The Bill of Rights (1791) The Bill of Rights was added to the U.S. Constitution in response to the Anti-Federalists’ concern that the U.S. Constitution did not enumerate individual rights and protections (see Benchmark 1.8). The Bill of Rights protects the rights of political expression (1st Amendment) and the rights of those accused of crimes (4th, 5th, 6th, 8th amendments). The Bill of Rights includes other rights that deal with matters other than expression or criminal procedure.

Due Process Rights and Protections Included in the Bill of Rights Due Process Right/Protection

Description

Cruel and unusual punishment

The death penalty, while constitutional, may not be used in a racially discriminatory manner, or in a way that causes severe pain.

Double jeopardy

A person may not be tried twice for the same crime.

Pleading the fifth

A person is not required to provide information while being questioned or while testifying if that information will self-incriminate.

Right to counsel

A person is entitled to legal counsel for representation in criminal cases even if that person cannot afford an attorney (see Benchmark 3.12).

Search and seizure

A person is protected from unreasonable search and seizure; probable cause must be established in order to search a person or their property.

Trial by jury

Criminal defendants are guaranteed a trial by jury of the defendant’s peers (see Benchmark 2.2) both as to findings of fact and as to the guilt of the defendant.

Other Rights Contained in the Constitution Right

Description

Eminent domain

The right of the government to take property for public use.

Equal protection under the law

State statutes may not deny U.S. citizens their rights under the Bill of Rights or other amendments to the Constitution.

Right to bear arms

The right of the people to have their own arms, including guns, for their defense (see Benchmark 3.12).

Suffrage

The right to vote (see Benchmark 3.7).

Unenumerated rights (Ninth Amendment)

Rights not listed in the Bill of Rights are not forbidden just because they are not listed.

Protecting and Limiting Individual Rights The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution includes five freedoms or rights including: religious exercise, speech, press, peaceable assembly and petitioning the government for redress of grievances. These freedoms are not absolute because doing so might threaten the public interest.

Federal and state laws, and U.S. Supreme Court decisions, have all placed limitations on First Amendment freedoms in order to protect the public interest. Properly balancing individual freedoms with the public interest promotes a stable society.

Freedom is an ideal of representative democracy, as is stability.

Balancing Individual Rights with the Public Interest Method

Meaning

Constitutional Protection

Ex post facto

A law that makes an act a crime after that act has been committed.

Article I, Section 9:

The government may not hold a citizen indefinitely without showing cause

Article I, Section 9:

Habeas corpus

No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

The Relationship between the People and Government in the U.S. Constitution The relationship between the people and the government in the U.S. is based on the notion that both individual rights and the public interest should be protected by government.

Individual rights are central to democratic political and social life and represent the “life, liberty and happiness” identified by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence and “life, liberty or estate” addressed by John Locke in the Two Treatises of Government (1690) (see Benchmark 1.1 and Benchmark 1.4). Protecting the public interest is also critical because community stability is threatened when the public believes that its interests as a community are threatened due to government action or inaction. The public interest is also understood as the general welfare or common well-being.

Individual Rights and the U.S. Constitution Individual rights are best understood as those rights found in the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights was offered by the Federalists as a compromise to the Anti-Federalists who believed that the constitution proposed in 1787 would deny rights that the people enjoyed under the Articles of Confederation (see Benchmark 1.8). The Bill of Rights protects social (First Amendment freedoms of association, peaceable assembly, speech, press), political (First Amendment freedom to petition the government for redress of grievances) and economic (Fifth Amendment protections that life, liberty or property may not be taken without due process of law and that private property may not be taken for public use without just compensation) rights (see Benchmark 2.4). Other amendments to the U.S. Constitution further protect political rights such as the right to vote protected by the Fifteenth (no race discrimination in voting), Nineteenth (no sex discrimination in voting), Twenty-fourth (no poll taxes) and Twenty-sixth amendments (lowers voting age to 18) (see Benchmark 3.7). The Fourteenth Amendment protects property rights in that, like the Fifth Amendment, life, liberty or property may not be taken without due process of law by the states (the Fifth Amendment applies to the federal government only).

When Individual Rights and the Public Interest Conflict: Civil Disobedience

“Since we so diligently urge people to obey the Supreme Court's decision of 1954 outlawing segregation in the public schools, at first glance it may seem rather paradoxical for us consciously to break laws. One may want to ask: ‘How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?’ The answer lies in the fact that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that ‘an unjust law is no law at all’”. Martin Luther King, Jr. Letter from a Birmingham Jail, 1963.

When Individual Rights and Public Interest Conflict: Economic Freedom Economic freedom is guarded as an individual right because it is a way to experience the freedom that is protected by the U.S. Constitution (see Benchmark 2.4) and addressed in the Declaration of Independence (see Benchmark 1.4).

A commitment to economic freedom has been cited by lawmakers and interest groups seeking to reduce trade barriers (see Benchmark 3.3), enact policies broadening the role of money in political campaigns (see Benchmark 2.10), weaken labor unions, increase or reduce taxes (see Benchmark 3.3), and limit increases in the minimum wage. In each of these areas, economic freedoms have been limited for the sake of the public interest. For example, contributions to political campaigns are limited in some contexts (direct contributions to candidates) but not others (money spent by interest groups on behalf of candidates)(see Benchmark 2.10). Many ways of earning money are outlawed; for example, President Obama has stated that the U.S. embargo on Cuba (see Benchmark 4.1 and Benchmark 3.1) is “in the national interests of the United States” which limits persons from buying and selling Cuban products.

When Individual Rights and Public Interest Conflict: Forced Internment “But hardships are part of war, and war is an aggregation of hardships. All citizens alike, both in and out of uniform, feel the impact of war in greater or lesser measure. Citizenship has its responsibilities, as well as its privileges, and, in time of war, the burden is always heavier. Compulsory exclusion of large groups of citizens from their homes, except under circumstances of direst emergency and peril, is inconsistent with our basic governmental institutions. But when, under conditions of modern warfare, our shores are threatened by hostile forces, the power to protect must be commensurate with the threatened danger.”

Korematsu v. U.S. (1944) Case Opinion, authored by Associate Justice Hugo Black

When Individual Rights and Public Interest Conflict: Property Rights The right to own property is addressed in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. The Fifth Amendment also guarantees that, should the government take money for purposes of “eminent domain” (taking property for public use), one is entitled to “just compensation”. Due process must be implemented if the government decides to take a person’s property through “eminent domain”. Over the last few decades, the U.S. Supreme Court, and lower courts, has been asked to rule on situations when local governments denied property rights in ways that many believe was unconstitutional.

19th Century Voting Rights Expansions Event

Event Details

13th Amendment (1865)

“Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.”

14th Amendment (1868)

Section 1. “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. 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 of the laws.” Section 2 (excerpt). “But when the right to vote at any election…is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, … the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.” “The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.”

15th Amendment (1870)

20th Century Voting Rights Expansions Event

Event Details

19th Amendment (1920)

“The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.”

24th Amendment (1964)

“The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay poll tax or other tax.”

Civil Rights Act of 1964

Contained several minority voting-related provisions including ending unequal application of voter registration requirements. Title VIII also required that voter registration and voting data be compiled in those areas specified by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

Voting Rights Act of 1965

Outlawed discriminatory voting practices directed against African-Americans such as literacy and good citizenship tests. These tests had the effect of denying registration to most African-American voters, especially in southern states such as Alabama and Mississippi.

26th Amendment (1971)

“The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.”

Sample Item 25 SS.7.C.3.6 Content Focus Free Speech What has been one long-term result of the constitutional protection of free speech? A. fewer court cases involving minors B. fewer laws limiting minority rights C. a more accurate election D. a more informed society*