Posted on Nov 3, 2021
Do you believe the 14th Amendment is actually provides equal treatment under the law?
1.71K
15
8
4
4
0
I am currently finishing up my bachelors degree and our discussion for the week was about whether or not the 14th amendment actually provides equal treatment under the law. I said no because individuals who commit similar crimes receive unequal punishments. I used the example of the Brock Turner/Kyle Vo rape cases in which Vo was expelled and received a 6 year prison sentence and 5 years probation for his case which was classified as less egregious to Turner's, yet turner only got 6 month in prison and a 3 year probation term given his status of a wealth white male.
Does the 14th amendment need to be looked over again to ensure individuals are given equal treatment?
Does the 14th amendment need to be looked over again to ensure individuals are given equal treatment?
Justice
Law
Equality
Posted 3 y ago
Responses: 5
4
4
0
So you asked one question, but answered a different one.
The question you asked, Does the 14th Amendment provide equal treatment under the law? Yes. It does. The 14th Amendment plays no favorites, it provides equal treatment, and it prevents unequal treatment. The 14th is not the problem.
The question you answered, Do the courts appropriately APPLY the 14th Amendment to ensure everyone ACTUALLY gets equal treatment under the law? No, no they do not. But, again, the problem is not the 14th Amendment. it is the overwhelming majority of people involved in the legal system who ignore it.
Also, remember that different localities (cities, counties, states) have different laws. What is illegal one place may be legal another (see: marijuana). Additionally, they have different emphases and foci. So when looking at equal treatment, we cannot compare crime A in location A with crime A in location B. If a person is thrown in jail for a month for smoking a joint in Alabama, and in Colorado the cop comes up and takes a toke off the joint of a different person, that is not unequal treatement. But if a cop comes up and takes a toke off the joint of person A, then the SAME COP turns around and arrests person B for smoking a joint, THAT is unequal treatment (provided no mitigating circumstances, such as fleeing arrest, assaulting the cop, pulling a knife, etc.)
Your comparison, with two different cases, different judges, different jurisdictions, etc. does not prove unequal treatment. Only by comparing like cases in the same jurisdiction - and preferably with the same principal players - can that case begin to be made.
The question you asked, Does the 14th Amendment provide equal treatment under the law? Yes. It does. The 14th Amendment plays no favorites, it provides equal treatment, and it prevents unequal treatment. The 14th is not the problem.
The question you answered, Do the courts appropriately APPLY the 14th Amendment to ensure everyone ACTUALLY gets equal treatment under the law? No, no they do not. But, again, the problem is not the 14th Amendment. it is the overwhelming majority of people involved in the legal system who ignore it.
Also, remember that different localities (cities, counties, states) have different laws. What is illegal one place may be legal another (see: marijuana). Additionally, they have different emphases and foci. So when looking at equal treatment, we cannot compare crime A in location A with crime A in location B. If a person is thrown in jail for a month for smoking a joint in Alabama, and in Colorado the cop comes up and takes a toke off the joint of a different person, that is not unequal treatement. But if a cop comes up and takes a toke off the joint of person A, then the SAME COP turns around and arrests person B for smoking a joint, THAT is unequal treatment (provided no mitigating circumstances, such as fleeing arrest, assaulting the cop, pulling a knife, etc.)
Your comparison, with two different cases, different judges, different jurisdictions, etc. does not prove unequal treatment. Only by comparing like cases in the same jurisdiction - and preferably with the same principal players - can that case begin to be made.
(4)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
I guess it should have been more towards if it’s implementation is fair across the board
(0)
(0)
SFC Casey O'Mally
SSG (Join to see) But that is not implementation of the 14th. It is implementation of other laws, and whether that implementation of those OTHER laws is consistent with the 14th.
14th, IMHO, is aimed far more at the laws themselves than how the laws are enforced. It is (relatively) easy to show a law is unequal. It is (relatively) hard to show implementation is unequal, because each case is different and bad actors can almost always find a way to prove why they treated one person or case differently from another.
14th, IMHO, is aimed far more at the laws themselves than how the laws are enforced. It is (relatively) easy to show a law is unequal. It is (relatively) hard to show implementation is unequal, because each case is different and bad actors can almost always find a way to prove why they treated one person or case differently from another.
(0)
(0)
CPL Earl Kochis
For your study try taking two cases out of the same area with the exact same charges and convictions then look at sentencing. Then you will have to do tge same in each local till you get all states then you’ll have your answer!SSG (Join to see)
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
the Turner case was in CA.
The Vo case was in PA.
And while CA judges mostly seem to suffer from a sentencing aversion disorder, this one was so egregious that the judge was ousted in a recall vote by 62 to 38 margin.
I don't think you'll see a push for mandatory minimum sentencing across the board, because in cases where it already exists, there is already too much data showing a broad disparity on how these "fair" sentencing laws disproportionately impact the poor and people of color.
The Vo case was in PA.
And while CA judges mostly seem to suffer from a sentencing aversion disorder, this one was so egregious that the judge was ousted in a recall vote by 62 to 38 margin.
I don't think you'll see a push for mandatory minimum sentencing across the board, because in cases where it already exists, there is already too much data showing a broad disparity on how these "fair" sentencing laws disproportionately impact the poor and people of color.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Well first of all Brock Turner was convicted under 3 counts of sexual assault.
Kyle Rittenhouse is charge with 3 counts of Murder.
Regardless of either one's conviction/release status those are two different crimes with different statutes. The evidence and required prison times and not the ssame.
Your argument using the comparison of these two case is not logical and fails the test of the US Legal Jurisprudence. In other words those case are not the same crime so fail in the consideration or estimate of the similarities or dissimilarities between the two accused.
However to answer the question "Do you believe the 14th Amendment is actually provides equal treatment under the law?"
My answer is, "Yes, the 14th amendment does provide equal protection under the Law."
My observation is a perfect legal system will have to deal with imperfect people.
Kyle Rittenhouse is charge with 3 counts of Murder.
Regardless of either one's conviction/release status those are two different crimes with different statutes. The evidence and required prison times and not the ssame.
Your argument using the comparison of these two case is not logical and fails the test of the US Legal Jurisprudence. In other words those case are not the same crime so fail in the consideration or estimate of the similarities or dissimilarities between the two accused.
However to answer the question "Do you believe the 14th Amendment is actually provides equal treatment under the law?"
My answer is, "Yes, the 14th amendment does provide equal protection under the Law."
My observation is a perfect legal system will have to deal with imperfect people.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google