Confronting Modern Case Law, Part 1 | America's Unwritten Constitution with Akhil Reed Amar

Critics said the Warren Court invented rights; defenders said the text didn't matter. Akhil Reed Amar offers a third account, measuring the decisions against the text itself. This lecture treats case law as a prism for reading the Constitution and puts the Warren Court to the test. Amar grounds Brown v. Board and its companion Bolling v. Sharpe in the anti-nobility clauses and the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of equal birth status, then examines how the Bill of Rights came to apply against the states through the privileges or immunities clause, and defends the free-speech holding of New York Times v. Sullivan. Chapters: 00:00 Case law as a prism on the Constitution 04:52 The Warren Court's six areas 07:15 Brown v. Board of Education 14:06 The history: Radical Republicans and equality 16:50 Was separate really equal 20:43 Incorporating the Bill of Rights against the states 27:39 New York Times v. Sullivan and free speech 📚 Learning objectives: After watching, you'll be able to: - Describe how case law serves as a prism for reading the constitutional text - Explain the textual basis for Brown v. Board and Bolling v. Sharpe - Analyze how the Fourteenth Amendment applies the Bill of Rights against the states - Assess the free expression holding of New York Times v. Sullivan An introduction to basic techniques of constitutional interpretation. 📺 Watch the full playlist on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLABHWcbOLwlY 🎓 Enroll on Coursera for assessments and a certificate: https://www.coursera.org/learn/unwritten-constitution 🌐 Explore more learning opportunities on Yale Online: https://online.yale.edu/courses/americas-unwritten-constitution