I. A Nation of Immigrants • By 2000, over nine percent of the population of the United States was born in other countries. More than 7 million Mexican Americans were included in this category, making Mexican nationals the largest group in our nation’s foreign-born population.
A. Immigrants and Aliens(pages 387–388) 1. Immigrants come to a new country intending to live there permanently; aliens live in a country where they are not citizens. 2. The federal government classifies aliens into five categories: a). resident aliens- person from a foreign nation who has established permanent residence in the U.S. b). nonresident aliens – person from a foreign country who expects to stay in the U.S. for a short, specified period of time c). enemy aliens- citizen of a nation with which the U.S. is at war d). refugees- people fleeing to escape persecution or danger e). illegal aliens- person who comes to the U.S. without a legal permit, such as a passport, visa, or entry permit.
A. Immigrants and Alienscontinued 3. Protections of the Bill of Rights, such as freedom of speech and assembly, apply to aliens as well as citizens. 4. Aliens cannot vote; most are exempt from military duty and serving on juries.
B. Immigration Policy (pages 388–390) 1. In 1882 Congress began to fully use its power to regulate immigration, and it imposed many restrictions during the next four decades. 2. The Immigration Act of 1924 sharply lowered the number of immigrants who could arrive each year and favored those who came from northern and western Europe. 3. The Immigration Reform Act of 1965 changed immigration policy by fixing a ceiling on countries in the Eastern Hemisphere and a different ceiling on those in the Western Hemisphere, as well as creating a complicated system for preferential treatment of selected immigrants.
B. Immigration Policy continued 4. The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 was passed to stem the tide of illegal immigrants and to allow illegal immigrants to become permanent residents and citizens. 5. The Immigration Act of 1990 was passed to revise the 1965 immigration law, putting limits on the flood of immigrants from Asia and Latin America, and to open immigration to Europeans who had been adversely affected by the 1965 law. 6. The 1990 immigration law reduced the total annual immigration slightly, encouraged immigrants with special skills, and set up special categories for special immigrants like close relatives of United States citizens.
II. The Basis of Citizenship • Certain citizens of the United States by birth were also made citizens by Congress. When Congress admitted Texas as a state in 1845, it also made all the people of Texas citizens of the U.S.
A. National Citizenship (pages 391–393) 1. Citizens of the United States have rights, responsibilities, and duties. 2. The Founders assumed the states would decide who was a citizen. 3. Citizenship came to have both a national and a state dimension. 4. The Dred Scott (1857) ruling that African Americans were not U.S. citizens led to the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment, which defined citizenship at both the state and national levels.
B. Citizenship by Birth (page 393) 1. Citizens by the “law of the soil” are born in the U.S. or its territories. 2. Children born to a parent who is a U.S. citizen are also citizens by the “law of blood,” including children born in another country of American parents.
C. Citizenship by Naturalization (pages 393–394) 1. Naturalized citizens have most of the rights and privileges of native-born citizens. 2. Congress has established qualifications for naturalization: a) Applicants must be of good moral character and have entered the U.S. legally. b) Applicants must read, write, and speak English. c) Applicants must show basic knowledge of American history and government and support the principles of American government.
D. The Steps to Citizenship (pages 394–395) 1. An applicant must file a petition requesting citizenship, be at least 18 years old, have been a lawfully admitted resident alien for 30 months out of the previous 5 years, and have resided in the state for at least 3 months. 2. At a final hearing, a federal judge administers the oath of allegiance to the new citizens.
E. Losing Citizenship (pages 395–396) 1. Only the federal government can take away citizenship. 2. A person may lose citizenship voluntarily or involuntarily.
F. The Responsibilities of Citizens (pages 396–397) 1. Responsible citizens need to know about the laws that govern society. 2. Responsible citizens participate in political life.
III. The Rights of the Accused • Prior to the Court ruling on Mapp v. Ohio, which banned the use of illegally obtained evidence at criminal trials in state courts, the exclusionary rule had applied only to federal courts.
A. Searches and Seizures (pages 398–401) 1. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights protect the rights of accused persons. 2. The Fourth Amendment offers protection from unreasonable searches and seizures, but the courts have dealt with this issue on a case-by-case basis. 3. Today most police searches are conducted with a court warrant.
A. Searches and Seizurescontinued 4. The 1914 exclusionary rule restricts the use of illegally obtained evidence. 5. Supreme Court rulings in 1985 and 1987 limited the warrant requirement for legally stopped cars and for students and their property in school. 6. In 1967 the Supreme Court reversed an earlier ruling permitting wiretapping. In 1968 Congress passed a statute requiring a court order before using wiretapping to obtain evidence.
B. Guarantee of Counsel (pages 401–402) 1. The Sixth Amendment guarantees a defendant the right to an attorney. 2. In federal cases, courts generally provide an attorney for defendants who cannot afford one. 3. State courts must also provide attorneys for defendants.
C. Self-incrimination (pages 402–404) 1. The Fifth Amendment protects witnesses before grand juries and congressional investigating committees. 2. The Fifth Amendment also protects defendants against forced confessions. 3. The Escobedo (1964) and Miranda (1966) decisions expanded the protections of persons arrested as suspects in a criminal case.
D. Double Jeopardy(pages 404–405) 1. The Fifth Amendment protects accused persons from double jeopardy, or being tried twice for the same crime; a person may be tried more than once for the same act, however, when a crime violates both a federal and a state law. 2. It is not double jeopardy if a single act involves more than one crime; a defendant may be tried for each offense. In case of a hung jury, a second trial is not double jeopardy.
E. Cruel and Unusual Punishment (page 405) 1. The Eighth Amendment forbids cruel and unusual punishment. 2. Use of the death penalty is an ongoing controversy under this amendment.
IV. Equal Protection of the Law • In 1957, President Dwight Eisenhower sent federal troops to Little Rock, Arkansas, to enforce court-ordered desegregation of Central High School. He took this action even though he did not believe the Supreme Court’s ruling in Brown v. Board of Education could effectively end segregation. As he told an adviser, “I am convinced that the Supreme Court decision set back progress in the South at least fifteen years.”
A. Meaning of Equal Protection (pages 406–407) 1. Both the Fourteenth Amendment and the Fifth Amendment require that all people are entitled to equal rights and equal protection of the law. 2. The Supreme Court has developed guidelines for deciding when state laws may violate the equal protection clause. 3. According to the rational basis test, the Court will uphold state laws that distinguish among different groups of people if the state shows good reason for those classifications.
A. Meaning of Equal Protectioncontinued 4. Classifications in state laws based on race or national origin are a suspect classification; the state must show some compelling public interest to justify them. 5. State laws that violate fundamental rights—the right to vote and First Amendment rights—are unconstitutional.
B. Proving Intent to Discriminate (pages 407–408) 1. Discriminatory laws classify people solely because of their race, gender, ethnic group, age, physical disability, or religion. 2. To prove a state or local government guilty of discrimination, one must prove the state’s intent to discriminate.
C. The Struggle for Equal Rights (pages 408–410) 1. For nearly a century after the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted, the courts upheld discrimination and segregation against African Americans. 2. In Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), the Supreme Court used the “separate but equal”doctrine to justify segregation in the United States. 3. In Brown v. Board of Education (1954), the Court overruled the “separate but equal” doctrine and touched off a long struggle to desegregate public schools.
C. The Struggle for Equal Rights continued 4. Civil rights workers peacefully broke laws supporting racial segregation; protesters who were arrested and convicted then appealed, challenging the constitutionality of these laws in the courts. 5. Influenced by the civil rights movement led by Martin Luther King, Jr., Congress passed major civil rights legislation to ensure voting rights and equal job opportunities such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
V. Challenges for Civil Liberties • In 1996 a majority of voters in California approved a proposition to end the state’s affirmative action program. When supporters of affirmative action asked the Supreme Court to prevent California from ending its program, the Court declined to hear the case.
A. Affirmative Action (pages 412–414) 1. In the 1960s the government began programs that gave a preference to minorities, women, or the physically challenged in hiring and promotions, government contracts, admission to schools and training programs, and other areas. 2. Most affirmative-action programs are required by federal government regulations or court decisions; others are voluntary efforts.
A. Affirmative Action continued 3. One of the most important applications of affirmative action is in higher education; in Bakke (1978) and other cases, the Supreme Court has held that although a strict quota system is unconstitutional, a state university can consider race along with other factors when admitting students. 4. Outside of higher education, the constitutional status of affirmative action is unclear; the Court has struck down as many programs as it has upheld.
B. Discrimination Against Women (pages 414–416) 1. New challenges against discrimination toward women have been raised. 2. The Supreme Court held that past laws discriminating against women did not violate the equal protection clause. 3. In its ruling in Reed (1971), however, the Court held a state law was unconstitutional because it discriminated against women.
B. Discrimination Against Women continued 4. Since the Reed case, the Court has allowed some laws based on gender classification but has declared others unconstitutional. 5. Congress has passed many laws protecting women from discrimination.
C. Citizens’ Right to Know (page 416) 1. The 1966 Freedom of Information Act requires federal agencies to grant people access to public records upon request, with some security exceptions. 2. The Sunshine Act of 1976 requires federal agencies, boards, and commissions to hold meetings open to the public or to provide a complete record of the meeting.
D. Citizens’ Right to Privacy (pages 416–418) 1. The Constitution does not specifically mention privacy, but the Supreme Court ruled in Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) that personal privacy is one of the rights protected by the Constitution. 2. Widespread use of the Internet challenges the right to privacy because of such issues as online surveillance by the government and the availability of personal information on Web sites to hackers.
D. Citizens’ Right to Privacy continued 3. War and other national emergencies create tension between the need to maintain individual rights and the need to protect the nation’s security. 4. The USA Patriot Act, passed in response to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, greatly increased the federal government’s power to detain, investigate, and prosecute people suspected of terrorism; questions continue to arise over whether the Act poses a threat to civil liberties.