9410十四修正案阅读求解，谢谢大家

wfxmfwjwUID: 3582171

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.


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.

答案是应该选A还是B呢？有两个不同版本的答案，不知道哪个正确，我选的是A，求大神们帮忙看看

无敌浩克OneUID: 3605802

我觉得是B哎
文中第二段，14修正案因为state action limitation才一直没有得到良好的应用，所以如果立法者就只是想管束联邦政府的行为，那么就相当于默许state action limitation发生，那这个法案不就没用了吗？

无敌浩克OneUID: 3605802

顺便请教一下这两题：
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
A所涉及的第一段总统否决那的逻辑没看懂T_T
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.
13th案提出了废除奴隶制，这不是和14案的平等是一致的吗？总之就是好晕
D为什么不对呢？是因为没强调all citizens?

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
从文中线索怎么推呀？ II 和 I 什么关系呀？

wfxmfwjwUID: 3582171

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。
先有 Dred Scott v. Sandford中黑人被denied citizenship，然后立法机构发布Civil Rights Act of 1866=declaration，但是President Andrew Johnson不同意，认为不能给黑人这么多人权，然后立法机构才又想通过更改宪法就是Fourteenth Amendment来实现黑人的人权。
所以如果国会也就是立法机构没有被总统否定的话，就不会有Fourteenth Amendment，直接Civil Rights Act 就通过了

无敌浩克OneUID: 3605802

wfxmfwjw 发表于 2015-5-24 11:55
This declaration, which was echoed in the text of the Fourteenth Amendment, was designed primarily t ...

Although Congress promptly overrode Johnson’s veto, supporters of the act sought to ensure its constitutional foundations with the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment.
这个congress不是已经Overrode总统了吗？哪里还被challenge了 ？

另外总统否决的act指的是什么呀？

wfxmfwjwUID: 3582171

被否就是challenge，congress 的overrode的方式就是提出 Fourteenth Amendment

_LittleChopper_UID: 3479772

总统否决的act应该就是civil rights act, 然后我觉得的吧，之前一直有个thirteenth，然后congress（framers）弄出了个civil rights act, 去对抗Supreme Court’s ruling in Dred Scott v. Sandford, 但是总统觉得thirteenth没有赋予congress那么大的权利，就把act给否了，但congress立马又把总统否了（promptly overrode), 所以act是通过了的。但是supporters of this act觉得这个没有constitutional foundation，就整出了个fourteenth, 就是为了给act提供constitutional foundation. 第一段还说第十四修订echoed了act的declaration