Home » Posts tagged 'Fourteenth Amendment'
Tag Archives: Fourteenth 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 a redress of grievances.
- Lesson 8 Instructions
- Review the National Constitution Center First Amendment section.
- Watch the Khan Academy video on the First Amendment.
Freedom of Religion
- The Trial of Peter Zenger April 16, 1735
- Cooper v. Pate 378 U.S. 546 (1964)
- O’Lone v. Estate of Shabazz 482U.S. 342 (1987)
- Van Orden v. Perry 545 US 677 (2005)
- McCreary County v. ACLU of Kentucky 545 US 844 (2005)
Freedom to Assemble
- Brandenburg v. Ohio 396 US 444 (1969)
- National Socialist Part of America v. Village of Skokie 432 US 42 (1977)
Freedom of Speech
- Schenck v. US 249 US 47 (1919)
- Dennis v. US 341 494 (1951)
- Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School 393 US 503 (1969)
Free Press – prior restraint
- Near v. Minnesota 283 US 698 (1931)
- New York Times v. US 403 US 713 (1971)
- Pell v. Procunier 417 US 817 (1974)
- Simon and Schuster, Inc. v. Members of the New York State Crime Victims Board 502 US 105 (1991)
- In Re: Grand Jury Subpoena, Judith Miller 397 F3rd 964 (DC Circuit 2005)
- Beard v. Banks 548 US 521 (2006)
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
- Read the National Constitution Center on the Fourth Amendment.
- Watch the Kahn Academy video on the Fourth Amendment.
- Watch “Shifting Scales”, a non-partisan research project conducted by Oyez that discusses how the Roberts Court has been interpreting the fourth amendment.
General Principles of the Exclusionary Rule
- Weeks v. US 232 US 383 (1914)
- Wolf v. Colorado 338 US 25 (1949)
- Mapp v. Ohio 367 US 643 (1961)
- Schmerber v. California 384 US 757 (1966)
- Illinois v. Gates 462 US 213 (1983) Overturns Aguilar-Spinelli in favor of ‘totality of circumstances” test.
“Fruits of the Poisonous Tree”
Are Exceptions Taking Over the rule?
Lesson 18: Fourteenth Amendment: Discrimination in the Constitution and Due Process, Incorporation Doctrine
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.
The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
- Understand and explain the relationship between the federal government and the states.
- Understand and explain the use of the incorporation doctrine, due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to apply cases to the states.
- Read the National Constitution Center on the Fourteenth Amendment.
- Watch the Khan Academy video on the Fourteenth Amendment.
- Dred Scott v. Sanford 60 US 393 (1856) (Overturned by the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments)
Separate, but Equal (Segregation)
- Plessy v. Ferguson 163 US 537 (1896)
- Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka Kansas (1) 347 US 483 (1954)
- Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka Kansas (2) 349 US 294 (1955)
- Korematsu v. United States 323 US 214 (1944)
Right to Remain Silent
Right to Confront Witnesses/Evidence