Fourteenth Amendment in AP US Government

Two clauses that turned the Bill of Rights toward the states

Before 1868, the Bill of Rights only limited the national government. The Court said so directly in Barron v. Baltimore (1833), so a state could restrict speech or run unfair trials without violating the federal Constitution.

The Fourteenth Amendment changed that. Its two key clauses both restrict state governments. The Due Process Clause protects life, liberty, and property from arbitrary state action. The Equal Protection Clause requires states to treat people equally under the law.

In the course, this amendment sits at the center of Unit 3, Topic 3.7 (Selective Incorporation & the 14th Amendment), and it reaches into Unit 1, Topic 1.8 (Constitutional Interpretations of Federalism). The bigger argument is about federalism. The amendment gave the national government, and especially federal courts, a way to enforce individual protections against the states, which shifted power toward Washington over time.

Cases that show each clause doing its job

The Due Process Clause is the vehicle for selective incorporation, where the Court applies chosen Bill of Rights protections to the states one case at a time. Gitlow v. New York (1925) applied free speech to the states. Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) applied the Sixth Amendment right to counsel, so states have to provide lawyers to poor defendants in felony cases. McDonald v. Chicago (2010), a required case, applied the Second Amendment's right to bear arms to state and local gun laws.

The Equal Protection Clause drives the civil rights side of Unit 3 (Topics 3.10 and 3.12):

• Brown v. Board of Education (1954), a required case, held that state-mandated school segregation violates equal protection because separate schools are inherently unequal.
• Reed v. Reed (1971) struck down an Idaho law that preferred men over women as estate administrators, the first time the Court used equal protection against sex discrimination.
• Baker v. Carr (1962), a required case, let federal courts hear equal protection challenges to how states draw legislative districts.
• Shaw v. Reno (1993), a required case, held that districts drawn mainly on the basis of race can be challenged under equal protection.

The Due Process Clause also carries substantive due process (Topic 3.9), the idea that some rights can't be taken away no matter how fair the procedure. Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) used it to recognize a right to privacy.

Where the amendment's reach has been limited

The text didn't settle much by itself. The Court decides how far the clauses go, and it has read them narrowly at times. In Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), the Court allowed "separate but equal" under the same Equal Protection Clause that Brown later used to strike segregation down. That reversal is the clearest example for Topic 3.12's point that government has both restricted and protected minority rights.

The amendment also only covers state action. In the Civil Rights Cases (1883), the Court held that it doesn't reach private businesses discriminating on their own. That's one reason Congress relied on the Commerce Clause when it banned discrimination in public accommodations in the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Incorporation is selective, so not every Bill of Rights protection has been applied to the states. Substantive due process is contested too. Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (2022) overturned Roe v. Wade and held that the Constitution doesn't protect a right to abortion, which shows the Court can pull back on rights it once found in the Due Process Clause.

Fifth Amendment due process vs. Fourteenth Amendment due process

Both amendments say government can't take life, liberty, or property without due process of law, so the two clauses are easy to mix up. The Fifth Amendment's clause binds the national government. The Fourteenth's binds the states.

That difference explains why incorporation runs through the Fourteenth. The Bill of Rights already applied to federal officials, so the Court needed a clause aimed at the states. On a due process question, the Fifth Amendment covers federal action and the Fourteenth covers state action. Still, the level of government alone doesn't tell you which provision a question is about. A case involving a state law might turn on the First Amendment or some other part of the Constitution, and a case involving federal action might have nothing to do with due process. Read the facts and figure out which right is at issue before picking the provision.

Using it in a SCOTUS Comparison or Argument Essay

On the SCOTUS Comparison question, the Fourteenth Amendment can link the non-required case to a required one. A prompt about a state law treating groups differently is likely asking you to connect it to Brown or Shaw v. Reno through equal protection. A prompt about a state restricting a Bill of Rights freedom is likely asking you to connect it to McDonald through due process and incorporation. Strong answers name the specific clause and explain how the holding applies it to the new facts.

On the Argument Essay, the Equal Protection Clause works as evidence for prompts about protecting minority rights or the balance between federal and state power. Paired with Letter from a Birmingham Jail, it shows how the clause motivated the civil rights movement.

Multiple-choice questions can give you a scenario or a case summary and ask which clause or principle it illustrates. For study, you can contrast the Fourteenth Amendment's limits on states with Congress's authority under the Necessary and Proper Clause to carry out its enumerated powers. The Fourteenth restricts what states can do to individuals, while the Necessary and Proper Clause gives Congress room to act.