Discrimination: Crash Course Government and Politics #31

Summary

This Crash Course episode delves into the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause, highlighting its application to various minority groups in the U.S., including racial and religious minorities, women, and the LGBT community. It discusses historical discrimination, such as the Chinese Exclusion Act, and how the courts have addressed these issues. The video also explores the rights of immigrants, both legal and undocumented, and the unique status of Native Americans. It concludes by emphasizing the ongoing struggle for civil rights and the importance of the 14th Amendment and anti-discrimination legislation in protecting these groups.

Takeaways

• 🏛️ The 14th Amendment is crucial for equal protection and has been interpreted to protect various minority groups beyond racial and religious minorities.
• 🗣️ The Supreme Court has determined that the 14th Amendment primarily safeguards 'discrete and insular minorities', including various ethnic groups.
• 🧳 Historically, Asians and Latinos have faced federal discrimination, such as the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882.
• 👶 The Wong Kim Ark v. U.S. case established that U.S. citizenship is based on birthright, not parents' citizenship.
• 🌐 Language can be a barrier to equal protection, as non-English speakers may face discrimination, especially in the political process.
• 🏫 Lau v. Nihcols mandated that school districts must provide education for students with limited English proficiency.
• 🌐 The 14th Amendment Equal Protection Clause applies to anyone born in the U.S., including immigrants.
• 🏥 Undocumented immigrants, despite not having full legal protections, are still entitled to some rights like medical care.
• 🏰 Native Americans, as a 'discrete and insular minority', receive special consideration under the law, including sovereignty in certain territories.
• 🌈 The Supreme Court has extended civil rights protections to LGBT people, including the right to same-sex marriage as per Obergefell v. Hodges.
• 📊 People with disabilities often face discrimination, leading to the passage of the Americans With Disabilities Act to ensure equal opportunities.

Q & A

What does the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution primarily protect?

The 14th Amendment primarily protects equal protection and non-discrimination for various groups, including racial and religious minorities, women, and anyone born in the U.S.

How does the Supreme Court interpret the 14th Amendment in relation to ethnic groups?

The Supreme Court interprets the 14th Amendment as applying mainly to discrete and insular minorities, which includes various ethnic groups, protecting them against discrimination.

What was the impact of the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882?

The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 was one of the first federal laws aimed specifically at immigrants, effectively closing the door on immigrants from China and setting a precedent for federal discrimination against certain ethnic groups.

How did Wong Kim Ark v. U.S. establish the citizenship rights of Asian-Americans?

In Wong Kim Ark v. U.S., the Supreme Court ruled that American citizenship is based on being born in the U.S., not the citizenship or nationality of one's parents, thereby granting citizenship rights to Chinese people born in the U.S.

What is the controversy surrounding the English-only standard in the U.S.?

The controversy surrounding the English-only standard in the U.S. is whether it is fair to expect everyone to speak English, especially for those who are not native English speakers and may face discrimination in the political process.

Why did the Supreme Court rule in Lau v. Nihcols that schools must provide education for students with limited English?

The Supreme Court ruled in Lau v. Nihcols that schools must provide education for students with limited English to prevent disenfranchising these students who could learn if they received instruction in their native language.

What legal protections against discrimination do legal and illegal immigrants have in the U.S.?

Legal immigrants generally have the same rights and privileges as citizens except for voting, while illegal immigrants have fewer protections but are still eligible for medical and educational services.

How does the 14th Amendment apply to Native Americans?

Native Americans, being a 'discrete and insular minority', are protected under the 14th Amendment Equal Protection Clause. Since 1924, they have also been granted citizen's rights and receive special consideration in their sovereign territories.

What is the Americans With Disabilities Act and why was it enacted?

The Americans With Disabilities Act, enacted in 1990, is a civil rights law that prohibits discrimination against individuals with disabilities in all areas of public life. It was enacted to provide equal opportunities and protections similar to those offered by the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for other minority groups.

How have civil rights protections been extended to LGBT people?

Civil rights protections for LGBT people have been extended through various Supreme Court rulings, such as Romer v. Evans, Lawrence v. Texas, and Obergefell v. Hodges, which have ruled against discriminatory state laws and established rights to privacy and marriage equality.

What is the significance of the Obergefell v. Hodges decision?

The Obergefell v. Hodges decision made same-sex marriage legal in all 50 U.S. states, marking a significant step towards equality and civil rights for LGBT individuals.

Outlines

00:00

🏛️ Equal Protection and Discrimination

The script discusses the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause, emphasizing its importance beyond racial and religious minorities, including women. It addresses the historical discrimination against various ethnic groups in the U.S., such as Asians and Latinos, with a focus on the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882. The script also covers the Wong Kim Ark v. U.S. case, which established birthright citizenship. Language discrimination is touched upon, with mention of the Lau v. Nichols case that mandates schools to provide education for students with limited English proficiency. The discussion then shifts to the legal protections for immigrants, distinguishing between legal and illegal immigrants, and the challenges they face with discrimination.

05:03

🌈 Civil Rights for Diverse Groups

This paragraph delves into the extension of civil rights to groups beyond traditional minorities, such as people with disabilities and LGBT individuals. It highlights the challenges faced by these groups, including employment discrimination and societal attitudes. The Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 is mentioned as a legislative effort to address these issues. The script also discusses the legal battles for LGBT rights, including Romer v. Evans, Lawrence v. Texas, and Obergefell v. Hodges, which have progressively expanded civil rights protections. The paragraph concludes by emphasizing the commonalities among these groups: historical discrimination and their status as numerical minorities, which necessitates legal and judicial support.

Keywords

💡Fourteenth Amendment

The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution is a key legal foundation for civil rights and equal protection under the law. It was adopted after the Civil War to grant citizenship to freed slaves and to provide legal protection against state-sponsored discrimination. In the video, the amendment is discussed as the most important for protecting various groups from discrimination, including racial and religious minorities.

💡Equal Protection

Equal protection refers to the legal requirement that all citizens should be treated equally by the law, without discrimination. It is a central theme of the video, which discusses how the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause has been applied to various groups to prevent discrimination, such as ethnic minorities and women.

💡Discrete and Insular Minorities

The term 'discrete and insular minorities' comes from Supreme Court jurisprudence and refers to groups that are small, distinct, and isolated from the rest of society. In the video, it is mentioned that the Supreme Court has decided that the Fourteenth Amendment applies mainly to these groups, which are often unable to defend themselves in the political process and thus require judicial protection.

💡Chinese Exclusion Act

The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 was a federal law that prohibited Chinese laborers from immigrating to the United States. It is mentioned in the video as an example of actual federal discrimination against a specific ethnic group, highlighting the historical unfair treatment of Asians in the U.S.

💡Wong Kim Ark v. U.S.

Wong Kim Ark v. U.S. is a Supreme Court case that established that American citizenship is based on being born in the U.S., regardless of the citizenship or nationality of one's parents. The video uses this case to illustrate how the Fourteenth Amendment's Citizenship Clause was applied to people born in the U.S., including Chinese individuals.

💡Lau v. Nichols

Lau v. Nichols is a Supreme Court case that established the right of students with limited English proficiency to receive education tailored to their needs. The video discusses this case to highlight the importance of providing equal educational opportunities to all students, regardless of their primary language.

💡Immigration

Immigration is the process of moving from one country to another with the intention of residing there. The video discusses the legal protections against discrimination for both legal and illegal immigrants, emphasizing the complexity of immigration laws and their impact on civil rights.

💡Native Americans

Native Americans are the indigenous peoples of the United States. The video discusses their unique status under the Constitution and the special considerations they receive, such as the right to operate casinos on tribal lands. It also touches on the historical discrimination and legal complexities associated with Native American rights.

💡Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA)

The Americans With Disabilities Act is a civil rights law that prohibits discrimination against individuals with disabilities in all areas of public life. The video mentions the ADA as a legislative effort to extend civil rights protections to people with disabilities, similar to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for other minority groups.

💡LGBT

LGBT refers to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender individuals. The video discusses the extension of civil rights protections to LGBT people, including Supreme Court rulings that have helped to prevent discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.

💡Obergefell v. Hodges

Obergefell v. Hodges is a landmark Supreme Court case that ruled state bans on same-sex marriage were unconstitutional, effectively legalizing same-sex marriage across the United States. The video uses this case to illustrate the ongoing struggle for LGBT rights and the role of the courts in advancing civil rights.

Highlights

The 14th Amendment is considered the most important amendment to the Constitution for protecting equal protection and against discrimination.

The Supreme Court has interpreted the 14th Amendment to mainly protect discrete and insular minorities.

Ethnic groups, including Asians and Latinos, have been historically targets of unfair treatment.

The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 was the first federal law aimed specifically at immigrants, effectively closing the door on Chinese immigrants.

Wong Kim Ark v. U.S. established that American citizenship is based on birth in the U.S., not parents' citizenship.

The Lau v. Nihcols case mandated school districts to provide education for students with limited English proficiency.

Immigrants, both legal and illegal, have varying degrees of legal protections against discrimination.

Native Americans, as a 'discrete and insular minority', receive special treatment under the Constitution.

People with disabilities face significant discrimination, with only about 35% being employed compared to 72% of those without disabilities.

The Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 was passed to prevent discrimination against people with disabilities.

LGBT people have recently been extended some civil rights protections, despite no federal laws specifically aimed at them.

Romer v. Evans and Lawrence v. Texas were Supreme Court cases that ruled against state discrimination against LGBT people.

Obergefell v. Hodges made same-sex marriage legal in all 50 states, marking a significant step in LGBT rights.

The 14th Amendment and anti-discrimination legislation support historically discriminated groups in their fight for equal rights.

Crash Course: Government and Politics is produced in association with PBS Digital Studios, supported by Voqal.

Transcripts

Hi, I'm Craig. And this is Crash Course: Government and Politics. And today

we're going to try to wrap up the incredibly fun and uplifting subject of equal protection and discrimination.

Because if you thought the fourteenth amendment only protected racial and religious minorities

and maybe women to some degree, then you've underestimated the power of what I call

the most important amendment to the Constitution.

- Typical leftie nonsense. You haven't even mentioned the second amendment, the one that gives us the real

power to protect ourselves from government overreach.

If you're a member of a well-regulated militia, you mean. Right?

Oh! Hey guys. Haven't seen you in a while.

That's because you CAN'T STAY ON TOPIC!

[Theme Music]

Given that the Supreme Court has decided that the fourteenth amendment applies mainly to discrete and

insular minorities, it makes sense that various ethnic groups should be protected against discrimination.

After all, you can't control who your parents are or what country they come from.

If you can, you're a time-traveller.

And you should probably use your time-travelling skills to do better things. Like, end World War II or something.

As long as you are born here, or naturalized, you are a citizen and entitled to the same treatment

as other citizens and no one is supposed to discriminate against you.

That being said, historically there are certain ethnic groups that have been targets of unfair treatment.

Notably, Asians and Latinos. Let's start with Asians, as they've been the victims of actual federal discrimination.

In 1882, Congress created the "Chinese Exclusion Act." One of the first federal laws aimed specifically at immigrants.

It effectively closed the door on immigrants from China.

Later immigration quotas had the effect of discriminating against Southern and Eastern Europeans.

And if you read the newspaper from the time, that was clearly their intent but they didn't single out any

particular group like the "Chinese Exclusion Act" did.

In fact, it was an Asian-American who helped establish that the 14th Amendment Citizenship Clause applied to people born in the US.

In Wong Kim Ark v. U.S., the Court ruled that American citizenship is based on being born here,

not the citizenship or nationality of one's parents.

This meant that Chinese people who were born in the US were entitled to the rights of anyone born here.

Although in the late 19th Century, when the case was decided, this number was pretty small.

A closely related topic that applies to many ethnic Americans has to do with language.

Whether America should adhere to an English-only standard is controversial and not something that I want to get into right now.

But it is true that people who don't speak English as their primary language, even if they're born and raised here,

can face discrimination. Especially in the political process.

This is why voting guides appear in multiple languages in many states.

Another Supreme Court Case, Lau v. Nihcols

established that school districts have to provide education for students whose English is limited.

They can't simply teach in English and disenfranchise those kids who could learn if they received instruction in their native language.

As you can imagine, this is also controversial on a number of levels.

But as in the Brown v. Board of Education case, here we again see how the Court didn't want to

create barriers in education, because this would have long-term negative consequences.

So it's pretty clear that the 14th Amendment Equal Protection Clause applies to anyone born in the U.S.,

but what about immigrants to this country? What legal protections against discrimination do they have?

The answer depends on if you're talking about people who immigrated here legally, or illegally.

Let's go to the Thought Bubble.

Okay, the terminology surrounding immigrants is complicated and highly politicized,

and I'm not going to get into whether or not we should be calling people "undocumented" or "aliens".

But I'm gonna draw a line and say that a person, no matter how he or she got here, can't be illegal.

That just doesn't make sense. Anyway:

People who emigrate to the US following immigration rules and regulations generally are entitled to the same

rights and privileges as citizens, except they are not allowed to vote unless they become citizens.

Those who immigrated here without following the rules,

and thus violated U.S. law, do not have nearly the same protections. Although they do have some.

They're usually eligible for medical and educational services, although not for other social services.

At times, states have tried to limit the privileges of this subset of immigrants. For example:

California's proposition 187 attempted to take away all social services, exceptfor emergency medical care,

for those who emigrated unlawfully, although most of its provisions were struck down by the courts.

And sometimes federal immigration policy can lead to more discrimination.

For example: the 1986 Immigration Restriction and Control Act tried to push the cost of

immigration enforcement onto employers by making them responsible for background checks on job applicants' immigration status.

Rather than risking fines, employers just discriminated against all immigrants, regardless of their legal status.

Maybe you're thinking that we shouldn't care about undocumented immigrants' rights since, almost by

definition, they aren't citizens and therefore might not be entitled to protections.

However, when we remember that the basic principle behind equal protection is that the courts

will step in to protect groups that are unable to defend themselves from the legislative process,

then it makes some sense that the courts would look closely at cases involving immigrants,

who for the most part, can't work to change policies by voting. Thanks, Thought Bubble.

There's one more ethnic group in the U.S. that gets special treatment in the Constitution,

and for good reason, Native Americans.

Since they were here long before the framers of the Constitution,

they're the only group mentioned by name in the document.

Unfortunately, the Constitution itself doesn't actually clarify how they are to be treated,

and their legal status has changed a lot over the past 250 years or so.

Originally Native Americas were not considered citizens of the U.S. but rather of their own sovereign nations,

the territory of which the U.S. kept purchasing... well, often stealing... from them.

Since 1924 Native Americans have been granted citizen's rights,

and so they also get full protection under the 14th Amendment.

But tribes also get special consideration in the territory where they are sovereign.

Which is why, for example, Indians can operate casinos in states that don't allow casino gambling.

Numerically, Native Americans constitute a "discrete and insular minority",

so it makes sense that the 14th Amendment Equal Protection Clause would apply to them.

In many cases, they are also a linguistic minority, so the Lau decision applies too.

The laws concerning Native Americans are really, really complicated, and tied up in a pretty shameful history.

We don't have time to go into detail about them here, but it's important that you know that they are one of

the groups that are discriminated against and can receive special consideration in court decisions.

So far we've looked at how the 14th Amendment protects groups that are

almost always numerical minorities, except women of course, and usually consist of people who

share immutable characteristics, although the courts also include religious groups here too.

But there are other groups who are discriminated against, and Congress has stepped in to help them as well.

One such group is people with disabilities.

Even trying to describe this group can be tricky, because some disabilities, like missing a limb,

are pretty much permanent. At least for now. While others are not.

Many people are born with an attribute that much of society considers a disability,

while others develop them as the result of accident or disease or from other factor.

Many people who study disability point out that most of us will become less and less able to function

in some way over time. It may become harder to walk. Or to see. Or to hear.

And so it's better to think of ourselves as "temporarily abled".

I thought of the eagle as temporarily tabled.

And even calling someone who is blind disabled implies a societal value judgement that the person in question,

or others like them, might not share. So disability itself is really, really complicated,

which makes the law about it equally so.

Leaving aside arguments about what constitutes disabled,

about 10% of the American population has some kind of disability.

And just looking at the numbers, it appears that employers do discriminate against them.

About 35% of people with disabilities are employed, while 72% of people without disabilities are.

This has a lot to do with why Congress in 1990 passed the Americans With Disabilities Act,

which did for people with disabilities what the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did for other minority groups.

LGBT people have recently been extended some civil rights protections.

Now, there are no federal civil rights laws aimed specifically at them,

but many local ordinances accord them protection against discrimination.

This is especially important because states have attempted to prohibit local governments

from passing ordinances that prevent discrimination against LGBT people. Think about that for a second.

Local voters wanted to pass laws saying that their community couldn't discriminate,

and the state legislature passed another law prohibiting these anti-discrimination statutes. What?

And since LGBT people are not usually in the majority,

and certainly don't make up a majority population in a state, they couldn't do much to protect themselves.

That is, until the Supreme Court stepped in and ruled in Romer v. Evans that states couldn't do this anymore.

More recently the Supreme Court in Lawrence v. Texas ruled that state morality laws that were applied

against LGBT people, and not against straight people, were a violation of equal protection.

What this means in practice is that everyone has the same right to privacy in their sexual relations.

Very recently, the Supreme Court decided in the landmark case Obergefell v. Hodges

that state bans on same sex marriage were unconstitutional.

This has the effect of making same sex marriage legal in all 50 states. Whoo!

Much like the Brown v. Board of Education decision, some states are making attempts to resist the ruling,

and in many states discrimination against LGBT people is still legal,

but it seems that the arc of civil rights history is pointing towards justice.

So as we can see, civil rights protections coming out of the 14th Amendment

have been extended to many groups. These groups, which include people with disabilities,

LGBT people, ethnic groups, and women, have two things in common:

The first is that they have historically been discriminated against, and in many cases the discrimination continues.

The second is that they are numerical minorities - except for women -

and this means that they will have a hard time defending themselves in the political arena.

Luckily they have the 14th Amendment and all the federal and state anti-discrimination

legislation on their side, and the courts to back them up.

Thanks for watching, see you next time.

You were supposed to be temporarily tabled!

Crash Course: Government and Politics is produced in association with PBS Digital Studios.

Support for Crash Course: US Government comes from Voqal.

Voqal supports nonprofits that use technology and media to advance social equity.

Learn more about their mission and initiatives at voqal.org.

Crash Course was made with the help of all these nice citizens of planet Earth, and of my heart.

Thanks for watching.

DFTBA!