7. 第十四修正法案
The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, ratified in 1868, prohibits state governments from denying citizens the “equal protection of the laws.” Although precisely what the framers of the amendment meant by this equal protection clause remains unclear, all interpreters agree that the framers’ immediate objective was to provide a constitutional warrant for the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which guaranteed the citizenship of all persons born in the United States and subject to United States jurisdiction. This declaration, which was echoed in the text of the Fourteenth Amendment, was designed primarily to counter the Supreme Court’s ruling in Dred Scott v. Sandford that Black people in the United States could be denied citizenship. The act was vetoed by President Andrew Johnson, who argued that the Thirteenth Amendment, which abolished slavery, did not provide Congress with the authority to extend citizenship and equal protection to the freed slaves. Although Congress promptly overrode Johnson’s veto, supporters of the act sought to ensure its constitutional foundations with the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment.
The broad language of the amendment strongly suggests that its framers were proposing to write into the Constitution not a laundry list of specific civil rights but a principle of equal citizenship that forbids organized society from treating any individual as a member of an inferior class. Yet for the first eight decades of the amendment’s existence, the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the amendment betrayed this ideal of equality. In the Civil Rights Cases of 1883, for example, the Court invented the “state action” limitation, which asserts that “private” decisions by owners of public accommodations and other commercial businesses to segregate their facilities are insulated from the reach of the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection under the law.
After the Second World War, a judicial climate more hospitable to equal protection claims culminated in the Supreme Court’s ruling in Brown v. Board of Education that racially segregated schools violated the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Two doctrines embraced by the Supreme Court during this period extended the amendment’s reach. First, the Court required especially strict scrutiny of legislation that employed a “suspect classification,” meaning discrimination against a group on grounds that could be construed as racial. This doctrine has broadened the application of the Fourteenth Amendment to other, nonracial forms of discrimination, for while some justices have refused to find any legislative classification other than race to be constitutionally disfavored, most have been receptive to arguments that at least some nonracial discriminations, sexual discrimination in particular, are “suspect” and deserve this heightened scrutiny by the courts. Second, the Court relaxed the state action limitation on the Fourteenth Amendment, bringing new forms of private conduct within the amendment’s reach.
17. Which of the following best describes the main idea of the passage?
(A) By presenting a list of specific rights, framers of the Fourteenth Amendment were attempting to provide a constitutional basis for broad judicial protection of the principle of equal citizenship.
(B) Only after the Supreme Court adopted the suspect classification approach to reviewing potentially discriminatory legislation was the applicability of the Fourteenth Amendment extended to include sexual discrimination.
(C) Not until after the Second World War did the Supreme Court begin to interpret the Fourteenth Amendment in a manner consistent with the principle of equal citizenship that it expresses.
(D) Interpreters of the Fourteenth Amendment have yet to reach consensus with regard to what its framers meant by the equal protection clause.
(E) Although the reluctance of judges to extend the reach of the Fourteenth Amendment to nonracial discrimination has betrayed the principle of equal citizenship, the Supreme Court’s use of the state action limitation to insulate private activity from the amendment’s reach has been more harmful.
18. The passage suggests that the principal effect of the state action limitation was to
(A) allow some discriminatory practices to continue unimpeded by the Fourteenth Amendment
(B) influence the Supreme Court’s ruling in Brown v, Board of Education
(C) provide expanded guidelines describing prohibited actions
(D) prohibit states from enacting laws that violated the intent of the Civil Rights Act of 1866
(E) shift to state governments the responsibility for enforcement of laws prohibiting discriminatory practices
19. The author’s position regarding the intent of the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment would be most seriously undermined if which of the following were true?
(A) The framers had anticipated state action limitations as they are described in the passage.
(B) The framers had merely sought to prevent discriminatory acts by federal officials.
(C) The framers were concerned that the Civil Rights Act of 1866 would be overturned by the Supreme Court.
(D) The framers were aware that the phrase “equal protection of the laws” had broad implications.
(E) The framers believed that racial as well as non-racial forms of discrimination were unacceptable.
20. According to the passage, the original proponents of the Fourteenth Amendment were primarily concerned with
(A) detailing the rights afforded by the principle of equal citizenship
(B) providing support in the Constitution for equal protection for all citizens of the United States
(C) closing a loophole that could be used to deny individuals the right to sue for enforcement of their civil rights
(D) asserting that the civil rights protected by the Constitution included nonracial discrimination as well as racial discrimination
(E) granting state governments broader discretion in interpreting the Civil Rights Act of 1866
21. The author implies that the Fourteenth Amendment might not have been enacted if
(A) Congress’ authority with regard to legislating civil rights had not been challenged
(B) the framers had anticipated the Supreme Court’s ruling in Brown v. Board of Education
(C) the framers had believed that it would be used in deciding cases of discrimination involving non-racial groups
(D) most state governments had been willing to protect citizens’ civil rights
(E) its essential elements had not been implicit in the Thirteenth Amendment
22. According to the passage, which of the following most accurately indicates the sequence of the events listed below?
I. Civil Rights Act of 1866
II. Dred Scott v. Sandford
III. Fourteenth Amendment
IV. Veto by President Johnson
(A) I, II, III, IV
(B) I, IV, II, III
(C) I, IV, III, II
(D) II, I, IV, III
(E) III, II, I, IV
23. Which of the following can be inferred about the second of the two doctrines referred to in lines 39-41 of the passage?
(A) It caused some justices to rule that all types of discrimination are prohibited by the Constitution.
(B) It shifted the focus of the Supreme Court from racial to nonracial discrimination.
(C) It narrowed the concern of the Supreme Court to legislation that employed a suspect classification.
(D) It caused legislators who were writing new legislation to reject language that could be construed as permitting racial discrimination.
(E) It made it more difficult for commercial businesses to practice racial discrimination.
于1868年批准的美国宪法第十四条修正案禁止州政府剥夺公民享受“平等的
法律保护。”尽管该修正案的制定者制定这一平等保护条款的确切意图是什么现在
仍无人知晓，但所有的解释者一致认为，该修正案制定者的直接目标是要为1868
年的《民权法》提供宪法保障，而1866年的《民权法》则保证，凡是在美国出生
并接受美国司法管辖的人均享有公民权。这一在第十四条修正案的文本中被复述的
宣言，主要是旨在对抗最高法院在“Dred Scott诉Sandford”一案中的判决，此
判决裁定，在美国的黑人可被剥夺公民权。安德罗·约翰逊总统(President Andrew
Johnson)否决了《民权法》，他论辩道，将奴隶制度予以废除的第十三条修正案，
没有能够为国会提供权力，将公民权和平等保护扩展至已获得自由的奴隶。尽管国
会迅速****了约翰逊总统的否决，但《民权法》的支持者则力图要以第十四条修正
案的通过来确保其宪法基础。
第十四条修正案的宽泛笼统的语言强烈地暗示，其制定者所意欲载入宪法的不
是一张具体民法的细目清单，而是一种平等公民权的原则，这一原则禁止有组织的
社会将任何一个个人作为劣等阶层的成员来对待。然而，对于此修正案存在的最初
八十年来说，最高法院对这一修正案的解释却背叛了这一平等理想。例如，在1883
年的“民权诉讼案”中，最高法院发明了“州政府行动”限制，这一限制声称，公
共旅馆和其它商业企业的所有者所作出的对其设施实行种族隔离的“私人”决定，
这类“私人”决定不属第十四条修正案中法律所保证的平等保护的适用范围。
在第二次世界大战之后，一种更有利于平等保护主张的法律氛围以最高法院在
“布朗诉教育委员会”(Brown V.Board of Education)一案中的裁决而臻顶点，
最高法院在此案中裁定，实施种族隔离的学校违反了第十四条修正案的适用范围。
第一，最高法院要求，对采用“怀疑分类”的立法进行格外严格的审查。所谓“怀
疑分类”，意指那种在有可能被理解成以种族为基础，针对某一群体进行的歧视这
一信条扩展了第十四条修正案的适用范围，使其同样也适用于其它的、非种族形式
的歧视。因为虽然某些法官拒不将除种族以外的立法分类裁定为非法的，但绝大多
数法官已经接受了这样一个论点，即至少某些非种族性质的歧视，尤其是性别歧视，
是“值得怀疑的”，并理应接受法庭这种更高程度上的审视。第二，最高法院放松
了州政府行动对第十四条修正案的限制，将各种新的形式的个人行为亦纳入到第十
条修正案的适用范围。
推荐访问：2013GRE真题