# data[].attributes.body
There was a New York state law that gave each individual a right to work steamboats on the water but only within legal bounds. Other states started to do the same thing for their state only. If you wanted to operate a steamboat in another state you would have been required to pay substantial fees for navigation privileges. Gibbons owned a business between NY and NJ under a coastal license. His license challenged that state monopoly license given to them by Aaron Ogden. NY held up the monopoly. In conclusion the court found this out-of-state license to be inconsistent act regulating the coastal ride.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Gibbons vs Ogden Explained in 5 Minutes (1824): US History Review

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Take five minutes and fill your head with tales of the interstate commerce clause and this foundational Constitutional defining Supreme Court case. Perfect for the discriminating life ling learner and students cramming for the exam.

# data[].attributes.headline
Popular Sovereignty: Failed Ludlow Amendment 

# data[].attributes.subject
Popular Sovereignty: Failed Ludlow Amendment 

# data[].attributes.body
In 1916 a group of Nebraska residents got a petition together and then sent a constitutional amendment to the Congress. This amendment would enact a national referendum before lawmakers could declare war. While the proposal didn't make it that far in the Congress, the new idea popped up on media and earning attention from people against war and interventions. This amendment isn't the only one that tried to give Americans voters more to say about when we go to war. When Ludlow submitted his measure saying that the Congress should have all the responsibility of declaring war. It was supported by 75% but the poll chose otherwise.

# data[].attributes.headline
Separation of Powers and Checks & Balances: U.S. v Nixon 

# data[].attributes.subject
Separation of Powers and Checks & Balances: U.S. v Nixon 

# data[].attributes.body
After the tapes of Nixon's conversations in the Oval Office, Nixon said that he was "immune" from subpoena claiming executive privilege. This meaning he was able to hold information from other government branches to preserve confidential communications. In the end, the Court said NO. Therefore the president must do as a subpoena and put the tapes out for everyone to hear.

# data[].attributes.body
The 22nd amendment was to set a maximum on the number of terms which a president can serve. This meant that no individual shall serve more than two terms. There was case between the US Term Limits v. Thornton in 1995. This case was about Arkansas adopted the 73rd the amendment which set limits on AK representatives. The Supreme Court ruled that this clashed with the 22nd amendment. So now all presidents can only serve 2 terms (8 years).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The 22nd Amendment Explained: The Constitution for Dummies Series

# data[].attributes.body
On this side of the board I will examine how the Constitution has created a government that remains stable by preventing changes from occurring too quickly.

# data[].attributes.headline
Separation of Powers and Checks & Balances: United States v. Windsor 

# data[].attributes.subject
Separation of Powers and Checks & Balances: United States v. Windsor 

# data[].attributes.body
The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was put in place because of the fairly new topic of same-sex marriage. Some federal courts have ruled DOMA unconstitutional under the Fifth Amendment, but the courts have disagreed. Edith Windsor was a widow of Thea Clara Spyer who died in 2009. The couple was married in Toronto, Canada in 2007, their marriage was recognized in New York by their state law. Thea left all of her estates to Windsor and since their marriage wasn't recognized by the federal law, the gov. imposed $363,000 in taxes. Had their marriage been legal none of this would've happened.  November 9, 2010, Windsor took up a case in the district against the United States. Windsor was seeking the DOMA was unconstitutional. on February 23, 2011, the court announced that they would not defend DOMA. An Advisory Group of the House of Representatives filed a petition in defense of the DOMA. The US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed. In the end, the court decided that the Constitution doesn't guarantee the right to same-sex marriage because the right isn't deeply rooted in our history. So the definition of marriage is left to the people to decide.

# data[].attributes.headline
Federalism: Brown v. Board of Education 

# data[].attributes.subject
Federalism: Brown v. Board of Education 

# data[].attributes.body
Brown v. Board of Education was the group name of all of the cases taken to court due to discrimination and segregation in schools. All of the cases taken to court all spoken on something different dealing with the problems with the school systems. But the main reason with these cases was the unconstitutional discrimination and segregation. The NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund handled each and even on of these cases. When the cases began the court consolidated all five cases under the name of Brown v. Board of Education. Marshall took these to court before and it brought up a variety of ideas. One of the most common ideas was that separate school systems for black and white were inherently unequal. This violated the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment to us Constitution. Plessy Decision was heard twice because Chief Justice Fred Vinson died and was replaced by Gov. Earl Warren of California. The Justices agreed to support a unanimous decision that segregation in schools was unconstitutional. On May 14, 1954, the court decided that "separate but equal" has no place.  Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal. The courts knew it would take the time to desegregate all schools so the Brown v. Board of Education was responsible for getting the process underway.

# data[].attributes.headline
Limited Government: Civil Rights Act of 1964 

# data[].attributes.subject
Limited Government: Civil Rights Act of 1964 

# data[].attributes.body
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was made to outlaw discrimination in all ways such as race, religion, gender, and etc. This act also removed segregation in all schools and in voting. No, this act didn't end discrimination but it did open doors. Even with the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments outlawing slavery, providing equal protection, citizenship, and protected the right to vote some states still wanted segregation. Each year from 1945-1957 Congress tried to get some type of Civil Rights Laws in action but they always proceeded to fail. In the years of 1957 and 1960, the Congress finally passed some limited Civil Rights Act. 1963 was the year when the Civil Rights Movement was crucial. The Birmingham Campaign was on TV, the March on Washington, and the 16th Street Baptist Church. The Civil Rights were now part of the government and they had no choice but to respond to what was now happening. In respond, President John F. Kennedy proposed in a nationally televised address, a Civil Rights Act in 1963. After a week a bill was submitted to the Congress by JFK. He warned all African American leaders to use caution. After the death of JFK in 1963, Martin Luther King and the new president Lyndon B. Johnson still pushed to pass the bill. The bill was finally passed in the House February 10 1964. The House quickly moved to approve the Senate bill and then July 2, 1964 the bill was signed by Martin Luther King, Lyndon B. Johnson, Dorothy Height, and John Lewis.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Contents

1. Lead-up to the Civil Rights Act

2. Civil Rights Act Moves Through Congress

3. What Is the Civil Rights Act?

4. Legacy of the Civil Rights Act

The Civil Rights Act of 1964, which ended segregation in public places and banned employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin, is considered one of the crowning legislative achievements of the civil rights movement. First proposed by President John F. Kennedy, it survived strong opposition from southern members of Congress and was then signed into law by Kennedy's successor, Lyndon B. Johnson. In subsequent years, Congress expanded the act and passed additional civil rights legislation such as the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Lead-up to the Civil Rights Act

Following the Civil War, a trio of constitutional amendments abolished slavery, made the former slaves citizens and gave all men the right to vote regardless of race.

Nonetheless, many states-particularly in the South-used poll taxes, literacy tests and other measures to keep their African-American citizens essentially disenfranchised. They also enforced strict segregation through "Jim Crow" laws and condoned violence from white supremacist groups like the Ku Klux Klan.

For decades after Reconstruction, the U.S. Congress did not pass a single civil rights act. Finally, in 1957, it established a civil rights section of the Justice Department, along with a Commission on Civil Rights to investigate discriminatory conditions.

Three years later, Congress provided for court-appointed referees to help blacks register to vote. Both of these bills were strongly watered down to overcome southern resistance.

When John F. Kennedy entered the White House in 1961, he initially delayed supporting new anti-discrimination measures. But with protests springing up throughout the South-including one in Birmingham, Alabama, where police brutally suppressed nonviolent demonstrators with dogs, clubs and high-pressure fire hoses-Kennedy decided to act.

In June 1963 he proposed by far the most comprehensive civil rights legislation to date, saying the United States "will not be fully free until all of its citizens are free."

Civil Rights Act Moves Through Congress

Kennedy was assassinated that November in Dallas, after which new President Lyndon B. Johnson immediately took up the cause.

"Let this session of Congress be known as the session which did more for civil rights than the last hundred sessions combined," Johnson said in his first State of the Union address. During debate on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives, southerners argued, among other things, that the bill unconstitutionally usurped individual liberties and states' rights.

In a mischievous attempt to sabotage the bill, a Virginia segregationist introduced an amendment to ban employment discrimination against women. That one passed, whereas over 100 other hostile amendments were defeated. In the end, the House approved the bill with bipartisan support by a vote of 290-130.

The bill then moved to the U.S. Senate, where southern and border state Democrats staged a 75-day filibuster-among the longest in U.S. history. On one occasion, Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia, a former Ku Klux Klan member, spoke for over 14 consecutive hours.

But with the help of behind-the-scenes horse-trading, the bill's supporters eventually obtained the two-thirds votes necessary to end debate. One of those votes came from California Senator Clair Engle, who, though too sick to speak, signaled "aye" by pointing to his own eye.

Having broken the filibuster, the Senate voted 73-27 in favor of the bill, and Johnson signed it into law on July 2, 1964. "It is an important gain, but I think we just delivered the South to the Republican Party for a long time to come," Johnson, a Democrat, purportedly told an aide later that day in a prediction that would largely come true.

Did you know? President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 with at least 75 pens, which he handed out to congressional supporters of the bill such as Hubert Humphrey and Everett Dirksen and to civil rights leaders such as Martin Luther King Jr. and Roy Wilkins.

What Is the Civil Rights Act?

Under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, segregation on the grounds of race, religion or national origin was banned at all places of public accommodation, including courthouses, parks, restaurants, theaters, sports arenas and hotels. No longer could blacks and other minorities be denied service simply based on the color of their skin.

The act also barred race, religious, national origin and gender discrimination by employers and labor unions, and created an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission with the power to file lawsuits on behalf of aggrieved workers.

Additionally, the act forbade the use of federal funds for any discriminatory program, authorized the Office of Education (now the Department of Education) to assist with school desegregation, gave extra clout to the Commission on Civil Rights and prohibited the unequal application of voting requirements.

Legacy of the Civil Rights Act

Civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. said that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was nothing less than a "second emancipation."

The Civil Rights Act was later expanded to bring disabled Americans, the elderly and women in collegiate athletics under its umbrella.

It also paved the way for two major follow-up laws: the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which prohibited literacy tests and other discriminatory voting practices, and the Fair Housing Act of 1968, which banned discrimination in the sale, rental and financing of property. Though the struggle against racism would continue, legal segregation had been brought to its knees in the United States.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Lead-up to the Civil Rights Act Civil Rights Act Moves Through Congress What Is the Civil Rights Act? Legacy of the Civil Rights Act The Civil Rights Act of 1964, which ended segregation in public places and banned employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin, is considered one of the crowning legislative achievements of the civil rights movement.

# data[].attributes.headline
Popular Sovereignty: Leser v. Garnett (19th Amendment)

# data[].attributes.subject
Popular Sovereignty: Leser v. Garnett (19th Amendment)

# data[].attributes.body
In 1920 two women by the names of Cecelia Street Waters and Mary D. Rudolph were trying to register to vote in Baltimore, Maryland but the state constitution only limited voting men. Oscar Leser was the man that sued the registry board to prevent all women from voting. This case was taking into the Supreme Court in 1922 on January 23rd. Oscar wanted to remove all women from voting in Maryland because he believed that the state constitution only granted suffrage of men. He also believed that the 19th amendment was unconstitutional. His argument was that the 15th and 19th amendment had no distinction.  Garnett was defending the women and they simply stated the 19th amendment was in the federal constitution and that they had to follow the constitution. The case summary was the Supreme Court said that the 19th amendment was apart of the federal constitution so they had to follow it and that it would be unconstitutional to disenfranchise women from voting. Women then achieved the right to vote in Maryland.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Uploaded by Gianna Oliveri on 2015-09-22.

# data[].attributes.body
On this side of the board I will examine how the Constitution has created a dynamic government that has the ability change with the times.