9/8 Do Now

Take out your Bill of Rights.

1. What right listed in the Bill of Rights do you think is the most important to you as an individual and to American society in general? Defend your answer.

The Bill of Rights

Introduction(Don’t copy this down, just read and think about the question at the end) In the summer of 1917, the US was mobilizing to join the allied nations in World War

One. The government was also trying to create public support and passed the Espionage Act, which said that actions that undermine the war effort were criminal.

The US turned to a draft to get more soldiers to support the war. Many Americans opposed the war and the draft. A socialist, by the name of Charles Schenck, took a stand against the draft, which he and his fellow socialists argued was immoral and a violation of individual rights.

To spread the message, Schenck and his party sent mass mail in the Philadelphia area telling people to resist the draft and call for it to be repealed. He said the draft violated the 13th amendment and when he was arrestted for the mailings, he argued the Espionage Act violated his 1st amendment rights.

What do you think? Is the draft unconstitutional based off the 13th amendment? Was the mailing of leaflets a violation of the 1st amendment?

The Result!

The court ruled 9-0 that the arrest was constitutional.

“The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man falsely shouting fire in a theater and causing a panic. [...] The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent.”

The Right of Judicial Review

Marbury vs Madison

Is the Bill of Rights applied to the states?

The court first said “no.” In the case Barron vs Baltimore, the court ruled that the Bill of

Rights applied only to actions by the Federal government. This meant the states could infringe on people’s rights.

Does the 14th Amendment change things?

This amendment states that no state can make a law that violates a US citizen’s rights. States cannot deprive anyone of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. States must uphold equal protection of the laws.

At first, the 14th amendment was interpreted in a narrow way, such as in the case of Plessy v Ferguson (1896) which said that racial segregation in the south did not violate the 14th amendment as long as the facilities provided were “separate, but equal”

The Role of the Supreme Court When the court makes a decision on an issue, it becomes precedent or an

example for all courts to follow for future similar type cases

Sometimes the court overturns itself. For example, Brown vs the Board of Education overturned Plessy vs

Ferguson and argued that separate facilities are inherently unequal and a violation of the 14th amendment.

The following slides will be about how the Supreme Court had ruled related to the Bill of Rights

Freedom of Religion: The Establishment Clause The Establishment Clause: “Congress shall make no law respecting an

establishment of religion”

This guarantees separation of Church and State. Prior to the Revolutionary War, many states had official churches with

taxes to support the church and in some places, required church attendance.

Naturally, not everyone supported these churches, which undermined freedom of religion.

Think about it! Congress opens up their daily sessions in prayer. Is this a violation of

the establishment clause?

Freedom of Religion: The Establishment Clause

Engel vs Vitale (1962) The public school opened each day with a prayer. Is this Constitutional?

Lemon v Kurtzman (1971) Can public funds be used to support private religious schools?

Freedom of Religion: The Free Exercise Clause The Free Exercise Clause comes from the 2nd part of the first

amendment “or prohibit the free exercise thereof.” You can follow no religion or if your faith conflicts with the law, the law

must prevail. Reynolds vs US: Reynolds is a Mormon who practices polygamy. The

Federal law prohibits having multiple husbands or wives and Reynolds claims the law violates his freedom of religion rights. Who do you think the court will side with?

Freedom of Religion: The Free Exercise Clause

In deciding the Reynolds case, the court drew a distinction between religious beliefs and practices.

The court argued that if people were able to disregard any law because it violated their beliefs, this could allow every citizen to do what they want, no matter what.

In the case West Virginia State Board of Education v Barnette, they dealt with the issue of a Jehovah’s Witness could refuse to say the Pledge. How do you think they ruled?

Freedom of Speech Protects someone from the persecution by government for freely

expressing one’s self, with some exceptions, such as Libel- false statements written about someone to harm them and their

reputation Slander- false words spoken about someone intending to harm them

and their reputation Obscenity- speech offensive to convention standards of decency Speech that intends to start a rebellion or statements that would

reasonably cause panic (yelling FIRE in a crowded theater) It does not protect you from getting in trouble from your business or

school for saying something that the company or school deems inappropriate.

Freedom of Speech Freedom of speech isn’t just spoken word, but symbolic speech that

conveys a message without spoken word

Texas vs Johnson (1989) . Johnson was arrested for burning a flag. He claimed that burning the flag is a form of free speech. How do you think this was decided?

Think about it. What about hate speech? Are groups like the KKK or the Nazis allowed to hold rallies? Why or why not?

Freedom of the Press Covers the media as well as the common person

Near vs Minnesota (1931) This case involved a newspaper that exposed government corruption and the state of Minnesota wanted to shut down the newspaper. How do you think the court ruled?

NY Times v US (1971) Dan Ellsberg leaked classified documents showing the government was lying about the progress of the war in Vietnam. The Times published “ the Pentagon Papers.” The court said that no notable impact on national security had been violated, and hence it was constitutional.

Think about it! What about a newspaper that publishes an article in a time of war arguing against the war? Is this constitutional?

Think about it! What about Edward Snowden? He released classified documents exposing the National Security Agency’s large

data collection abilities, that showed the government compiles data about regular citizens emails, phone calls, and text messages. The US wants him arrested, but others claim he is exposing government corruption. Who do you agree with?

Freedom of Assembly and Right to Petition

Hague vs CIO (1937) C.I.O, a labor union, wanted to assemble. The mayor did not like labor unions and told them they were not allowed. How do you think the court ruled?

The Second Amendment This amendment has not been incorporated by the 14th amendment, meaning that

gun laws do not apply to all places in the US. The regulation of guns is in the hand of the state and local governments There were no gun regulations prior to 1934. With growing gang violence, the

government placed a tax on some weapons and required background checks on buyers, along with registration of some weapons.

US v Miller (1939) In this case, 2 men failed to register a sawed off shot gun. How do you think the court ruled?

The Fourth Amendment To search your property, you need a warrant A warrant can only be issued based on probable cause In some cases, no warrant is needed if criminal evidence is in plain view.

Terry vs Ohio (1968) Three men whose behavior caused police to suspect they were going to rob a store, so the officers frisked them by patting the outside of their clothing. Two of the suspects had guns, which led to a concealed weapons charge. The men appealed, saying the police had no right to do what they did. The court ruled in favor of the police.

The “stop and frisk” rule has now given police more power to try to prevent serious crimes before they happen.

New York’s use of stop and frisk

The Fifth Amendment

Miranda vs Arizona (1966) The court set forth the procedure of ensuring suspects know their rights, Miranda Rights. “You have the right to remain silent…..”

The 5th includes the Takings clause –Government may not take private property for public use without just compensation.

Taking private property for public use is known as eminent domain.

Do Now 9/9

Using your notes from yesterday, go to the 5th amendment slide and then read the hand out on the Kelo case about property rights.

Important Info about Eminent Domain When reading this handout and making your decision, remember

that the government must prove they have an important public benefit when taking away private property and must provide just compensation.

The Sixth and Seventh Amendment Read your Bill of Rights for these amendments

The right to legal counsel was not originally limited by one’s ability to pay or the type of crime.

In Gideon vs Wainwright (1963), Earl Gideon, a poor, uneducated ex-convict was arrested for theft. He could not afford an attorney , and a free one was only offered in death penalty cases in Florida at the time.

Gideon was found guilty and had to serve 5 years in prison. While in prison, he educated himself on legal rights and appealed his

case. He won, since the judges ruled the ability to pay should not limit the

right to an attorney.

8th Amendment

Is the death penalty cruel and unusual punishment? Furman vs Georgia (1972)- death penalty is cruel and unusually if

it is applied unfairly. In re Kemmler (1890) Any method of execution is fine as long as

it does not involved torture or lingering death. Gregg v Georgia (1976) Death penalty was constitutional

9th Amendment

Courts have ruled the right to privacy exists