Annotation 3. 1 - Fourteenth Amendment SECTION 1. RIGHTS GUARANTEED: THE NEW EQUAL PROTECTION Classifications Meriting Close Scrutiny Alienage and Nationality .- -''It has long been settled . But the Court in many cases thereafter recognized a permissible state interest in distinguishing between its citizens and aliens by restricting enjoyment of resources and public employment to its own citizens. But in Hirabayashi v. United States, 4 it was announced that ''. United States, 5 classifications based upon race and nationality were said to be suspect and subject to the ''most rigid scrutiny.'' These dicta resulted in a 1. There the Court held void a statute barring issuance of commerical fishing licenses to persons ''ineligible to citizenship,'' which in effect meant resident alien Japanese. The Fourteenth Amendment and the laws adopted under its authority thus embody a general policy that all persons lawfully in this country shall abide 'in any state' on an equality of legal privileges with all citizens under nondiscriminatory laws.'' Justice Black said for the Court that ''the power of a state to apply its laws exclusively to its alien inhabitants as a class is confined within narrow limits.'' 7 Announcing ''that classifications based on alienage . Thereafter, in a series of decisions, the Court adhered to its conclusion that alienage was a suspect classification and voided a variety of restrictions. More recently, however, it has created a major ''political function'' exception to strict scrutiny review, which shows some potential of displacing the previous analysis almost entirely. Dougall, 9 the Court voided the total exclusion of aliens from a State's competitive civil service. A State's power ''to preserve the basic conception of a political community'' enables it to prescribe the qualifications of its officers and voters, 1. Court held, and this power would extend ''also to persons holding state elective or important nonelective executive, legislative, and judicial positions, for officers who participate directly in the formulation, execution, or review of broad public policy perform functions that go to the heart of representative government.'' 1. But a flat ban upon much of the State's career public service, both of policy- making and non- policy- making jobs, ran afoul of the requirement that in achieving a valid interest through the use of a suspect classifica tion the State must employ means that are precisely drawn in light of the valid purpose. State bars against the admission of aliens to the practice of law were also struck down, the Court holding that the State had not met the ''heavy burden'' of showing that its denial of admission to aliens was necessary to accomplish a constitutionally permissible and substantial interest. The State's admitted interest in assuring the requisite qualifications of persons licensed to practice law could be adequately served by judging applicants on a case- by- case basis and in no sense could the fact that a lawyer is considered to be an officer of the court serve as a valid justification for a flat prohibition. Nor could Puerto Rico offer a justification for excluding aliens from one of the ''common occupations of the community,'' hence its bar on licensing aliens as civil engineers was voided. Mauclet, 1. 5 the Court seemed to expand the doctrine. Challenged was a statute that restricted the receipt of scholarships and similar financial support to citizens or to aliens who were applying for citizenship or who filed a statement affirming their intent to apply as soon as they became eligible. Therefore, since any alien could escape the limitation by a voluntary act, the disqualification was not aimed at aliens as a class, nor was it based on an immutable characteristic possessed by a ''discrete and insular minority''- -the classification that had been the basis for declaring alienage a suspect category in the first place. But the Court voided the statute. The fact that the statute is not an absolute bar does not mean that it does not discriminate against the class.'' 1. The Royal Marriages Act 1772 was an act of the Parliament of Great Britain, which prescribed the conditions under which members of the British Royal Family could. ![]() 13 BLOODLINES OF THE ILLUMINATI. There has been no consistency among the Du Pont family members in the spelling they have employed to write. Paramount Pictures - Filmography. Join IMDb Pro for more details! Definition: The traditional Chinese family, or ji Author's Note This document consists of the christening details of the Royal Family from King George I in 1660 including Queen Victoria in 1819 to their present-day. Two proffered justifications were held insufficient to meet the high burden imposed by the strict scrutiny doctrine. Accordingly, we have recognized 'a State's historic power to exclude aliens from participation in its democratic political institutions,' . It is therefore permissible to reserve to citizens offices having the ''most important policy responsibilities,'' a reservation drawn from Sugarman, but the critical factor in this case is the analysis finding that the police function is ''one of the basic functions of government.'' ''The execution of the broad powers vested'' in police officers ''affects members of the public significantly and often in the most sensitive areas of daily life. Clearly the exercise of police authority calls for a very high degree of judgment and discretion, the abuse or misuse of which can have serious impact on individuals. The office of a policeman is in no sense one of 'the common occupations of the community'. Norwick 2. 0 upheld a bar to qualifying as a public school teacher for resident aliens who have not manifested an intention to apply for citizenship. The ''governmental function'' test took on added significance, the Court saying that the ''distinction between citizens and aliens, though ordinarily irrelevant to private activity, is fundamental to the definition and government of a State.'' 2. Thus, ''governmental entities, when exercising the functions of government, have wider latitude in limiting the participation of noncitizens.'' 2. Teachers, the Court thought, because of the role of public education in inculcating civic values and in preparing children for participation in society as citizens and because of the responsibility and discretion they have in fulfilling that role, perform a task that ''go. Chavez- Salido, 2. Court sustained a state law imposing a citizenship requirement upon all positions designated as ''peace officers,'' upholding in context that eligibility prerequisite for probation officers. First, the Court held that the extension of the requirement to an enormous range of people who were variously classified as ''peace officers'' did not reach so far nor was it so broad and haphazard as to belie the claim that the State was attempting to ensure that an important function of government be in the hands of those having a bond of citizenship. First, it has disapproved the earlier line of cases and now would foreclose attempts by the States to retain certain economic benefits, primarily employment and opportunities for livelihood, exclusively for citizens. Second, when government exercises principally its spending functions, such as those with respect to public employment gen erally and to eligibility for public benefits, its classifications with an adverse impact on aliens will be strictly scrutinized and usually fail. Third, when government acts in its sovereign capacity, when it acts within its constitutional prerogatives and responsibilities to establish and operate its own government, its decisions with respect to the citizenship qualifications of an appropriately designated class of public office holders will be subject only to traditional rational basis scrutiny. However, the ''political function'' standard is elastic, and so long as disqualifications are attached to specific occupations 2. Sugarman, the concept seems capable of encompassing the exclusion. Inasmuch as it was clear that the undocumented status of the children was not irrelevant to valid government goals and inasmuch as the Court had previously held that access to education was not a ''fundamental interest'' which triggered strict scrutiny of governmental distinctions relating to education, 3. Court's decision to accord intermediate review was based upon an amalgam of at least three factors. First, alienage was a characteristic that provokes special judicial protection when used as a basis for discrimination. Second, the children were innocent parties who were having a particular onus imposed on them because of the misconduct of their parents. Third, the total denial of an education to these chil dren would stamp them with an ''enduring disability'' that would harm both them and the State all their lives. The Court evaluated each of the State's attempted justifications and found none of them satisfying the level of review demanded. It seems evident that Plyler v. Doe is a unique case and that whatever it may doctrinally stand for, a sufficiently similar factual situation calling for application of its standards is unlikely to be replicated. Man is, or should be, woman's protector and defender. The natural and proper timidity and delicacy which belongs to the female sex evidently unfits it for many of the occupations of civil life. The constitution of the family organization, which is founded in the divine ordinance, as well as in the nature of things, indicates the domestic sphere as that which properly belongs to the domain and functions of womanhood.'' 3. On the same premise, a statute restricting the franchise to men was sustained. The greater number of cases have involved legislation aimed to protect women from oppressive working conditions, as by prescrib ing maximum hours 3. A 1. 96. 1 decision upheld a state law which required jury service of men but which gave women the option of serving or not. In a highly controversial ruling, the Court sustained a state law which forbade the licensing of any female bartender, except for the wives or daughters of male owners. The Court purported to view the law as one for the protection of the health and morals of women generally, with the exception being justified by the consideration that such women would be under the eyes of a protective male.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
January 2017
Categories |