![]() Activists in Nebraska extend the motto to other groups, for example, to promote LGBT rights in Nebraska. ![]() The motto was chosen to symbolize political and civil rights for Black people and women in Nebraska, particularly Nebraska's rejection of slavery and the fact that Black men in the state could legally vote since the beginning of statehood. ![]() It appears on both the state flag and the state seal. The US state of Nebraska adopted the motto "Equality Before the Law" in 1867. The Bible says that "You and the foreigner shall be the same before the Lord: The same laws and regulations will apply both to you and to the foreigner residing among you." (Numbers 15:15f) If we look to the laws, they afford equal justice to all in their private differences if to social standing, advancement in public life falls to reputation for capacity, class considerations not being allowed to interfere with merit nor again does poverty bar the way. The 431 BC funeral oration of Pericles, recorded in Thucydides's History of the Peloponnesian War, includes a passage praising the equality among the free male citizens of the Athenian democracy: The legalist philosopher Guan Zhong (720–645 BC) declared that "the monarch and his subjects no matter how great and small they are complying with the law will be the great order". History Statue of Equality in Paris as an allegory of equality For example, while many constitutions guarantee equality regardless of race, only a few mention the right to equality regardless of nationality. The general guarantee of equality is provided by most of the world's national constitutions, but specific implementations of this guarantee vary. Thus, everyone must be treated equally under the law regardless of race, gender, color, ethnicity, religion, disability, or other characteristics, without privilege, discrimination or bias. It is incompatible with legal slavery.Īrticle 7 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) states: "All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law". Equality before the law is one of the basic principles of some definitions of liberalism. Sometimes called the principle of isonomy, it arises from various philosophical questions concerning equality, fairness and justice. The principle requires a systematic rule of law that observes due process to provide equal justice, and requires equal protection ensuring that no individual nor group of individuals be privileged over others by the law. (4) prohibited from denying people life-, liberty-, and property-related protection that is provided by constitutionally proper federal laws.Ĭontinue reading Antisubjugation and the Equal Protection of the Laws.Equality before the law, also known as equality under the law, equality in the eyes of the law, legal equality, or legal egalitarianism, is the principle that all people must be equally protected by the law. (3) prohibited from enacting discriminatory laws that unreasonably burden or benefit the life, liberty, and property of some people more than others (2) required to provide people with impartial access to the courts (1) required to impartially execute nondiscriminatory state laws that protect life, liberty, and property The Clause also prohibits states from interfering with any protection provided by constitutionally proper federal laws. This Article contends that the Equal Protection Clause guarantees both nondis-criminatory law enforcement and nondiscriminatory laws. One group of scholars-call them protection theorists-contends that the original meaning of “the equal protection of the laws” only guarantees security against physical violence and possibly access to the courts.6 Another group of scholars contends that the “state-action doctrine” is incoherent and that the original meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment does guarantee positive rights to certain kinds of governmental aid, including protective services. ![]() Scholars have long questioned these features of Fourteenth Amendment law. At the same time, the Court has insisted that the Equal Protection Clause generally prohibits unjustified, intentional discrimination. The Court has articulated a general rule against judicial use of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause to guarantee governmental protection against private violence.2 It has also hindered Congress’s efforts to provide civil remedies for private violence. It then contends that constitutional doctrine should be reconstructed to realize the Constitution’s promise of “the equal protection of the laws.” This Article argues that neither of those things is true as a matter of the original meaning and purpose of the Equal Protection Clause. For nearly 150 years, the Supreme Court has held that the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution does not secure “positive” rights to governmental aid or apply to “private” action. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |