Bill Of Rights Only Apply To Fed Not State Gov?
This is a discussion on Bill Of Rights Only Apply To Fed Not State Gov? within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Read this. When I went to school thhey use to teach that the bill of rights applied to all goverments even state and local as ...
February 13th, 2006 03:59 PM
Bill Of Rights Only Apply To Fed Not State Gov?
Read this. When I went to school thhey use to teach that the bill of rights applied to all goverments even state and local as wrote. What do you think??
Incorporation (Bill of Rights)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Incorporation of the Bill of Rights is the legal doctrine by which portions of the U.S. Bill of Rights are applied to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Bill of Rights was incorporated by a series of United States Supreme Court decisions, mostly in the 1940's and 1950's.
Though the Bill of Rights was originally written to limit only the power of the federal government, the Supreme Court has ruled that most of its guarantees protect citizens against state governments. Because the Slaughterhouse Cases of 1872 found only a very limited number of privileges inherent in federal citizenship, the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment has not been used to incorporate the Bill of Rights. This has meant that the Due Process Clause was the means by which incorportion occurred.
1.1 Complete Incorporation
1.2 Selective Incorporation
2 Timeline of incorporation
The genesis of incorporation has been traced back to either Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co. v. Chicago (1897) in which the Supreme Court appeared to require some form of just compensation for property appropriated by state or local authorities (although there was a state statute on the books that provided the same guarantee) or, more commonly, to Gitlow v. New York (1925), in which the Court expressly held that States were bound to observe First Amendment free speech protections. Since that time, the Court has steadily incorporated most of the significant provisions of the Bill of Rights. Exceptions are the Second Amendment right to bear arms, the Fifth Amendment right to an indictment by a grand jury, the Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial in civil lawsuits, and the Sixth Amendment's implicit command that a criminal jury can consist only of twelve members and must reach a unanimous verdict.
It should be noted that incorporation applies both procedural and substantive guarantees to the states. Thus, procedurally, only a jury can convict a defendant of a serious crime, since the Sixth Amendment jury-trial right has been incorporated against the states; substantively, for example, states must recognize the First Amendment prohibition against a state-established religion, regardless of whether state laws and constitutions offer such a prohibition. The Supreme Court has declined, however, to apply new procedural constitutional rights retroactively against the states in criminal cases (Stone v. Powell) with limited exceptions, and it has waived constitutional requirements if the states can prove that a constitutional violation was "harmless beyond a reasonable doubt."
There are, however, some substantive guarantees whose incorporation the Supreme Court has not yet ruled on—for example, the Eighth Amendment prohibition on excessive bail and fines, and the Third Amendment right against quartering soldiers in private homes.
As the incorporation drive picked up speed in the 1940s and '50s, disagreements over the method that ought to be taken in making Bill of Rights guarantees enforceable to the States emerged. One school of thought, championed by Justice Hugo Black, was total incorporation. Black felt that the Fourteenth Amendment required that the States respect all of the enumerated rights set forth in the first eight amendments, but did not wish to see the doctrine expanded to include other, unenumerated "fundamental rights." Black felt that his formulation eliminated any arbitrariness or caprice in deciding what the Fourteenth Amendment ought to protect, by sticking to words already to be found in the Constitution.
Justice Felix Frankfurter, however, felt that the incorporation process ought to be incremental, and that the federal courts should only apply those sections of the Bill of Rights whose abridgement would "shock the conscience," as he put it in Rochin v. California (1952). Although Frankfurter's incrementalist approach did carry the day, the end result is very nearly what Justice Black advocated, with the exceptions noted above.
Timeline of incorporation
Many of the provisions of the First Amendment were applied to the States in the 1930s and 1940s, but most of the procedural protections provided to criminal defendants were not enforced against the States until the Warren Court of the 1960s, famous for its concern for the rights of those accused of crimes, brought state standards in line with federal requirements.
Freedom of Speech
Gitlow v. New York (1925)
Freedom of the Press
Near v. Minnesota (1931)
Assistance of Counsel (Capital Criminal Cases)
Powell v. Alabama (1932)
Freedom of Assembly
DeJonge v. Oregon (1937)
Free Exercise of Religion
Cantwell v. Connecticut (1940)
Establishment of Religion
Everson v. Board of Education (1947)
In re Oliver (1948)
Right Against Unreasonable Search and Seizure
Wolf v. Colorado (1949): The Court held that although the Fourth Amendment applied to the states, the exclusionary rule (unconstitionally obtained evidence cannot be used at trial), which the Court had been held to be an essential corollary to the Fourth Amendment, did not. The Court later incorporated the exclusionary rule in Mapp v. Ohio (1961).
Freedom of Association
NAACP v. Alabama ex rel. Patterson (1958)
Mapp v. Ohio (1961)
Cruel and Unusual Punishment
Robinson v. California (1962)
Assistance of Counsel (All Felony Cases)
Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
Right Against Self-Incrimination
Malloy v. Hogan (1964)
Right to Confront Adverse Witnesses
Pointer v. Texas (1965)
Miranda v. Arizona (1966): The Court held that the Miranda Warning was an essential corollary to the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and the Sixth Amendment right to assistance of counsel.
Right to Speedy Trial
Klopfer v. North Carolina (1967)
Right to Compulsory Process to Obtain Witness testimony
Washington v. Texas (1967)
Trial by Jury
Duncan v. Louisiana (1968): The Court held that in state criminal proceedings, where a person could be sentenced to a significant time in prison, he or she had a right to a trial by jury.
Right Against Double Jeopardy
Benton v. Maryland (1969)
Right to Notice of Accusation
Rabe v. Washington (1972)
Right to Counsel (Imprisonable Misdemeanor Cases)
Argersinger v. Hamlin (1972)
Right to Unanimous Jury Verdict
Burch v. Louisiana (1979): The Court has never incorporated the Sixth Amendment's implicit guarantee that convictions be obtained only from unanimous twelve-member juries, but in Burch, the Justices did hold that when as few as six jurors are empanelled, their verdict must be unanimous.
J. Lieberman (1999). A Practical Companion to the Constitution. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Regina McClendon, Public Law Research Institute (1994) (stating that "[t]he almost total incorporation of the Bill of Rights lends support to the theory that incorporation of the Second Amendment is inevitable").
February 13th, 2006 04:00 PM
forgot to say found the link on the Sig Forum
February 13th, 2006 07:05 PM
An "encyclopedia" that can be edited by just about anyone who cares to, is perhaps NOT the best place to go for any real information.
Simply, Wikipedia cannot be trusted.
It has been abused and misused before.
Political Correctness has now "evolved" into Political Cowardice.
February 13th, 2006 10:00 PM
The BoR originally only applied to the Federal Government. After the 14th Amendment, the SCOTUS began to selectively apply them to the state goverments. The 1960s saw a big push in this regard.
February 14th, 2006 06:23 AM
1943 - 2009
Very true. The 2A right to keep and bear arms has never been incorporated (applied) to the states by the Supreme Court thru the 14th Amendment (known as the Equal Protection Of The Laws) amendment. This is the reason why state & local governments have the authority to pass gun control laws.
Originally Posted by CombatEffective
Read more here: http://www.combatcarry.com/vbulletin...ead.php?t=6772
Other provisions of the BoR not incorporated to the states are:
The 3A restriction on quartering troops, the 5A right to a grand jury indictment, the 7A trial by jury in civil cases, and the 8A ban on excessive bail and fines.
The 9A and 10A also do not apply to the states because these amendments do not directly protect individual rights.
When you’re wounded and left on Afghanistan’s plains,
And the women come out to cut up what remains,
Just roll to your rifle and blow out your brains,
And go to your God like a soldier.
By ayce2 in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
Last Post: December 15th, 2010, 01:18 PM
By bigiceman in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
Last Post: February 28th, 2009, 08:08 PM
By DrLewall in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
Last Post: October 1st, 2007, 12:48 AM
By Kid1911 in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
Last Post: July 4th, 2006, 06:20 PM
By P95Carry in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
Last Post: May 26th, 2005, 11:55 AM
Search tags for this page
bill of rights not yet ruled on
regina mcclendon incorporation doctrine
Click on a term to search for related topics.