______________________ Period: ______________________ Chapter 21 Civil Rights Review Worksheet—ANSWERS OGT Section Page Person, Place, Date, Description Term refer to and study “Civil Rights Movement— Alphabet Soup” 4.1 166 Dred Scott vs. Dred Scott was a slave who sued Sanford (1857) unsuccessfully for his freedom in the famous lawsuit Dred Scott v. Sandford which bears his name—The court ruled 7 to 2 against Scott, stating that slaves were property, and the court could not deprive people of their property without due process of law according to the Fifth Amendment 8.3 287 Grandfather clause Provision that exempts certain people from a law on the basis of previously existing circumstances—especially a clause formerly in some Southern states’ constitutions that exempted whites from the strict voting requirements used to keep African Americans from the polls 8.3 287 Jim Crow Laws Laws enacted by Southern state and local governments to separate white and black people in public and private facilities; named after a popular old minstrel song that ended in the words “Jump, Jim Crow” 8.3 287 Poll Tax An annual tax that had to be paid before qualifying to vote—African Americans and poor white citizens were often too poor to pay the poll tax; to reinstate white voters who could not pay the poll tax, several Southern states added the grandfather clause which allowed citizens to still vote if their grandfathers were able to vote 8.3 287 & 290 Plessy v Ferguson Affirmed the legality of racial segregation (“separate but equal”); In 1890, the State of Louisiana had passed a law that required separate accommodations for Blac ks and Whites on railroads. Homer Plessy, who was one-eighth African, had taken a seat in the whites only railway car, he was asked to vacate it and sit instead in the "blac ks only" car. Plessy refused and was immediately arrested. In 1896, the Supreme Court ruled by a 7-1 decision in this case that the separation of races in public accommodations was legal and did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment as long as the accommodations were equal; decision established the doctrine of “separate but equal” which allowed states to maintain segregated facilities. 19.1 637 What were some of the actions taken by President Truman as a result of the Committee on Civil Rights? Based on the committee’s findings, Truman urged Confess to pass an anti-lynching law and an anti-poll-tax measure to end discrimination in federal agencies and the military. He issued executive orders banning racial discrimination in the military and in federal hiring. He also took steps to end employment discriminati on by companies holding government contracts. 21.1 99 Thirteenth Amendment 21.1 99 Fourteenth Amendment XIV (the Fourteenth Amendment) of the United States Constitution recognized former slaves as citizens. abolished slavery. The amendment states: Amendment (1868) Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. 21.1 100 Fifteenth Amendment Amendment XV (the Fifteenth Amendment) of the United States Constitution grants voting rights regardless of (1867) race. The amendment states: Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude. Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. 21.1 102 Twenty-fourth Amendment XXIV (the Twenty-fourth Amendment) of the United States Constitution Amendment (1964) prohibits both Congress and the states from putting restrictions (poll tax, literacy test, etc.) on the right to vote in federal elections. The amendment states: Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or V ice President, for electors for P resident or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay poll tax or other tax. Section 2.The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. 21.1 700 Literacy test A test that judged the reading of voters to — N/A determine if they could vote or not; African Americans were often given more difficult questions than white, or given a test in a foreign language in the end though it was white officials that graded it and they could pass or fail applicants as they wished 21.1 700— racism N/A Racial prejudice or discrimination 21.1 702 Brown v. Board of In Topeka, Kansas, Linda Brown’s parents sued the school Education (1954) board for not allowing their daughter to attend a better all-white school miles closer to their home and than the segregated elementary school she was assigned to (Linda Brown—7 years-old—had to walk a mile through a dangerous train switching yard to get to a bus to ta ke her to her school rather than attending a school several bloc ks from her home); on 17 May 1954 the Warren Court handed down a unanimous 9-0 decision which stated, in no uncertain terms, that "separate educational facilities are inherently unequal." This ruling eliminated the doctrine of "separate but equal”. Some border states integrated their schools, but the South remained segregated. The governor of Virginia threatened to close the state ’s public schools and send white children to private schools. A group of Southern members of Congress signed a “Southern Manifesto,” which called the court’s ruling “a clear abuse of judicial power” and pledged use of “all lawful means to bring about a reversal of this 21.1 702 Discuss three results of the Brown v. decision.” The decision gave legal support of the Board of Education African American struggle for civil rights. decision. 21.1 702 How did events during World War II lay the groundwork for African Americans to fight for civil rights in the 1950s? African Americans had experienced better job opportunities; many veterans who had fought racist Germans wanted to resist racist Americans; civil rights groups had staged some successful protests 21.1 702 Thurgood Marshall Leading civil rights attorney In total, Marshall won twenty-nine out of the thirty-two cases he argued before the Supreme Court (including Brown v Board of Education); On June 13, 1967, President Johnson appointed Marshall to the Supreme Court saying that this was "the right thing to do, the right time to do it, the right man and the right place." He was the first African-American to hold the position. 21.1 703 “Little Rock Nine” The nine African American students who attempted to enroll at Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas 21.1 703 Brown II In response to the Brown v Board of Education decision, many whites resisted desegregation and in many places the Ku Klux Klan reappeared; in response, the Supreme Court handed down a second ruling ( known as Brow n II) that ordered school desegregation be implemented “with all deliberate speed” 21.1 703 Little Rock Crisis Wednesday, Sept. 4, 1957, Nine black students (“The Little Rock Nine”) seeking to enter Little Rock Central High School were stopped by Governor Orval Faubus, the National Guard, and angry white segregationists. These actions forced President Eisenhower to intervene. He federalized the Arkansas National Guard and sent in 1,000 paratroopers to protect the students and to allow them to enter. Students attended for that year then Faubus shut down Central High rather than let integration continue. 21.1 703 Southern Manifesto A document signed by a group of 101 — N/A southern members of Congress which called the Cour t’s ruling of Brown v Board of Education “a clear abuse of judicial power” and pledged use of “all lawful means to bring about a reversal of this decision” Why weren’t schools in all regions desegregated immediately after the Brown II decision? Some Southern whites and state officials resisted integration, and neither the president nor Congress forced them to act quic kly 21.1 703 Explain the pr imary effect of the bus boycott in Montgomery, Alabama, on the bus company and the community. African American passengers who regulary used the buses for transportation boycotted them. Because a majority of the regular bus riders were African Americans, the bus company lost much of its business. The boycott eventually forced the bus company to desegragete buses. 21.1 704 2 21.1 704 Federalized Put under the jurisdiction of the federal — N/A government—during the Civil Rights Movement, the president often federalized state National Guardsmen until federal troops could arrive 21.1 704 Montgomery Bus A boycott of public transportation in Boycott Montgomery, Alabama in response to Rosa Parks being arrested; the boycott was organized by the MIA and led by Martin Luther King, Jr.; many African Americans chose to walk for miles rather than ta ke the bus—in many cases people organized car pools; donations were taken up to purchase “boycott taxies” to pic k up and dr ive walkers; the boycott lasted for 381 days until the Supreme Court outlawed bus segregation 21.1 704 What effect do you think television coverage of the Little Roc k incident had on the nation? Television allowed the people to see the white separatists’ cruel treatm ent of the African American students—this helped them relate and cause sympathy for the cause and anger towards the segregation list 21.1 704 What was the Montgomery Improvement Association The MIA was a group of local civil rights leaders wor king for fair conditions for minorities in Montgomery and around the nation.
Recommended publications
  • H.Doc. 108-224 Black Americans in Congress 1870-2007

    H.Doc. 108-224 Black Americans in Congress 1870-2007

    “The Negroes’ Temporary Farewell” JIM CROW AND THE EXCLUSION OF AFRICAN AMERICANS FROM CONGRESS, 1887–1929 On December 5, 1887, for the first time in almost two decades, Congress convened without an African-American Member. “All the men who stood up in awkward squads to be sworn in on Monday had white faces,” noted a correspondent for the Philadelphia Record of the Members who took the oath of office on the House Floor. “The negro is not only out of Congress, he is practically out of politics.”1 Though three black men served in the next Congress (51st, 1889–1891), the number of African Americans serving on Capitol Hill diminished significantly as the congressional focus on racial equality faded. Only five African Americans were elected to the House in the next decade: Henry Cheatham and George White of North Carolina, Thomas Miller and George Murray of South Carolina, and John M. Langston of Virginia. But despite their isolation, these men sought to represent the interests of all African Americans. Like their predecessors, they confronted violent and contested elections, difficulty procuring desirable committee assignments, and an inability to pass their legislative initiatives. Moreover, these black Members faced further impediments in the form of legalized segregation and disfranchisement, general disinterest in progressive racial legislation, and the increasing power of southern conservatives in Congress. John M. Langston took his seat in Congress after contesting the election results in his district. One of the first African Americans in the nation elected to public office, he was clerk of the Brownhelm (Ohio) Townshipn i 1855.
  • Restoring the Right to Vote | 2 Criminal Disenfranchisement Laws Across the U.S

    Restoring the Right to Vote | 2 Criminal Disenfranchisement Laws Across the U.S

    R E S T O R I N G T H E RIGHT TO VOTE Erika Wood Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law ABOUT THE BRENNAN CENTER FOR JUSTICE The Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law is a non-partisan public policy and law institute that focuses on fundamental issues of democracy and justice. Our work ranges from voting rights to redistricting reform, from access to the courts to presidential power in the fight against terrorism. A singular institution – part think tank, part public interest law firm, part advocacy group – the Brennan Center combines scholarship, legislative and legal advo- cacy, and communications to win meaningful, measurable change in the public sector. ABOUT THE BRENNAN CENTER’S RIGHT TO VOTE PROJECT The Right to Vote Project leads a nationwide campaign to restore voting rights to people with criminal convictions. Brennan Center staff counsels policymakers and advocates, provides legal and constitutional analysis, drafts legislation and regulations, engages in litigation challenging disenfranchising laws, surveys the implementation of existing laws, and promotes the restoration of voting rights through public outreach and education. ABOUT THE AUTHOR Erika Wood is the Deputy Director of the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice where she lead’s the Right to Vote Project, a national campaign to restore voting rights to people with criminal records, and works on redistricting reform as part of the Center’s Government Accountability Project. Ms. Wood is an Adjunct Professor at NYU Law School where she teaches the Brennan Center Public Policy Advocacy Clinic.
  • BRNOVICH V. DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE

    BRNOVICH V. DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE

    (Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2020 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Syllabus BRNOVICH, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ARIZONA, ET AL. v. DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE ET AL. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT No. 19–1257. Argued March 2, 2021—Decided July 1, 2021* Arizona law generally makes it very easy to vote. Voters may cast their ballots on election day in person at a traditional precinct or a “voting center” in their county of residence. Ariz. Rev. Stat. §16–411(B)(4). Arizonans also may cast an “early ballot” by mail up to 27 days before an election, §§16–541, 16–542(C), and they also may vote in person at an early voting location in each county, §§16–542(A), (E). These cases involve challenges under §2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA) to aspects of the State’s regulations governing precinct-based election- day voting and early mail-in voting. First, Arizonans who vote in per- son on election day in a county that uses the precinct system must vote in the precinct to which they are assigned based on their address. See §16–122; see also §16–135.
  • Barriers to Voting in Alabama (2020)

    Barriers to Voting in Alabama (2020)

    Barriers to Voting in Alabama A Report by the Alabama Advisory Committee to the United States Commission on Civil Rights February 2020 i Advisory Committees to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights By law, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights has established an advisory committee in each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia. The committees are composed of state citizens who serve without compensation. The committees advise the Commission of civil rights issues in their states that are within the Commission’s jurisdiction. More specifically, they are authorized to advise the Commission in writing of any knowledge or information they have of any alleged deprivation of voting rights and alleged discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, age, disability, national origin, or in the administration of justice; advise the Commission on matters of their state’s concern in the preparation of Commission reports to the President and the Congress; receive reports, suggestions, and recommendations from individuals, public officials, and representatives of public and private organizations to committee inquiries; forward advice and recommendations to the Commission, as requested; and observe any open hearing or conference conducted by the Commission in their states. ii Letter of Transmittal To: The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights Catherine E. Lhamon (Chair) Debo P. Adegbile David Kladney Gail Heriot Michael Yaki Peter N. Kirsanow Stephen Gilchrist From: The Alabama Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights The Alabama State Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (hereafter “the Committee”) submits this report, “Barriers to Voting” as part of its responsibility to examine and report on civil rights issues in Alabama under the jurisdiction of the Commission.
  • Barriers to Voting in Louisiana

    Barriers to Voting in Louisiana

    Barriers to Voting in Louisiana A Briefing Paper by the Louisiana Advisory Committee for the United States Commission on Civil Rights June 2018 Advisory Committees to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights By law, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights has established an advisory committee in each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia. The committees are composed of state citizens who serve without compensation. The committees advise the Commission of civil rights issues in their states that are within the Commission’s jurisdiction. More specifically, they are authorized to advise the Commission in writing of any knowledge or information they have of any alleged deprivation of voting rights and alleged discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, age, disability, national origin, or in the administration of justice; advise the Commission on matters of their state’s concern in the preparation of Commission reports to the President and the Congress; receive reports, suggestions, and recommendations from individuals, public officials, and representatives of public and private organizations to committee inquiries; forward advice and recommendations to the Commission, as requested; and observe any open hearing or conference conducted by the Commission in their states. Louisiana Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights The Louisiana Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights submits this briefing paper detailing civil rights concerns associated with barriers to voting in Louisiana. The Committee submits this report as part of its responsibility to study and report on civil rights issues in the state of Louisiana. The contents of this report are primarily based on testimony the Committee heard during hearings on November 15, 2017 in Grambling, Louisiana and December 6, 2017 in Baton Rouge, Louisiana.
  • Racial Disenfranchisement and Its Impact on Political Participation in the United States

    Racial Disenfranchisement and Its Impact on Political Participation in the United States

    University of Dayton eCommons Honors Theses University Honors Program 4-26-2020 Racial Disenfranchisement and Its Impact on Political Participation in the United States Cierra Dei Stewart University of Dayton Follow this and additional works at: https://ecommons.udayton.edu/uhp_theses eCommons Citation Stewart, Cierra Dei, "Racial Disenfranchisement and Its Impact on Political Participation in the United States" (2020). Honors Theses. 284. https://ecommons.udayton.edu/uhp_theses/284 This Honors Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the University Honors Program at eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Racial Disenfranchisement and Its Impact on Political Participation in the United States Honors Thesis Cierra Dei Stewart Department: Political Science Advisor: Nancy Martorano Miller, Ph.D. April 2020 Racial Disenfranchisement and Its Impact on Political Participation in the United States Honors Thesis Cierra Dei Stewart Department: Political Science Advisor: Nancy Martorano Miller, Ph.D. April 2020 Abstract Political participation, and in particular, the power to cast a vote, is crucial to representation in a democracy. This project seeks to explore the issue of racial disenfranchisement in the United States, both historically and in the present day, as well as its implications for the political participation and representation of racial minorities in politics and government. In analyzing the broad scope of this issue, I will research both federal and state laws. Until recently, the 14th and 15th Amendments to the Constitution of the United States coupled with the Voting Rights Act of 1965 have provided important barriers to state passage and implementation of laws that suppress or disenfranchise minority voters.
  • A Brief History of the Voter Suppression of Black Americans Anthony Brown, Joanna Batt, and Esther June Kim

    A Brief History of the Voter Suppression of Black Americans Anthony Brown, Joanna Batt, and Esther June Kim

    Social Education 84(4), p. 204–208 ©2020 National Council for the Social Studies Beyond the 19th: A Brief History of the Voter Suppression of Black Americans Anthony Brown, Joanna Batt, and Esther June Kim The history of voting rights for African Americans has been tumultuous. It began to vote in 1920 and far beyond. After the at the moment West Africans became the chattel of white men and women. For the 15th Amendment, Black women would next 200 years, enslaved African Americans had virtually no voting rights. In the continue and intensify their suffrage activ- Dred Scott decision of 1857, the Supreme Court declared that even “free” African ism, digging into the Black “woman ques- Americans did not have the right to be citizens. After this, African Americans went tion.”5 Even after the 19th Amendment through varied periods where the vote was repeatedly given and taken away. What for women’s suffrage was ratified in 1920, anchors this history is what Derrick Bell calls the permanence of racism, which is Black women were subjected to the same the idea that racism remains a stable feature of American society.1 We contend in this restrictions on voting faced by Black men. essay that the story of voting rights of African Americans from Post-Reconstruction These restrictions came in various forms, to the present illustrates how racism has changed over time. In this essay, we focus on all cloaked with guile and creativity to three periods of history: Post-Reconstruction, Civil Rights, and Post-Civil Rights. In execute the same egregious purpose: stop- the sections that follow, we offer a brief history of voting rights for African Americans ping African Americans from voting at all during these periods.
  • The Voting Rights Act of 1965 & Voter Suppression in the U.S

    The Voting Rights Act of 1965 & Voter Suppression in the U.S

    In 1870, Congress ratified the 15th Amendment, voting rights act giving all (male) citizens the right to vote, regardless of “race, color, or previous condition OF 1965 of servitude.” As a result, Black men began voting in large In response to Black-led activism and public numbers. Fearing that this would weaken their pressure, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed own dominance in the South, white leaders the Voting Rights Act (VRA) in August 1965. The imposed legal restrictions on their right to vote VRA was created to enforce the 15th Amendment. for the next 95 years. It states: No voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure shall be imposed or applied by any State or political subdivision to deny or abridge the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color. In effect, the Voting Rights Act made it illegal to restrict voting rights by using literacy tests, poll taxes, and other means – methods that were very common in the South from 1865 to 1965. Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act explains the President Lyndon B. Johnson and Dr. act’s purpose: to prohibit voting practices or Martin Luther King Jr. at the signing of the Voting Rights Act. procedures that discriminate against any citizen on account of race or color. Section 3 allows citizens to file lawsuits against a state or other jurisdiction if they feel that discrimination in voting has occurred. It also allows federal examiners to be sent to local areas to enforce the 15th amendment if the Section 4 establishes a formula to identify area is attempting to restrict people from voting.
  • TENANT TALK ONGOING NEW VOTER SUPPRESSION LAWS in the UNITED STATES SINCE 2010 VOTER New Voter Suppression Laws in the United States Since 2010 SUPPRESSION

    TENANT TALK ONGOING NEW VOTER SUPPRESSION LAWS in the UNITED STATES SINCE 2010 VOTER New Voter Suppression Laws in the United States Since 2010 SUPPRESSION

    A HISTORY OF VOTER SUPPRESSION VOTER SUPPRESSION IS AN UNFORTUNATE BUT CONSISTENT FEATURE OF THE U.S. POLITICAL SYSTEM. LIMITATIONS ON THE RIGHT TO VOTE WERE CODIFIED IN THE JUNE 2013 CASE OF SHELBY COUNTY V. HOLDER, IN WHICH THE U.S. SUPREME COURT GUTTED THE 1965 VOTING RIGHTS ACT. THIS DECISION NO LONGER REQUIRED STATES AND LOCALITIES WITH A HISTORY OF SUPPRESSING VOTING RIGHTS TO SUBMIT CHANGES IN THEIR ELECTION LAWS TO THE U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT FOR REVIEW. SINCE THIS RULING, 25 STATES CREATED NEW OBSTACLES TO VOTE. SOME READERS MIGHT ASK, “How didLET’S EXAMINE we OUR get NATION’S RELATIONSHIP here?” WITH VOTER SUPPRESSION. EARLY VOTER SUPPRESSION ur nation’s “founding fathers” wrote about a fair and just democracy for all, but this ideal was not realized in the early stages of the American experiment. Only Oland-owning white men were able to vote. As time passed, laws were modified to allow states to make their own election rules, allowing less privileged people like farmers and commoners the ability to vote, but it did not extend voting rights to all. In 1776, New Jersey gave voting rights to all who lived in the state, but then quickly passed a law to disenfranchise all women and Black men. Native Americans, African Americans, women, and immigrants were barred from voting, and places like Maryland also banned Jewish people from voting. The 15th amendment ensured that people could not be denied the right to vote because of their race, color or previous condition of servitude, but it also enabled states to oversee elections as they saw fit.
  • Why Equal Protection No Longer Protects: the Evolving Forms of Status-Enforcing State Action Reva Siegel*

    Why Equal Protection No Longer Protects: the Evolving Forms of Status-Enforcing State Action Reva Siegel*

    Why Equal Protection No Longer Protects: The Evolving Forms of Status-Enforcing State Action Reva Siegel* In this essay, ProfessorSiegel examines efforts to reform racialand gender status law in the nineteenth century in order to raise questions about the ways antidiscriminationlaw operates today. The essay demonstrates how efforts to dismantle an entrenched system of status regulationcan produce changes in its constitutive rules and rhetoric,transforming the status regime without abolish- ing it. PartI illustratesthis reform dynamic in the nineteenth century, a period when protest movements were demanding the abolition of slavery and reform of marital status law. Legislatures and courts responded by eliminatingsome of the more overtly hierarchicalfeatures of marital status law, yet adopted gender-biased policies governing domestic labor and domestic violence that were justified as promoting family privacy, rather than marital hierarchy. Similarly, in the aftermath of the Civil War, legislaturesand courts grantedthe newly emancipatedslaves "civil" rights, yet denied them "social" rights, ra- tionalizing miscegation laws and segregation as preserving associationallib- erty, ratherthan racialhierarchy. As these examples illustrate, the rules and reasons the legal system employs to enforce status relationshipsevolve as they are contested. PartII of the essay uses this dynamic model of status regulation to analyze the operations of equal protection law today. We know that doc- trines of heightened scrutiny have disestablishedovertly classificatoryforms
  • Voting Rights in Louisiana: 1982–2006

    Voting Rights in Louisiana: 1982–2006

    VOTING RIGHTS IN LOUISIANA: 1982–2006 DEBO P. ADEGBILE* I. INTRODUCTION President Lyndon Johnson framed the challenge posed by our nation’s tradition of racially motivated violence and discriminatory voting practices in his speech proposing the bill that became the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA): Many of the issues of civil rights are very complex and most difficult. But about this there can and should be no argument. Every American citizen must have an equal right to vote. There is no reason which can excuse the denial of that right. There is no duty which weighs more heavily on us than the duty we have to ensure that right.1 For nearly one hundred years following passage of the Fifteenth and Fourteenth Amendments, entrenched discrimination in voting eroded the promise of equality. Citizen protests brought urgency to the need to recon- cile our nation’s high constitutional principles with its low anti-democratic practices. Congress took up President Johnson’s charge to ensure political equality by overwhelmingly passing the VRA, which was “designed . to banish the blight of racial discrimination in voting.”2 On four subsequent occasions, after determining that the goal of purging discrimination from voting had yet to be achieved, Congress and the sitting President have re- newed the national commitment to the VRA’s expiring enforcement provi- * Associate Director of Litigation of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. This report was prepared with the generous and dedicated assistance of Darin Dalmat and Bryan Brooks (Co- lumbia Law School J.D. candidates, 2006), and Michael Grinthal and Tara Curtis (Harvard Law School J.D.
  • Resource Packet for Middle School Teachers LAW DAY 2014 American Democracy and the Rule of Law: Why Every Vote Matters

    Resource Packet for Middle School Teachers LAW DAY 2014 American Democracy and the Rule of Law: Why Every Vote Matters

    Resource Packet for Middle School Teachers LAW DAY 2014 American Democracy and the Rule of Law: Why Every Vote Matters What is Law Day? In 1961, Congress passed a joint resolution designating May 1 as the national day set aside to celebrate the rule of law. Law Day underscores how law and the legal process contribute to the freedoms that all Americans share. What is the 2014 theme? “American Democracy and the Rule of Law: Why Every Vote Matters.” This theme calls on every American to reflect on the importance of a citizen’s right to vote and the challenges we still face in ensuring that all Americans have the opportunity to participate in our democracy. For more information on the theme, see www.LawDay.org Why is the theme important? The right to vote is the very foundation of government by the people. For this reason, striving to establish and protect every citizen’s right to vote has been a central theme of American legal and civic history. Much of the struggle for voting rights began decades ago, but the work is far from complete, and a citizen’s right to cast a ballot remains at risk today. Prepared by Rachel E. Marshall, Public Education & Community Outreach Administrator U.S. Courts, Thomas F. Eagleton U.S. Courthouse, St. Louis, Missouri See www.MOED.uscourts.gov or www.JudicialLearningCenter.org for a PDF version of this packet 1 Activity for MIDDLE SCHOOL students Grade Level: 6-8 Suggested Time: 40-55 minutes A. Theme: American Democracy and the Rule of Law: Why Every Vote Matters B.