Final Essay (Essay Sample)

Name: Course: Professor: Date: Final Essay- Option 1 The struggle for civil rights in Texas resulted in different outcomes, especially from the court. The struggle for civil rights in Texas becomes intense after the Second World War. This was due to the return of the veterans who felt that they wanted to be regarded equally as their counterparts. Different groups also joined the struggle which is one of the reasons why it was regarded as one of the most intense struggles for civil rights. Some of the critical areas where the advocators wanted to be addressed include housing, education, and the justice system. Most of the minority groups had the notion that the criminal justice system favored the whites at the expense of the other minority groups. Their push was to have a justice system that prioritized the rights of all regardless of their origin and racial background. The struggle for civil rights made courts make favorable decisions to the minority and ethnic groups in different areas especially the area of education and participation in the political and social aspects of the state. The struggle for civil rights in Texas led to courts allowing the exercise of political and civil rights by ethnic minority groups. This was seen in Texas v. Johnson where the Supreme Court overturned Johnson’s conviction on the ground that he had burned a U.S national flag. During protests. Johnson had engaged in a protest over some of the policies that had been put in place by Reagan’s administration. According to the state, Johnson had committed a criminal offense involving the burning of the national flag which serves as a symbol of national unity (“Texas v. Johnson”). However, the Supreme Court overturned the lower court’s decision arguing that the conviction was in violation of the First Amendment of the Constitution. The court observed that what Johnson had done was expressive conduct that was protected under the First Amendment of the Constitution. This meant that any person from Texas regardless of their racial or ethnic background had the right to engage in expressive conduct (“Texas v. Johnson”). Since expressive conduct was allowed under the constitution, the state had no power to hold anyone criminally liable for committing some supposed offences such as desecrating the national flag. This is a decision that paved way for people from the racial and ethnic minority groups to advocate for their political and social rights without the fear of being held accountable by the state. The law was to be upheld especially in cases where the actions in question were protected under the law and the Constitution. Courts also reinforced the implementation of the Equal Protection Clause as provided for under the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution. In 1982, the Supreme had a Texas statute that regulated and denied funding to district schools that admitted undocumented immigrants overturned (“The Supreme Court Affirms the Rights of Undocumented Immigrants”). The Statute had been designed to segregate schools that admitted undocumented immigrants getting into the US from benefiting from the state funding on education. In some instances, the funds were withheld making it difficult for the schools to develop or even cater for the students admitted. The court observed that even an alien person is a person in the normal sense and even though such persons might have been admitted into the country unlawfully, most of them had already been accepted and recognized as persons and therefore guaranteed equal protection by the law (“The Supreme Court Affirms the Rights of Undocumented Immigrants”). In its interpretation, the court also observed that due to the important role education plays in sustaining the state’s political and cultural heritage, denying the isolated children the right to education would pose a serious challenge to the achievement of the goals of the Equal Protection Clause. The decision was critical as it opened a channel through which schools with illegal immigrants were able to start benefiting from state funding. Children who were regarded as illegal immigrants were given a chance to access education as one of their most critical rights. The state had no option but to ensure that these children were well protected just like the state protected other children from the majority ethnic groups. Courts opened an avenue for children from minority ethnic groups to access education without being segregated. This is a decision that was affirmed in the Brown vs. Board of Education. According to the court in Mendez et al vs. Westminster School District, schools districts could not segregate children on the ground of their racial origin (“The Méndez Case: Brown v. Board of Education for Mexican Americans”). As had been the case, Gonzalo Mendez who was from the minority group demand that all children go to the same schools and that the state and the country should not segregate them as it had been the norm in the earlier days. The district schools in Westminister had already taken action of allowing children from all facets to attend school. However, there was a requirement that had been put in place by the boards of the school that required non-English speaking children to attend different designated boards from the English-speaking children. The reason for the segregation was to allow the non-English speaking children to learn English before they could be allowed to mix with the English-speaking ones (“The Méndez Case: Brown v. ...