Describe the differences between the black and the women’s movement. how were the barriers different between them? what were the various standards used by the courts in interpreting the 14th amendment, and how did these standards differ depending on whether women or blacks were involved?

The difference between the Blacks and women's movement is that blacks were arguing against a legal tradition that explicitly aimed to keep them in a subservient status while women argued against a tradition that claimed to be protecting them.

Some standards used by courts to interpret the fourteenth amendment included the traditional standard which was a kind of protective paternalism, and later on, this changed to being a choice between two other standards: the reasonableness standard and the strict scrutiny standard. The reasonableness standard says that when the government treats some classes of people differently from others the different treatment must be reasonable and not arbitrary while the strict scrutiny standard says that some instances of drawing distinction between different groups of people are inherently suspect; thus the court will subject them to strict scrutiny to ensure that they are clearly necessary to attain a legitimate state goal. The strict scrutiny standard, but not the reasonableness standard, can act in a very similar way depending on if this case involves blacks or women. For example, by treating whites and blacks differently.

The key to the fourteenth amendment is how its interpreted. After it was created in 1868, the courts took a narrow view of it. It was originally interpreted as everyone has the same political and civil rights, but not social rights. So in cases such as segregation, the courts ruled against the civil rights activists. This is shown when the courts stated that the constitution could not make inferior people not inferior after ruling on Plessy v. Ferguson.

The NAACP used several steps to try to work its way to civil equality through the courts. First, persuade the court to declare unconstitutional laws creating schools that were separate but obviously unequal. Second, persuade it to declare unconstitutional laws supporting schools that were separate but unequal in not-so-obvious ways. Third, persuade it to rule that racially separate schools were inherently unequal and hence unconstitutional.

Plessy v. Ferguson stated that the separate-but-equal doctrine did not break the constitution because as long as both groups were given the same facilities, they were being treated equally even though in many cases the facilities were far from equal. Then in Brown v. Board of Education, the courts changed their minds and declared that the separate-but-equal doctrine is inherently unconstitutional.

Explanation:

answer; /// i believe that they became successful farmers; ///////////////

so what is your question?