How has the Supreme Court interpreted the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause?

The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was adopted in 1868 and forbids state governments from denying any person equal protection under the law. This amendment has been the basis for a wide range of civil rights advances over the years. The Supreme Court has interpreted the amendment’s equal protection clause in various ways, enabling greater protection for citizens’ rights. One of the most significant interpretations of the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause is that it applies to all people, including gender and racial minorities. This was established by the Supreme Court in the 1896 decision of Plessy v. Ferguson, which overturned a state law that segregated people based on race. This decision was the basis for the legal doctrine of “separate but equal” that was in effect until it was overturned by the Supreme Court in 1954 in the Brown v. Board of Education case. The Supreme Court has also used the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause to strike down laws that discriminated against women. This was done in the 1971 case of Reed v. Reed, which found that laws that treated men and women differently were unconstitutional. Additionally, the Supreme Court has used the equal protection clause to protect lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) individuals, ruling in 2015 that it was unconstitutional to deny same-sex couples the right to marry. The interpretations of the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause by the Supreme Court have been instrumental in advancing civil rights for all people. Through its various decisions, the Supreme Court has further solidified the principle that all people, regardless of race, gender, or sexual orientation, are entitled to equal rights and protection under the law.

How has the Supreme Court interpreted the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts