Civil and Human Rights

The Road from Lincoln to Obama

In November, Constitutional Accountability Center (CAC) joined the American Constitution Society (ACS) in hosting The Second Founding and the Reconstruction Amendments: Toward a More Perfect Union, a two-day conference celebrating the importance of the post-Civil War Amendments in realizing our Constitution’s progressive promise. In keeping with the congressionally-declared theme of the upcoming inauguration, “the new birth of freedom,” we are bringing the message of the Second Founding back to Washington, hosting a pre-inaugural panel laying out a potential legal agenda for the incoming Obama Administration that would bring these Amendments back into constitutional focus.

On Wednesday, January 14, CAC will join the NAACP Legal Defense Fund (NAACP LDF), the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF), and ACS, in co-sponsoring The Road from Lincoln to Obama: the Constitution and the New Birth of Freedom. This midday panel will feature leading historians, constitutional law experts, and civil rights leaders discussing how the “new birth of freedom” took form in the Civil War Amendments, how those Amendments have been interpreted (and in some cases misinterpreted) since their ratification, and how their promise can be better fulfilled today.

CAC Founder and President Doug Kendall will speak at this event, along with John Payton of NAACP LDF, John Trasviña of MALDEF and historians Eric Foner and Mary Frances Berry. Doug will provide an overview of how the Supreme Court has often departed from the Second Founders’ vision of the way in which liberty and equality should be protected through the Fourteenth Amendment. In particular, he will discuss the need to revive the Privileges or Immunities Clause, the original centerpiece of the Fourteenth Amendment that was effectively written out of the Constitution by the Supreme Court in the 1870s. Doug and the other panelists will also address the Supreme Court’s unjustifiable efforts to limit Congress’ ability to enforce the Civil War Amendments. The relevance of this point was vividly illustrated last week, when the Supreme Court granted review in Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District v. Mukasey (08-322), a critical Voting Rights Act case that will test whether the Supreme Court will respect Congress’ authority to prevent racial discrimination in voting.

Registration for this event is free and open to the public. Further details, including where to register, are available here.

More from Civil and Human Rights

Civil and Human Rights
April 20, 2025

Debate over transgender rights grows more fraught in new Trump era

The Christian Science Monitor
Actions by the Trump administration have been pushing back on transgender inclusion, amid sharp public...
Civil and Human Rights
March 19, 2025

Viewpoint: The North Dakota Constitution’s protections include reproductive autonomy

North Dakota's Grand Forks Herald
The Court should live up to North Dakota’s history as a state with some of...
By: Nargis Aslami
Civil and Human Rights
February 27, 2025

What You Should Know About the Right to Protection in the Trump Era

Washington Monthly
The 14th Amendment was meant to enforce the laws equally, not put vulnerable populations in...
By: David H. Gans
Civil and Human Rights
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington

Shilling v. Trump

In Shilling v. Trump, the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington considered whether Trump’s Executive Order categorically barring transgender persons from serving in the military is unconstitutional.
Civil and Human Rights
February 19, 2025

History of the North Dakota Constitution Amicus Brief in Access Independent Health Services Inc., d/b/a Red River Women’s Clinic v. Wrigley

Center for Reproductive Rights
Amicus is the Constitutional Accountability Center, a think tank and public interest law firm dedicated...
Civil and Human Rights
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia

Talbott v. Trump

In Talbott v. Trump, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia considered whether Trump’s Executive Order categorically barring transgender persons from serving in the military is unconstitutional.