AP Syllabus focus:
‘The National Organization for Women represents how equal protection claims helped energize the women’s rights movement.’
The modern women’s rights movement sought to expand women’s political, economic, and social equality. In AP Gov terms, it highlights how equal protection arguments can mobilise activism, shape litigation strategies, and influence policy agendas.
The Women’s Rights Movement in Constitutional Terms
The women’s rights movement (especially from the mid-20th century onward) framed unequal treatment as a problem of government discrimination rather than private preference. Activists argued that laws and official practices often treated men and women differently in ways that were not justified by legitimate governmental goals.
Equal protection as a movement strategy
A core claim was that sex-based legal distinctions should be treated as constitutionally suspect under the Fourteenth Amendment.
Page 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment as preserved by the U.S. National Archives. This primary source helps connect the movement’s claims directly to the constitutional text that courts use when evaluating Equal Protection challenges, including sex-based classifications. Source
Equal Protection Clause: The Fourteenth Amendment requirement that states provide “equal protection of the laws,” limiting discriminatory government classifications and demanding sufficient justification for unequal treatment.
Photograph of women marching in Washington, D.C. on August 26, 1970, carrying banners and signs demanding equal rights. The image illustrates how equality claims moved beyond courtrooms into public demonstration, helping transform constitutional principles into sustained political pressure. Source
In practice, this meant the movement frequently:
Identified sex classifications in law (explicit distinctions) and in administration (unequal enforcement).
Pushed courts to recognise that sex discrimination can be a form of unconstitutional inequality.
Connected constitutional language to everyday barriers (employment rules, educational access, jury service, and credit/financial practices), reinforcing mass participation.
The National Organization for Women (NOW)
Logo of the National Organization for Women (NOW), a major national advocacy organization in the modern women’s rights movement. Placing the logo at the start of the NOW section helps students visually separate organizational tactics (lobbying, coalition-building, litigation support) from the broader constitutional doctrine discussed elsewhere. Source
NOW became a major institutional vehicle for turning constitutional ideals into sustained political action. It helped transform individual grievances into collective claims that government should treat women as equal citizens.
How NOW energised the movement through equal protection claims
Consistent with the AP focus, NOW illustrates how equal protection claims helped energize the women’s rights movement by providing:
A shared constitutional vocabulary (“equality,” “discrimination,” “equal protection”) that unified diverse issues.
A persuasive basis for litigation and amicus briefs, encouraging courts to scrutinise sex-based distinctions.
A framework for public campaigns that linked policy demands to constitutional legitimacy.
Organisational tactics tied to constitutional change
NOW’s approach blended legal and political strategies:
Litigation support: encouraging cases that challenged sex discrimination by government actors and pressing courts to treat sex classifications more skeptically.
Lobbying and agenda-setting: pressing elected officials and agencies to adopt rules consistent with equal citizenship.
Coalition-building: working with other civil society groups to broaden the perceived public stakes of gender equality.
Public education and protest: using demonstrations and media to normalise the claim that sex equality is a constitutional value, not a special interest.
How Equal Protection Arguments Work in Gender-Equality Advocacy
Equal protection arguments typically ask courts (and the public) to evaluate two questions:
What classification is the government using (explicitly or effectively)?
Is the government’s justification strong enough to permit unequal treatment?
Why this mattered for mobilisation
Equal protection claims did more than win (or lose) court cases; they:
Signalled that women’s status was a matter of citizenship and constitutional principle.
Encouraged participation by offering a clear standard: government must supply adequate reasons for unequal treatment.
Pressured institutions to anticipate legal vulnerability and adjust policies to avoid discrimination claims.
Key takeaways for AP US Government and Politics
The women’s rights movement used the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause to frame sex discrimination as unconstitutional government action.
NOW represents how equal protection arguments can translate constitutional ideals into organised activism, including litigation support, lobbying, and public campaigns.
The movement shows how constitutional interpretation and political participation reinforce each other: legal claims can energise a social movement, and sustained mobilisation can influence how equality principles are applied.
FAQ
NOW’s priorities often reflected where discrimination was most visible and where pressure could produce change.
Factors included membership demands, media salience, and opportunities in courts or administrative agencies.
Disagreements commonly centred on whether to emphasise litigation versus electoral politics, and whether to pursue broad cultural change versus narrowly targeted policy reforms.
These debates shaped messaging and coalition choices.
A broader membership encouraged diversified tactics, such as combining professional lobbying with grassroots protest.
Membership networks also helped spread constitutional equality language into local organising.
Equal protection framing can legitimise demands, simplify messaging, and portray policy goals as consistent with American civic ideals.
It also pressures officials to justify unequal treatment publicly.
Coordination often relied on issue-specific coalitions and shared equality goals.
Groups could align on narrow objectives while keeping distinct organisational brands and priorities.
Practice Questions
(2 marks) Explain how equal protection claims helped energise the women’s rights movement.
1 mark: Identifies that activists argued sex discrimination by government violates the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection principle.
1 mark: Explains mobilisation effect (e.g., unified demands, encouraged litigation, strengthened lobbying/protest by grounding claims in constitutional legitimacy).
(5 marks) Analyse how the National Organization for Women (NOW) used constitutional ideas to advance women’s rights.
1 mark: Accurate link to the Equal Protection Clause as a core constitutional basis.
1 mark: Describes a legal tactic (e.g., supporting litigation/amicus activity challenging sex classifications).
1 mark: Describes a political tactic (e.g., lobbying elected officials/agencies).
1 mark: Explains how these tactics reinforced movement growth (e.g., shared language of equality, coalition-building, public education).
1 mark: Overall analysis connecting constitutional framing to sustained collective action (not just a list).
