Summary Of Justice Black's Interpretation Of The Fourteenth Amendment

The founding fathers of the United States of America fought hard to achieve an independent nation. An independent nation containing freedoms and rights for citizens that only the constitution can guarantee. One of the crucial rights guaranteed to U.S citizens today is the right to privacy, or the right to be left alone according to Brandeis and Warren. The right to privacy is not specifically mentioned in the constitution, it is however mentioned in the bill of rights. The bill of rights is the first ten amendments of the constitution, which protects many civil rights and liberties of all U.S citizens. The debate today is whether the constitution protects the privacy of citizens from being regulated and invaded by federalism.

The Due process in the 14th amendment is the same as the due process in the fifth but it regards the states. “It acts as a safeguard from arbitrary denial of life, liberty, or property by the Government outside the sanction of law” (Madison 2010). The due process clause has been upheld and seen in many Supreme Court cases. The most influential and infamous was Roe v. Wade which said the right of privacy under the due process clause of the14th Amendment extended to a woman's decision to have an abortion. Due process upholds citizens’ rights and does not let the government take them away. This clause is important so the people can be protected from the government, which has been a fear for

In the Fourth Amendment of the U.S Constitution provides privacy as it states in the Constitution “the rights of the people to be secure in their persons, house, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched,and the persons or things to be seized.” this amendment assures you how you have the right to your privacy a personal life or just technology without a search warrants. The Fourth Amendment was added to the Bill of Rights because it deals with the privacy for the individuals and because the people have the right to feel secure in their house or while using their technologies. There has been many court cases regarding the rights that the Fourth Amendment provides. For example in the article “Creating a Fourth Amendment loophole” talks about how there was a policeman who suspected drugs in an apartment and kicked the door open without a search warrant. When they

The supreme court acknowledged that the Constitution does not outright state that there is a general right to privacy. (Linder 2016) Instead, they looked at various amendments and selected bits and pieces out of them to form a basis to establish a right to privacy. In other words, the decision is unconstitutional because the supreme court essentially created a right

A U.S. citizen's "right to privacy" was first discussed in an 1890 Harvard Law Review article in which two Boston lawyers, Louis Brandeis and Samuel Warren, defined it as "the right to be let alone." Since then, the right to privacy has provided the basis for a stream of revolutionary and controversial constitutional interpretations by courts across the United States, culminating in the U.S. Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision in 1973. Although decisions have come down in favor of a right to privacy, they are largely based on a broad and disputed interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment. With the plethora of privacy issues that confront courts and policymakers in the current information

The 14th Amendment provides that no government shall take away the individual right to life, liberty, and property, within its jurisdiction, without due process of law.

The Fourth Amendment of the Constitution holds grave importance for the citizens of the United States of America. This amendment of the Constitution is exceptionally important due to the fact, that it protects citizens from unreasonable searches or seizures. However, the phrase, “reasonable expectation of privacy” is a different aspect that is pertinent to the evolution of the Fourth Amendment, and Riley v. California. To dissect this phrase, reasonable is the important aspect here, this is where the court must decide what is and what is not reasonable, in relation to the Fourth Amendment. Privacy, on the other hand, seems to be defined inadequately. (Baude & Stern, 2016). Within this, importance comes from the actual warrant requirement

Not only does the Fourth Amendment assist in protecting the rights of our home and property, but it goes a step further to provide citizens with an inherent right to privacy. Furthermore, the Fourth Amendment protects people from being illegally searched, subject to racial profiling, and or entrapped for every minor offense they may commit.

The Lemon test refers to the case Lemon vs. Kurtzman, which took place in 1971. The case was heard with two other cases involving religion and education, with the main issue being financial support for teacher salaries that were part of parochial schools. State financial aid was being awarded to non-public schools that were teaching religion, which created unsettlement (https://www.oyez.org/cases/1970/89.) The establishment clause was intended to prevent government involvement or support of religion.

It is important to have equal protection of the law because that ensures that everyone will be treated the same. This means that one person can’t have better opportunities than another because of their race. This specific topic was very controversial in 1868. Equal protection o the law is basically what Martin Luther King was fighting for. He wanted everyone no matter what your race was, to be treated equally. African Americans at the time were treated brutally by whites and didn’t get the same treatment. Whites had many advantages and still do to this day, though most people like to believe that racism doesn’t exist.

Does the Constitution explicitly state a right to privacy? This particular question was brought to the attention of the Supreme Court in 1965 during the Griswold vs. Connecticut case. This case involved Doctor Griswold giving birth control pills to a married couple in order to prevent conception. In Connecticut at this time the use of contraceptives was illegal since one was not to avoid conception. However, law of contraceptives was not strongly enforced against individuals. As a result of Doctor Griswold giving the couple contraceptives, he was helping them break the law. This case was also seen as illegal because it was supposedly going against the right of privacy and was taken to court in order to address the use of contraceptives and if prescribing contraceptives to married couples was legal. However the right of privacy is something that is not clearly stated in the Constitution. When this case was then taken to the Supreme Court, there were many justices that interpreted this case and some were for and against the ruling. Three of the justices were Justice Douglas, Justice Harlan and Justice Black. The three of these Justices had different methods of reasoning about the Constitution and how the Constitution should therefore be interpreted. As a result not all of the reasoning’s included the theory of natural law, and not all of their theories are necessarily plausible. I myself feel that Justice Douglas’s way of understanding the constitution is the most plausible

Some of the ways that the Supreme Court address the issue of privacy is within the home. Along with the 1st, 3rdm 4th, 5th, 9th Amendments that give citizens right to privacy. In Griswold v Connecticut the Majority opinion written by Justice Douglas talks about penumbral rights in the shadow of the constitution. In the 1st the right to assembly, 3rd the right to refuse quartering soldiers within the home, the 4th amendment protects citizens against unreasonable search and seizure, the 5th amendment protects citizens by allowing them to not self-incriminate. With the Griswold v Connecticut case the Court ruled that a couple had the right to privacy when using contraceptives. Justice Goldberg concurred in the case on the Fundamental Rights theory.

The Kyllo v. United States and United States v. Jones cases follow the adage that the “Fourth Amendment protects people and not places” as shown by Katz v. United States. Therefore, the Fourth Amendment protects a person’s “reasonable expectation of privacy” as reaffirmed by Katz v. United States, which shows that it protects people as opposed to places.

The two men peacefully protesting in this picture represent the american population and the african american man represents how the american justice system tends to accuse black people of crimes instead of white people. The police represent our justice system. The constitutional amendment being questioned in this cartoon is the fourteenth amendment. The fourteenth gives everyone equal protection under the law and these two men who are completely equal are getting far from equal treatment by our police. The African American is being asked for a permit and the white male wasn't even questioned, when he is holding the same sign as the black man. The artist feels strongly about the fact that there has been unequal treatment to people in america

Because Church and State laws seem to create such a gray area, there are tests that have been developed to help determine if church and state laws have been violated. When dealing with cases falling under the Establishment Clause, the first test that could be applied is called the Lemon Test and it consists of three prongs. These prongs are: “The government must have a secular (non-religious) purpose, the government action must