Chat with us, powered by LiveChat Constitutional Cases Essay | All Paper

All that is need is to apply these suggestions my teacher asked for to my final paper !!! your structure so far is in compliance, but you are missing running header with page numbers, Abstract page about the contents of your paper and more in text citations are needed. , with your thesis statement, state your thesis statement with “it is the opinion of the writer…” then talk about why you like this amendment in more detail. Save your conclusions to be combined in one conclusion with your final paper. , make sure your applications for each case is more comprehensive by using other authors writings who have agreed with the court findings on the case and ones who disagree. Put those comments in your application followed by in text citations. In addition, make sure your references are in alphabetical order and for each in text citation with a reference. !!!!^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^The original post is this: Hello Students, three constitutional cases are due on 4/28/19 at 11:59 pm. These cases are part of the collective Term Paper worth 150 points. The phase two term paper is to be formatted in APA writing style, with paragraph headings, centered, bold, upper and lower case with an introduction (paragraph heading) giving a narrative synopsis of the three cases, but leaving room for the final two case that are not due. At the end of your introduction give a short but concise thesis statement as to why you like or dislike the amendment you have chosen for all your cases. There should be only one amendment for your five case. There is no paragraph heading that says Body, but the first case heading, followed by Issue , rule, application and conclusion. Your references are to be compiled on the las page of your term paper with a heading of reference.. You are to write in your own words. If you use other sources use in text citations Remember in text citations have references. Write in double space and 12″ font with type face style of Times New Roman. Furthermore, each page must have a running heading (name of your paper and page number) Refer to Purdue Owl APA in Week 4 module.

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Fourteenth Amendment Cases
Your name
Institutional Affiliations
The Slaughter-House Cases
Other slaughterhouses contending about the monopoly granted by the Louisiana state to
New Orleans slaughtering business in 1869 claiming that they were deprived off their property
without following the due process of the law (Labbé, & Lurie, 2005).
The U.S. supreme court ruled out that the “privileges and immunities” of U.S. citizens
that were protected by the Fourteenth Amendment against the state were only limited as per the
ones in the constitution and included many rights that individual states had to enjoy. For that
reason, some citizens may be granted monopolies while others may be denied by the state
without violating the constitution.
Having passed a law in Louisiana which gave Crescent City Livestock Landing &
Slaughterhouse Company monopoly in the slaughter industry, local butchers went to court to sue
the state as they claimed that their privileges of running slaughterhouses were deprived from
them and therefore they could not earn a living but the state court
Even though a group of butchers believed that they were deprived of their privileges of running
slaughterhouses and hence their source of income, the Supreme court insisted that the clause “No
State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens
of the United States” did not allow the states to take away the privileges and immunities which
belonged to American citizenship but not the citizenship of the state(Labbé, & Lurie, 2005).
The Slaughterhouse Cases represented a reversal that was not permanent in the efforts of making
the powers to be more centralized in the federal government. Also, by limiting the clause that
deals with the “privileges and immunities,” the court ended up weakening the power that
accompanies the Fourteenth Amendment that was meant to protect the blacks’ civil rights.
Plessy v. Ferguson
The Issue is the enactment of the Separate Car Act in Louisiana whereby there was to be a
separate railway vehicle for the blacks and whites, that is, separate but equal facilities (Hoffer,
The state of Louisiana enacted an act that could forbid the blacks from using the same facilities
(Railway and buses) but Homer Plessy challenged this move because it violated Fourteenth
Amendments, equal protection clause of 1868 but the Plessy was convicted (The Library of
Congress, n.d)
According to the judge, Louisiana had the did not go against the constitution as long as
the state enforces the law within its railway boundaries thereby rendering the state law as being
constitutional. Justice Brown argued that separate treatment was not meant to treat African
Americans as inferior (Hoffer, 2012). The court argued out that there was no difference in the
railway cars used by the blacks and the whites.
It was ruled out by the court that the law that the stated has adopted was constitutional
because segregation by itself never constituted unlawful discrimination.
Lochner v. New York
The Bakeshop Act was enacted by the state of New York to reduce the working hours of
the people working in bakeries to 60 hours per week (Kens, 1998).
Lochner, a New York resident who owned a bakery was accused of having an employee
for more than 60 hours in a work whereby the first charge attracted a $25 fine without
challenging the conviction. A few years later, he was accused of the same crime and charged a
$50 fine, but he appealed this time (LII / Legal Information Institute, n.d.).
Lochner argued before the Supreme Court that there should have been a clear
interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment so that freedom to a contract could have substantive
due process, which was indeed backed up by the Supreme court (Kens, 1998).
The law that the New York state had adopted was invalidated by the Court on the ground
that the law was not in line with the freedom of contracts and therefore interfered with the right
to liberty between an employer and an employee, as backed up with the Fourteenth Amendment.
There was also no rational basis of the law since people working did not experience dramatic
changes in their health as a result of working for longer hours. Furthermore, baking is not that
particularly dangerous.
Gitlow v. New York
Distribution of a “Left wing Manifesto” by Gitlow in 1919 that aimed at establishing
socialism all forms of class actions and strikes (Lendler, 2012).
Benjamin Gitlow was a socialist. He was arrested for committing a Criminal Anarchy
which was against the laws of the New York state. Being a columnist, he published “Left wing
Manifesto” which championed overthrowing of the US government by violent means hence
being convicted on the ground of “bad (or dangerous) test” (Justia, n.d).
The due process protects among others the freedom of the press and speech as per the due
process of the Fourteen Amendment. However, it is an absolute ticket of publishing and speaking
anything without a sense of responsibility and therefore anyone who abuses this freedom shall be
punished by a state and for this reason, Gitlow became a victim of breaking the rule. Therefore,
Gitlow is punished for posing danger to the public making the security of the state to be at stake
through “utterances” for that matter to overthrow an already established government.
The Court concluded that it was wrong to overthrow the government by using violent
efforts as stipulated in the Criminal Anarchy Law and therefore any speech that is aimed at
threatening the existence of the government should be punished for the sake of the security of the
Brown v. Board of Education
This case is about the segregation of schools as per the people’s races whereby African
Americans were denied admission to a number of public schools.
Brown v. Board of Education is a compilation of several cases whereby the most
prominent one being the one filed by Oliver Brown, whose daughter was denied admission at
Topeka elementary schools for whites. He then went to head and filed a lawsuit claiming that the
segregation did not protect everyone as per the 14th Amendment whereby the clause stipulated
that, “deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” At Kansas
Court, the court insisted on the concept of “separate but equal” thereby appealing. On May 17,
1954, the supreme court Warren stated that “in the field of public education the doctrine of
‘separate but equal’ has no place,” because the segregated schools were “inherently unequal” and
therefore, the court made a ruling that petitioners were being “deprived of the equal protection of
the laws guaranteed by the 14th Amendment” (History, 2019).
According to the judges, when people are segregated on the basis of their races, there is a
likelihood on the inferiority syndrome to develop amongst the races that are less privileged
thereby causing negative effects on the education and the growth of those viewed as inferior, the
African American children for this case (Greenberg, 2004).
Having “separate but equal” education facilities goes against the clause that deals with
the Equal Protection in the Fourteenth Amendment and therefore the education system by itself
is inherently unequal.
Greenberg, J. (2004). Brown v. Board of Education: Witness to a landmark decision. New York,
NY: Twelve Tables Press.
History. (2019). Brown v. Board of Education. Retrieved from
Hoffer, W. (2012). Plessy v. Ferguson: Race and inequality in Jim Crow America. Lawrence,
Kan: University Press of Kansas.
Justia. (n.d). Gitlow v. New York, 268 U.S. 652 (1925). Retrieved from
Labbé, R. M., & Lurie, J. (2005). The slaughterhouse cases: Regulation, Reconstruction, and the
Fourteenth Amendment.
Lendler, M. (2012). Gitlow v. New York: Every idea an incitement. Lawrence: University
Press of Kansas.
Kens, P. (1998). Lochner v. New York: Economic regulation on trial. Lawrence: Univ. Press of
LII / Legal Information Institute. (n.d.). Lochner v. New York. [online] Available at:
The Library of Congress. (n.d). Plessy v. Ferguson: Primary Documents in American History
(Virtual Programs & Services, Library of Congress. Retrieved from

Purchase answer to see full

error: Content is protected !!