Welcome Visitor: Login to the siteJoin the site

Constitution Essay

Essay By: LyricWriter246
Other


I wrote this in response to this question (sorry I know it's long but it's the actual question & yes I am aware of the typo):
In November 2013, Congress passes, and the President signs, the America Promotes Public
Leadership in Education (APPLE) Act of 2013. The Act includes the following key provisions:
1) All states must adopt affirmative action admissions policies for their public
universities that require consideration of a prospective student's race or ethnicity
when deciding whether to admit the student and that give applicants in a racial or
ethnic group that is underrepresented at the public university a preference in
admission in order to achieve a diverse student body and improve the educational
experience.
2) States that fail to adopt these required affirmative action policies by October 1, 2014,
are ineligible to receive any federal funds for education programs, including both
higher education programs and K-12 programs.
Teresa Talkative is a high school junior at Peaceful Public High School. She is Caucasian.
Shortly after the APPLE Act is passed, Teresa begins posting on her "Facebook Wall" about how
upset she is about the Act. She first states that she thinks the Act is stupid and will hurt her
chances to get into a public university. She continues to post, making numerous offensive and
derogatory comments about various racial and ethnic minority groups. Even though Teresa had
her privacy settings set so that only her "friends" could see posts on her Wall, the Principal of
Peaceful Public High School receives copies of the posts. The Principal also receives several
complaints from parents of students who were offended by the comments. Because of Teresa's
conduct, the Principal suspends Teresa for one week and prohibits her from participating on the
basketball team for the season.
Write an essay between 200 and 1000 words analyzing (1) whether the APPLE Act of 2013 is
constitutional and (2) whether Teresa's discipline by the Principal of Peaceful Public High
School violates the Constitution. Make specific reference in your answer to any applicable
Articles, Amendments and any other surrounding contextual constitutional authority on which
you can reasonably rely. You may include actual historical examples of the application of any
relevant constitutional authority. This is an open-ended question, and you are free to take any
position you wish.

They took the top 100 and this essay was one of them so tell me what you think.


Submitted:May 10, 2013    Reads: 7    Comments: 0    Likes: 0   


The APPLE Act of 2013 is not constitutional because it in violation of Amendment XIV which says in Section 1 of the amendment: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The APPLE Act does not allow persons of all ethnic groups equal chances to earn a profound education. The Act states that it will grant any person of a minority ethnic group a better chance to be accepted into the school than a person of the present major ethnic group in the school. If every person is created equal, then it should matter naught what their race, creed, color, or religion is for them to be able to get an education.
Teresa's discipline by the Principal of Peaceful Public High School does indeed violate the Constitution. Teresa is entitled to the freedom of speech by Amendment I of the Constitution of the United States of America. She was expressing her anger towards the new law and also practicing her "first amendment rights" by posting her thoughts on her Facebook "Wall". The posts were only allowed to be viewed by her "friends" also, so they were private. Teresa's privacy was violated when the Principal received a copy of the posts because they were only accessible by certain people. The Principal has violated Amendment IX of the constitution which states: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be constructed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." Summarized, it means that certain rights, obvious to an individual, that are not listed in the Constitution are, in fact, protected by the Constitution, which includes the freedom of privacy. Also, Teresa had not said the offensive comments directly to anyone nor did she speak them at the school, so the Principal should not have the authority to punish her for saying offensive statements in the privacy of her own home and on her personal Facebook "Wall".




0

| Email this story Email this Essay | Add to reading list



Reviews

About | News | Contact | Your Account | TheNextBigWriter | Self Publishing | Advertise

© 2013 TheNextBigWriter, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this service is provided to you. Privacy Policy.