Month: November 2020

The thirteenth amendment of the United States Constitution was passed on January 31, 1865; making slavery and indentured servitude illegal. Reading; “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.” Passed towards the end of the American Civil War, this amendment resolved a fraction of what was known as the United States’ greatest shame… slavery. While over a century later racial discrimination is still irrefutably present in American society, the thirteenth amendment made an enormous stride in racial equality. Later followed by the Civil Rights Act of 1964, just shy of ONE HUNDRED years later, it was set into law that “outlawed discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin, required equal access to public places and employment, and enforced desegregation of schools and the right to vote.”

There are not as many prevalent Supreme Court cases addressing the thirteenth amendment since its passing in 1865, but of course, instances still exist. Such as Bailey vs. Alabama from 1911; Bailey was contracted to work on a farm for $12 a month for an entire year, but quit after one month and did not return his $15 he received as an advance. This was seen as a criminal act in Alabama and Bailey was sentenced to 136 days of hard labor under Alabama Peonage Law (forced labor to repay a debt). This forced labor violated the thirteenth amendment of the United States’ Constitution. The Supreme Court ruled that the law was a restriction on personal rights and that the law violated the thirteenth amendment.

Another case mentioning this amendment being Schenck vs. the United States from 1919; although the case is about the violation of Schenck’s first amendment rights, his argument for his “crime” was to prevent the violation of the thirteenth amendment. During WWI, Charles Schenck and Elizabeth Baer created and distributed leaflets stating that the military draft violated the constitution’s thirteenth amendment prohibiting involuntary servitude. Schenck and Baer were arrested for violating the Espionage Act of 1917 which was created in order to “prevent insubordination in the military, and to prevent the support of United States enemies during wartime.” The court ruled to uphold the Espionage Act, declaring that Congress had every right to uphold the act under their wartime authority. This case introduced the “clear and present danger test” that limited the first amendment’s free speech in cases where exercising said right would result in danger to others; such as yelling “fire” in a crowded room.

Sources:

https://www.oyez.org/cases/1900-1940/249us47

https://www.oyez.org/cases/1900-1940/219us219

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act_of_1917

 

PAS #8

Let us roundabout back to the discussion of the fourteenth amendment and dive into a case and subject of ENORMOUS controversy… Roe versus Wade and the topic of a government’s role in abortion rights.

Roe v. Wade has always been a case that has intrigued me because it made me wonder; “why does the government even care about what a woman does to her own body?” For those who do not know the case well, Roe v. Wade was argued in December of 1971 and decided in 1973 regarding a woman’s right to get an abortion in Texas. Jane Roe (a false name to protect her actual identity) filed a lawsuit against the district attorney in Dallas County, Texas wanting to challenge the law that made abortions illegal unless performed to save the mother’s life. The case went to the supreme court and in 1973 it was determined that a woman’s right to choose fell under the right to privacy provided by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. It was determined that in the first trimester of pregnancy (the first three months) a state cannot impose any restrictions on whether or not a woman can get an abortion. But in the second and third trimesters, the state can impose regulations and ban it entirely (third trimester) to protect the mother’s health and to protect the child once it has grown and “reached the point of viability”.

Roe won her case but the decision was presented after she had her child, and she went on to be a key speaker on the Pro-Life side of the argument.

I personally agree with the court’s decision because it should be a woman’s choice to have a child or not, and it becomes inhumane to abort a child once they are fully developed. Although it is an entirely personal, and often religious and ethical decision to make; it is the woman’s decision alone to make and I think that no person nor government has any right to say otherwise. I think that Voltaire’s saying; “I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it” applies to this situation because even if a person disagrees with getting one themselves, I believe that other women’s rights to do so should be protected at all cost.

This case was an enormous stride in women’s rights, especially reproductive rights. It gave her control of her own body and it saved so many women from self-harm and illegal abortions; because it was estimated that there were “between 200,000 and 1.2 million illegally induced abortions occur[red] annually in the United States.’ As many as 5,000 to 10,000 women died per year following illegal abortions and many others suffered severe physical and psychological injury” (Center for Reproductive Rights) before the Roe v. Wade Decision. Legalizing abortion saved so many women’s lives because they were able to have the procedure professionally and safely.

Sources:

https://www.oyez.org/cases/1971/70-18

https://www.reproductiverights.org/document/roe-v-wade-then-and-now

 

PAS #7