Gale Encyclopedia Of American Law 3Rd Edition Volume 2 P44 doc

civil rights, and, therefor e, Congress was powerless to legislate on the social conduct of private individuals. Following this decision, states began enacting SEGREGATION in various laws, the most notorious of which were collectively referred to as the JIM CROW LAWS.It took more than 80 years before Congress would again attempt to legislate in this area. The Civil Rights Acts of 1957 indicated congressional recognition that the federal gov- ernment had to bring about an end to racial discrimination. The Civil Rights Commission was established, and the laws guaranteed quali- fied voters the right to vote, regardless of their color. From 1964 through 1968, Congress enacted extensive and far-reaching legislation affording blacks equal status under the law, ranging from full and free enjoyment of public accommodations and facilities to the prohibition of racial discrimination in employment as well as transactions affecting housing in the United States. These laws include the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the VOTING RIGHTS ACT OF 1965, and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967. The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 outlawed discrimination based on physical disability in employment and public buildings. The Civil Rights Act of 1991 granted to victims of unlawful discrimination the right to seek money damages, jury trial s, and back pay. The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 amended the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to the make the 180-day STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS fo r filing an equal-pay lawsuit reset with each new discrimi- natory paycheck. The act overturned a Supreme Court ruling that held the 180 days began running with the employee’s first paycheck that was effected by discrimination. CROSS REFERENCES Civil Rights; “Civil Rights Act of 1964” (Append ix, Primary Document); Ku Klux Klan Act; “Voting Rights Act of 1965” (Appendix, Primary Document). CIVIL RIGHTS CASES A landmark decision, which was a consolidation of several cases brought before the Supreme Court of the United States in 1883 that declared the Civil Rights Act of 1875 (18 Stat. 336) unconstitutional and ultimately led to the enactment of state laws, such as Jim Crow Laws, which codified what had previously been individual adherence to the practice of racial segregation. The cases were United States v. Stanley, United S tates v. Ryan, United States v. Nichols, and United States v. Singleton, 109 U.S. 3, 3 S. Ct. 18, 27 L. Ed. 835. The CIVIL RIGHTS Act of 1875 was passed by Congress in the post-Civil War era in response to the refusal of many w hites to afford newly freed slaves equal treatment with whites under federal law. The act mandated that owners of public facilities, such as inns, restaurants, rail- roads, and other carriers, not discriminate against blacks who sought acce ss to, or service from, them on the basis of their race. Anyon e who violated the law was subject to criminal prosecution. Scores of prosecutions ensued and six cases reached the Supreme Court. The fact patterns of the cases were comparable in that they all were predicated upon the failure of blacks to be treated the same as whites in various establish- ments such as restaurants, theaters, railroads, and even the New York City Grand Opera House. The Court consolidated these cases by deciding that the crucial issue in each was whether the Civil Rights Act of 1875 was constitutional, to which it answered “no.” In an 8–1 decision, Justice JOSEPH BRADLEY reasoned that neither the Thirteenth nor Fourteenth Amendments empowered Congress to safe- guard blacks against the actions of private individuals. To decide otherwise would afford blacks a special status under the law that whites did not enjoy . The Thirteenth Amendment’s prohibition of SLAVERY had no application to discrimination in the area of public accommo- dations. Neither did the EQUAL PROTECTION Clause of the FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT apply to prohibit racial SEGREGATION, because it was as the result of conduct by private individuals, not state law or action, that blacks were suffering. The only dissenting justice was JOHN MARSHALL HARLAN , who criticized the majority opinion on a number of grounds, including that the exclusion of blacks from state licensed facilities for no other reason than their race did bring into application both the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments and that Congress had the author- ity pursuant to the COMMERCE CLAUSE to legislate in those cases involving railroads. The decision in the Civil Rights Cases severely restricted the power of the federal government to guarantee equal status under the law to blacks. State officials in the South took GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 418 CIVIL RIGHTS CASES advantage of the eclipsed role of Congress in the prohibition of racial discrimination and pro- ceeded to embody individual practices of racial segregation into laws that legalized the treat- ment of blacks as second-class citizens for another seventy years. CROSS REFERENCE S Civil Rights; Civil Rights Acts; “Civil Rights Cases” (Appendix, Primary Document). CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT The civil rights movement has been called the Second Reconstruction, in reference to the Recon- struction imposed upon the South following the Civil War. During this period, the Fourteenth Amendment (1868)—granting equal protection of the laws—and Fifteenth Amendment (1870)— giving the right to vote to all males regardless of race—were ratified, and troops from the North occupied the South from 1865 to 1877 to enforce the abolition of slavery. However, with the end of Reconstruction in 1877, southern whites again took control of the South, passing a variety of laws that discriminated on the basis of race. These were called Jim Crow laws, or the Black Codes. They segregated whites and blacks in education, housing, and the use of public and private facilities such as restaurants, trains, and rest rooms; they also denied blacks the right to vote, to move freely, and to marry whites. Myriad other prejudicial and discriminatory practices were committed as well, from routine denial of the right to a fair trial to outright murder by lynching. These laws and practices were a reality of U.S. life well into the twentieth century. The civil rights movement was a struggle by African Americans in the mid-1950s to late 1960s to achieve CIVIL RIGHTS equal to those of whites, including equal opportunity in employ- ment, housing, and education, as well as the right to vote, the right of equal access to public facilities, and the right to be free of racial discrimination. No social or political movement of the twentieth century has had as profound an effect on the legal and political institutions of the United States. This movement sought to restore to African Americans the rights of citizenship guaranteed by the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments, which had been eroded by segregationist JIM CROW LAWS in the South. It fundamentally altered relations between the federal government and the states, as the federal government was forced many times to enforce its laws and protect the rights of African American citizens. The civil rights movement also spurred the reemergence of the judiciary, including the Supreme Court, in its role as protector of individual liberties against majority power. In addition, as the Reverend MARTIN LUTHER KING Jr, and other leaders of the movement predicted, the movement prompted gains not only for African Americans but also for women, persons with disabilities, and many others. Organized efforts by African Americans to gain their civil rights began well before the official civil rights movement got under way. By 1909, blacks and whites together had formed the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People ( NAACP), which became a leading organization in the cause of civil rights for African Americans. From its beginning, the NAACP and its attorneys challenged many discriminatory laws in court, but it was not until after WORLD WAR II that a widespread movement for civil rights gathered force. The war itself contributed to the origins of the movement. When African Americans who had fought for their country returned home, they more openly resisted being treated as second-class citizens. The movement’s first major legal victory came in 1954, when the NAACP won BROWN V. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF TOPEKA, KANSAS, 347 U.S. 483, 74 S. Ct. 686, 98 L. Ed. 873, in which the Supreme Court struck down laws segregating white and black children into differ- ent public elementary schools. With Brown, it became apparent that African Americans had important allies in the highest federal court and its chief justice, EARL WARREN. Another catalyzing event occurred on December 1, 1955, when ROSA PARKS, an African In order to protect them from possible violence on the part of desegregation opponents, African American students at Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas, are escorted from school by members of the Army’s 101st Airborne division in September 1957. AP IMAGES. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3 RD E DITION CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT 419 American woman, was arrested after she refused to give up her seat to a white man on a Montgomery, Alabama, bus. The law required African Americans to sit in the back of city buses and to give up their seats to whites should the white section of the bus become full. The city’s black residents, long tired of the indignities of SEGREGATION, began a BOYCOTT of city buses. They recruited King, a 27-year-old preacher, to head the Montgo mery Improve- ment Association, the group that organized the boycott. The African Americans of Mon- tgomery held out for nearly a year despite violence—including the bombing of King’s home—directed at them by angry whites. This violence was repugnant to many whites and actually increased support for the civil rights movement among them. The boycott finally achieved its goal on November 13, 1956, when the Supreme Court, in Gayle v. Browder, 352 U.S. 903, 77 S. Ct. 145, declared Montgomery’s bus segregation law unconstitutional. By December 1956, the city was forced to desegre- gate its buses. Although African Americans had sporadi- cally demonstrated against segregation laws in previous decades, the MONTGOMERY BUS BOYCOTT became a turning point for their protests. It gained significant media attention for the civil rights cause, and it brought King to the fore as a leader. King would go on to head the SOUTHERN CHRISTIAN LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE (SCLC), which was formed in 1957, and to guide the civil rights movement itself. The boycott also marked the end of reliance on LITIGATION as the major tactic for gaining civil rights for African Americans. From this point on the movement also engaged in nonviolent direct action, a technique of CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE that had been used before by pacifists, by labor movements, and by MOHANDAS K . GANDHI in the struggle to secure India’s freedom from Great Britain. Nonviolent methods had been used by African Americans since the 1940s, when the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE)—a group of blacks and whites that formed in 1942 to lobby for equal civil rights for all—organized nonviolent direct action to protest racial discrimination. King described his own view of nonviolent protest in his 1958 book Stride toward Freedom. This type of protest worked in part by seeking to create a sense of shame in the opponent. The nonviolence of the civil rights move- ment and the power of the federal government over the states were tested as African Americans sought to make use of the rights that had been confirmed by the Supreme Court. For example, segregationist whites, including the Alabama legislature, refused to recognize the rulings of After the Supreme Court outlawed segregation in interstate bus terminals, the 1961 Freedom Rides were undertaken to challenge continuing segregation policies in the South. The riders were attacked at many of the stops, and are shown here being protected by police and National Guard troops in Montgomery, Alabama. AP IMAGES GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 420 CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT the federal judiciary regarding SCHOOL DESEGRE- GATION . Some whites formed citizens’ councils to combat desegregation, and the KU KLUX KLAN and other reactionary whites began a campaign of TERRORISM, including bombings and murders, intended to intimidate African Americans into giving up their cause. A significant state-federal confrontation oc- curred in 1957 at Little Rock, Arkansas’sCentral High School, when angry mobs of whites attacked nine black students attempting to enroll for classes. President DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER had to send in troops to enforce the Supreme Court’s decision in Brown, confirming the right of the students to attend the school. In 1962, when JAMES MEREDITH attempted to enroll at the University of Mississippi, President JOHN F. KENNEDY also sent in federal military troops to uphold desegregation. The SCLC, which under Ki ng’s leadership had become one of the most important civil rights organizations in the country, in turn spawned another influential group, the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee ( SNCC, popularly called Snick). In 1960 this group, which was made up of both blacks and whites, became a major player in the civil rights struggle. SNCC attracted youths who were often dissatis- fied by what they s aw as the unnecessarily moderate goals and methods of the NAACP and the SCLC. SNCC members later led voting registration and education efforts throughout the South, often at great personal risk. Even- tually, the group planted the seed of factionalism in the civil rights movement, as it became increasingly radical and alienated from the mainstream of the movement as represented by King. SNCC played an influential role in another form of nonviolent direct action employed in the civil rights movement: sit-ins. These demonstrations often focused upon the whites- only lunch counters across the South. Armed only with a strict code of conduct that forbade them to strike back or curse their opponents, demonstrators endured jeers, spitting, and blows by angry whites. One tactic associated with this strategy was the jail-in—also called jail, no bail— in which hundreds of people, many of them underage youths, arrived in waves at segregated lunch counters, were arrested for trespassing, and proceeded to overcrowd local jails. Jail-ins bogged down local governments and drew national attention to the cause. In the North, activists responded by picketing businesses, including the Woolworth chain of stores that operated segregated lunch counters in the South. The right to participate in sit-ins was upheld by the Supreme Court decisions Garner v. Louisiana, 368 U.S. 157, 82 S. Ct. 248, 7 L. Ed. 2d 207 (1961), and Peterson v. City of Greenville, 373 U.S. 244, 83 S. Ct. 1119, 10 L. Ed. 2d 323 (1963). The Freedom Rides were a type of nonvio- lent direct action designed to oppose segrega- tion in interstate buses and bus stations. They were inspired in part by the 1960 Supreme Court decision Boynton v. Virginia, 364 U.S. 459, 81 S. Ct. 182, 5 L. Ed. 2d 206, which outlawed racial segregation in bus terminals and other places of public accom modation related to interstate transportation. Organized by CORE in 1961, the Freedom Rides were undertaken by six whites and seven blacks who rode two interstat e buses from Washing- ton, D.C., to New Orleans. Along the way, the riders deliberately violated segregation policies on the buses and in bus terminal rest rooms, waiting areas, and restaurants. White mobs Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and other civil rights movement leaders participate in the March on Washington on August 28, 1963. AP IMAGES GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3 RD E DITION CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT 421 savagely beat Freedom Riders of both races at different stops in the Deep South and in Alabama, one of the buses was firebombed. Although the 1961 Freedom Rides pro- ceeded no farther than Jackson, Miss issippi, they achieved their larger goal of inducing the federal government to enforce its laws. The administration of President Kennedy sent in U.S. marshals to protect the riders during the last part of their journey. An even clearer victory was achieved in September 1961 when the INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISS ION abolished all segregated facilities in interstate transportation. On August 28, 1963, the civil rights move- ment reached a high point of public visibility when it held the March on Washington. Hundreds of thousands of people—an estimated 20 to 30 percent of them white—gathered in front of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C., to urge Congress and the federal government to support desegregation and voting rights. During this occasion, King gave his famous “IHaveaDream” speech. The following summer, civil rights activists in Mississippi organized another highly publi- cized event, Freedom Summer, a campaign to bring one thousand students, both white and black, into the South to teach and organize voter registration. Many civil rights groups provided backing for this movement, including SNCC, CORE, and the NAACP. Throughout this period of nonviolent pro- test, the civil rights movement continued to suffer the effects of white violence. MEDGAR EVERS, an NAACP leader who was organizing a black boycott in Jackson, was shot and killed outside his home in 1963. Three participants in Freedom Summer—James Chaney, an African American, and Andrew Goodman and Michael Schwerner, both whites—were killed in Mississippi in June The Birth of the Civil Rights Movement O B n December 1, 1955, Rosa Parks was arrested in Montgomery, Alabama, for refusing to give up her seat on a city bus to a white man. News of Parks’s arrest quickly spread through the African American community. Parks had worked as a secretary for the local branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. Because she was a well-respected and dignified figure in the community, her arrest was finally enough to persuade African Americans that they could no longer tolerate racially discriminatory laws. After exchanging phone calls, a group of African American women, the Women’s Political Council, decided to call for a boycott of the city buses as a response to this outrage. This suggestion was greeted with enthusiasm by local African American leaders, including the influential black clergy. On December 5, members of the A frican American community rallied at the Holt Street Baptist Church in Montgomery and decid ed to carry out the boycott. Their resolve was in spired by the words of the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. “We are here this evening,” King declared to the packed church, “to say to those who have mistreated us so long that we are tired—tired of being segrega ted and humiliated; tired of being kicked abo ut by the brutal feet of oppression.” He went on to make a case for peace and nonviolence. Contrasting the methods of nonviolence that he envisioned for a civil rights movement, to the methods of violence used by the racist and terrorist Ku Klux Klan, King declared, inourprotesttherewillbenocrossburn- ings…. We will be guided by the highest principles of law and order. Our m ethod will be that of persuasion , not coercion. We will only say to the people, “Let c onscience be your guide”…[O]ur actions m ust be guided by the deepest principles of o ur Christian faith. Love must be our regulating ideal. Once again we must hear the words of Jesus echoing across the centuries: “Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, and pray for them that despitefully use you.” With these words and these events, the long, difficult struggle of the civil rights movemen t began. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 422 CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT Million Man March O B n Monday, O ctober 16, 1995, hu ndreds of thousands of African American men gathered on the Mall in Washington, D.C., for the Million Man March, a daylong rally promoting personal responsibility and racial solidarity. Organized by Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam, the march was one of the most well attended and significant rallies in the history of the nation’s capital. With its mass of men stretching from the Capitol steps to the Washington Monument, the gathering marked a renewed commitment to self- empowerment and betterme nt on the part of African Americans. The Million Man March deliberately recalled the 1963 March on Washington, which many consider the hi gh point of the civil rights movement. D uring that earlier gathering, the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr., gave h is famous “IHaveaDream” speech. Many speakers at the Million M an March invoked King’s speech, noting with a combination of sorrow, anger, and penitence that King’sdreamsfora racially united America had not yet been realized. Farrakhan gave the keynote address of the day. Flanked by members of his paramilitary group, the Fruit of Islam, and speaking from behind a bullet-proof shield, he announced at the beginning of his speech, “We are gathered here to collect ourselves for a responsibility that God is placing on our shoulders to move this nation toward a more perfect union.” He continued to orate for over two hours, frequently bringing home the point that African Americans still suffer disadvantages that European Americans did not have. “There’sstilltwoAmericas,” he declared, “one black, one white, separate and unequal.” In another significant speech, the Reverend Jesse Jackson e xpanded on the religiously inspired tone of repentance that was so muc h a part of the Million Man March. Speaking for those in atten- dance, the civil rights leader prayed for “God to forgive us for our sins and the foolishness of our ways.” Like many of the o ther speakers, he called on African American men to take responsibi lity for their families, to end violence and drug use in the home and in their communities, and to make sure their children are learnin g in school. He had this to say about the current problems facing African Americans: We come here today because there is a structural malfunction in America. It was structured in the Constitution, and they referred to us as three-fifths of a human being, legally…. Why do we march? Because our babies die earlier …. Why do we march? Because we’re less able to get a primary or second- ary education. Why do we march? Because the media stereotypes us. We are projected as less intelligent t han we are; l ess hard- working than we work; less universal than we are; less patriotic than we are; and more violent than we are. Why do we march? We’re less able to borrow money….Whydo we march? Because we’re trapped with second-class schools and first-class jails. Other speakers at t he march included the Reverend Joseph Lowery; Damu Smith, of Green- peace; poet Maya Angelou; and Rosa Parks, whose arrest inspired the 1955 Montgomery bus boycott. Away from the speakers’ podium, the men collected on the Mall made their own history on that day. Coming from different classes, regions, and religion s, they were a diverse group not beholden to any one lead er. Many men remarked on the deep meaning the experience had for them, on the fellowship and friendships they gained, and on their own commitment to renewal and repair of both themselves and their communities. One of the most contentious issues of all regarding the march was the attendance figure. The National Park Service officially estimated attendance at 400,000, whereas event organizers pegged it at over 1.5 million. In comparison, the 1963 March on Washington attracted 250,000 participants. The Million Ma n March drew an extremely large share of the nation’s television audience, as well as laudatory comments f rom many national leaders, including P resident Bill Clinton and former general Colin L. Powell. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT 423 1964. Events such as these murders outraged many in the nation and solidified popular support for the civil rights cause. Then Congress passed one of the most significant pieces of civil rights legislation ever proposed, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C.A. § 2000a et seq.). This act made Congress an equal partner with the Supreme Court in establishing civil rights. Title II of the act outlawed discrimination in all places of public accommodation, including restaurants and lunch counters, motels and hotels, gas stations, theaters, and sports arenas. It also allowed the DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE to bring suit in order to achieve desegregation in public schools, relieving the NAACP of some of its civil rights litigation caseload. The following year, Congress passed another important piece of legislation, the VOTING RIGHTS ACT OF 1965 (42 U.S.C.A. § 1973 et seq.). This act outlawed the voting qualifications, including literacy tests, that whites had used to keep African Americans from voting. It also gave the federal government oversight powers regarding changes in state voting laws. These laws together with federal actions showed that the civil rights movement had the backing of the powers of the federal government and that no amount of resistance, however violent, by white southerners would impede the cause. By the mid-1960s, the nature of the civil rights movement began to change. African Americans, who had been united in their support of activities such as the Montgomery bus boycott, began to diverge in their views over what political action should be taken to improve their situation. Members of different groups within the movement increasingly expressed their dissatisfaction with other groups. More radical groups, including the Black Muslims and black power proponents, voiced discontent with the limited goals of the civil rights movem ent and its advocacy of nonviolence. Many of the new African American radicals called for black separatism or nationalism—that is, separation from white society rather than integration with it. Not content merely to seek civil equality, they began to press for social and economic equality. They also questioned the usefulness of nonviolence and no longer sought to include whites in the movement. SNCC, for example, became an all -black o rganization in 1966. The arguments of the African American radicals were punctuated by urban riots such as those in the Watts section of Los Angeles in 1965. By the late 1960s, African Americans still suffered from many disadvantages, including poverty rates that were much higher than those among whites and physical health that was much worse. Racially motivated violence per- sisted as well, as seen in the ASSASSINATION of King by a white man in 1968. Despite these problems, the civil rights movement had forever changed the face of U.S. law and politics. It had led to legislation that gave greater protection to the rights of minorities. It had also greatly changed the role of the judiciary in U.S. government, as the Supreme Court had become more active in its defense of individual rights, often in response to litigation and demonstrations initiated by those in the movement. In this respect, the Court and the civil rights movement had great influence on each other, with each reacting to and encouraging the efforts of the other. Likewise, the federal government had, even if hesitatingly, enforced the rights of a persecuted minority in the face of vigorous opposition from the southern states. FURTHER READINGS Blumberg, Rhoda L. 1991. Civil Rights: The 1960s Freedom Struggle. Farmington Hills, MI: Cengage Gale. Chalmers, David. 2003. Backfire: How the Ku Klux Klan Helped the Civil Rights Movement. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. Friedman, Leon, ed. 1967. The Civil Rights Reader: Basic Documents of the Civil Rights Movement. New York: Walker. Gray, Fred D. 2003. “Civil Rights—Past, Present and Future, Part II.” Alabama Lawyer 64, no. 8 (January). Johnson, Frank Minis. 2001. Defending Constitutional Rights. Athens, GA: Univ. of Georgia Press. Levine, Ellen, ed. 2000. Freedom’s Children: Young Civil Rights Activists Tell Their Own Stories. New York: Putnam Juvenile. Liebman, James S., and Charles F. Sabel. 2003. “The Federal No Child Left Behind Act and the Post-Desegregation Civil Rights Agenda. North Carolina Law Review 81 (May). Available online at http://www2.law.columbia. edu/sabel/No%20Child%20Left.doc; website home page: http://www2.law.columbia.edu (accessed July 13, 2009). McKissack, Fredrick L., Jr. 2004. This Generation of Americans: A Story of the Civil Rights Movement. Grand Rapids, MI: School Specialty Publications. Rostron, Alan. 1999. “Inside the ACLU: Activism and Anti- Communism in the Late 1960s.” New England Law Review 33, no. 2 (winter). Wilkinson, J. Harvie III. 1979. From Brown to Bakke: The Supreme Court and School Integration, 1954–1978. New York: Oxford Univ. Press. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 424 CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT CROSS REFERENCE S Baker, Ella Josephine; Bates, Daisy Lee Gatson; Black Panther Party; Carmichael, Stokely; Cleaver, LeRoy Eldridge; Davis, Angela Yvonne; Douglass, Frederick; Du Bois, William Edward Burghardt; Jackson, Jesse; Ku Klux Klan; Liuzzo, Viola Fauver Gregg; Marshall, Thurgood; School Desegrega- tion; Wallace, George Corley. See also primary documents in “From Segregation to Civil Rights” section of Appendix. CIVIL SERVICE The designation given to government employment for which a person qualifies on the basis of merit rather than political patronage or personal favor. Civil service employees, often called civil servants or public employees, work in a variety of fields such as teaching, sanitation, health care, management, and administration for the federal, state, or local government. Legislatures establish basic prerequisites for employment such as compliance with minimal age and educational requirements and residency laws. Employees enjoy job security, promotion and educational opportunities, comprehensive med- ical insuran ce coverage, and pension and other benefits often not provided in comparable positions in private employment. Most civil service positions are filled from lists of applicants who are rated in descending order of their passing scores on competitive civil service examinations. Such examinations are written tests designed to measure objectively a person’s aptitude to perform a job. They are open to the general public upon the completion and filing of the necessary forms. Promotional competitive examinations screen eligible employ- ees for job advancement. Veterans of the ARMED SERVICES may be given hiring preference, usually in the form of extra points added to their examina- tion scores, depending upon the nature and duration of their service. Applicants may also be required to pass a medical examination and more specialized tests that relate directly to the per- formance of a designated job. Once hired, an employee may have to take an OATH to execute his job in GOOD FAITH and in accordance with the law. Unlike workers in private employment, civil service employees may be prohibited from certain acts that would compromise their position as servants of the government and the general public. For example, the federal HATCH ACT (5 U.S.C.A. § 7324 et seq. [1887]) makes participation by federal, state, and local civil service employees in designated public electoral and political activ i ties unlawful. The U.S. Civil Service Commission, created by Congress in 1883 and reorganized under the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C.A. § 1101 et seq.) as the MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD , established a MERIT SYSTEM for federal employment and governs various aspects of such employment, such as job classification, tenure, pay, training, employee relations, equal opportunity, pensions, and health and life insurance. Most states have comparable bodies for the regulation of state and local civil service employment. CIVIL WAR Civil war exists when two or more opposing parties within a country resort to arms to settle a conflict or when a substantial portion of the population takes up arms against the legitimate government of a country. Within INTERNATIONAL LAW distinctions are drawn between minor conflicts like riots, where order is restored promptly, and full-scale insurrections finding opposing parties in political as well as military control over different areas. When an internal conflict reaches sufficient proportions that the interests of other countries are affected, outside states may recognize a state of insurgency. A recognition of insurgency, whether formal or DE FACTO , indicates that the recognizing state regards the insurgents as proper contestants for legitimate power. Although the precise status of insurgents under international law is not well-defined, recognized insurgents traditionally gain the protection afforded soldiers under international Islamist insurgents face off against Somali government officials in Mogadishu in August 2009. Civil war has plagued Somalia and its surrounding areas for more than 18 years. ª STR/REUTERS/CORBIS GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3 RD E DITION CIVIL WAR 425 rules of law pertaining to war . A state may also decide to rec ognize the conte nding group a s a belligerent, a status that invokes more well-defined rights and responsibilities. Once recognized as a belligerent party, t hat party obta in s the r ights of a belligerent party in a public war, or war between opposing states. The belligerents stand on a par with the parent state in t he conduct a nd settlement of the conflict. In addition, stat es recognizing the insurgents as belligerents must assume the duties of NEUTRALITY toward the con flict. CROSS REFERENCES U.S. Civil War; War. CIVIL WAR AMENDMENTS See FIFTEENTH AMENDMENT; FOURTEENTH AMEND- MENT ; THIRTEENTH AMENDMENT. v CIVILETTI, BENJAMIN RICHARD Benjamin Richard Civiletti served as U.S. attorney general from 1979 to 1981 under President JIMMY CARTER. His leadership helped the JUSTICE DEPARTMENT regain public credi bility in the years following the WATERGATE scandal. Civiletti was born July 17, 1935, in Peekskill, New York. He received a bachelor of arts degree from Johns Hopkins University in 1957 and a law degree from the University of Maryland in 1961. He served from 1961 to 1962 as clerk to William Calvin Chesnut, a U.S. district judge for Maryland. From 1962 to 1964, he worked as assistant U.S. attorney in Baltimore. Civiletti then turned to private practice with the prestigious Baltimore law firm of Venable, Baetjer, and Howard. His skill as a trial attorney enabled him to rise quickly in the firm. He became a partner in 1969 and headed the LITIGATION department two years later. He also became highly active on various professional committees in Baltimore and Maryland, includ- ing the Character Committee of the Court of Appeals of Maryland (1970–76), the Mayor’s Commission to Investigate Baltimore City Jails (1972–73), the Judiciary Committee of the BAR ASSOCIATION of Baltimore (1972–75), and the Maryland state legislature’s Task Force on Crime (1975–76). Civiletti’s reputation as an outstanding lawyer and civic leader attracted the notice of officials in President Carter’s administration. In 1977, the Carter administration appointed Civiletti assistant attorney general in charge of the Criminal Division of the Justice Department. He oversaw a number of sensitive cases in the Criminal Division, including the investigation of Bert Lance, a friend of Carter’swhoresignedas director of the OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET in September 1977 after being questioned by the Senate about alleged violations of banking laws. Civiletti also dealt with a scandal involving alleged attempts by South Korean government officials to buy influence from members of Congress and from other U.S. government officials. In late 1977, the Carter administration nominated Civiletti as deputy attorney general. He was finally appointed to the post in January 1978. As deputy attorney general, Civiletti received widespread praise for his coordination of an interagency campaign against WHITE-COLLAR CRIME . Civiletti’s rapid rise through the ranks of the Justice Department culminated in his appoint- ment, in 1979, as U.S. attorney general. His appointment came after President Carter requested the resignation of top cabinet officials in an attempt to improve the functioning of his administration. The previous attorney ge neral, GRIFFIN B. BELL, had strongly recommended Civiletti to be his replacement. The Senate approved Civiletti’s appointment on August 1, 1979, by a vote of 94–1. As attorney general, Civiletti continued policies initiated by Bell: a restructuring of the FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION so that it might better investigate white-collar crime; recodifica- tion of CRIMINAL LAW statutes; increased pursuit of antitrust cases; and improvement of the IMMI- GRATION and Naturalization Service. In addition, Civiletti continued his earlier work to improve cooperation between different law enforcement divisions of the federal government. Civiletti was also forced to respond to international events during his tenure as attor- ney general. After U.S. citizens were seized at the U.S. Embassy in Tehran in 1979, Civiletti directed the Justice Department’seffortsto deport Iranians who had entered the United States illegally. Civiletti also traveled to the INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE at The Hague, and persuaded its judges to rule in favor of the United States and denounce the Iranian capture of the U.S. embassy. After RONALD REAGAN took office as presi- dent in 1981, Civiletti returned to private practice at the Venable law firm. He founded LAW REQUIRES BOTH A HEART AND A HEAD . —BENJAMIN CIVILETTI GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 426 CIVIL WAR AMENDMENTS the Maryland LEGAL SERVICES CORPORATION and was the original director of the National Institute against Prejudice and Violence. In 1992 Civiletti became the director and vice president of the American JUDICATURE Society, and in 1993 he was name d chairman of the Maryland Governor’sCommissiononWelfare Policy. Civiletti has served as a trustee of Johns Hopkins University and has received honorary doctorates of law from the University of Baltimore, Tulane University, Saint John’s University, the University of Notre Dame, and the University of Maryland. In 1999 Civiletti testified before a House Judiciary Subcommittee in opposition to the reauthorization of the INDEPENDENT COUNSEL Act. The act authorized a three-judge panel to appoint a special PROSECUTOR to investigate alleged illegal actions by government officials. It drew criticism for granting these prosecutors too much power without any effective oversight from the executive or judicial branches of government. In August 2001, Civiletti was sworn in as the second member of the Independent Review Board, a quasi-governmental agency that was created by court order to monitor the activities of the Teamsters Union. As of 2009, Civiletti continues his work in private practice where he focuses on litigation and antitrust issues as well as white collar- crime, corporate governance, government regu- lation, and health law. He is a senior partner at Venable LLP in Maryland. He is chair of the Maryland Commission on CAPITAL PUNISH- MENT and continues to recommend abolishing the death penalty. Civiletti sits on numerous boards, committees, councils, and task forces and maintains a steady schedule of speaking engagements. FURTHER READINGS Baker, Nancy V. 1992. Conflicting Loyalties: Law and Politics in the Attorney General’s Office, 1789–1990. Lawrence: Univ. Press of Kansas. “Profiles in Power: The 1994 Power List: An Overview of the Outstanding Members of the Legal Profession.” 1994. National Law Journal (April 4). Venable, Baetjer, and Howard V enable. “Civiletti, Benjamin R.” Baltimore: West’sLegalDirectory,WESTLAW. Benjamin Richard Civiletti 1935– ▼▼ ▼▼ 1925 2000 1975 1950 ◆ ❖ ◆◆◆ ◆ 1935 Born, Peekskill, N.Y. 1939–45 World War II 1950–53 Korean War 1961–73 Vietnam War 2008 Appointed chair of Maryland Commission on Capital Punishment ◆ ◆ 1961 Clerked for U.S. district judge William Chesnut 1964 Joined law firm of Venable, Baetjer and Howard 1962–64 Served as assistant U.S. attorney in Baltimore 1977 Appointed assistant attorney general; headed Justice Department’s Criminal Division 1982–86 Served as chair of Maryland Legal Services Corporation 2001 Sworn in as member of Independent Review Board 1979 Appointed U.S. attorney general 1981 Returned to private practice with Venable 1992 Became director and vice president of the American Judicature Society ◆ ◆ 1995 Appointed by SEC to review dealings of Bankers Trust New York Corp. Benjamin Civiletti. AP IMAGES GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3 RD E DITION CIVILETTI, BENJAMIN RICHARD 427 . struggle of the civil rights movemen t began. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 422 CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT Million Man March O B n Monday, O ctober 16, 1995, hu ndreds of thousands of. Cases severely restricted the power of the federal government to guarantee equal status under the law to blacks. State officials in the South took GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 418 CIVIL. North Carolina Law Review 81 (May). Available online at http://www2 .law. columbia. edu/sabel/No %20 Child %20 Left .doc; website home page: http://www2 .law. columbia.edu (accessed July 13, 20 09). McKissack,