Fiveable
Fiveable

or

Log in

Find what you need to study


Light

Find what you need to study

3.12 Balancing Minority and Majority Rights

5 min readfebruary 7, 2023

Riya Patel

Riya Patel

Annika Tekumulla

Annika Tekumulla

Riya Patel

Riya Patel

Annika Tekumulla

Annika Tekumulla

Introduction

Balancing minority and refers to the process of reconciling conflicting rights and interests between individuals or groups in a society. This can involve striking a balance between protecting the rights of minority groups, such as ethnic, religious, or linguistic minorities, and those of the majority population. This can be a complex and challenging task, as it often involves making trade-offs and finding compromises between competing interests. A key in this process is to ensure that everyone's rights are respected and protected, regardless of their or .

Key Vocabulary

  • : The rights and protections afforded to individuals or groups that make up a smaller proportion of a society, such as ethnic, religious, or linguistic minorities.

  • : The rights and protections afforded to individuals or groups that make up a larger proportion of a society.

  • : The process of resolving conflicts and finding common ground between opposing groups.

  • : A compromise or exchange of one thing for another in order to resolve a conflict.

  • : A fundamental truth or belief that serves as the foundation for a system of values or actions.

  • : Recognition and consideration of the worth or value of something or someone.

  • : The act of preserving or safeguarding something or someone from harm or loss.

  • : The experiences, knowledge, and circumstances that shape a person's and perspective.

  • : The characteristics, beliefs, and values that define a person as an individual.

Key Questions

  • What are the specific rights and interests of minority groups and the majority population?

  • How do these rights and interests come into conflict with one another?

  • What are the consequences of not balancing minority and ?

  • What are the principles and values that should guide the process of balancing minority and ?

  • What trade-offs and compromises can be made to reconcile conflicting rights and interests?

  • How can the rights of both minority groups and the majority population be protected and respected?

  • What role do laws, institutions, and policies play in balancing minority and ?

  • How can the perspectives and experiences of both minority groups and the majority population be taken into account when balancing their rights?

  • How can stakeholders and decision-makers ensure that everyone's rights are respected and protected, regardless of their or ?

Cases to Know

Here are a few notable cases related to the balancing of minority and :

  1. (1954)

  2. (1967)

  3. (1944)

  4. (1967)

  5. (2003)

  6. R. v. Big M Drug Mart Ltd. (1985)

Brown v. Board of Education (1954)

was a landmark Supreme Court case decided in 1954. The case challenged the constitutionality of in public schools, specifically in Topeka, Kansas. The Court ruled that in public schools violated the of the , which guarantees equal treatment under the law to all citizens.

In its decision, the Court held that "separate educational facilities are inherently unequal" and that had a detrimental effect on African American students, stifling their educational opportunities and damaging their self-esteem. The decision was a major victory for the and marked the beginning of the end of in the United States. The case remains one of the most significant in American history, as it set the stage for further legal battles against and other forms of discrimination.

Shaw v. Reno (1993)

was a Supreme Court case decided in 1993. The case dealt with the issue of and the creation of , specifically in North Carolina. A group of white voters challenged the state's creation of a predominantly African-American district, claiming that it violated the of the .

The Supreme Court held that the district's oddly-shaped boundary and lack of a logical basis other than the racial makeup of its voters made it an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. The Court held that plans that are so highly gerrymandered on the basis of race must be subject to close judicial scrutiny and that such plans may be invalid if they are not narrowly tailored to serve a compelling government interest.

placed limits on the ability of states to create and was seen as a setback for minority representation in government. The case remains significant as it has shaped the way courts interpret the constitutionality of plans and the role of race in the process.

Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) 

was a Supreme Court case decided in 1896. The case dealt with the constitutionality of in public places, specifically regarding a Louisiana law that required separate railway cars for African Americans and whites. Homer Plessy, who was 7/8 white and 1/8 black, refused to move to a segregated railway car designated for African Americans and was arrested.

The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of as long as the separate facilities were equal in quality, ruling that the "separate but equal" doctrine did not violate the of the . This decision sanctioned in public places across the United States and was seen as a major setback for the . The "separate but equal" doctrine established by remained the law of the land for nearly 60 years, until it was finally overturned by the landmark 1954 case of .

remains a significant case in American legal history, as it established the constitutional basis for in the United States and served as a catalyst for the . The case is now widely discredited and seen as a stain on the American legal system.

Summary

In summary, the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Constitution and its role in protecting or restricting can change based on its composition and the prevailing political and social views of the time. The Court's decisions, such as and , show how its views on and the of civil rights have evolved. The political affiliation of the appointing president also plays a role in shaping the Court's ideology and decisions.

Key Terms to Review (25)

Background

: In political terms, background refers to an individual's past experiences, education, family history etc., that may influence their political beliefs or decisions.

Brown v. Board of Education

: A landmark Supreme Court case in 1954 that declared state laws establishing separate public schools for black and white students to be unconstitutional.

Civil Rights Movement

: The Civil Rights Movement was a struggle for social justice that took place mainly during the 1950s and 1960s for Black Americans to gain equal rights under the law in the United States.

Equal Protection Clause

: Part of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution providing that no state shall deny any person within its jurisdiction "the equal protection of the laws".

Fourteenth Amendment

: The Fourteenth Amendment is a part of the U.S. Constitution that guarantees equal protection under the law and extends citizenship rights.

Grutter v. Bollinger

: A Supreme Court case in 2003 that upheld affirmative action admissions policy at University of Michigan Law School.

Identity

: Political identity refers to the way individuals categorize themselves and others within the political world. This can be based on party affiliation, ideology, or other factors.

Loving v. Virginia

: A landmark Supreme Court case in 1967 that invalidated laws prohibiting interracial marriage.

Majority Rights

: Majority rights refer to the rights given by democratic systems where decisions are made by majority rule but minority rights must be protected.

Majority-minority districts

: These are electoral districts in which the majority of the constituents belong to racial or ethnic minorities.

Minority Rights

: Minority rights refer to the normal individual rights as applied to members of racial, ethnic, class, religious, linguistic or gender and sexual minorities. These are designed to protect an unfair treatment on these individuals.

Plessy v. Ferguson

: This was a landmark 1896 U.S. Supreme Court decision upholding the constitutionality of state laws requiring racial segregation in public facilities under the doctrine of "separate but equal."

Principle

: A principle is a fundamental truth or proposition that serves as the foundation for a system of belief or behavior or for a chain of reasoning.

Protection

: In the context of US Government, protection refers to the safeguarding of citizens' rights and freedoms by the government. This includes physical safety, economic security, and upholding civil liberties.

R. v. Big M Drug Mart Ltd.

: A Canadian Supreme Court case in 1985 that ruled the Lord's Day Act, which forced businesses to close on Sundays, as unconstitutional.

Racial Gerrymandering

: This refers to the deliberate and intentional manipulation of district boundaries so as to advantage or disadvantage certain racial or ethnic groups politically.

Reconciliation

: In U.S Government context, reconciliation refers to a legislative process intended to allow consideration of controversial issues affecting the budget by limiting debate to twenty hours under Senate rules.

Redistricting

: Redistricting is the process of redrawing district boundaries to ensure equal representation in a legislative body. This typically happens every 10 years, following the national census.

Reitman v. Mulkey

: A landmark Supreme Court case in 1967 that ruled California's Proposition 14, which allowed racial discrimination in housing, as unconstitutional.

Respect

: Respect is a feeling of deep admiration for someone or something elicited by their abilities, qualities, or achievements.

Segregation

: Segregation is the enforced separation of different racial groups in a country, community, or establishment.

Separate but Equal Doctrine

: The Separate but Equal Doctrine was a legal principle in United States constitutional law that justified systems of segregation. Under this doctrine, as long as the facilities provided to each race were equal, segregation did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment ("equal protection of the laws").

Shaw v. Reno

: Shaw v. Reno was a 1993 Supreme Court case which ruled that redistricting based on race must be held to a standard of strict scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause (meaning it must serve a compelling government interest and be narrowly tailored to achieve that interest).

Trade-off

: A trade-off is a situation where you give up one thing in order to gain something else. It's the process of balancing between two or more conflicting desires or outcomes.

United States v. Korematsu

: A Supreme Court case in 1944 that upheld the constitutionality of the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II.

3.12 Balancing Minority and Majority Rights

5 min readfebruary 7, 2023

Riya Patel

Riya Patel

Annika Tekumulla

Annika Tekumulla

Riya Patel

Riya Patel

Annika Tekumulla

Annika Tekumulla

Introduction

Balancing minority and refers to the process of reconciling conflicting rights and interests between individuals or groups in a society. This can involve striking a balance between protecting the rights of minority groups, such as ethnic, religious, or linguistic minorities, and those of the majority population. This can be a complex and challenging task, as it often involves making trade-offs and finding compromises between competing interests. A key in this process is to ensure that everyone's rights are respected and protected, regardless of their or .

Key Vocabulary

  • : The rights and protections afforded to individuals or groups that make up a smaller proportion of a society, such as ethnic, religious, or linguistic minorities.

  • : The rights and protections afforded to individuals or groups that make up a larger proportion of a society.

  • : The process of resolving conflicts and finding common ground between opposing groups.

  • : A compromise or exchange of one thing for another in order to resolve a conflict.

  • : A fundamental truth or belief that serves as the foundation for a system of values or actions.

  • : Recognition and consideration of the worth or value of something or someone.

  • : The act of preserving or safeguarding something or someone from harm or loss.

  • : The experiences, knowledge, and circumstances that shape a person's and perspective.

  • : The characteristics, beliefs, and values that define a person as an individual.

Key Questions

  • What are the specific rights and interests of minority groups and the majority population?

  • How do these rights and interests come into conflict with one another?

  • What are the consequences of not balancing minority and ?

  • What are the principles and values that should guide the process of balancing minority and ?

  • What trade-offs and compromises can be made to reconcile conflicting rights and interests?

  • How can the rights of both minority groups and the majority population be protected and respected?

  • What role do laws, institutions, and policies play in balancing minority and ?

  • How can the perspectives and experiences of both minority groups and the majority population be taken into account when balancing their rights?

  • How can stakeholders and decision-makers ensure that everyone's rights are respected and protected, regardless of their or ?

Cases to Know

Here are a few notable cases related to the balancing of minority and :

  1. (1954)

  2. (1967)

  3. (1944)

  4. (1967)

  5. (2003)

  6. R. v. Big M Drug Mart Ltd. (1985)

Brown v. Board of Education (1954)

was a landmark Supreme Court case decided in 1954. The case challenged the constitutionality of in public schools, specifically in Topeka, Kansas. The Court ruled that in public schools violated the of the , which guarantees equal treatment under the law to all citizens.

In its decision, the Court held that "separate educational facilities are inherently unequal" and that had a detrimental effect on African American students, stifling their educational opportunities and damaging their self-esteem. The decision was a major victory for the and marked the beginning of the end of in the United States. The case remains one of the most significant in American history, as it set the stage for further legal battles against and other forms of discrimination.

Shaw v. Reno (1993)

was a Supreme Court case decided in 1993. The case dealt with the issue of and the creation of , specifically in North Carolina. A group of white voters challenged the state's creation of a predominantly African-American district, claiming that it violated the of the .

The Supreme Court held that the district's oddly-shaped boundary and lack of a logical basis other than the racial makeup of its voters made it an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. The Court held that plans that are so highly gerrymandered on the basis of race must be subject to close judicial scrutiny and that such plans may be invalid if they are not narrowly tailored to serve a compelling government interest.

placed limits on the ability of states to create and was seen as a setback for minority representation in government. The case remains significant as it has shaped the way courts interpret the constitutionality of plans and the role of race in the process.

Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) 

was a Supreme Court case decided in 1896. The case dealt with the constitutionality of in public places, specifically regarding a Louisiana law that required separate railway cars for African Americans and whites. Homer Plessy, who was 7/8 white and 1/8 black, refused to move to a segregated railway car designated for African Americans and was arrested.

The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of as long as the separate facilities were equal in quality, ruling that the "separate but equal" doctrine did not violate the of the . This decision sanctioned in public places across the United States and was seen as a major setback for the . The "separate but equal" doctrine established by remained the law of the land for nearly 60 years, until it was finally overturned by the landmark 1954 case of .

remains a significant case in American legal history, as it established the constitutional basis for in the United States and served as a catalyst for the . The case is now widely discredited and seen as a stain on the American legal system.

Summary

In summary, the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Constitution and its role in protecting or restricting can change based on its composition and the prevailing political and social views of the time. The Court's decisions, such as and , show how its views on and the of civil rights have evolved. The political affiliation of the appointing president also plays a role in shaping the Court's ideology and decisions.

Key Terms to Review (25)

Background

: In political terms, background refers to an individual's past experiences, education, family history etc., that may influence their political beliefs or decisions.

Brown v. Board of Education

: A landmark Supreme Court case in 1954 that declared state laws establishing separate public schools for black and white students to be unconstitutional.

Civil Rights Movement

: The Civil Rights Movement was a struggle for social justice that took place mainly during the 1950s and 1960s for Black Americans to gain equal rights under the law in the United States.

Equal Protection Clause

: Part of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution providing that no state shall deny any person within its jurisdiction "the equal protection of the laws".

Fourteenth Amendment

: The Fourteenth Amendment is a part of the U.S. Constitution that guarantees equal protection under the law and extends citizenship rights.

Grutter v. Bollinger

: A Supreme Court case in 2003 that upheld affirmative action admissions policy at University of Michigan Law School.

Identity

: Political identity refers to the way individuals categorize themselves and others within the political world. This can be based on party affiliation, ideology, or other factors.

Loving v. Virginia

: A landmark Supreme Court case in 1967 that invalidated laws prohibiting interracial marriage.

Majority Rights

: Majority rights refer to the rights given by democratic systems where decisions are made by majority rule but minority rights must be protected.

Majority-minority districts

: These are electoral districts in which the majority of the constituents belong to racial or ethnic minorities.

Minority Rights

: Minority rights refer to the normal individual rights as applied to members of racial, ethnic, class, religious, linguistic or gender and sexual minorities. These are designed to protect an unfair treatment on these individuals.

Plessy v. Ferguson

: This was a landmark 1896 U.S. Supreme Court decision upholding the constitutionality of state laws requiring racial segregation in public facilities under the doctrine of "separate but equal."

Principle

: A principle is a fundamental truth or proposition that serves as the foundation for a system of belief or behavior or for a chain of reasoning.

Protection

: In the context of US Government, protection refers to the safeguarding of citizens' rights and freedoms by the government. This includes physical safety, economic security, and upholding civil liberties.

R. v. Big M Drug Mart Ltd.

: A Canadian Supreme Court case in 1985 that ruled the Lord's Day Act, which forced businesses to close on Sundays, as unconstitutional.

Racial Gerrymandering

: This refers to the deliberate and intentional manipulation of district boundaries so as to advantage or disadvantage certain racial or ethnic groups politically.

Reconciliation

: In U.S Government context, reconciliation refers to a legislative process intended to allow consideration of controversial issues affecting the budget by limiting debate to twenty hours under Senate rules.

Redistricting

: Redistricting is the process of redrawing district boundaries to ensure equal representation in a legislative body. This typically happens every 10 years, following the national census.

Reitman v. Mulkey

: A landmark Supreme Court case in 1967 that ruled California's Proposition 14, which allowed racial discrimination in housing, as unconstitutional.

Respect

: Respect is a feeling of deep admiration for someone or something elicited by their abilities, qualities, or achievements.

Segregation

: Segregation is the enforced separation of different racial groups in a country, community, or establishment.

Separate but Equal Doctrine

: The Separate but Equal Doctrine was a legal principle in United States constitutional law that justified systems of segregation. Under this doctrine, as long as the facilities provided to each race were equal, segregation did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment ("equal protection of the laws").

Shaw v. Reno

: Shaw v. Reno was a 1993 Supreme Court case which ruled that redistricting based on race must be held to a standard of strict scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause (meaning it must serve a compelling government interest and be narrowly tailored to achieve that interest).

Trade-off

: A trade-off is a situation where you give up one thing in order to gain something else. It's the process of balancing between two or more conflicting desires or outcomes.

United States v. Korematsu

: A Supreme Court case in 1944 that upheld the constitutionality of the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II.


© 2024 Fiveable Inc. All rights reserved.

AP® and SAT® are trademarks registered by the College Board, which is not affiliated with, and does not endorse this website.


© 2024 Fiveable Inc. All rights reserved.

AP® and SAT® are trademarks registered by the College Board, which is not affiliated with, and does not endorse this website.