GRE阅读考试回忆：第十四次修订法案（在线收听） |
新GRE考试阅读部分机经Fourteenth AmendmentThe Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution， ratified in1868， prohibits state governments from denying citizens the “equalprotection of the laws.” Although precisely what the framers of the amendment meant by thisequal protection clause remains unclear， all interpretersagree that the framers’ immediate objective was to provide a constitutional warrant for theCivil Rights Act of 1866， which guaranteed the citizenship of all persons born in the UnitedStates and subject to United States jurisdiction. This declaration， which wasechoed in the text of the Fourteenth Amendment， was designedprimarily to counter the Supreme Court’s ruling in DredScott v. Sandford that Black people in the United States could be deniedcitizenship. The act was vetoed by President Andrew Johnson， who arguedthat the Thirteenth Amendment， which abolished slavery， did not provideCongress with the authority to extend citizenship and equal protection to thefreed slaves. Although Congress promptly overrode Johnson’s veto， supportersof the act sought to ensure its constitutional foundations with the passage ofthe Fourteenth Amendment. 第一段：14修正案禁止政府否认法律对公民的平等保护“equal protection of the laws”
虽然不太明白提案者这么说的具体意义，但所有解释都认同提案者的直接目的是为Civil Right Acts提供支持，这个Act的内容是保证所有出生于美国的并遵从美国法律的公民的市民权citizenship。14修正案重提Act的内容主要是为了反对最高法院Super Court的“黑人应该没有citizenship”这一判决。Act被总统否定了，他认为13修正案中废除了奴隶制，但没有向国会提供将citizenship和equal protection扩展到黑人的权力authority。尽管国会又否决了总统的否定，Act的支持者们仍然去寻找Act的宪法基础constitutional foundations，这样就有了14修正案。
The broad language of the amendment strongly suggests that itsframers were proposing to write into the Constitution not a laundry list ofspecific civil rights but a principle of equal citizenship that forbidsorganized society from treating any individual as a member of an inferior class. Yet for thefirst eight decades of the amendment’s existence， the SupremeCourt’s interpretation of the amendment betrayed this ideal of equality. In theCivil Rights Cases of 1883， for example， the Court invented the “state action” limitation， whichasserts that “private” decisions by owners of public accommodations and other commercialbusinesses to segregate their facilities are insulated from the reach of theFourteenth Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection under the law.
第二段：14修正案所用的broad language强烈地表明了提案者的目的并不是要提出谁的权力应该受保护的名单，而是要在宪法中建立这样一个原则：任何一个个人都不应该被当做低等阶层对待。但是14修正案提出后的80年间，最高法院对它的解释违背了它的这个平等的想法。举例：1883年的Civil Rights Cases中最高法院发明了“state action”这样的一个限制，将public accommodations and other commercial businesses所有者的四人决定孤立于14修正案的法律平等保护之外。
After the Second World War， a judicial climatemore hospitable to equal protection claims culminated in the Supreme Court’s ruling inBrown v. Board of Education that racially segregated schools violated theequal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Twodoctrines embraced by the Supreme Court during this period extended theamendment’s reach. First， the Court required especially strict scrutiny of legislation thatemployed a “suspect classification，” meaning discrimination against a group on grounds that could beconstrued as racial. This doctrine has broadened the application of the FourteenthAmendment to other， nonracial forms of discrimination， for while somejustices have refused to find any legislative classification other than race tobe constitutionally disfavored， most have been receptive to arguments that at least some nonracialdiscriminations， sexual discrimination in particular， are “suspect” and deservethis heightened scrutiny by the courts. Second， the Courtrelaxed the state action limitation on the Fourteenth Amendment， bringingnew forms of private conduct within the amendment’s reach.
|
| 原文地址：http://www.tingroom.com/listen/gre/252696.html |