 United States v. Sandoval (1913) |
|
In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that the Pueblo people were Indians, repudiating the earlier United States v. Joseph decision which had held that they were not. The title to Pueblo lands was now seen as held by tribes instead of in fee simple, meaning that Congressional approval was needed in order to make land sales. This undermined the legitimacy of non-Indian land titles across New Mexico.
|
| United States v. Thind (1923) |
|
The Supreme Court found in U.S. v. Thind that Indian immigrants were not eligible for naturalization, based on a contested category of whiteness. Contradicting their 1922 ruling in Ozawa naming caucasian identity as a requirement for naturalization, as a South Asian immigrant, Thind was deemed ineligible for citizenship because, despite being racially caucasian, he did not appear white.
|
| United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898) |
|
In United States v. Wong Kim Ark, the Supreme Court solidified the principle of birthright citizenship, affirming that anyone born in the U.S., regardless of their parents' citizenship, is a U.S. citizen.
|
| Vanguard: Black Women and the Right to Vote |
|
This teaching module discusses how Black women fought against both racism and sexism during their fight for women's suffrage, featuring a webinar with Martha S. Jones, author of the 2020 book, Vanguard: How Black Women Broke Barriers, Won the Vote, and Insisted on Equality for All.
|
| Voting Rights Act (1965) |
|
The Voting Rights Act of 1965 prohibits racial discrimination in voting, enforcing the voting rights protected by the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments. Its intent was to outlaw the discriminatory voting practices adopted by many southern states against African Americans. Its power was severely reduced by the 2013 Supreme Court Decision in Shelby County v. Holder.
|
| War Brides Act (1945) |
|
The War Brides Act was a federal law that allowed for the naturalization of foreign women married to United States servicemen.
|
| Webinar - Affirmative Action's Origins and Legacies (2023) |
|
In this webinar, UNL Law Faculty Eric Berger, Danielle Jefferis, and Catherine Wilson provide an in-depth look at affirmative action, delving into its origins and tracing its impact to the present day.
|
| Webinar - From Back Alley to the Border: Criminal Abortion in the 20th Century U.S. (2024) |
|
In this webinar, Dr. Alicia Gutierrez-Romine of California State University, San Bernardino, discusses U.S. constitutionalism and criminal abortion in the 20th century with Dr. William Thomas and his American Constitutional History class.
|
| Webinar - Latina/os and Criminal and Immigration Law Enforcement (2025) |
|
In this webinar, Professor Kevin R. Johnson of the University of California, Davis, discusses the history of criminal and immigration law enforcement of Latina/os in the U.S with Dr. Donna D. Anderson and her And Justice For All class.
|
| Webinar - The Insular Cases and Contested Citizenship (2024) |
|
In this webinar, Professor Robert McGreevey of the College of New Jersey discusses the intersection of U.S. colonial power and migration with Dr. Jeannette Eileen Jones and her And Justice For All class.
|
| Webinar - Vanguard: Black Women and the Right to Vote (2024) |
|
In this webinar, Professor Martha S. Jones of Johns Hopkins University discusses Black women and the right to vote with Dr. William Thomas and his American Constitutional History class.
|
| Yasui v. United States (1943) |
|
In this case, the Supreme Court held that curfews against minority groups were constitutional at a time of war against the country that group's ancestors originated from. After the Executive Order 9066 was issued in the wake of the attack on Pearl Harbor, Japanese Americans were subject to curfews and other restrictions in addition to being removed to internment camps. Minoru Yasui was convicted of violating the curfew. This was a companion case to Hirabayashi v. United States, decided on the same day.
|