Updating search results...

14th Amendment

Amendment XIV: Civil rights
The Fourteenth Amendment was proposed on June 13, 1866 and ratified on July 9, 1868.

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.
Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

26 affiliated resources

Search Resources

View
Selected filters:
14th Amendment
Rating
0.0 stars

This resource from the National Constitution Center includes an introduction, big questions, recorded class sessions, briefing documents, slide decks, and worksheets about the fourteenth amendment of the United States Constitutuion.

Subject:
History
Social Science
Material Type:
Lesson Plan
Provider:
National Constitution Center
Date Added:
05/10/2024
14th Amendment Summary
Restricted Use
Copyright Restricted
Rating
0.0 stars

The 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution deals with several aspects of U.S. citizenship and the rights of citizens. Ratified on July 9, 1868, during the post-Civil War era, the 14th, along with the 13th and 15th Amendments, are collectively known as the Reconstruction Amendments. Although the 14th Amendment was intended to protect the rights of formerly enslaved people, it has continued to play a major role in constitutional politics to this day.

Subject:
Social Science
Social Studies
Material Type:
Reading
Provider:
ThoughtCo
Provider Set:
Constitution
Author:
Martin Kelly
Date Added:
07/10/2024
Baker v. Carr: Supreme Court Case, Arguments, Impact
Restricted Use
Copyright Restricted
Rating
0.0 stars

Baker v. Carr (1962) was a landmark case concerning re-apportionment and redistricting. The United States Supreme Court ruled that federal courts could hear and rule on cases in which plaintiffs allege that re-apportionment plans violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Subject:
Social Science
Social Studies
Material Type:
Reading
Provider:
ThoughtCo
Provider Set:
Constitution
Author:
Elianna Spitzer
Date Added:
07/10/2024
Brown v. Board of Education
Restricted Use
Copyright Restricted
Rating
0.0 stars

This lesson explores the landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education, which led to the end of legal school segregation and other forms of legal segregation throughout the United States. Access to this resource requires a free educator login.

Subject:
History
Social Science
Material Type:
Lesson Plan
Provider:
Teach Democracy
Date Added:
05/10/2024
Brown v. Board of Education (1954): Segregation in Public Education is Unconstitutional
Restricted Use
Copyright Restricted
Rating
0.0 stars

The Court decided that state laws requiring separate but equal schools violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. This resource includes teacher materials, guides, and activities for teaching about this Supreme Court case.

Subject:
Social Science
Material Type:
Unit of Study
Provider:
Landmark Cases
Date Added:
03/22/2024
Brown v. Mississippi: Supreme Court Case, Arguments, Impact
Restricted Use
Copyright Restricted
Rating
0.0 stars

In Brown v. Mississippi (1936), the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that, under the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, forced confessions cannot be admitted into evidence. Brown v. Mississippi marked the first time the Supreme Court reversed a state trial court conviction on the basis that the defendants’ confessions were coerced.

Subject:
Social Science
Social Studies
Material Type:
Reading
Provider:
ThoughtCo
Provider Set:
Constitution
Author:
Elianna Spitzer
Date Added:
07/10/2024
Civil Liberties vs. National Security: A Wartime Balancing Act
Restricted Use
Copyright Restricted
Rating
0.0 stars

This lesson will focus on the case Korematsu v. U.S. in comparison with other times in U.S. history when the government was faced with the challenge of how to protect the country during war and, at the same time, protect individual freedoms. Using primary sources, students will examine five events in which U.S. citizens were forced to give up their civil liberties in times of war, highlighting the tension between liberty and security. Students will analyze these events to determine what groups were affected and the reasoning for and against the government action to decide if the government action was justified. Students will be able to form an opinion on the essential question: Is our government ever justified in restricting civil liberties for the security of the nation?

Subject:
Social Science
Social Studies
Material Type:
Lesson Plan
Provider:
Annenberg Foundation
Provider Set:
Annenberg Classroom
Date Added:
08/11/2022
A Conversation on the Fourteenth Amendment
Restricted Use
Copyright Restricted
Rating
0.0 stars

Three key components of the Fourteenth Amendment – due process, equal protection, and privileges and immunities – are explored in this lesson, which centers on the video âA Conversation on the Constitution: The Fourteenth Amendment.â In the video, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg speaks with high school students about the Fourteenth Amendment and the protections it offers.

Subject:
Social Science
Social Studies
Material Type:
Lesson Plan
Provider:
Annenberg Foundation
Provider Set:
Annenberg Classroom
Date Added:
08/11/2022
A Conversation on the Japanese Internment Cases
Restricted Use
Copyright Restricted
Rating
0.0 stars

Essential Question: Should the executive branch have the authority to deny individual rights and liberties during times of war, even if it is done in a discriminatory way?
As a result of this lesson, students will be able to:
Know the facts and decisions of the Hirabayashi and Korematsu cases.
Consider the impact of war-time pressures on governmental decision-making.
Consider the extent to which the judicial and legislative branches should defer to the executive.
Apply the concepts of discrimination and rigid scrutiny to contemporary scenarios.

Subject:
Social Science
Social Studies
Material Type:
Lesson Plan
Provider:
Annenberg Foundation
Provider Set:
Annenberg Classroom
Date Added:
08/11/2022
Equal Justice Under Law: Yick Wo v. Hopkins
Restricted Use
Copyright Restricted
Rating
0.0 stars

In this lesson, based on the Annenberg Classroom video âYick Wo and the Equal Protection Clause,â students explore the cause-and-effect relationships between historical events and the development of constitutional principles that protect the rights of all people in America today. The words inscribed on the U.S. Supreme Court building are a reminder of that protection: âEqual Justice Under Law.â

Subject:
Social Science
Social Studies
Material Type:
Lesson Plan
Provider:
Annenberg Foundation
Provider Set:
Annenberg Classroom
Date Added:
08/11/2022
First Amendment Principles and Jefferson’s “Wall”
Restricted Use
Copyright Restricted
Rating
0.0 stars

In this lesson, students will gain an understanding of how the Supreme Court's interpretation of the First Amendment changed in light of the Fourteenth Amendment. They will also analyze Thomas Jefferson's Letter to the Danbury Baptist Association, evaluate the Supreme Court's application of Jefferson's metaphor about the wall of separation between church and state, and assess how much weight should be given to Jefferson's letter in determining the constitutionality of state action with respect to religion.

Subject:
Social Science
Material Type:
Lesson Plan
Provider:
Bill of Rights Institute
Date Added:
03/22/2024
Goldberg v. Kelly: Supreme Court Case, Arguments, Impact
Restricted Use
Copyright Restricted
Rating
0.0 stars

Goldberg v. Kelly (1970) asked the Supreme Court to determine whether the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applies to welfare recipients who are about to lose their benefits. The landmark case hinged on whether or not public assistance could be considered “property” and whether the interests of the state or the individual took precedence.

Subject:
Social Science
Social Studies
Material Type:
Reading
Provider:
ThoughtCo
Provider Set:
Constitution
Author:
Elianna Spitzer
Date Added:
07/10/2024
Katzenbach v. Morgan: Supreme Court Case, Arguments, Impact
Restricted Use
Copyright Restricted
Rating
0.0 stars

In Katzenbach v. Morgan (1966), the United States Supreme Court ruled that Congress had not exceeded its authority when crafting Section 4(e) of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which extended voting rights to a group of voters who had been turned away at the polls because they could not pass literacy tests. The case hinged on the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Enforcement Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Subject:
Social Science
Social Studies
Material Type:
Reading
Provider:
ThoughtCo
Provider Set:
Constitution
Author:
Elianna Spitzer
Date Added:
07/10/2024
Key Constitutional Concepts: Right to Counsel
Restricted Use
Copyright Restricted
Rating
0.0 stars

The lesson begins with students considering the need for an attorney in a criminal trial, followed by an examination of the rights contained in the Sixth Amendment. Using the video, students examine both the constitutional right to counsel and how this right has been secured by Supreme Court decisions. Throughout this lesson, students are provided opportunities to form their own opinions regarding Gideon's case while reviewing the language of the Sixth Amendment as they see his case unfold. The lesson concludes with students writing a historical analysis of the Gideon decision and understanding how criminal defendants are now informed about their right to counsel.

Subject:
Social Science
Social Studies
Material Type:
Lesson Plan
Provider:
Annenberg Foundation
Provider Set:
Annenberg Classroom
Date Added:
08/11/2022
Munn v. Illinois: Supreme Court Case, Arguments, Impact
Restricted Use
Copyright Restricted
Rating
0.0 stars

In Munn v. Illinois (1877), the U.S. Supreme Court found that the state of Illinois could regulate a private industry in the public interest. The Court's decision drew a distinction between state and federal industry regulation.

Subject:
Social Science
Social Studies
Material Type:
Reading
Provider:
ThoughtCo
Provider Set:
Constitution
Author:
Elianna Spitzer
Date Added:
07/10/2024
Near v. Minnesota: Supreme Court Case, Arguments, Impact
Restricted Use
Copyright Restricted
Rating
0.0 stars

Near v. Minnesota was a groundbreaking case which ensured that prohibitions against prior restraint applied to states as well as the federal government. The Supreme Court used the Fourteenth Amendment to incorporate First Amendment Freedom of Press to the states.

Subject:
Social Science
Social Studies
Material Type:
Reading
Provider:
ThoughtCo
Provider Set:
Constitution
Author:
Elianna Spitzer
Date Added:
07/10/2024
Obergefell v. Hodges: Supreme Court Case, Arguments, Impacts
Restricted Use
Copyright Restricted
Rating
0.0 stars

In Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), the United States Supreme Court ruled that marriage is a fundamental right guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment, and therefore must be afforded to same-sex couples. The ruling ensured that statewide bans on same-sex marriage could not be held up as constitutional.

Subject:
Social Science
Social Studies
Material Type:
Reading
Provider:
ThoughtCo
Provider Set:
Constitution
Author:
Elianna Spitzer
Date Added:
07/10/2024
One Person, One Vote: Baker v. Carr and Reynolds v. Sims
Restricted Use
Copyright Restricted
Rating
0.0 stars

Using the Annenberg Classroom video âOne Person, One Vote,â this lesson explores the questions âDoes the Constitution require that every person's vote count the same as another person's vote? Why would that be important?â Students will use their knowledge of the U.S. Supreme Court cases Baker v. Carr and Reynolds v. Sims to answer these questions.

Subject:
Social Science
Social Studies
Material Type:
Lesson Plan
Provider:
Annenberg Foundation
Provider Set:
Annenberg Classroom
Date Added:
08/11/2022
The Power of One Decision: Brown v. Board of Education
Restricted Use
Copyright Restricted
Rating
0.0 stars

This lesson is based on the Annenberg Classroom video âA Conversation on the Constitution: Brown v. Board of Educationâ in which Supreme Court Justices Sandra Day O'Connor, Anthony Kennedy and Stephen Breyer participate in a Q&A session with a group of high school students. The conversation revolves around the issues and arguments in Brown v. Board of Education. Through the lesson, students gain insight into decision-making at the Supreme Court, learn about the people behind the case, construct a persuasive argument, and evaluate the significance of Brown v. Board of Education.

Subject:
Social Science
Social Studies
Material Type:
Lesson Plan
Provider:
Annenberg Foundation
Provider Set:
Annenberg Classroom
Date Added:
08/11/2022