The Bill of Rights (1791)

The Bill of Rights was added to the U.S. Constitution in response

to the Anti-Federalists’ concern that the U.S. Constitution did not

enumerate individual rights and protections (see Benchmark 1.8).

The Bill of Rights protects the rights of political expression (1st

Amendment) and the rights of those accused of crimes (4th, 5th,

6th, 8th amendments).

The Bill of Rights includes other rights that deal with matters

other than expression or criminal procedure.

Due Process Rights and Protections

Included in the Bill of Rights Due Process

Right/Protection

Description

Cruel and unusual

punishment

The death penalty, while constitutional, may not be used

in a racially discriminatory manner, or in a way that

causes severe pain.

Double jeopardy A person may not be tried twice for the same crime.

Pleading the fifth A person is not required to provide information while

being questioned or while testifying if that information

will self-incriminate.

Right to counsel A person is entitled to legal counsel for representation in

criminal cases even if that person cannot afford an

attorney (see Benchmark 3.12).

Search and seizure A person is protected from unreasonable search and

seizure; probable cause must be established in order to

search a person or their property.

Trial by jury Criminal defendants are guaranteed a trial by jury of the

defendant’s peers (see Benchmark 2.2) both as to

findings of fact and as to the guilt of the defendant.

Other Rights Contained in the

Constitution Right Description

Eminent domain The right of the government to take property for public

use.

Equal protection under

the law

State statutes may not deny U.S. citizens their rights

under the Bill of Rights or other amendments to the

Constitution.

Right to bear arms The right of the people to have their own arms, including

guns, for their defense (see Benchmark 3.12).

Suffrage The right to vote (see Benchmark 3.7).

Unenumerated rights

(Ninth Amendment)

Rights not listed in the Bill of Rights are not forbidden

just because they are not listed.

Protecting and Limiting Individual

Rights The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution includes five freedoms or rights

including: religious exercise, speech, press, peaceable assembly and

petitioning the government for redress of grievances.

These freedoms are not absolute because doing so might threaten the public

interest.

Federal and state laws, and U.S. Supreme Court decisions, have all placed

limitations on First Amendment freedoms in order to protect the public

interest.

Properly balancing individual freedoms with the public interest promotes a

stable society.

Freedom is an ideal of representative democracy, as is stability.

Balancing Individual Rights with the

Public Interest

Method Meaning Constitutional Protection

Ex post facto A law that makes

an act a crime

after that act has

been committed.

Article I, Section 9:

No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law

shall be passed.

Habeas

corpus

The government

may not hold a

citizen

indefinitely

without showing

cause

Article I, Section 9:

The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas

Corpus shall not be suspended, unless

when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the

public Safety may require it.

The Relationship between the People and

Government in the U.S. Constitution

The relationship between the people and the government in the U.S. is based on the

notion that both individual rights and the public interest should be protected by

government.

Individual rights are central to democratic political and social life and represent the

“life, liberty and happiness” identified by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of

Independence and “life, liberty or estate” addressed by John Locke in the Two Treatises

of Government (1690) (see Benchmark 1.1 and Benchmark 1.4).

Protecting the public interest is also critical because community stability is threatened

when the public believes that its interests as a community are threatened due to

government action or inaction. The public interest is also understood as the general

welfare or common well-being.

Individual Rights and the U.S.

ConstitutionIndividual rights are best understood as those rights found in the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights

was offered by the Federalists as a compromise to the Anti-Federalists who believed that the

constitution proposed in 1787 would deny rights that the people enjoyed under the Articles of

Confederation (see Benchmark 1.8).

The Bill of Rights protects social (First Amendment freedoms of association, peaceable assembly,

speech, press), political (First Amendment freedom to petition the government for redress of

grievances) and economic (Fifth Amendment protections that life, liberty or property may not be

taken without due process of law and that private property may not be taken for public use without

just compensation) rights (see Benchmark 2.4).

Other amendments to the U.S. Constitution further protect political rights such as the right to vote

protected by the Fifteenth (no race discrimination in voting), Nineteenth (no sex discrimination in

voting), Twenty-fourth (no poll taxes) and Twenty-sixth amendments (lowers voting age to 18)

(see Benchmark 3.7). The Fourteenth Amendment protects property rights in that, like the Fifth

Amendment, life, liberty or property may not be taken without due process of law by the states

(the Fifth Amendment applies to the federal government only).

When Individual Rights and the Public

Interest Conflict: Civil Disobedience

“Since we so diligently urge people to obey the Supreme Court's decision of 1954 outlawing segregation in the

public schools, at first glance it may seem rather paradoxical for us consciously to break laws. One may want to

ask: ‘How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?’ The answer lies in the fact that there are

two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal

but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I

would agree with St. Augustine that ‘an unjust law is no law at all’”. Martin Luther King, Jr. Letter from a

Birmingham Jail, 1963.

When Individual Rights and Public

Interest Conflict: Economic FreedomEconomic freedom is guarded as an individual right because it is a way to experience the freedom

that is protected by the U.S. Constitution (see Benchmark 2.4) and addressed in the Declaration of

Independence (see Benchmark 1.4).

A commitment to economic freedom has been cited by lawmakers and interest groups seeking to

reduce trade barriers (see Benchmark 3.3), enact policies broadening the role of money in political

campaigns (see Benchmark 2.10), weaken labor unions, increase or reduce taxes (see Benchmark

3.3), and limit increases in the minimum wage.

In each of these areas, economic freedoms have been limited for the sake of the public interest.

For example, contributions to political campaigns are limited in some contexts (direct

contributions to candidates) but not others (money spent by interest groups on behalf of

candidates)(see Benchmark 2.10). Many ways of earning money are outlawed; for example,

President Obama has stated that the U.S. embargo on Cuba (see Benchmark 4.1 and Benchmark

3.1) is “in the national interests of the United States” which limits persons from buying and selling

Cuban products.

When Individual Rights and Public

Interest Conflict: Forced Internment“But hardships are part of war, and war is an

aggregation of hardships. All citizens alike,

both in and out of uniform, feel the impact of

war in greater or lesser measure. Citizenship

has its responsibilities, as well as its privileges,

and, in time of war, the burden is always

heavier. Compulsory exclusion of large groups

of citizens from their homes, except under

circumstances of direst emergency and peril, is

inconsistent with our basic governmental

institutions. But when, under conditions of

modern warfare, our shores are threatened by

hostile forces, the power to protect must be

commensurate with the threatened danger.”

Korematsu v. U.S. (1944) Case Opinion,

authored by Associate Justice Hugo Black

When Individual Rights and Public

Interest Conflict: Property RightsThe right to own property is addressed in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S.

Constitution.

The Fifth Amendment also guarantees that, should the government take money for purposes of

“eminent domain” (taking property for public use), one is entitled to “just compensation”.

Due process must be implemented if the government decides to take a person’s property through

“eminent domain”.

Over the last few decades, the U.S. Supreme Court, and lower courts, has been asked to rule on

situations when local governments denied property rights in ways that many believe was

unconstitutional.

19th Century Voting Rights Expansions

Event Event Details

13th

Amendment

(1865)

“Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime

whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United

States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.”

14th

Amendment

(1868)

Section 1. “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.”

Section 2 (excerpt). “But when the right to vote at any election…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, … 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.”

15th

Amendment

(1870)

“The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged

by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous

condition of servitude.”

20th Century Voting Rights Expansions

Event Event Details

19th Amendment

(1920)

“The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the

United States or by any State on account of sex.”

24th Amendment

(1964)

“The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for

President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or

Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any

State by reason of failure to pay poll tax or other tax.”

Civil Rights Act

of 1964

Contained several minority voting-related provisions including ending unequal application

of voter registration requirements. Title VIII also required that voter registration and voting

data be compiled in those areas specified by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

Voting Rights

Act of 1965

Outlawed discriminatory voting practices directed against African-Americans such as

literacy and good citizenship tests. These tests had the effect of denying registration to most

African-American voters, especially in southern states such as Alabama and Mississippi.

26th Amendment

(1971)

“The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote

shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.”

Sample Item 25 SS.7.C.3.6 Content Focus Free Speech

What has been one long-term result of the constitutional protection of free

speech?

A. fewer court cases involving minors

B. fewer laws limiting minority rights

C. a more accurate election

D. a more informed society*