A thought, nay a collection of thoughts. Ideas and opinions spreading like the tendrils of a spider's web, touching people's minds and sparking curiosity.
No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of representatives shall have intervened.
Yet another house keeping amendment, this amendment was actually written by James Madison in the late 18th century. However, as it was only ratified by a handful of states, it did not become part of the Constitution. It was formally accepted and ratified and now sits last in line of the amendments of the conversation.
Congressmen now have better checks and balances upon themselves: now they cannot pass laws to their own personal benefit. Is this a good thing, of course! If you don't agree (or are a congressman) comment below and tell me why not.
It took over 200 years for James Madison's amendment to finally be accepted, but here we are now! What does this say about the state of the Union?
Section 1
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.
Section 2
The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
This amendment quantified the age minimum for voters, whereas before it was a minimum of 21 years old. Starting from Vietnam War-era young men and women, the idea that if one is old enough to die for their country they should be old enough to have a say in how the country is run.
The age of protests brought the public eye to the new voting age reformers.
This young man, old enough to fight in the wars of his country, had no say as to the governance of his country. Was this right? Are 18 year olds mature enough to vote? Can the young persons vote offer additional insight to how our country should be run? Comment below on your opinion!
For more information about this amendment, click here.
Section 1
In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become President.
Section 2
Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.
Section 3
Whenever the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, and until he transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary, such powers and duties shall be discharged by the Vice President as Acting President.
Section 4
Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.
Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.
A very humorous and in-depth view of presidential succession put to song!
Air Force One, the presidential plane, never holds the president and vice-president, so as to prevent any disasters from having too much of an effect on the governance of the country.
For more information about this amendment, click here.
Section 1
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.
Section 2
The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
Yet another standardization of the voting method by Congress, this amendment protects the right to vote without the burden of a poll tax or any other method of payment to vote. This protects the right in its purest form and does not discriminate against people without the financial means to support a poll tax. This is a great amendment (I believe), but if you disagree please comment below and let me know why!
Before this amendment, some people just did not vote in elections because of the cost. What would happen if we instituted a poll tax now? What ways are trying to be instituted in the country currently? (Hint: check out Missouri's bill to require a state recognized ID to vote... a $25 fee if you don't have a driver's licence.)
A poll tax: is it just in regards to money? Or are there other costly ways in which voting can "tax" its citizens?
For more information about this amendment, click here.
Section 1
The District constituting the seat of Government of the United States shall appoint in such manner as Congress may direct:
A number of electors of President and Vice President equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives in Congress to which the District would be entitled if it were a State, but in no event more than the least populous State; they shall be in addition to those appointed by the States, but they shall be considered, for the purposes of the election of President and Vice President, to be electors appointed by a State; and they shall meet in the District and perform such duties as provided by the twelfth article of amendment.
Section 2
The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
This amendment is another that really just standardized the way in which our federal government conducted itself. Namely, it allowed the population of the District of Columbia (the District constituting the seat of Government of the United States) to vote and participate in presidential and other such elections.
A constitutional right for US citizens to vote was not available to citizens in D.C.
A current explanation for this amendment.
For more information about this amendment, click here.
Section 1
No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of President more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this Article was proposed by Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.
Section 2
This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission to the States by the Congress.
Despite never before being put into official law, most presidents had been restricted (self-imposed or by way of election) to only two years in office anyway. This was directly related to George Washington's decision to only serve for two terms so as to prevent any notion of kingly rule. However, seeing as this was never officially the case, there were many presidents that served for more than two terms: most notably if Franklin D. Roosevelt. FDR served for a total of four terms (that's 16 years for you slow math people). This was unprecedented and the citizenry realized there had to be a change.
The idea behind term limits is that there needs to not be a monopoly on a presidency. What do you think? Should there be term limits? What if there are changes to the limits, would that be good or bad for us?
We have presidential term limits, but what about congress? Would these be a good idea? Why not? Let me know what you think in the comments below!
Section 1
The eighteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.
Section 2
The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or Possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited.
Section 3
This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by conventions in the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress.
The first direct repeal of any amendment, this amendment gave control of alcohol laws to each State. A slight variation of previous amendments that have been increasing national government power, this is an increase in state government (very similar to the Bill of Rights). Towards the end of the Prohibition era, people began to realize the toll it was taking on the country. The crime rate had skyrocketed as bootleggers and the like were taking advantage of supply and demand opportunities, a national revenue had been eliminated as well as the taxes that came along with it, and too many people were participating in illegal activities now that alcohol was banned. So the solution was to repeal the amendment and let the states decide whether to ban it or not, overall a very smart move.
People were overjoyed that they could finally and legally partake in their mood-altering substance of choice.
A post-Prohibition newsreel shows the boom of industry following this repeal.
For more information about this amendment, click here.
Section 1
The terms of the President and the Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.
Section 2
The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting shall begin at noon on the 3d day of January, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.
Section 3
If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.
Section 4
The Congress may by law provide for the case of the death of any of the persons from whom the House of Representatives may choose a President whenever the right of choice shall have devolved upon them, and for the case of the death of any of the persons from whom the Senate may choose a Vice President whenever the right of choice shall have devolved upon them.
Section 5
Sections 1 and 2 shall take effect on the 15th day of October following the ratification of this article.
Section 6
This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission.
This amendment, mainly a housekeeping change to the constitution, specifically details Presidential as well as Legislative protocols. Nothing too special here, but check it out anyway! It's a vital part of our Constitution nonetheless.
Sometimes, it's just a countdown until the presidential term is up.
There have been a few, very unfortunate times where the VP must take over the position of POTUS.
For more information about this amendment, click here.
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.
Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
The women: they finally got here. After years of watching the men control the vote, women are given the right to play a part in the shaping of their country. From the beginnings of suffrage movements to current day women's rights advocates (feminists), women have been fighting for what they see as rights for many years now. From the vote to equal wages, as well as fighting social ideas, women have been working hard lately.
A Gaga parody to the tune of women's suffrage. What other things are women fighting for today? Should they have them? Is it getting to the point of overdoing it? Comment below!
It took 50 years for women to be given the vote after the 15th amendment was passed. Why was this the case? What were the factors in keeping the vote from women? What good has now come of this today?
Section 1
After one year from the ratification of this article the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.
Section 2
The Congress and the several States shall have concurrent power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
Section 3
This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress.
This amendment effectively banned any and all alcohol sales within the United States (and its territories). A major national movement that sought an end to what they saw as a most vile substance, Prohibitionists pushed and succeeded in passing this amendment, which turned out to merely be a lesson in the infringement of state's and citizen's rights. What do you think? Was this amendment good or not? Do you think that some reformed portion of this ban should be re-instituted? Tell me about it in the comments below!
A fantastic summary of the age of Prohibition, this video shows both the beginning and end of this movement.
Prohibition, far from decreasing criminal activity began a huge surge in it. As seen here by criminal Al Capone, the mobsters of the era grew their syndicates and increased their criminal activities.
For more information about this amendment, check this website out.
The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.
When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.
This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution.
Before this amendment, direct election of Senators by the States was not a necessary thing. In fact, it was the legislature of the States that were able to choose the Senators. With this amendment, a more republic-based form of government was instituted and enacted. Was this a good thing? What problems did this solve on a representation level? What are some of the problems that this may have caused? Comment below!
This video, by CGP Grey, explains a different and more representational form of government. Would this work well or not? What are it's pros and cons?
Yet another alternative voting method! What do you like about this one? Is it better or worse than our current method? What about compared to the method above?
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
This amendment, in essence, took away some of the State's rights where revenue was considered. After its enumeration, the amendment allowed for the federal government (through Congress) to levy taxes as they wished, with no discretionary oversight whatsoever. What do you think about this power the government can exercise over its citizens? What good things could this bring and what bad things could this open the door for? Comment below!
What does this striking growth in our tax code say about our government? Is this really necessary even?
In this system brought by the 16th Amendment, what representation in the federal gov't do we have?
For more history about this amendment, click here.
Section 1
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 —
Section 2
The Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
This amendment, the third installment of President Lincoln's New Birth of Freedom, gave citizens the right to vote. Previously only landowners could vote, which means essentially only white males could vote. The vote was seen as being needed to be given to the newly freed slaves so that they become complete citizens. There was a few separate camps on how to accomplish this: one major one was advocating the allocation of land to the freed slaves. This presented a problem because it brought up the question, "Where is this land going to come from?". The answer was primarily Southern plantation owners and that did not please the South, therefore this current solution was promoted. Instead of requiring them to have land (and therefore more influence) the vote was simply given to any citizen. What do you think about this? Was there a better way to go about this that Congress did not see? What about just giving them land and hence the vote, where would that leave us today? Comment below!
Now that black men (and all men) have the right to vote, what are some policies that would change with the huge influx of votes? How would politicians campaign and what would the separate groups be focused on?
This video addresses some of the other things going on with the 15th amendment, with a good soundtrack. It also shows that there is still work that is being done to continue the progress made by this amendment.
If you want to learn more about this amendment, click here.
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
Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, 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, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, 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.
Section 3
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
Section 4
The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.
Section 5
The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
Finally! An amendment that furthers the accomplishment of freeing the slaves. Before this, freed slaves were not considered citizens and neither were their children. This obviously caused a lot of problems for the black American population at this point and something needed to be done. This amendment, in broad sweeping strokes gave citizenship to these people as well as confronting the problem that this would bring about regarding the representation of all these brand new citizens. I think that anyone reading this can agree that this amendment was a good idea, but if you're an outlier then please let me know what your reasoning is for your dissenting opinion.
So with this particular sub-portion of the amendment, can you think of any current day happenings that are applicable to this? Perhaps the issue of ABORTION? What rights to life does an unborn child have and how are we abridging those rights today? Tell me about your pro-life or pro-choice arguments below!
This video, albeit rather lengthy, gives a good summary to the amendment (no I didn't watch it all).
For even more information about this amendment, click here.
Section 1
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.
Section 2
Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
This amendment, rather simple in writing, was revolutionary for its time. It banned all slavery of all forms from the United States forever. Beyond the freeing of African and African American slaves from the constraints of the South (most Northern states had already banned slavery), this also required any labor to be paid for. Some interesting exceptions to this would be the duly convicted felons stated in the amendment, any form of the military draft (although there are ways to get out of that, e.g. bed wetting, drugs, etc.), and jury duty service. While this decision solved many problems, there remained a few glaring errors; namely that the newly freed prisoners had no place to go, no land, and no income. But this was simply a step-wise solution that Abraham Lincoln pioneered and called a "new birth of freedom".
Conditions for freed slaves were quite similar to that of the time of their slavery.
In the movie Django Unchained, the man known as Dr. King Schultz treats slaves just as kindly as free men. This is a movie full of racial inequality and brings to question a lot about this particular time period.
More information about this amendment can be found here.
The Electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate; — the President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted; — The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President. — The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.
This amendment is designed to redesign the process by which the president and vice-president are elected. A redesign based on problems in the 1800 election. Before this amendment, the president and vice-president were voted on in the same election and the 1st and 2nd place were given the offices, respectfully. Now with this new amendment there are specific guidelines to elections and preventative measures to avoid problems in the future.
Now that elections are revised, what do you think are some problems in our selection processes? Comment!
The 2012 election explained! This is a basic explanation for our current election system.
The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.
This amendment, a change to Article III of the Constitution, basically iterates a rule that one cannot use the federal government to sue state government. One of the reasons for this amendment was the Supreme Court case Chisholm v. Georgia (1793) which affirmed that one could sue states in federal court. This was eventually seen as a breech in state's rights and the 11th amendment was born.
Interestingly, Puerto Rico enjoys Eleventh Amendment immunity as given to it by the US State Court of Appeals.
State's rights are protected, but what does this mean if you wanted to sue a state? How can you do it now?
Is it not wonderful that a HOR minority leader that claims to be "with the Constitution" doesn't even know it?
Make sure to comment and discuss about this amendment, why should Puerto Rico receive immunity or why should it not? What do you think of Nancy Pelosi's gross misquoting of the Constitution she claims to support? What are the implications of a politician of her stature committing this error? Comment below!
For more information about this amendment and it's birth, click here.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
This amendment ends the Bill of Rights and gives power that hasn't been given to the national government to the states' governments. This is a reiteration that states and people have the power except for what power the Constitution gives the federal government and what it prohibits the state's from doing. However, it is a vague amendment because the Constitution allows the government to express powers that aren't expressly stated in the document. The Articles of Confederation (precursor to the US Constitution) said that any power not expressly given to the nation was up to the states' discretion to regulate. This word "expressly" denied implied powers of the national government. This was amended in the Constitution to protect implied powers such as Article 1, Section 8, Clause 18 (or the Necessary and Proper clause). This clause allows the national legislature to pass laws that are necessary and proper for the prosperity of the country. James Madison stated that without this clause the Constitution would be a "dead letter". While this amendment was originally crafted to benefit state government, it now is more beneficial to national government.
The decision to abort an unborn child should not be regulated by national government.
Thoughts? Post them in the comments.
A warning to big government to watch out for states' bite
For more information on this amendment, click here.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
A crucial amendment in the Constitution, this deals with rights that are not expressed in the document and how they are still retained by the people (citizens). This has been a hotly debated amendment for the classification of which unenumerated rights can actually be enforced. In the case United Public Workers v. Mitchel the Supreme Court said the right to engage in political activity is an unenumerated right. In Richmond Newspapers v. Virginia it expressed the press' right to report in criminal trials. As far as whether these decisions have been good or bad I believe that these decisions are good and good respectively. I am of the opinion that political efficacy is of vital importance and if someone cannot engage in political activity then there can be governmental control of who and how people are politically active. As far as the right of the press to report in criminal trials I think that it is a right for the press to report criminal trials (the judge can order a closed courtroom however). Due to the very heavy biases of the media and its ability to be coerced into reporting false news, the press' information should be taken with a grain of salt.
One of the major discussions surrounding this amendment is the issue of privacy. The issue of privacy is not expressly stated in the Constitution and this has led to some believing it is not a right under the law. Penumbra (a body of rights held to be guaranteed by implication in a civil constitution) is a word used to describe the rights expressed and implied through the combination of amendments 1, 3, and 4 in concert with the 9th. This allows the implication of privacy without the explicit expression of privacy. What do you think about these rights? What are some other rights that aren't in the Constitution that you think are still rights?
Even though it doesn't seem like it, the 9th Amendment is very important!
Everyone has a different opinion on privacy, what's yours?
Click here, for more information on this amendment.
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
This rather short-worded amendment is nonetheless an extremely relevant amendment to this country. This one in particular protects citizens of this nation from punishments or restrictions that are unnecessary or overboard. In the Supreme Court case Gregg v. Georgia the court decided that capital punishment does not violate this amendment iff (not a typo, check out what iff means here) three requirements are met. They are:
The jury must be impartial
The jury has been allowed to hear all mitigating circumstances and family pleas
The jury has not been coerced to hand down a decision
If these three stipulations are met, a jury can pass a sentence of capital punishment. What do you think about this? Should capital punishment be legal in the United States? What about the death penalty? I'm a supporter of the death penalty but I also think that there needs to be drastic changes to the methods utilized and the efficacy of the process. Let me know what YOU think in the comments below.
This execution might be more effective than some electric chairs out there.
Where does your state fall in the spectrum? Do you support it?
For more information about this article, click here.
In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
This amendment guarantees a trial by jury for people facing charges that would deprive them of life and liberty, although the value has been raised from $20 to $75,000: a protection of the courts from complete overload. This amendment also allows people to be tried in criminal and civil court cases for the same crime. This is based on the burden of proof for the different court systems. In criminal courts, a decision must be made that is beyond a reasonable doubt, but in civil cases, there only needs to be a preponderance of evidence. An example of this is the famous (infamous?) O.J. Simpson case where he was acquitted of his criminal charges, where the burden of proof is high; but was found guilty on civil charges in a later case, where the burden of proof is lower.
The jury, even though, secured by right, still may want to be waived in favor of a bench trial.
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
The right to speedy and public trial as well as an impartial jury are crucial to the success of our criminal justice system. There are eight separate guarantees of this amendment that are listed below:
(1) Right to a speedy trial
(2) All trials must be public and accused must be informed of charge (not always public, in the case of Grand Jury "trials")
(3) Witnesses for the prosecution must testify in public
(4) Defense can produce witnesses to testify on his behalf
(5) Defense has the right to secure council (if not able, a public defender will be provided)
(6) The trial can (defense's choice) be by a jury of peers
(7) Juries are to remain unbiased throughout the trial
(8) Speedy trials must take place within a reasonable amount of time
A person MUST be told of their charges and given a speedy trial. Not like in this man's life.
Maybe you should avoid a public defendant, as the defense attorney from My Cousin Vinny so aptly proves.
For more info about this very important amendment, click here.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
This amendment protects against certain rights that are always in contest or brought up. They are listed here:
(1) Protection from a government who might harass with malicious and fallacious courts
(2) No citizen can be subject to testify against themselves
(3) Due Process: government actions must always follow the rules and guidelines set down by law
A straight-forward, if not highly detailed, amendment, this particular portion of our constitution sees the most screen time in TV shows and movies. Pleading the Fifth, now a very common phrase, spread through the right to not be a witness against their selves. Miranda v Arizona (1966) was the landmark case that led to the extension of the right against a suspects' self-incrimination beginning at their arrest (and the reading of the Miranda rights).
Another, less popular section of this amendment is the protection of citizens' from deprivation of life, liberty, or property. This, however, only extends so far. For a specific example, Lochner v New York (1905) states that state law cannot force limitations on the number of house a business owner can require from his employees. This is a cut against this amendment and allows citizens' deprivation. What do you think about this? Comment and let me know.
Double jeopardy does not apply to Thanksgiving turkeys however.
Maybe the Colonel should have plead the fifth.
For more info about this amendment, check out a good history here.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, 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, which is of particular importance in this day of policing, protects the rights of citizens, giving more power to "the people". There is also some interesting controversy related to this amendment, specifically when it comes to "Probably Cause" and the Supreme Court case of Weeks v US (1914). In this case, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the defendant who's property (which was condemning evidence) was seized without a warrant. This evidence was ruled inadmissible in a court of law, creating what would be know as the Exclusionary Rule. Now, no evidence taken in violation of the 4th amendment can be used in a criminal trial. This loophole can be exploited by criminals to walk, where in other circumstances, they would be jailed. However, as Benjamin Franklin so aptly put it, “Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security.” In this particular political climate, we must remember this and not allow the government to hold what, in other times, would be considered unconstitutional and dangerous power.
A poignant reminder that some government organizations do not subscribe to our Constitutional rights.
Speaking of which... if you're reading this Mr. NSA agent, don't call me... I'm not into booty calls.
For information about the framing of this amendment, click here.
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
This rather self-explanatory amendment was of vital importance to the Founders and the budding Union. So important in fact, that they even mentioned it in the Declaration of Independence. However, this particular amendment might seem a little aged by today's standards. With army barracks in every major city and the military's ability to set up camp virtually anywhere, some might say that this is a superfluous right in this day and age. What do you think about this? I have not yet made up my mind about this but I see how it could be unnecessary now. Comment and let the discussion begin.
Make sure you know what you're talking about before you start living it.
This kind of quartering was a major problem to the homes of the colonialists.
For more information about the reasons behind this amendment, click here.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
This, a highly debated and contested amendment, secures the rights of citizens to legally own guns and other arms. However, like the first amendment, it is not absolute. Criminals and foreign aliens cannot own guns and there was a Supreme Court decision (a 5:4 decision, so it was highly contested) that says the second amendment protects against firearms that are typically possessed by law abiding citizens for lawful purposes. Any and all people outside of these parameters cannot legally keep and bear arms.
This amendment is one more example of how the Bill of Rights was a check against the US government and how it protects individual rights from said government. It is my opinion that there should be less restrictions on guns and ownership of them. Like the first amendment, the right to gun use and ownership should not be breached unless there is harm or intention to do harm. Keeping guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens (or at least, making it more difficult to posses these guns) presents opportunity for criminals to act with illegally acquired guns. The possession of arms serves (at the very least) as a deterrent from criminals. For example, Oklahoma recently legalized open carry laws which permit concealed carry guns to be carried unconcealed and "open" provided the owner has the required licence (more details of the law here). This was a step in the right direction for Oklahoma as it serves to increase individual rights over the rights of the government. It is not that many people will opt for an open carry, but that they have a choice to do so is where there is movement in the right direction.
A news story in OK that addresses the open carry issue
There are a great many laws pertaining to the owning and operating of firearms in the many states of this Union. I cannot cover them all here but comment and let me know what your thoughts are about it.
While a little extreme, this law student explains his rights as a citizen to carry guns in public.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
This amendment is a well-debated and well-practiced set of rights. Generally, the Bill of Rights gives power back to people that was in the hands of the government as stated in the Articles of the Constitution. There are a great many actions that are protected by this amendment but there are an equal amount that are not. Defamatory, inflammatory, and hate speech are exceptions that infringe upon other people's rights so they are not protected by the amendment. Additionally, religion is also protected as long as the members' actions do not infringe upon others' rights: this applies for all amendments. There are two clauses in the freedom of religion: the establishment clause (which says there will not be any establishment of any national religion), and the free-exercise clause (stating that citizens can practice all religions as they choose).
Penn & Teller brazenly practice and explain their rights
A different view on Freedom of Speech and society.
For some more information about this amendment, click here.
The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same.
Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth In witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names,
G°. Washington Presidt. and deputy from Virginia
Delaware
Geo: Read
Gunning Bedford jun
John Dickinson
Richard Bassett
Jaco: Broom Maryland
James McHenry
Dan of St Thos. Jenifer
Danl. Carroll Virginia
John Blair
James Madison Jr. North Carolina
Wm. Blount
Richd. Dobbs Spaight
Hu Williamson South Carolina
J. Rutledge
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney
Charles Pinckney
Pierce Butler Georgia
William Few
Abr Baldwin New Hampshire
John Langdon
Nicholas Gilman Massachusetts
Nathaniel Gorham
rufus King Connecticut
Wm. Saml. Johnson
Roger Sherman New York
Alexander Hamilton New Jersey
Wil: Livingston
David Brearley
Wm. Paterson
Jona: Dayton Pennsylvania
B Franklin
Thomas Mifflin
Robt. Morris
Geo. Clymer
Thos. FitzSimons
Jared Ingersoll
James Wilson
Gouv Morris
Attest William Jackson, Secretary
And it's over! Until you decide to put on amendments that is.
All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
A handshake and an oath. Neither should be forgotten.
Click here for a detailed overview of this article.
For a gentleman's guide to a proper handshake, the most basic form of an oath, click here.
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
Changes come in all shapes and sizes.
For a compendium (look that word up) of this article, click here.
Section 1
Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.
Section 2
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
A Person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on Demand of the executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime.
No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.
Section 3
New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new States shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.
The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.
Section 4
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened), against domestic Violence.
Bucket-List to travel to every capital? Oh yeah, sign me up.
For a detailed analysis of this article, click here.
