“A Bill of Rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth, general or particular, and what not just government should refuse, or rest on inference.” -TJ CIVIL LIBERTIES

CIVIL LIBERTIES Interpreted by courts and legislature US Constitution (1789) failed to enumerate individual freedoms Bill of Rights (1791) - Protects individual freedoms from government intrusion Interpreted by courts and legislature CIVIL LIBERTIES – the protections the Constitution provides against the abuse of government power LIMITS GOVERNMENT POWER TO PROTECT INDIVIDUAL ACTION

BILL OF RIGHTS At first applied to federal rights but not states “CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW…” First eight Amendments guarantee the federal gov will not trample on certain individual liberties Altered over time 14th Amendment nationalized Bill of Rights - INCORPORATION DOCTRINE Prevented state gov. officials from abusing people’s liberties Only applied as restrictions to federal government In an effort to protect newly freed slaves, the amendment and latter interpretation affected everyone

CONFLICTING INTERESTS Constitution and Bill of Rights contain competing rights and duties Articles of Constitution: what federal gov. can do Bill of Rights: what federal gov. can’t do FREEDOM V. ORDER V. LIBERTY Tiger Woods has the right to privacy, but the media can blast him with rumors KKK can march through DC to freely express themselves…but not without a permit to keep the peace

14th AMENDMENT 5 sections, only two currently important (first and fifth): 1) All persons born or naturalized in the US, and subject to jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the US and of the State wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges and immunities of citizens of the US; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny any person within its jurisdiction they equal protection of laws DUE PROCESS CLAUSE EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE 5) The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article

SELECTIVE INCORPORATION Incorporation Doctrine: Process of applying Bill of Rights to states Most, but not all, applied Supreme Court could examine citizens' rights on a (selective part) case-by-case basis and employ the protections afforded by the Bill of Rights as needed

SIGNIFICANT CASES 1833 Barron v. Baltimore 1925 Gitlow v. New York Bill of Rights does not apply to states 1925 Gitlow v. New York Bill of Rights DOES apply to states! First Amendment protected by due process clause of 14th Amendment Upheld conviction Began selective incorporation

1st AMENDMENT “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 redress of grievances”

1st AMENDMENT: RELIGION ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of a religion Courts may not favor one religion Maintain a “wall of separation” FREE EXERCISE CLAUSE Prohibits the abridgement of citizens’ freedom to worship, or not, as they please

LEMON V. KURTZMAN (1971) Established the LEMON TEST

FREEDOM OF SPEECH Preferred position doctrine – fundamental to other freedoms and provide basis for other liberties. Types of speech: pure, speech plus, symbolic Not automatically protected: Libel (oral = slander) – defamation False information that can greatly harm a person’s reputation TRUE statements have FULL constitutional protection

“SCHOOL SPEECH” On-campus speech which is neither obscene, vulgar, lewd, indecent or plainly offensive nor advocating illegal drugs at a school-sponsored events, Tinker applies limiting the authority of schools to regulate the speech, whether on or off-campus, unless it would materially and substantially disrupt classwork and discipline in the school.

1973 Court classified what is “obscene” 1. The work, taken as a whole, appealed “to prurient interest in sex.” 2. The work showed “patently offensive” sexual conduct that was specifically defined by an state obscenity law 3. The work, taken as a whole, lacked “serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.” Local standard: “Reasonable person” – someone whose outlook is broad enough to evaluate the material on its overall merit rather than its most objectionable feature Average person

Warren Court (1953-1969)

Warren Court (1953-1969) Engel v. Vitale New York Times v. Sullivan Brandenburg v. Ohio Tinker v. Des Moines Mapp v. Ohio Miranda v. Arizona Gideon v. Wainwright Brown v. Board of Education

RIGHT TO PRIVACY The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.