14th Amendment US Constitution--Rights Guaranteed ...

1 1559 fourteenth AMENDMENTRIGHTS GUARANTEEDPRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES OF CITIZENSHIP, due process AND EQUAL PROTECTIONCONTENTSPageSection 1. Rights of the United and process of Development of Substantive Due Persons Power Defined and Liberty ..1581 Liberty of Labor Laws Regulating Hours of Regulating Labor in Prohibiting Employment of Children in Hazardous Regulating Payment of Wage Compensation of Business Enterprises: Rates, Charges, and Conditions of Business Affected With a Public Interest ..1594 Nebbia v. New Review of Publicly Determined Rates and on Judicial Ben Avon of the Valuation of Public Utilities (Other Than Rates)..1607In Expenditures: Grade Crossings, and the Regulations Applicable to Liabilities and Penalties Applicable to of Corporations, Business, Professions, and in Prohibiting Trusts, Discrimination, Restraint of Preventing Fraud in Sale of Goods and , Wage Assignments and Businesses and of State 14 RIGHTS GUARANTEEDS ection 1.

2 Rights Guaranteed ContinuedDue process of Law ContinuedOil and of Property and Agricultural and of Real Property: Limitations, and Similar , Succession, Abandoned , Safety, and , Drugs, of Motor Vehicles and Rights, Remedial Rights, Political of Local Units of Considerations Affecting Validity: Excessive Burden; Ratio ofAmount Of Benefit , Gift and Inheritance Property to (Inheritance, Estate, Gift) Privilege Income Income Taxes: Foreign Company in and Hearing in Relation to and Hearing in Relation to of and Manner of Giving of due process and Noneconomic : Its Constitutional Interests of Retarded and Mentally Ill: Commitment and 14 RIGHTS GUARANTEEDS ection 1. Rights Guaranteed ContinuedDue process of Law Continued Right to Die ..1692 Procedural due process : General Use and process , Judicial process , and Separation of of the States to Regulate of in and , Damages, and of and Personam Proceedings Against of Foreign in Rem: Proceedings Against in Rem: Attachment in Rem: Estates, Trusts, : Service of Procedure Which Is Due Interests Protected: Entitlements and Positivist in Which Procedural due process Must Be Is process Requirements of Due due process : Elements of Due in Criminal Statutes: The Void-for-Vagueness Aspects of Statutory Identification of the , Burden of Proof, and Problem of the Incompetent or Insane Defendant or process .

3 Appeals and Other of and Problem of the Juvenile Problem of Civil Protection of the and 14 RIGHTS GUARANTEEDE qual Protection of the Laws ContinuedScope and Application ContinuedState Persons ..1802 Within Its Jurisdiction ..1803 Equal Protection: Judging Classifications by Standard: Restrained New Standards: Active Facially Neutral Classifications Which Impact on Equal Protection: Economic Regulation and Related Exercises of the for Purpose of Corporations and Vehicle Power Business and Employment and Unfair Trade of Protection and and Application of Separate But Equal ..1840 Brown v. Board of s of School Schools: Inter- and Intradistrict to Curb Busing and Other Desegregation of Court Areas of Remedial Utilization of Racial New Equal Meriting Close and 14 RIGHTS GUARANTEEDThe New Equal Protection ContinuedClassifications Meriting Close Scrutiny Interests: The Political to the and of Right to Residency and Familial and Fundamental Interests: The Intersection of due process and Equal Criminal to 2.

4 Apportionment of 3 and 4. Disqualification and Public 5. Definition of fourteenth Amendment v. Sandford, 60 (19 How.) 393, 404 06, 417 18, 419 20 (1857).2 The controversy, political as well as constitutional, which this case stirred andstill stirs, is exemplified and analyzed in the material collected in S. KUTLER, THEDREDSCOTTDECISION: LAW ORPOLITICS? (1967).3 That all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreignpower, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the UnitedStates; and such citizens, of every race and color, without regard to any previousRIGHTS GUARANTEEDPRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES OF CITIZENSHIP, DUEPROCESS AND EQUAL PROTECTIONFOURTEENTH AMENDMENTSECTION1. All persons born or naturalized in the UnitedStates, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens ofthe United States and the State wherein they reside.

5 No Stateshall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privi-leges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shallany State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, with-out due process of law; nor deny to any person within its juris-diction the equal protection of the OF THE UNITED STATESIn the Dred Scott Case,1 Chief Justice Taney for the Courtruled that United States citizenship was enjoyed by two classes ofindividuals: (1) white persons born in the United States as de-scendents of persons, who were at the time of the adoption of theConstitution recognized as citizens in the several States and [who]became also citizens of this new political body, the United Statesof America, and (2) those who, having been born outside the do-minions of the United States, had migrated thereto and been nat-uralized therein.

6 The States were competent, he continued, to con-fer state citizenship upon anyone in their midst, but they could notmake the recipient of such status a citizen of the United Negro, or African race, according to the Chief Justice, wasineligible to attain United States citizenship, either from a State orby virtue of birth in the United States, even as a free man de-scended from a Negro residing as a free man in one of the Statesat the date of ratification of the , first in 1 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 3and then in the first sentence1566 Amendment 14 RIGHTS Guaranteed condition of slavery or involuntary servitude .. shall have the same right[s].. Ch. 31, 14 Stat. proposed Amendment as it passed the House contained no such provision,and it was decided in the Senate to include language like that finally GLOBE, 39th Cong.

7 , 1st Sess. 2560, 2768 69, 2869 (1866). The sponsor of thelanguage said: This Amendment which I have offered is simply declaratory of whatI regard as the law of the land already, that every person born within the limitsof the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is .. a citizen of the UnitedStates. Id. at 2890. The legislative history is discussed at some length in Afroyimv. Rusk, 387 253, 282 86 (1967) (Justice Harlan dissenting).5 United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 649, 688 (1898).6 Slaughter-House Cases, 83 (16 Wall.) 36, 74 (1873).7 United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 649 (1898).8Id. at at 680 82; Elk v. Wilkins, 112 94, 99 (1884).10 United States v. Gordon, 25 Fed. Cas. 1364 ( 1861) (No. 15,231);In re Look Tin Sing, 21 F. 905 ( 1884); Lam Mow v.

8 Nagle, 24 316(9th Cir. 1928).11387 253 (1967). Though the Court upheld the involuntary expatriationof a woman citizen of the United States during her marriage to a foreign citizenin Mackenzie v. Hare, 239 299 (1915), the subject first received extended judi-cial treatment in Perez v. Brownell, 356 44 (1958), in which by a five-to-fourdecision the Court upheld a statute denaturalizing a native-born citizen for havingvoted in a foreign election. For the Court, Justice Frankfurter reasoned that Con-gress power to regulate foreign affairs carried with it the authority to sever the re-lationship of this country with one of its citizens to avoid national implication inof 1 of the fourteenth Amendment ,4set aside the Dred Scottholding in a sentence declaratory of existing rights, and affirma-tive of existing law.

9 5 While clearly establishing a national rule on national citizen-ship and settling a controversy of long standing with regard to thederivation of national citizenship, the fourteenth Amendment didnot obliterate the distinction between national and state citizen-ship, but rather preserved Court has accorded the firstsentence of 1 a construction in accordance with the congressionalintentions, holding that a child born in the United States of Chi-nese parents who themselves were ineligible to be naturalized isnevertheless a citizen of the United States entitled to all the rightsand privileges of intent in including thequalifying phrase and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, was ap-parently to exclude from the reach of the language children bornof diplomatic representatives of a foreign state and children bornof alien enemies in hostile occupation, both recognized exceptionsto the common-law rule of acquired citizenship by birth,8as wellas children of members of Indian tribes subject to tribal courts have generally held that the citizenship of the parentsdetermines the citizenship of children born on vessels in UnitedStates territorial waters or on the high Afroyim v.

10 Rusk,11a divided Court extended the force ofthis first sentence beyond prior holdings, ruling that it withdrew1567 Amendment 14 RIGHTS Guaranteed acts of that citizen which might embarrass relations with a foreign nation. Id. at60 62. Three of the dissenters denied that Congress had any power to discussion supra pp. 272 76. In the years before Afroyim, a series of decisionshad curbed congressional v. Rusk, 387 253, 262 63 (1967). Four dissenters, Justices Har-lan, Clark, Stewart, and White, controverted the Court s reliance on the history andmeaning of the fourteenth Amendment and reasserted Justice Frankfurter s pre-vious reasoning in Perez. Id. at v. Bellei, 401 815 (1971). This, too, was a five-to-four decision,Justices Blackmun, Harlan, Stewart, and White, and Chief Justice Burger in themajority, and Justices Black, Douglas, Brennan, and Marshall Co.