You are here

Human and Civil Rights and the Constitution

The Reconstruction Amendments were intended to give our nation what Abraham Lincoln promised at Gettysburg: a New Birth of Freedom. Unfortunately, much of their power and meaning was eviscerated in a series of egregious Supreme Court rulings in the 1870s and 1880s. These rulings are just as wrong as long-overruled opinions such as Plessy v. Ferguson, but remain on the books. Read properly, the Reconstruction Amendments provide a solid foundation for courts and the federal government to protect human and civil rights. CAC works to raise public consciousness about the importance of the Reconstruction Amendments and convince politicians and judges about the mandate these Amendments create for the advancement of civil and human rights.

Think Tank

On November 16, 2011, CAC released Perfecting the Declaration: The Text and History of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, the fourth volume in CAC’s Text and History Narrative Series. This narrative tells the story of how the American people, after the Civil War, re-wrote the Constitution to guarantee equality to all persons, bringing the Constitution back in line with the principle of equality laid out in the Declaration of Independence.

In June 2009, CAC released The Shield of National Protection: The Text and History of Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment, the second in CAC’s Text and History Narrative Series and the follow-up to The Gem of the Constitution, our report on the Privileges or Immunities Clause.

On September 29, 2011, CAC released "CAC Supreme Court Preview:  Tests of Government Power in the Supreme Court’s 2011 Term—With Even Bigger Cases on the Horizon."  In this issue brief, CAC previews cases that challenge the federal government’s constitutional authority to act to protect against sex discrimination in the workplace, Coleman v. Maryland Court of Appeals, and to conduct surveillance using modern technology, United States v. Jones, as well as the states’ ability to take regulatory action that purportedly conflicts with federal law, for example, Douglas v. Independent Living Center. We note that the likely blockbusters of the Term are cases challenging the constitutionality of President Obama’s health care reform law, defending Arizona’s controversial immigration law, attacking affirmative action policies, and asserting the rights of same-sex adoptive parents. By June 2012, this term may prove to be among the most momentous terms in recent decades.

In December 2008, CAC released the first narrative in its Text and History Narrative Series. This narrative tells the sad story of the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which was supposed to be the centerpiece of the Fourteenth Amendment and the critical constitutional language that guarantees the fundamental rights of all Americans. Instead, the Supreme Court wrote it out of the Constitution in 1873 and it has lain dormant ever since. The report argues for a reconsideration of the Clause and its critical role of protecting fundamental rights and liberties.

In September 2009, CAC released the first installment of its new Issue Briefs Series. The issue brief, titled CAC Supreme Court Preview: Three Big Cases, One Monumental Test for the Roberts Court, provided a preview of the Supreme Court’s upcoming docket, highlighting three important cases facing the Roberts Court: Citizens United v. FECFree Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, and McDonald v. City of Chicago.