Civil rights pols 2305

civil liberties

as limitations on government power, intended to protect freedoms upon which governments may not legally intrude.

civil rights

are guarantees that government officials will treat people equally and that decisions will be made on the basis of merit rather than race, gender, or other personal characteristics.

due process clause,

which famously reads, “nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” Like the Fifth Amendment, this clause refers to “due process,” a term that is interpreted to require both access to procedural justice (such as the right to a trial) as well as the more substantive implication that people be treated fairly and impartially by government officials

selective incorporation

of the Bill of Rights into the practices of the states: the Constitution effectively inserts parts of the Bill of Rights into state laws and constitutions, even though it doesn’t do so explicitly. When cases arise to clarify particular issues and procedures, the Supreme Court decides whether state laws violate the Bill of Rights and are therefore unconstitutional.

grand jury

A grand jury is a group of citizens charged with deciding whether there is enough evidence of a crime to prosecute someone.

establishment clause.

ongress is prohibited from creating promoting a state-sponsored religion (this now includes the states,it not only forbids the creation of a “Church of the United States” or “Church of Ohio” it also forbids the government from favoring one set of religious beliefs over others or favoring religion (of any variety) over non-religion. Thus, the government cannot promote, say, Islamic beliefs over Sikh beliefs or belief in God over atheism or agnosticism

lemon test

1. The action or law must not lead to excessive government entanglement with religion; in other words, policing the boundary between government and religion should be relatively straightforward and not require extensive effort by the government. 2. The action or law cannot either inhibit or advance religious practice; it should be neutral in its effects on religion. 3. The action or law must have some secular purpose; there must be some non-religious justification for the law

blue laws t

hat limit working hours or even shutter businesses on Sunday, 112 4 • Civil Liberties the Christian day of rest, because by allowing people to practice their (Christian) faith, such rules may help ensure the “health, safety, recreation, and general well-being” of citizens.

frree exercise clause, o

n the other hand, limits the ability of the government to control or restrict religious practices. T

The rights of conscientious objectors—

individuals who claim the right to refuse to perform military service on the grounds of freedom of thought, conscience, or religion—have also been controversial, although many conscientious objectors have contributed service as non-combatant medics during wartime

Sherbert test

It must demonstrate both that it had a “compelling governmental interest” in limiting that practice and that the restriction was “narrowly tailored.” In other words, it must show there was a very good reason for the law in question and that the law was the only feasible way of achieving that goal.

symbolic speech—

wearing clothing like an armband that carried a political symbol or raising a fist in the air, for example—were subject to the same protections as written and spoken communication.

prior restraint;

that is, states and the federal government could not in advance prohibit someone from publishing something without a very compelling reason

obscenity,

acts or statements that are extremely offensive under current societal standards

miller test

whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, (b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and (c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.”

common-law

inherited from English law that predated the federal and state constitutions.

search warrant prior t

o a search or seizure; this warrant is a legal document, signed by a judge, allowing police to search and/or seize persons or property.

Probable cause

is the legal standard for determining whether a search or seizure is constitutional or a crime has been committed; it is a lower threshold than the standard of proof at a criminal trial

e exclusionary rule,

which was first established in 1914 on a federal level in Weeks v. United States.46 The exclusionary rule doesn’t just apply to evidence found or to items or people seized without a warrant (or falling under an exception noted above); it also applies to any evidence developed or discovered as a result of the illegal search or seizure.

they can neither use the bank statements as evidence of criminal activity, nor prosecute you for the crimes they discovered during the illegal search. This extension of the exclusionary rule is sometimes called the “fruit of the poisonous tree,” because just as the metaphorical tree (i.e., the original search or seizure) is poisoned, so is anything that grows out of i

The courts have allowed evidence to be used that was obtained without the necessary legal procedures in circumstances where police executed warrants they believed were correctly granted but in fact were not (“good faith” exception), and when the evidence would have been found anyway had they followed the law (“inevitable discovery”)

exceptions to the fith amendment

he courts have generally found this requirement to apply only to felonies; less serious crimes can be tried without a grand jury proceeding. Second, this provision of the Bill of Rights does not apply to the states because it has not been incorporated; many states instead require a judge to hold a preliminary hearing to decide whether there is enough evidence to hold a full trial. Finally, members of the armed forces who are accused of crimes are not entitled to a grand jury proceeding.

second prosecution only at the same level of government (federal or state) as the first; the federal government can try you for violating federal law, even if a state or local court finds you not guilty of the same action.

Miranda warning,

law enforcement officials do not necessarily have to inform suspects of their rights before they are questioned in situations where they are free to leave

due process

a guarantee that people will be treated fairly and impartially by government officials when the government seeks to fine or imprison them or take their personal property away from them.

economic liberty

: their right to obtain, use, and trade tangible and intangible property for their own benefit.

he Fifth Amendment Integrity Restoration Act

aimed at reducing the practice of civil forfeiture, in which governments and law enforcement entities seize property of people suspected of crimes, prior to conviction and sometimes without bringing formal charges. The government can take financial assets, jewelry, vehicles, art, and other items of value. The bipartisan bill backed by organizations ranging from the conservative-leaning Heritage Foundation to the ACLU, would reduce what its Senate sponsor, Rand Paul, refers to as "policing for profit." C

plea bargain,

an agreement between the defendant and the prosecutor in which the defendant pleads guilty to the charge(s) in question, or perhaps to less serious charges, in exchange for more lenient punishment than they might receive if convicted after a full trial. T

Gideon v. Wainwright

ruling to apply to any case in which an accused person faced the possibility of “loss of liberty,” even for one day. The courts have also overturned convictions in which people had incompetent or ineffective lawyers through no fault of their own. The Gideon ruling has led to an increased need for professional public defenders, lawyers who are paid by the government to represent those who cannot afford an attorney themselves, although some states instead require practicing lawyers to represent poor defendants on a pro bono basis

Bail

is a payment of money that allows a person accused of a crime to be freed pending trial. If you “make bail” in a case and do not show up for your trial, you will forfeit the money you paid

bail bond,

which allows them to pay a fraction of the money (typically 10 percent) to a person who sells bonds and who pays the full bail amount.,“so grossly excessive as to amount to deprivation of property without due process of law” or “grossly disproportional to the gravity of a defendant’s offense

common law/natural rigfhts

inherited from the laws, traditions, and past court decisions of England. To this day, we regularly exercise and take for granted rights that aren’t written down in the federal constitution, like the right to marry, the right to seek opportunities for employment and education, and the right to have children and raise a family.

Critics of a broad interpretation of the Ninth Amendment

point out that the Constitution provides ways to protect newly formalized rights through the amendment process. For example, in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, the right to vote was gradually expanded by a series of constitutional amendments (the Fifteenth and Nineteenth), even though at times this expansion was the subject of great public controversy

supporters of broad interprentatipon of the 9th amendment

point out that the rights of the people—particularly people belonging to political or demographic minorities—should not be subject to the whims of popular majorities. One right the courts have said may be at least partially based on the Ninth Amendment is a general right to privacy, discussed later in the chapter

right to privacy

as it would have been understood in the late eighteenth century: a right to be free of government intrusion into our personal life, particularly within the bounds of the home

undue burden test,

which allows restrictions prior to viability that are not “substantial obstacle[s]” (undue burdens) to women seeking an abortion.74 Thus, the court upheld some state restrictions, including a required waiting period between arranging and having an abortion, parental consent (or, if not possible for some reason such as incest, authorization of a judge) for minors, and the requirement that women be informed of the health consequences of having an abortion.