Modern Applications Of Bill Of Rights

The United States Bill of Rights came into being as a result of a promise made by the Fathers of Confederation to the states during the struggle for ratification of the Constitution in 1787-88. A great number of the states made as a condition for their ratification, the addition of amendments, which would guarantee citizens protection of their rights against the central government. Thus, we have a rather interesting situation in which the entrenchment of a bill of rights in the American Constitution was done by the virtual demand of the states, they themselves fearing a central government which was not legally constrained and restricted as far as its powers were concerned.

In the case of Barron v. Baltimore in 1833, the Supreme Court ruled that the Bill of Rights are just restrictions on the federal government alone. To prevent the states from limiting rights granted to the citizens in the Constitution, the 14th Amendment was passed. The 14th Amendment was adopted on July 9, 1868 as one of the Reconstruction Amendments. The amendment addresses citizenship rights and equal protection of the laws and was proposed in response to issues related to former slaves after the American Civil War. It was severely contested, especially by the states of the Confederacy that were defeated and were forced to ratify it in order to regain representation in Congress. The amendment’s first section includes many clauses, but one important one is the Equal Protection Clause. This clause requires each state to provide equal protection under the law to all people, including non-citizens, within its jurisdiction. The clause has also been the basis for many decisions rejecting irrational or unnecessary discrimination against people belonging to various groups. Eventually, selective incorporation occurred in which the civil liberties granted in the Bill of Rights were applied to the states on a case-by-case basis through the 14th Amendment. Now, the same liberties that were granted to the federal government, were now enacted with the state governments. Same-sex marriage is one of these fundamental rights, rights that require a high degree of protection from government

In his book titled The Bill of Rights: Creation and Reconstruction, Akhil Amar tries to offer the interpretation of the Bill Rights by evoking the world of framers of the constitution and that of the people who amended the constitution. According to Amar, there are numerous differences about the original bill of rights as they were originally framed and those that are contained in the Fourteenth Amendment of 1868. Amar tries to construct a theory of Bill of Rights that is comprehensive by focusing on the implications that are drawn from constitutional text as well as its structure. Amar points out, “The main goal of the Federalists was to forge set of the federally enforceable rights which were against the abusive state governments and this resulted to Fourteenth Amendment” (4). The book tries to explain the first 10 amendments by interpreting them and offering the new insights. This essay focuses on discussing the differences between the Founding Fathers Bill of Rights and the Reconstruction Amendments as it argued by Amar.

Barron v. Baltimore started in 1833. It was the Supreme Court decision that the Bill of Rights were restraining the national government. In the Supreme Court John Marshall declared that Mr. Barron did not have a claim against the stated because the Bill of Rights does not apply to the states. The Supreme Court emphasized that the Constitution was intened to serve for the people of the United States. Marshall wanted it to apply only to the US government that was created by the Constitution, and not for the individual state’s government. Therefore, the states had filed constitutions that would only apply to them, which limited the power of the state government. Thusly, they interpreted the Fifth Amendment as limiting the power of the general government in which did not apply to the

As the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment became the source of various other rights that were inherent to our system of freedoms and liberties, it also became the channel through which the amendments in the Bill of Rights became applicable to the states as well. The landmark case of Mapp V. Ohio is very important, because it set a legal precedent in the courts that held up Mapp’s rights guaranteed to her by the Constitution. This paper will examine the details of this case and trace the historical extension of the federal government's power over the states using the 14th Amendment and the Bill of Rights.

It was not until after the Civil War that the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth amendments were enacted and began protecting individuals against the states. The Fourteenth Amendment has been the principal means by which this protection has been accomplished. It reads, in part, “No State shall...deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.” The Supreme Court had interpreted this guarantee of liberty to embrace the fundamental liberties in the Bill of Rights, meaning that the state governments must observe and protect them to the same extent as the federal government this is also known called incorporation. The amendments in the Bill of Rights are said to be incorporated against the states through the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. There has been an ongoing debate on the Supreme Court about the extent of incorporation, and whether the entire Bill of Rights, or only some of it’s guarantees, should be incorporated against the states.

This judgment settled the question until the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1868. It guaranteed the citizens of every state the right to EQUAL PROTECTION of the laws and the right to due process of law. Following RATIFICATION of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Supreme Court began making individual freedoms enumerated in the Bill of Rights applicable to the states via the doctrine of incorporation. Under this doctrine the Court explained through a series of cases that no state may deny any citizen a fundamental liberty without violating the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses. The Court has ruled that these fundamental liberties include every liberty set forth in the Bill of Rights, except the Second Amendment's right to bear arms, the Third Amendment's right against quartering soldiers, the Seventh Amendment's

The concept of selective incorporation has played a huge role over the debate of the powers of a state or local government against the federal government. According to Tom Streissguth, "... it refers to how the rights outlined in the Constitution apply to the states -- and the requirement that state laws and constitutions must observe these rights" in his article "The Definition of Selective Incorporation" (Streissguth). After the Civil War, the idea of selective incorporation came with the passing of the Fourteenth Amendment. The legislature laid down significant new rights for the citizens of the United States; these rights included due process and equal protection. This amendment also touched upon and strengthened the first ten amendments to the Constitution known as the Bill of Rights.

Where as, prior to Jackson’s civil liberties jurisprudence in Barnett and incorporation, of the Bill of Rights, each individual state legislature had maintained primary responsibility for defining rights such as freedom of expression. Additionally, after incorporation of the Bill of Rights, the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court in cases such as Minersville School District v Gobitis reinforced the legislator’s long

P.7 With the end of the Civil War and the 14th Amendment’s creation of a national citizenship, the Court has found that most of the rights recognized in the Bill of Rights apply to state constitutions through the due process clause. Beginning in the 1920s and most recently in 2011 the Court has used this amendment to amend state constitutions through a process that Madison most likely could not have envisioned in 1787.

Ever since the Bill of Rights was first written and published it had been established as the supreme law of the land. Certain amendments in the Bill of Rights have been incorporated and these include the First Amendment, parts of the Fifth Amendment, and also the Fourth Amendment. Selective incorporation helps to strengthen this idea by not allowing states to pass a law which takes away the rights that are published within the Bill of Rights. Although this has not been made an actual law, it is a belief that has been fortified over the years by rulings in the United States Supreme Court. Selective incorporation helps to protect citizens’ rights that are included in the Bill of Rights. It protects them from states imposing laws that would take

The Bill of Rights as it stands for the United States entered as a stems from a vow as promises so to speak was made by the Fathers of Confederation to the states during the effort for ratification of the Constitution in 1787-1788. Numerous states had created some conditions for their ratification; the appendage of amendments, which would assure citizen’s a safeguard like a safety net for their human rights in contrast to the central government and therefore the people had a rather remarkable circumstances in which the entrenchment of a bill of rights in the American Constitution was prepared by means of the fundamental command of the states, they themselves being alarmed about the central government which was not officially enforced

Supported by the Anti-Federalists, the Bill of Rights was put into the Constitution in fear that the Constitution gave the federal government too much power and in the future, American citizens could be at risk of oppression. After ten months waiting for the approval of all the states, it was finally ratified December 7, 1787. Nevertheless, Federalist argued that the Bill of Rights was unnecessary because the original Constitution implemented a few of the rights that were in In the Bill of Rights. However, the Bill of Rights was set in place to give rights to the people because the Constitution was believed to give the government too much power and without the Constitution being accompanied by the Bill of rights, the ratification wouldn’t have taken place. Therefore the Bill of Rights had a substantial impression on today’s society.

The United Bill of Rights is perhaps one of the most important pieces of constitutional legislature that protects the rights of the individual to freedom, liberty, and personal autonomy by limiting the powers of the federal government. While most people and the media discussions surrounding the Bill of Rights usually clusters around the 1st and 2nd Amendments, the 7th Amendment is also an integral component in limiting federal power, which aids in transferring the power of government from the concentrated hands of a few to instead the people. However, the 7th Amendment plays a less significant role in affecting the day to day lives of the average American in today 's time than it did when the Bill of Rights was initially ratified in 1791.

“...No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection on the laws (US Const. amend. XIV, sec. 1)”. Selective incorporation is a constitutional doctrine that guarantees that states cannot enforce laws that deprive American citizens of their constitutional rights given in the Bill of Rights. The Fourteenth Amendment passed in 1868, still upholds a controversial role. Although the initial intention of the Fourteenth Amendment was to implement equality for newly freed slaves, its power expanded to justifying the application of federal rights granted by the Bill of Rights to state governments. On a case by case basis, the Supreme Court decides on which aspects of the Bill of Rights it will apply to the states. The idea of selective incorporation has influenced American federalism tremendously due to multiple variances in opposing and supporting outlooks. Numerous cases of violated rights will be the topic of discussion, and how selective incorporation has brought justice among them all. Demonstrated in this paper will be how Selective Incorporation has made a significant difference in America, and reflect on how it came about.