Chapter 10: Civil Liberties

Transcription

1

2 Chapter 10: Civil Liberties Section 1: Protecting Constitutional Rights Section 2: First Amendment Freedoms Section 3: Protecting Individual Liberties Section 4: Crime and Punishment

3 Section 1 at a Glance Protecting Constitutional Rights The Bill of Rights protects Americans civil liberties and civil rights. In some cases, government may place limits on individual freedoms for the sake of the common good. The Supreme Court has established that many of the provisions of the Bill of Rights limit the actions of state and local governments as well as of the federal government.

4 Main Idea Reading Focus Protecting Constitutional Rights The United States was formed out of a belief that individuals had certain important liberties and rights. The Constitution s Bill of Rights protects these liberties and rights. What is the Bill of Rights, and what does it protect? What are the limitations on civil liberties and rights? How does the Fourteenth Amendment help protect civil liberties?

5 The Importance of the Bill of Rights

6 The Bill of Rights A firm commitment to gain personal freedoms drove American colonists to break from Great Britain in the Revolutionary War. The colonists were trying to protect their rights, including Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. Eventually this quest led to the creation of the Bill of Rights.

7 The Bill of Rights A firm commitment to gain personal freedoms drove American colonists to break from Great Britain in the Revolutionary War. The colonists were trying to protect their rights, including Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. Eventually this quest led to the creation of the Bill of Rights. After Independence States adopted own constitutions, most of which protected liberties 1787: delegates gathered to draft new national constitution, but there was little talk of protecting individual rights until end of convention George Mason wrote Virginia Declaration of Rights, proposed including bill of rights; others argued state constitutions enough to protect rights Mason s proposal defeated; few specific protections of individual rights included in Constitution

8 The Bill of Rights (cont d.) The Ten Amendments To win ratification of Constitution, supporters agreed to add bill of rights as soon as new national government met James Madison began drafting amendments Some feared listing individual rights might imply government would protect only those rights Amendment added stating that listing specific rights did not mean other rights denied to the people December 1791: 10 amendments became part of Constitution Civil liberties: basic freedoms to think and act; all people have them; protected from government abuse Civil rights: rights of fair and equal status, treatment, right to participate in government though these rights not originally guaranteed for all

9

10

11 Limits on Civil Liberties and Rights The Bill of Rights sets limits on government, but people do not have complete freedom to do whatever they choose. To protect the common good, there are limits on individual liberties and rights.

12 Limits on Civil Liberties and Rights The Bill of Rights sets limits on government, but people do not have complete freedom to do whatever they choose. To protect the common good, there are limits on individual liberties and rights. When Rights Conflict Framers: ideal government one that limited liberties as little as possible Personal freedoms limited when one person s exercise of a freedom harms another person

13 Limits on Civil Liberties and Rights The Bill of Rights sets limits on government, but people do not have complete freedom to do whatever they choose. To protect the common good, there are limits on individual liberties and rights. When Rights Conflict Framers: ideal government one that limited liberties as little as possible Personal freedoms limited when one person s exercise of a freedom harms another person Supreme Court has examined limits of different constitutionally protected freedoms over the years, continues to do so Example: government can limit free speech in wartime when that speech might aid enemy such as publishing information about tactics of soldiers

14 The Role of the Courts Balancing protection of civil liberties a challenge for government Government maintains balance through courts Courts cannot bring action on their own; only issue rulings when cases brought before them Early on many who needed rights protected had no access to court system

15 The Role of the Courts Balancing protection of civil liberties a challenge for government Government maintains balance through courts Courts cannot bring action on their own; only issue rulings when cases brought before them Early on many who needed rights protected had no access to court system Most Supreme Court cases protecting civil rights occurred after early 1900s Some cases came through actions of interest groups like National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF) Groups involvement in cases had important impact on courts decisions about liberties, rights

16 Civil Liberties and the Fourteenth Amendment The Bill of Rights was intended to limit the actions of the federal government. This does not mean that state and local governments can deny individuals their civil liberties and rights. The Supreme Court has ruled that most Bill of Rights protections apply to state and local governments as well.

17 Civil Liberties and the Fourteenth Amendment The Bill of Rights was intended to limit the actions of the federal government. This does not mean that state and local governments can deny individuals their civil liberties and rights. The Supreme Court has ruled that most Bill of Rights protections apply to state and local governments as well. The Due Process Clause 14th Amendment: intended to protect rights of formerly enslaved African Americans after the Civil War Forbade states from passing laws to deprive any of life, liberty or property without due process of law following established legal procedures Supreme Court says 14th Amendment s due process clause guarantees Bill of Rights applies to states Incorporation doctrine holds that certain protections are essential to due process of law, therefore states cannot deny protections to the people

18 Process of incorporation found in number of Supreme Court cases Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Company v. Chicago required states to give owners fair compensation when taking private property Key Cases

19 Process of incorporation found in number of Supreme Court cases Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Company v. Chicago required states to give owners fair compensation when taking private property Key Cases 1920s: flurry of 1st Amendment freedom cases Gitlow v. New York: Court agreed New York State could forbid man from plotting to overthrow government, but states must respect freedom of speech

20 Process of incorporation found in number of Supreme Court cases Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Company v. Chicago required states to give owners fair compensation when taking private property Key Cases 1920s: flurry of 1st Amendment freedom cases Gitlow v. New York: Court agreed New York State could forbid man from plotting to overthrow government, but states must respect freedom of speech 1931, Near v. Minnesota: Court incorporated freedom of press 1937, DeJonge v. Oregon: incorporated freedom of assembly 1947, Everson v. Board of Education: limits against establishment of religion

21 Process of incorporation found in number of Supreme Court cases Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Company v. Chicago required states to give owners fair compensation when taking private property Key Cases 1920s: flurry of 1st Amendment freedom cases Gitlow v. New York: Court agreed New York State could forbid man from plotting to overthrow government, but states must respect freedom of speech 1931, Near v. Minnesota: Court incorporated freedom of press 1937, DeJonge v. Oregon: incorporated freedom of assembly 1947, Everson v. Board of Education: limits against establishment of religion Multiple rulings incorporating other amendments Court has not incorporated all of Bill of Rights into 14th Amendment Incorporating many rights has proved important for protection of rights, liberties

22

23 Section 2 at a Glance First Amendment Freedoms The First Amendment protects five freedoms that are fundamental to the American concept of liberty: religion, speech, press, assembly, and petition. Government may not act to establish an official religion, support one religion over another, or tell people what they must believe in matters of religion. The First Amendment gives every person the right to express his or her opinion. While this guarantee protects unpopular speech, free expression is not unlimited.

24 First Amendment Freedoms Main Idea The First Amendment protects five fundamental freedoms that are central to the American notion of liberty: the freedoms of religion, speech, the press, assembly, and petition. Reading Focus How does the First Amendment guarantee religious freedom? What are the guarantees of and limits on the freedoms of speech and of the press? What are the guarantees of and limits on the freedoms of assembly and petition?

25 Religious Freedom Chief among the freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment is the freedom of religion. Central factor in development of United States Many came to colonies for freedom to practice faith without discrimination faced in home countries. First Amendment forbids government from establishing official religion, and guarantees people s right to free exercise of own religion

26 Religious Freedom Chief among the freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment is the freedom of religion. Central factor in development of United States Many came to colonies for freedom to practice faith without discrimination faced in home countries. First Amendment forbids government from establishing official religion, and guarantees people s right to free exercise of own religion The Establishment Clause Establishment clause declares that government cannot take actions to create official religion or support one religion over another. Through incorporation doctrine, state governments face same prohibition Separation of church and state how separated should they be? Religious displays on public property? Public money used to support religious schools?

27 Public Displays Court issue: legality of government-sponsored religious displays 1984, Lynch v. Donnelly: Supreme Court ruled that acknowledging religion in Christmas display did not necessarily mean government promotion of it

28 Public Displays Court issue: legality of government-sponsored religious displays 1984, Lynch v. Donnelly: Supreme Court ruled that acknowledging religion in Christmas display did not necessarily mean government promotion of it 2005: two 5 4 Supreme Court decisions regarding Ten Commandments Two Kentucky courthouses sued for displaying copies of Ten Commandments along with other historical documents including Constitution Kentucky case ruled unconstitutional focused excessively on religious aspects of Ten Commandments

29 Public Displays Court issue: legality of government-sponsored religious displays 1984, Lynch v. Donnelly: Supreme Court ruled that acknowledging religion in Christmas display did not necessarily mean government promotion of it 2005: two 5 4 Supreme Court decisions regarding Ten Commandments Two Kentucky courthouses sued for displaying copies of Ten Commandments along with other historical documents including Constitution Kentucky case ruled unconstitutional focused excessively on religious aspects of Ten Commandments Texas sued for stone marker of Ten Commandments on state capitol grounds Texas case ruled constitutional marker part of historical, educational display, did not primarily promote a religion

30

31 Religion and Education First Supreme Court case exploring limits of establishment clause based on educational issues 1947, Everson v. Board of Education: Court upheld New Jersey plan to use public money to bus students to private schools Did not violate establishment clause because did not single out students attending religious schools 1962, Engel v. Vitale: Court said public school prayer violated establishment clause even though it was not based on specific religion 1971, Lemon v. Kurtzman: established Lemon Test, law must meet all three standards in order to be found constitutional: Must have secular purpose Major effects must neither advance nor inhibit religion Must not encourage excessive government entanglement with religion

32

33 Free exercise clause guarantees each person right to hold any religious beliefs they choose Government cannot tell person what he/she must believe Free Exercise of Religion However, religious practices can be limited in some cases

34 Free exercise clause guarantees each person right to hold any religious beliefs they choose Government cannot tell person what he/she must believe Free Exercise of Religion However, religious practices can be limited in some cases 1990, Employment Division of Oregon v. Smith: government can punish illegal drug use even if drug use part of religious practice 1878, Reynolds v. United States: Court ruled government could ban Mormon practice of polygamy

35 Free exercise clause guarantees each person right to hold any religious beliefs they choose Government cannot tell person what he/she must believe Free Exercise of Religion However, religious practices can be limited in some cases Laws regulating behavior can be constitutional as long as laws neutral, do not target specific religious group 1940, Minorsville School District v. Gobitis: upheld expelling child from public school for refusing to salute flag, recite Pledge of Allegiance 1990, Employment Division of Oregon v. Smith: government can punish illegal drug use even if drug use part of religious practice 1878, Reynolds v. United States: Court ruled government could ban Mormon practice of polygamy

36 Free exercise clause guarantees each person right to hold any religious beliefs they choose Government cannot tell person what he/she must believe Free Exercise of Religion However, religious practices can be limited in some cases 1990, Employment Division of Oregon v. Smith: government can punish illegal drug use even if drug use part of religious practice 1878, Reynolds v. United States: Court ruled government could ban Mormon practice of polygamy Laws regulating behavior can be constitutional as long as laws neutral, do not target specific religious group 1940, Minorsville School District v. Gobitis: upheld expelling child from public school for refusing to salute flag, recite Pledge of Allegiance 1943: Court reversed self when Jehovah s Witnesses were assaulted during World War II Some court rulings uphold religious freedom when state laws cause harmful consequences to members of religious groups

37

38 Freedom of Speech and of the Press The First Amendment forbids Congress from making any law abridging freedom of speech or the press; but the Supreme Court has ruled that government may place limits on these freedoms, especially when issues of national security are concerned.

39 Freedom of Speech and of the Press The First Amendment forbids Congress from making any law abridging freedom of speech or the press; but the Supreme Court has ruled that government may place limits on these freedoms, especially when issues of national security are concerned. Why Freedom of Speech and of the Press? Decisions in U.S. government made by representatives of people People must have access to full range of opinions, information Must be able to discuss, criticize government without fear of punishment Open meeting laws require government to act in public Freedom of Information Act: federal government must release most documents to press, public on request Protecting freedom of speech, press challenging in cases of unpopular ideas First Amendment exists especially to protect such ideas

40 Limits on Freedoms

41 Limits to protection of even unpopular ideas Government can limit speech, printed material judged obscene False advertising also outlawed Freedom of speech, press does not give person right to knowingly harm another Constitution does not protect defamation, false statements that harm another person Slander: spoken defamatory statement Libel: defamation in print Limits on Freedoms

42 Limits on Freedoms Limits to protection of even unpopular ideas Government can limit speech, printed material judged obscene False advertising also outlawed Freedom of speech, press does not give person right to knowingly harm another Constitution does not protect defamation, false statements that harm another person Slander: spoken defamatory statement Libel: defamation in print Individuals who believe selves to be slandered or libeled may take legal action 1964, New York Times Co. v. Sullivan: public officials have fewer legal protections against libel than private citizens Involved ad in New York Times describing racial discrimination in Alabama Supreme Court rejected libel suit Court: to be libelous, false statement about public official must demonstrate actual malice

43 Limits on Freedoms (cont d.) Government may limit First Amendment freedoms in name of national security, to prevent treason, sedition Treason: crime of making war against United States or giving aid and comfort to its enemies

44 Limits on Freedoms (cont d.) Government may limit First Amendment freedoms in name of national security, to prevent treason, sedition Treason: crime of making war against United States or giving aid and comfort to its enemies During wartime certain speech or writings may be treasonous, such as publishing information about location, tactics of American forces Sedition: legal term for speech, actions that inspire revolt against government

45 Limits on Freedoms (cont d.) Government may limit First Amendment freedoms in name of national security, to prevent treason, sedition Treason: crime of making war against United States or giving aid and comfort to its enemies During wartime certain speech or writings may be treasonous, such as publishing information about location, tactics of American forces Sedition: legal term for speech, actions that inspire revolt against government Courts have upheld laws banning seditious speech Attempts to define seditious speech, analyze whether or not it has been protected by First Amendment, have caused much controversy

46 The Alien and Sedition Acts 1798: United States on verge of war with France Federalist Party controlled presidency; Congress passed Alien and Sedition Acts; intended to protect country from domestic dissent during war Supposedly outlawed false, scandalous, and malicious statements about U.S. government

47 The Alien and Sedition Acts 1798: United States on verge of war with France Federalist Party controlled presidency; Congress passed Alien and Sedition Acts; intended to protect country from domestic dissent during war Supposedly outlawed false, scandalous, and malicious statements about U.S. government In reality, new laws designed to silence Federalists rivals, Democratic-Republicans 1800: anger over acts brought about defeat of President John Adams Three of four acts later repealed or allowed to expire One, Alien Enemies Act, still in effect; allows president to deport resident aliens if their home countries at war with United States

48 A Clear and Present Danger World War I, Congress passed Espionage Act, Sedition Act targeting criticism of government, interference with war effort 1919, Schenck v. United States: Court upheld conviction of man charged with interfering with war effort by publishing flyer urging men to refuse to serve in military Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote Schenck decision Established idea that speech can be limited if it creates clear and present danger of an outcome that government has right to prevent Later changed view, argued for specific definition of dangerous speech 1927, Whitney v. California: state has power to punish those whose words might encourage crime, disturb peace, harm public welfare Eve of U.S. entry into World War II Outlawed calling for forceful overthrow of United States Also outlawed organizing, joining group with such views

49 The First Amendment and the Media First Amendment also protects freedom of press Acknowledges importance of free media in democratic society Government has tried to balance need for media freedom, rights of others, issues of national security Radio, television broadcasters have fewer First Amendment protections than print media; government regulates public airwaves Certain language and content limited or prohibited

50 The First Amendment and the Media First Amendment also protects freedom of press Acknowledges importance of free media in democratic society Government has tried to balance need for media freedom, rights of others, issues of national security Radio, television broadcasters have fewer First Amendment protections than print media; government regulates public airwaves Certain language and content limited or prohibited Cable systems do not use public airwaves, have greater freedom Internet also less subject to government regulation Trying to limit pornography on Internet largely unsuccessful 1997, Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union: Court rejected law seeking to regulate Internet pornography, in part because users not likely to encounter offensive content by accident ruled law violated First Amendment s guarantee of free speech

51

52 Prior Restraint Another freedom of press issue is prior restraint: government action that seeks to prevent materials from being published 1931, Near v. Minnesota: Court ruled prior restraint almost always unconstitutional Someone could be punished if law broken, but not if officials believed law might be violated in the future

53 Prior Restraint Another freedom of press issue is prior restraint: government action that seeks to prevent materials from being published 1931, Near v. Minnesota: Court ruled prior restraint almost always unconstitutional Someone could be punished if law broken, but not if officials believed law might be violated in the future 1971, New York times Co. v. United States: President Richard Nixon tried to stop New York Times publication of Pentagon Papers, classified documents about Vietnam War policy White House argued publication of papers would threaten national security In reality, publication would reveal that U.S. officials had long misled public about war Court ruled government failed to prove need for prior restraint; Pentagon Papers were published

54 Supreme Court has granted some First Amendment protections to symbolic speech: communication of ideas through symbols, actions Protected as long as speech does not pose major threat to property, public order Symbolic Speech

55 Supreme Court has granted some First Amendment protections to symbolic speech: communication of ideas through symbols, actions Protected as long as speech does not pose major threat to property, public order Symbolic Speech 1931, Stromberg v. California: Court overturned conviction of woman displaying red flag as symbol of opposition to organized government Ruled California law overly vague, restricted free speech

56 Supreme Court has granted some First Amendment protections to symbolic speech: communication of ideas through symbols, actions Protected as long as speech does not pose major threat to property, public order Symbolic Speech 1931, Stromberg v. California: Court overturned conviction of woman displaying red flag as symbol of opposition to organized government Ruled California law overly vague, restricted free speech 1969, Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District: Supreme Court ruled Iowa school could not prevent students from wearing black armbands as Vietnam War protest

57 Supreme Court has granted some First Amendment protections to symbolic speech: communication of ideas through symbols, actions Protected as long as speech does not pose major threat to property, public order Symbolic Speech 1931, Stromberg v. California: Court overturned conviction of woman displaying red flag as symbol of opposition to organized government Ruled California law overly vague, restricted free speech 1969, Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District: Supreme Court ruled Iowa school could not prevent students from wearing black armbands as Vietnam War protest 1989, Texas v. Johnson: burning American flag as part of political protest protected act of free speech Cannot prohibit expression of idea simply because society finds idea offensive, disagreeable

58 Freedoms of Assembly and Petition The First Amendment s final two protections prohibit government from denying people the right peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. People have right to meet together, express views peacefully People have right to make opinions known to government through petitions designed to force government to consider issue, allow vote

59 Freedoms of Assembly and Petition The First Amendment s final two protections prohibit government from denying people the right peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. People have right to meet together, express views peacefully People have right to make opinions known to government through petitions designed to force government to consider issue, allow vote Landmark Cases 1937, DeJonge v. Oregon: ruling recognized right to peaceably assemble as basic right, incorporated into 14th Amendment making it illegal for states to deny this right 1963, Edwards v. South Carolina: students denied right to assemble, petition for redress of grievances; if assembly is peaceful, cannot be stopped simply because bystanders ARE disorderly

60

61 Limits on Assembly and Petition In general, government cannot limit right of assembly, petition based on protesters points of view Only in extreme cases protesters encouraging violent acts does government have strong reason to limit First Amendment freedom Governments can place reasonable restrictions on time, manner, place of gatherings Citizens can be required to obtain permit to hold demonstration

62 Limits on Assembly and Petition In general, government cannot limit right of assembly, petition based on protesters points of view Only in extreme cases protesters encouraging violent acts does government have strong reason to limit First Amendment freedom Governments can place reasonable restrictions on time, manner, place of gatherings Citizens can be required to obtain permit to hold demonstration Citizens can be denied right to make excessive noise Citizens can be kept off private property, prevented from invading privacy of others Any rules must serve clear, valid purpose Any rules must be applied evenly, without regard to content of demonstrator s message

63 Freedom of association the right to join with others, share ideas, work toward common purpose Phrase does not appear in First Amendment Freedom of Association

64 Freedom of association the right to join with others, share ideas, work toward common purpose Phrase does not appear in First Amendment Freedom of Association Supreme Court has determined freedoms guaranteed by First Amendment establish right to freedom of association 1958, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. Alabama ex rel. Patterson

65 Freedom of association the right to join with others, share ideas, work toward common purpose Phrase does not appear in First Amendment Freedom of Association Supreme Court has determined freedoms guaranteed by First Amendment establish right to freedom of association 1958, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. Alabama ex rel. Patterson Alabama had tried to force NAACP to give state list of members NAACP feared publicizing names would lead to violence, harmful consequences

66 Freedom of association the right to join with others, share ideas, work toward common purpose Phrase does not appear in First Amendment Freedom of Association Supreme Court has determined freedoms guaranteed by First Amendment establish right to freedom of association 1958, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. Alabama ex rel. Patterson Alabama had tried to force NAACP to give state list of members NAACP feared publicizing names would lead to violence, harmful consequences Supreme Court agreed: forcing release of members names would harm freedom to associate Found Alabama s actions violation of Constitution

67 Debating the Issue: Prayer in Public Schools Does the Constitution permit prayer in public schools? The First Amendment states that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. This protection of religious freedom both forbids the government from establishing an official religion and guarantees Americans right to freely exercise their own religious beliefs. But what about prayer in public schools? Some Americans believe that allowing prayer in public schools is an unconstitutional government support for religion. Others believe that the right to pray in public schools is an essential religious freedom.

68 Section 3 at a Glance Protecting Individual Liberties The Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms. The Third and Fourth Amendments guard the rights to security of home and person. The Supreme Court has interpreted the Constitution as protecting a right to privacy. The Constitution s guarantees of due process require that government act in accordance with fair and public laws in whatever it does.

69 Protecting Individual Liberties Main Idea A key purpose of the Bill of Rights is to protect individuals from government abuses. Several amendments limit the government s power and protect individual rights against government actions. Reading Focus What are the purposes of and limits on the right to keep and bear arms? How does the Bill of Rights guarantee the security of home and person? How has the right to privacy developed? How and why does the Constitution guarantee due process of law?

70 The Right to Keep and Bear Arms Second Amendment, one of most heavily debated amendments today Included to protect rights of states to form militias, ease fears of those worried about standing army controlled by federal government Some believe this protects individual right to own all kinds of firearms Others believe amendment only protects rights of states to form militias Only one major Supreme Court ruling 1939, United States v. Miller: Court upheld law placing restrictions on possession of some types of guns often used by criminals Said amendment protected only guns that might be used by people in militia Since Miller, Supreme Court has not addressed issue of gun control Some lower courts have made decisions on gun control laws 2007: federal appeals court overturned Washington, D.C., law banning almost all ownership of handguns or rifles

71 Security of Home and Person The Third Amendment British military sometimes quartered housed soldiers in colonists homes Sometimes paid for food, shelter; often did not Declaration of Independence listed quartering of troops among many American complaints against British Third Amendment forbids government from housing troops in private houses during times of peace without consent of owner During war, troops can only occupy private houses as prescribed by law Military forces cannot simply take over house without due process

72 Security of Home and Person The Third Amendment British military sometimes quartered housed soldiers in colonists homes Sometimes paid for food, shelter; often did not Declaration of Independence listed quartering of troops among many American complaints against British Third Amendment forbids government from housing troops in private houses during times of peace without consent of owner During war, troops can only occupy private houses as prescribed by law Military forces cannot simply take over house without due process Today the Third Amendment is largely forgotten by most Americans. Forced quartering of troops has never been the subject of a Supreme Court case.

73 Security of Home and Person (cont d.)

74 Security of Home and Person (cont d.) The Fourth Amendment Fourth Amendment also result of hated British practice in colonial times: use of writs of assistance Writ, a legal document that gave British authorities wide power to search private homes, businesses Could conduct searches without probable cause, strong likelihood they would find evidence of a crime Fourth Amendment written to protect Americans against such abuses, has proved to be important guarantee of personal security

75 Security of Home and Person (cont d.) The Fourth Amendment Fourth Amendment also result of hated British practice in colonial times: use of writs of assistance Writ, a legal document that gave British authorities wide power to search private homes, businesses Could conduct searches without probable cause, strong likelihood they would find evidence of a crime Fourth Amendment written to protect Americans against such abuses, has proved to be important guarantee of personal security Search and Seizure Fourth Amendment also forbids unreasonable searches and seizures Sets terms for issuing search warrant, document giving police legal authority to search private property Government can issue search warrant only after authorities have proved to a judge there is probable cause for a search Warrant must describe what will be searched, seized

76 Officials an enter in emergency without warrant, must follow strict rules Only search for evidence directly related to crime being investigated May seize other evidence only if it is in plain view

77 Officials an enter in emergency without warrant, must follow strict rules Only search for evidence directly related to crime being investigated May seize other evidence only if it is in plain view 1987, Arizona v. Hicks: plain view did not extend to serial numbers 1914, Weeks v. United States: evidence obtained illegally may not be used against person in court; known as exclusionary rule 1961, Mapp v. Ohio: conviction overturned because evidence seized in illegal search

78 Officials an enter in emergency without warrant, must follow strict rules Only search for evidence directly related to crime being investigated May seize other evidence only if it is in plain view 1987, Arizona v. Hicks: plain view did not extend to serial numbers 1914, Weeks v. United States: evidence obtained illegally may not be used against person in court; known as exclusionary rule 1961, Mapp v. Ohio: conviction overturned because evidence seized in illegal search Fourth Amendment does not always require police to obtain warrant Person s right to be free does not reach outdoors Police can search through person s trash without warrant

79 Security of Home and Person (cont d.) Pedestrians and Cars Legally speaking, stopping a person considered a seizure Police can stop someone on basis of reasonable suspicion Once stopped, police may search person if there is concern for safety of police officer, others To arrest, police must be able to show probable cause

80 Security of Home and Person (cont d.) Pedestrians and Cars Legally speaking, stopping a person considered a seizure Police can stop someone on basis of reasonable suspicion Once stopped, police may search person if there is concern for safety of police officer, others To arrest, police must be able to show probable cause Fourth Amendment relates to stopping, searching vehicles Can stop, search autos without warrant under some circumstances Can stop drivers observed committing traffic violations May seize evidence in plain view, search any place within reach or control of vehicle s occupants In some cases may also search auto s trunk without warrant

81 Security of Home and Person (cont d.) Electronic Communications Fourth Amendment protects person s papers Courts have had to decide if this applies to new means of communication telegraph, telephone, Internet 1928, Olmstead v. United States: wiretapping not illegal search 1967, Katz v. United States: Court reversed self; wiretapping now requires probable cause warrant Post-9/11, USA PATRIOT Act gave law enforcement agencies more freedom to search telephone, communications, business, medical, library records 2007: parts of act struck down; gave officials too much power to search phone, Internet records without court oversight 2005: NSA secret program monitoring communications prompted debate of violations

82 Security of Home and Person (cont d.) Testing for Drugs Courts have held private employers have wide freedom to test their workers to discourage illegal drug use Governments face limits in ability to test their workers Can test employees whose jobs may affect public safety pilots, drivers

83 Security of Home and Person (cont d.) Testing for Drugs Courts have held private employers have wide freedom to test their workers to discourage illegal drug use Governments face limits in ability to test their workers Can test employees whose jobs may affect public safety pilots, drivers Protections for Students Supreme Court: public school students have fewer Fourth Amendment rights than general population Court has ruled school s need to ensure safe learning environment can override privacy concerns School officials may search for drugs, weapons, randomly test student athletes for drugs, require other students participating in extracurricular activities be tested for drugs

84 The Right to Privacy Throughout this section there have been references to the Supreme Court s protection of a right to privacy. Yet the Constitution makes no explicit reference to such a right. Where does this right come from?

85 The Right to Privacy Throughout this section there have been references to the Supreme Court s protection of a right to privacy. Yet the Constitution makes no explicit reference to such a right. Where does this right come from? Implied Fourth Amendment implies people can expect not to have their privacy violated by unreasonable searches Some argue right to privacy should be considered part of concept of liberty guaranteed by due process clauses of Fifth, Fourteenth Amendments 1965, Griswold v. Connecticut

86 The Right to Privacy Throughout this section there have been references to the Supreme Court s protection of a right to privacy. Yet the Constitution makes no explicit reference to such a right. Where does this right come from? Implied Fourth Amendment implies people can expect not to have their privacy violated by unreasonable searches Some argue right to privacy should be considered part of concept of liberty guaranteed by due process clauses of Fifth, Fourteenth Amendments 1965, Griswold v. Connecticut Zones of Privacy Court embraced right to privacy, stating several amendments create zones of privacy, including right of married couples to make decisions about birth control 1973, Roe v. Wade: citing right to privacy, Court held state law could not deny woman right to abortion in first three months of pregnancy

87

88 Due Process of Law The concept of due process is key to the protections provided by the Bill of Rights. Due process requires that government act fairly and reasonably in accordance with established laws. Due process limits government s police power, or its ability to regulate behavior for the common good.

89 Due Process of Law The concept of due process is key to the protections provided by the Bill of Rights. Due process requires that government act fairly and reasonably in accordance with established laws. Due process limits government s police power, or its ability to regulate behavior for the common good. Procedural Due Process Procedural due process: certain procedures must be followed before punishing person 1979, Mackey v. Montrym: state can take away driver s license if driver refused breath test; penalizing without finding guilty Getting drunk drivers off road strong enough reason to deny due process

90 Due Process of Law The concept of due process is key to the protections provided by the Bill of Rights. Due process requires that government act fairly and reasonably in accordance with established laws. Due process limits government s police power, or its ability to regulate behavior for the common good. Procedural Due Process Substantive Due Process Procedural due process: certain procedures must be followed before punishing person 1979, Mackey v. Montrym: state can take away driver s license if driver refused breath test; penalizing without finding guilty Getting drunk drivers off road strong enough reason to deny due process Substantive due process: concerns whether laws themselves are fair and just Based on idea that people have rights that cannot be taken away, even by laws passed properly 1873, Slaughterhouse Cases: dissenting opinion became basis for later rulings on due process

91

92 Section 4 at a Glance Crime and Punishment The Constitution protects rights of people accused of crimes, including the right to a fair trial. People convicted of crimes also have certain rights. The Constitution prohibits government from imposing excessive fines or cruel and unusual punishments.

93 Crime and Punishment Main Idea The Constitution contains many features that help ensure that people accused of a crime receive fair and reasonable treatment from arrest to trial to punishment. Reading Focus How does the U.S. justice system address both civil law and criminal law? How does the Constitution guarantee the rights of those accused of a crime? What are the major constitutional guarantees for ensuring fair trials? How does the Constitution address the punishment of persons convicted of crimes?

94 Protections for the Accused

95 The U.S. Justice System The basic freedoms to think and to act as we choose are guarded by the U.S. justice system, which also provides protections for persons accused of crimes and for those convicted of crimes. The justice system seeks fair and impartial outcomes for disputes of all kinds. It follows rules and guidelines to resolve lawsuits, criminal trials, and other disputes.

96 The U.S. Justice System The basic freedoms to think and to act as we choose are guarded by the U.S. justice system, which also provides protections for persons accused of crimes and for those convicted of crimes. The justice system seeks fair and impartial outcomes for disputes of all kinds. It follows rules and guidelines to resolve lawsuits, criminal trials, and other disputes. Types of Law Law commonly classified into two categories Civil law covers private disputes between people over property, relationships People who violate civil law often fined, otherwise punished, not imprisoned Criminal law is system for dealing with crimes, punishments People who violate criminal law may be fined, imprisoned, even executed

97 The U.S. Justice System (cont d.)

98 The U.S. Justice System (cont d.) Civil Law Several categories: contracts; tort law; property law; family law Contract: legal agreement between two or more parties; verbal or written, but all legally binding Tort law involves actions harmful to another person; medical malpractice, civil rights violation Property law involves purchase, sale of property; house, auto Family law, marriage, divorce, child custody

99 The U.S. Justice System (cont d.) Civil Law Several categories: contracts; tort law; property law; family law Contract: legal agreement between two or more parties; verbal or written, but all legally binding Tort law involves actions harmful to another person; medical malpractice, civil rights violation Property law involves purchase, sale of property; house, auto Family law, marriage, divorce, child custody Civil Lawsuits Civil law case called lawsuit; plaintiff brings suit against defendant, seeking damages, compensation Alternative dispute resolution sometimes sought rather than trial; mediation, arbitration, negotiation Basic steps of trial: plaintiff hires lawyer, files complaint; seek to settle before trial; trial goes forward; trial heard by jury, or judge; jury, judge issues ruling; decisions may be appealed

100 Criminal Law The U.S. Justice System (cont d.) Deals with crime, offenses against public Crime occurs when person breaks local, state, federal law Misdemeanor crimes, relatively minor offense; traffic, petty theft Felony crimes, more serious; murder, sexual assault, grand theft Criminal Case Processes 5th Amendment guarantee: cannot face trial for most federal crimes without first facing grand jury Grand jury decides if enough evidence to charge person with crime Issues formal complaint, indictment Accused arrested, taken into custody Pretrial hearings Plea entered

101 The U.S. Justice System (cont d.) Criminal Case Processes (cont d.) Bail money pledged by accused as guarantee he/she will return for trial may be set Plea bargain may be reached If trial proceeds, complex process begins Jury Trial Jury selection comes first Prosecution and defense each offer evidence, witnesses Judge or jury decides case Either side may appeal decision to higher court If defendant found guilty, sentencing takes place at separate hearing Sentences depend on severity of crime: probation, prison time, capital punishment punishment by death most severe sentence

102 Rights of the Accused In our justice system, we presume that people accused of crimes are innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Balancing the rights of the accused with the need to protect society from criminals is a major challenge.

103 Rights of the Accused In our justice system, we presume that people accused of crimes are innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Balancing the rights of the accused with the need to protect society from criminals is a major challenge. Habeas Corpus Writ of habeas corpus, legal order requiring imprisoned person to be brought before court so judge may determine whether or not imprisonment is legal Important protection against government abusing police power Has received much attention in aftermath of 9/11 Many suspected terrorists held several years after capture with no formal hearing, judicial process 2004, Hamdi v. Rumsfeld and Rasul v. Bush: unlawful enemy combatants do have limited rights to challenge imprisonment 2006: Congress passed law establishing tribunal system

104 Grand Juries Rights of the Accused (cont d.) Fifth Amendment includes guarantee people cannot be tried for most federal crimes without first being indicted by grand jury Some states do not have grand jury system Criminal charges brought by prosecutor in an information

105 Grand Juries Rights of the Accused (cont d.) Fifth Amendment includes guarantee people cannot be tried for most federal crimes without first being indicted by grand jury Some states do not have grand jury system Criminal charges brought by prosecutor in an information Self-Incrimination Fifth Amendment protects accused from witnessing against him/herself Protection covers any government proceeding that might lead to criminal charges; covers only spoken testimony Government can get people to testify against selves by granting immunity 1966, Miranda v. Arizona: questioning suspects without giving right to consult with attorney violates Fifth Amendment

106 Self-Incrimination (cont d.) Miranda decision requires police to read Miranda warnings to suspects Miranda warnings, list of constitutional rights: right to remain silent; anything they say may be used against them in court; right to have attorney; courtappointed attorney provided if they cannot afford attorney Police failure to advise of Miranda rights may result in courts refusing to consider confession as evidence Miranda warnings controversial Critics: some guilty people go unpunished because police did not inform of rights Supporters: warnings protect innocent people from being tricked, forced into confessing to crimes they did not commit

107 Rights of the Accused (cont d.) Bail Eighth Amendment: excessive bail shall not be required Not all must be allowed to post bail Some charged with crimes like murder not allowed to post bail

108 Rights of the Accused (cont d.) Bail Eighth Amendment: excessive bail shall not be required Not all must be allowed to post bail Some charged with crimes like murder not allowed to post bail Bills of Attainder Bill of attainder declares person guilty; takes away right to trial Constitutionally prohibited from being passed by states, Congress as violation of separation of powers

109 Rights of the Accused (cont d.) Bail Eighth Amendment: excessive bail shall not be required Not all must be allowed to post bail Some charged with crimes like murder not allowed to post bail Ex Post Facto Laws Ex post facto laws apply to events in past; outlawed by Constitution If not prohibited, such laws would make it possible to punish person for actions legal at time committed Bills of Attainder Bill of attainder declares person guilty; takes away right to trial Constitutionally prohibited from being passed by states, Congress as violation of separation of powers

110 Rights of the Accused (cont d.) Bail Eighth Amendment: excessive bail shall not be required Not all must be allowed to post bail Some charged with crimes like murder not allowed to post bail Bills of Attainder Bill of attainder declares person guilty; takes away right to trial Constitutionally prohibited from being passed by states, Congress as violation of separation of powers Ex Post Facto Laws Ex post facto laws apply to events in past; outlawed by Constitution If not prohibited, such laws would make it possible to punish person for actions legal at time committed Victims Rights Some feel Constitution does not sufficiently protect victims of crimes Victims rights laws defend right to be treated with fairness, respect; be present at court proceedings, informed of outcome of trial

111

112 Landmark Supreme Court Cases Miranda v. Arizona (1966) Why It Matters: Miranda v. Arizona protects the rights of criminal suspects during police interrogations. Suspects in police custody must be informed of their rights before questioning.

113 Guarantees of a Fair Trial The Constitution provides many safeguards for the rights of those accused of crimes. Portions of the Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth Amendments, as well as Article I, guarantee the basic courtroom protections that define the American legal system.

114 Guarantees of a Fair Trial The Constitution provides many safeguards for the rights of those accused of crimes. Portions of the Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth Amendments, as well as Article I, guarantee the basic courtroom protections that define the American legal system. Speedy and Public Trial Sixth Amendment: accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial Innocent person may spend less time in jail, witnesses memories fresher, testimony more accurate Public trial prevents abuses of law, allows public to monitor proceedings Press access to courtroom controversial; may influence jurors Supreme Court: televising trial does not prevent fair trial Courts have power to limit public access to courtrooms May close trial to public to ensure fair trial, protect the public interest

115 Trial by Jury 6th Amendment: right to trial by jury, incorporated into 14th Amendment Trial jury made up of 12 jurors; takes place in district in which crime took place Bench trial: one in which judge alone hears trial; usually minor criminal trials

116 Trial by Jury 6th Amendment: right to trial by jury, incorporated into 14th Amendment Trial jury made up of 12 jurors; takes place in district in which crime took place Bench trial: one in which judge alone hears trial; usually minor criminal trials Right to an Adequate Defense Defendants must be informed of charges against them; be confronted with, have chance to cross-examine, witnesses against them Adequate legal representation guaranteed; right to attorney; lawyer s failure to meet professional standards violation of defendant s rights

117 Trial by Jury 6th Amendment: right to trial by jury, incorporated into 14th Amendment Trial jury made up of 12 jurors; takes place in district in which crime took place Bench trial: one in which judge alone hears trial; usually minor criminal trials Right to an Adequate Defense Defendants must be informed of charges against them; be confronted with, have chance to cross-examine, witnesses against them Adequate legal representation guaranteed; right to attorney; lawyer s failure to meet professional standards violation of defendant s rights Double Jeopardy Double jeopardy: no one can be made to stand trial twice for same offense Incorporated into 14th Amendment, but not double jeopardy if jury fails to reach verdict and government tries case again

118 Punishment The Constitution includes protections for those convicted of crimes. The Framers were anxious to protect the American people from possible abuse of government powers. Excessive Fines Eighth Amendment: prohibits government from imposing excessive fines Limit applies only to government, not jury awards in civil cases Cruel and Unusual Punishments Eighth Amendment bans cruel and unusual punishments Supreme Court has never defined cruel and unusual Debate has figured into numerous cases involving death penalty

119 Capital Punishment Death penalty practiced at time Bill of Rights written Supreme Court has consistently ruled capital punishment constitutional Number of crimes for which capital punishment applied reduced Court focused on just application of penalty Punishment (cont d.)

120 Punishment (cont d.) Capital Punishment Death penalty practiced at time Bill of Rights written Supreme Court has consistently ruled capital punishment constitutional Number of crimes for which capital punishment applied reduced Court focused on just application of penalty 1972, Furman v. Georgia 1976, Gregg v. Georgia Most states allow death penalty Many Americans concerned about how fairly penalty is applied New technology has helped prove innocence of some convicted criminals

121 Punishment (cont d.) Capital Punishment Death penalty practiced at time Bill of Rights written Supreme Court has consistently ruled capital punishment constitutional Number of crimes for which capital punishment applied reduced Court focused on just application of penalty 1972, Furman v. Georgia 1976, Gregg v. Georgia Most states allow death penalty Many Americans concerned about how fairly penalty is applied New technology has helped prove innocence of some convicted criminals Lethal injection has become the subject of controversy, particularly over whether or not it constitutes cruel and unusual punishment.

122