CJ140-02A – Introduction to CJ140-02A – Introduction to Constitutional LawConstitutional Law

Unit 3: The First and Second AmendmentsUnit 3: The First and Second Amendments

CJ140

Tonight’s TopicTonight’s Topic

• Discussion and Comparison of Discussion and Comparison of the First and Second the First and Second Amendments to the Constitution Amendments to the Constitution of the United States.of the United States.

CJ140 – Introduction to Constitutional CJ140 – Introduction to Constitutional LawLaw

Unit 3: The First AmendmentUnit 3: The First Amendment

CJ140

First Amendment Broken First Amendment Broken DownDown

• Congress shall make no law Congress shall make no law • respecting an establishment of religion, respecting an establishment of religion, • or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;• or abridging the freedom of speech, or abridging the freedom of speech, • or of the press; or of the press; • or the right of the people peaceably to or the right of the people peaceably to

assemble, assemble, • and to petition the Government for a and to petition the Government for a

redress of grievances. redress of grievances.

CJ140 – Introduction to Constitutional CJ140 – Introduction to Constitutional LawLaw

Unit 3: The Second AmendmentUnit 3: The Second Amendment

CJ140

Second Amendment Broken Second Amendment Broken DownDown

• A well-regulated militia, being A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a necessary to the security of a free State, free State,

• the right of the people to keep the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be and bear arms, shall not be infringed. infringed.

CJ140 – Introduction to Constitutional CJ140 – Introduction to Constitutional LawLaw

Discussion of Discussion of

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ET AL. v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ET AL. v. HELLER HELLER , 554 U.S. ____ (2008). , 554 U.S. ____ (2008).

CJ140

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ET DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ET AL. v. HELLER AL. v. HELLER , 554 U.S. ____ , 554 U.S. ____

(2008).(2008).

““The two sides in this case have set out very different The two sides in this case have set out very different interpretations of the Amendment. Petitioners and interpretations of the Amendment. Petitioners and today’s dissenting Justices believe that it protects today’s dissenting Justices believe that it protects only the right to possess and carry a firearm in only the right to possess and carry a firearm in connection with militia service. See Brief for connection with militia service. See Brief for Petitioners 11–12; post, at 1 (STEVENS, J., dissenting). Petitioners 11–12; post, at 1 (STEVENS, J., dissenting). Respondent argues that it protects an individual right Respondent argues that it protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. See purposes, such as self-defense within the home. See Brief for Respondent 2–4.” Brief for Respondent 2–4.” District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. ____ (2008).

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ET DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ET AL. v. HELLER AL. v. HELLER , 554 U.S. ____ , 554 U.S. ____

(2008).(2008).

““The two sides in this case have set out very different The two sides in this case have set out very different interpretations of the Amendment. interpretations of the Amendment. Petitioners and Petitioners and today’s dissenting Justices believe that it protects today’s dissenting Justices believe that it protects only the right to possess and carry a firearm in only the right to possess and carry a firearm in connection with militia serviceconnection with militia service. See Brief for . See Brief for Petitioners 11–12; post, at 1 (STEVENS, J., dissenting). Petitioners 11–12; post, at 1 (STEVENS, J., dissenting). Respondent argues that it protects an individual right Respondent argues that it protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. See purposes, such as self-defense within the home. See Brief for Respondent 2–4.” Brief for Respondent 2–4.” District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. ____ (2008).

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ET DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ET AL. v. HELLER AL. v. HELLER , 554 U.S. ____ , 554 U.S. ____

(2008).(2008).

““The two sides in this case have set out very different The two sides in this case have set out very different interpretations of the Amendment. interpretations of the Amendment. Petitioners and Petitioners and today’s dissenting Justices believe that it protects today’s dissenting Justices believe that it protects only the right to possess and carry a firearm in only the right to possess and carry a firearm in connection with militia serviceconnection with militia service. See Brief for . See Brief for Petitioners 11–12; post, at 1 (STEVENS, J., dissenting). Petitioners 11–12; post, at 1 (STEVENS, J., dissenting). Respondent argues that it protects an individual right Respondent argues that it protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the homepurposes, such as self-defense within the home. See . See Brief for Respondent 2–4.” Brief for Respondent 2–4.” District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. ____ (2008).