Column 1
|
|
|
|
|
One of the controversies that arose during the national debate and discussion that led to the progressive ratification by the different states of the Constitution elaborated in the summer of 1787 was that of personal rights, and of whether the proposed Constitution would be effective in protecting individual liberties and rights. In 1787 and 1788, the war for Independence, or Revolutionary War, as Americans usually call it, was still very fresh in the memories of the public, and many people were fearful that the tripartite government, with its powerful President, would be the first step toward the creation of a monarchy like the one they had fought and suffered to escape.
The men who had authored the Constitution argued that the checks and balances they had included were sufficient to prevent the federal government from becoming tyrannical, but others insisted that an explicit list of personal rights that the central government was required to respect should be added. This solution was finally adopted, and in 1791, ten amendments were added to the Constitution, which became collectively known as the Bill of Rights, i.e., a list of rights.
Many of the rights listed are clearly intended to prevent specific abuses committed by the royal imperial British government: Amdt 3 is an example. Other amendments have given rise to far more debate: Amdt 1, and recently, Amdt 2, have led to politically charged controversies.
It will be noted that with the possible exception of Amdts 9 & 10, the amendments all protect specific rights; there is no general statement, as there is in the French Déclaration des Droits de l'Homme (or for that matter in the Declaration of Independence of 1776), of human equality or of rights that are a natural characteristic and feature of being human. One part of the explanation for this is the common law heritage of law in the US, in which it was anticipated and expected that judicial interpretations would become part of the law more generally; another is that ratification of the amendments could only be hoped for on condition that the institution of slavery was not threatened or even questioned by the language of the Bill of Rights.
It is also worth remembering that the authors of the Bill of Rights expected that the list would apply to the federal government and that the federated states would not be subject to the new rules. Many of the states, in fact, had already included similar protections in their own Constitutions, and it was assumed that the states , which had been at the forefront of the struggle against imperial tyranny, would similarly provide protection from intrusion by the central government.
|
|
|
|
Amendment I
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.
|
|
|
|
Amendment II
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
|
|
|
|
Amendment III
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
|
|
|
|
Amendment IV
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.
|
|
|
|
Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
|
|
|
|
Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
|
|
|
|
Amendment VII
In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
|
|
|
|
Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
|
|
|
|
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
|
|
|
|
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
|
|