Civil Liberties PDF

Civil Liberties  Civil Liberties Civil Liberties: Protections of citizens from the government  Substantive: Limits on what the government can or cannot do  Procedural: Rules regarding how the government must act The Bill of Rights and the Founding era Debate over...

Civil Liberties  Civil Liberties Civil Liberties: Protections of citizens from the government  Substantive: Limits on what the government can or cannot do  Procedural: Rules regarding how the government must act The Bill of Rights and the Founding era Debate over Bill of Rights  In Federalist 84, Alexander Hamilton objected to calls for a bill of rights.  He argued:  The main text of the Constitution already protected certain rights.  Bills of rights are appropriate in monarchies but not republics.  Listing specific rights would limit the rights that Americans would enjoy. A Brief History of the Bill of Rights In Federalist 51, Madison claimed that federalism would provide a “double security” to the rights of Americans. 1. States would protect citizens from national government. 2. The national government would protect citizens from the states. Civil Liberties in the Bill of Rights  Barron v Baltimore Double security delayed: the long shadow of Barron v. Baltimore (1833)  The importance of Barron v. Baltimore  The Supreme Court ruled that the Bill of Rights did not protect citizens from state governments.  The Court confirmed the notion of “dual citizenship.”  14th Amendment, 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.” The adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment seems to reverse “dual citizenship” and provide for the protection of citizens by the national government. Narrow interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment in the Slaughter-House Cases extends the shadow of Barron.  Selective Incorporation The Supreme Court, on a case-by-case basis, “selectively incorporated” certain elements of the Bill of Rights into the Fourteenth Amendment.  The first wave of incorporation 1. Chicago, Burlington, and Quincy Railroad Company v. Chicago (1897)—eminent domain 2. First Amendment cases a. Gitlow v. New York (1925)—freedom of speech b. Near v. Minnesota (1931)—freedom of the press c. Hague v. CIO (1939)—freedom of assembly Palko v. Connecticut (1937)  The Court refuses to incorporate “double jeopardy” provision of Fifth Amendment.  Justice Cardozo establishes principle that only rights “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty” need be incorporated.  A second wave of incorporation Wolf v. Colorado (1949)—incorporates Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches. Protections of the rights of the accused incorporated throughout the 1960s  Mapp v. Ohio (1961)—search and seizure without a warrant  Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)—right to counsel in criminal trials  Malloy v. Hogan and Escobedo v. Illinois (1964)—right against self-incrimination and forced confessions  Benton v. Maryland (1969)—rights against double jeopardy Supreme Court develops the right to privacy Using Third, Fourth, Fifth, and Ninth Amendments, Supreme Court finds right to privacy in Griswold v. Connecticut (1965). Loving v Virginia (1967) Marriage as a fundamental constitutional right of privacy In Roe v. Wade (1973), Supreme Court extends right to privacy to include state protection. Bowers v Hardwick 1996 – denies right to privacy applies to homosexual activity Lawrence v Texas 2003 – overturns Bowers Obergefell v Hodges 2015 – Protects same-sex marriage  Right to privacy overturned Dobbs Vs. Jackson Women’s Health Org 2022  Dissent argues that this threatens same-sex marriage, interracial marriage  First Amendment FREE SPEECH 1. SCHENK V. UNITED STATES 1919 – “CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER” 2. DENNIS V. UNITED STATES (1951) Communist leafleters prosecuted under Smith Act 3. YATES V. UNITED STATES (1957) Also Smith Act prosecution, reverses conviction.  First Amendment FREE SPEECH CONTINUED: 4. BRANDENBURG V. OHIO (1969) 5. SYMBOLIC SPEECH – TINKER V. DES MOINES INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT (1969) 6. TEXAS V. JOHNSON (1989) Separation between Church and State  The First Amendment Guarantees Freedom of Religion Establishment Clause  Dilemma: How to deal with longstanding traditions in an increasingly secular world  The First Amendment Guarantees Freedom of Religion Free Exercise of Religion  One can believe in and practice the religion of one’s choice, or be a non-believer, as long as one does not harm others  The First Amendment Guarantees Freedom of Religion How to interpret the Establishment Clause  Preventing an official church  Government can aid religious institutions as long as it does not favor some over others  Wall of Separation  First Amendment SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE LEMON V. KURTZMAN (1971)  The Lemon Test The statute must have a secular legislative purpose. (Also known as the Purpose Prong) The principal or primary effect of the statute must neither advance nor inhibit religion. (Also known as the Effect Prong) The statute must not result in an "excessive government entanglement" with religion. (Also known as the Entanglement Prong)Factors.  Character and purpose of institution benefited.  Nature of aid the state provides.  Resulting relationship between government and religious authority. Carson v Makin 2022 requires the state of Maine to fund religious education at private religious schools as part of its tuition assistance program. The program pays for students to attend private school if their town does not have a public high school. The decision marks the first time that the court has explicitly required taxpayers to support a specifically religious activity  First Amendment FREEDOM OF PRESS NEAR V. MINNESOTA (1931) – PRIOR RESTRAINT  Threats to a Free Press Obama revived the 1917 Espionage Act to prosecute eight people who leaked classified information to the press – more than all other previous presidents combined.  Second Amendment District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) The Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess firearms for self-defense and other lawful purposes. New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen (2022) This landmark decision expanded judicial protection for gun rights. McDonald v. City of Chicago (2024) The Supreme Court ruled that the right to bear arms is a fundamental right that applies to all levels of government. United States v. Rahimi (2024) The Supreme Court rejected a challenge to a federal law that prohibits people with domestic violence restraining orders from possessing guns.  Fifth Amendment: Due process and crime POWELL V. ALABAMA (1932) (SCOTTSBORO CASE) GIDEON V. WAINWRIGHT (1963) ESCOBEDO V. ILLINOIS (1964) MIRANDA V. ARIZONA (1966) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v =_Y3EtuCzsGQ