Evidently, the United States is not proficient in either math or history. In fact, California recently failed a multiple choice test with only one question. If you haven’t guessed, that test is called Proposition 8. In light of this underachievement on the part of the United States, a history lesson is in order. Let’s crack open our handy review booklet, titled “The Constitution.” I know, nobody’s looked at it in ages, right? But maybe we can find a helpful hint as to why California failed its finals this month.

Let’s open our lesson books to the 14th Amendment, to the section titled The Equal Protection Clause. Here we have a little tidbit that says, “No state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” Pretty confusing stuff; so let’s look at an example we’ve seen before. In Brown v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court declared the “separate but equal” facilities that segregated blacks from whites unconstitutional. The court ruled the inferior nature of the facilities assigned to black Americans demonstrated a denial of equal protection under the law. Clearly, not everyone liked this idea. Among the most famous cases of rebellion against the Brown ruling is the case of Little Rock High School in Arkansas, in which the governor of Arkansas enlisted the state national guard to block black students from entering the high school.

However, because the Supreme Court pronounced “separate but equal” unconstitutional, then-President Dwight D. Eisenhower had the federal authority to force desegregation of the high school. To put it in the most euphemistic terms possible, the governor of Arkansas did not “get it.” He and countless others did not accept the importance of and need for desegregation. Regardless, the federal government had the authority to override state laws in favor of separate facilities.

We can’t know exactly what would have happened without this centralized mandate, but I think I can safely say it would not have been auspicious for the desegregation movement. Part of the reason the segregation policies of the pre-Brown era are now viewed as an embarrassment is because the Supreme Court ruling did not allow states the choice between segregated and integrated schools. Only after the enforcement of desegregation did the U.S. come to a more complete understanding of its necessity. Thus, federal intervention played a key role in integration.

A student who does poorly in school and does not study will almost always improve when he does spend time studying. Sometimes, a parent or a tutor must press the student to do this. In the case of the United States, the federal government needs to be that tutor. The Supreme Court must recognize that failure to allow and to honor same-sex marriage is an infringement upon every American’s right to equal legal protection. The passing of Proposition 8 demonstrates that, just as with the Brown ruling, not everyone is ready to embrace equality. And if this is the case, then federal authorities must interfere, and force states to recognize Constitutional rights. Proposition 8 is proof of the fact that some states cannot, or will not, understand that the legal limitations same-sex couples face make their unions “inherently unequal” to heterosexual partnerships. Among other rights, homosexuals cannot receive family-related Social Security benefits, cannot make decisions for each other in the event of a medical emergency, and cannot continue to purchase health care for a domestic partner after the loss of a job. A heterosexual couple, however, is legally entitled to these rights. Because the Constitution is “the supreme law of the land,” state judges must comply with its mandates. Thus, in the infringement of Constitutional rights, federal law trumps state law. It is therefore the responsibility of central authorities to intervene on behalf of the principle of equal protection. Otherwise, we risk a historical stain that will echo the legacy of discrimination we have sought to erase.

Hannah Shtein ([email protected]) is a junior majoring in philosophy.