It wouldn't be fair to say that conservatives cherish property the way liberals cherish equality. But it would be fair to say that the takings clause is the conservatives' recipe for judicial activism just as they say liberals have misused the equal protection clause.
Full participation in government and society has been a basic right of the country symbolizing the full citizenship and equal protection of all.
History has shown us that, on extraordinarily rare occasions, it becomes necessary for the federal government to intervene on behalf of individuals whose 14th Amendment rights to legal due process and equal protection may be violated by a state.
When a politician like Marco Rubio is willing to sacrifice his career defining immigration reform legislation solely to insure that gays and lesbians are denied equal protection under the law, we have to admit that we're under attack. This is not pragmatic politics at work. These are the policies of bias, exclusion and unfairness.
The Constitution has a good share of deliberately open-ended guarantees, like rights to due process of law, equal protection of the law, and freedom from unreasonable searches.
When the 14th Amendment, equal protection clause was enacted, the galleries in the Senate were segregated. Now we have integration.
Civil union is less than marriage. Marriage is a sacred and valued institution and ought to be afforded equal protection.
What is the American dream? The American dream is one big tent. One big tent. And on that big tent you have four basic promises: equal protection under the law, equal opportunity, equal access, and fair share.
There is no proportional representation requirement in the Equal Protection Clause.
The 'takings' clause of the Fifth Amendment is for conservatives what the equal protection clause of the 14th is for liberals.