Minor+v.+Happersett

Decided March 29th, 1875
 * Minor vs. Happersett **

Morrison Waite was the 7th Chief Justice of the United States. Nominated by Ulysses S. Grant, he was in office from January 21st, 1874 to March 23rd, 1888. Waite was the son of a former chief justice of the Supreme Court of Connecticut. Along with other notable alumni from his class, Waite attended Yale, and graduated in 1837. Waite was also the Chief Justice of many other important court cases in history, like the Civil Rights Cases, the Ku-Klux Case, and Munn vs. Illinois. He died March 23rd, 1888.
 * Chief Justice[[image:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fa/Chief_Justice_Morrison_Waite.jpg/494px-Chief_Justice_Morrison_Waite.jpg width="131" height="163" align="right" caption="File:Chief Justice Morrison Waite.jpg" link="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fa/Chief_Justice_Morrison_Waite.jpg"]] **

The main arguments of this case centered around __womens__ suffrage. In 1872, the suffragists decided to test the recently adopted __fourteenth ammendment__ and see if voting was a __privlage__ to them because they were U.S. citizens. Minors case was the first suffrage case tomake it to the supreme court and after their unanimous verdict infavor of Happersett, the suffragist movement moved their attention to congress and the states instead of the courts. Minors registration to vote set off many challenges by women against the 14th ammendment including Susan B. Anthony who was prosecuted for illegally voting in the 1872 election. Also, when the united states adopted the 14th ammendment, Virgina Minor was president of the Women Suffrage Association of Missouri and she decided to challenge that by applying to vote. **Lots of spelling/ cap errors.**
 * Main Issue **

Virginia Minor, a leader of the women’s suffrage movement in Missouri, suspected that the refusal of Reese Happersett, a Missouri state registrar, to __allowher__ to register to vote was an encroachment of her civil rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. This case was first argued in October of 1872, but there was no follow-up. Virginia Minor then pursued her argument even further in February of 1875, hoping to prove her point to the Supreme Court. It all started on October 15th, 1872 when Ms. Minor applied to Happersett, the registrar of voters, to register to vote for electors for President and Vice-President of the US, and for a representative in __congress__, and for other officers, at the General election, which he then refused her. She was shocked, considering she was a native born, free, white citizen of the United States, and of the State of Missouri, and over the age of 21. She applied to the Supreme Court on the claim that Missouri had violated the U.S. constitution by refusing to let women vote. The verdict sided with Happersett saying that the constitution of the United States did not give suffrage to anyone, so states could deny it to anyone that they wanted.
 * Overall Summary **

During this case, two main documents were used. The __first__ was the __fourteenth__ Amendment of the United States Constitution, mainly in its first section where it states: "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 other important document used was the constitution of the state of Missouri at the time, mainly where it stated: "Every male citizen of the United States shall be entitled to vote." Both of these documents were used against Virginia Minor because in neither one of them is the words: "Women can vote".
 * Documents Involved **

The final decision of the court was unanimously for Happersett. They said that the right to suffrage is not a "necessary privilege and immunity" to which all citizens are entitled and that the fourteenth ammendment did not add the right of suffrage to citizenship privleges.They also found that womens suffrage was excluded in nearly every state either in the constitution or in its legal code; no state had been excluded from joining the union for lack of womens voting rights. They also said that the U.S. had made no objections when New Jersey had __withdrew womens__ suffrage votes in 1807 and that the __arrgumant__ for the need of womens suffrage was irrevalent to their decision. The court came to the conclusion that __nop__ where in the 14th __ammendment__ does it state that women are allwoed suffrage, so it is up to the state to decide and in this case, Missouri was __aginst__ it.
 * Decision **

The vote for Minor vs. Happersett was unanimous throughout the court. It was 9-0 Happersett. The court found overwhelming information supporting Happersett's decision, not to let Minor vote. They found that although she was a citizen of the US, it was illegal for her to vote, and there was no where in the actual Constitution that said women were allowed to vote. So, since there was nothing about voting in the federal government, it was up to the states to decide what to do about the issue. In Missouri's __Constitution__, it said that only men could vote, and no women.
 * Who Voted What? **

The appelent in this case was Virgina Minor and her lawyer was her husband, Francis Minor. The appelle was Resse Happersett who did not have a lawyer. At this time, the justices of the court were: Joseph P. Bradley: March 21, 1870-__Jannuary__ 22, 1892 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">Nathan Clifford: January 12, 1858- July 15, 1881 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">David Davis: October 17th, 1862-March 4th, 1877 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">Stephen Johnson Field: March 10, 1863- December 1st, 1897 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">Ward Hunt: December 11, 1872-January 27, 1882 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">Samuel Freeman Miller: July 16, 1862- October 13th, 1890 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">William Strong: February 18th, 1870- December 14h, 1880 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">Noah Haynes Swayne: January 25, 1862- January 24, 1881 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">Chief justice of this case, Morrisson Remick Waite- January 24, 1874- March 23, 1888
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">Members of Court **

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">**Julie:** In my opinion, the case was a good case to argue and the decision was fair. The case wasn't over whether or not women should vote, it was whether they could and on October 15th, 1872 in Missouri, they couldn’t. Virginia Minor had a good point to argue because if I had been in her position I would have tried to challenge the new __fourteenth amendment__ but the court had good reasons why they ruled with Happersett. If I had been the __chief justice__, I would have sided with Happersett because Virginia was trying to push the fourteenth amendment, not if women should vote and the fourteenth amendment just couldn’t be pushed.
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">Personal Opinion **

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">**Madison:** I think the case was fair to argue, but the decision was also fair. If I was put into Virginia Minor’s position, I probably would have argued over the fourteenth amendment too. But, this case was over whether or not women could vote on that certain day in 1872, not if women could vote at all. The amendment for women to vote would come much later, in the 1920s. Virginia Minor was just trying to push the fourteenth amendment, which stated that “all citizens who were born, or naturalized, into the United States were considered to be citizens of the US.” But, it was pretty hard to challenge the amendment, when the state of Missouri didn’t classify women to be able to vote at all.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">If the court had decided in favor of Virgina Minor, then women everywhere would have wanted the right to vote and then they could have possibly gottern the right to vote almost 45 years too early. **(too early?? Tell that to Susan B. Anthony).** In order for the court to have sided with Minor, they would have had very strong evidence to fight what is writtenin the constitution. Also, if the women would have gotten the right to vote in 1875, then all of the elections between 1875 and 1920 could have gone the other way depepnding on which opponents applealed to more women. If the court had decided in favor of Minor, then a whole chunk of history would have been out of whack! **That's o.k!**
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">What if? **

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">"The Nineteenth Amendment." //UMKC School of Law//. Web. 09 Feb. 2012. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;"> [].
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">Bibliography: **

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">Lewis, Jone Johnson. "Minor v. Happersett - Voting Rights for Women Tested and Denied." //Women's History - Comprehensive Women's History Research Guide//. Women's History Guide. Web. 09 Feb. 2012. [].

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">"Minor v. Happersett (Supreme Court Drama) - ENotes.com." //ENotes - Literature Study Guides, Lesson Plans, and More.// Gale Cengage, 2006. Web.09Feb.2012.<http://www.enotes.com/minor-v-happersett-reference/minor-v-happersett>.


 * <span style="color: #ff0000; font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 16px;">6/7 Biblio - alphabetize, plus, only 3 sources?? **
 * <span style="color: #ff0000; font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 16px;">25/28 Content -- Good job explaining things and analysis. **
 * <span style="color: #ff0000; font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 16px;">2.5/5 Organization - I couldn't read this w/o stopping on almost every sentence to fix something. **


 * <span style="color: #ff0000; font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 16px;">33.5/40 **
 * <span style="color: #ff0000; font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 16px;">Total **