Edwards Learning Objectives Trace the process by which the Bill of Rights has been applied to the states Distinguish the two types of religious rights

Edwards Learning Objectives

Trace the process by which the Bill of Rights has been applied to the states

Distinguish the two types of religious rights protected by the First Amendment and determine the boundaries of those rights

4.1

4.2

4

Differentiate the rights of free expression protected by the First Amendment and determine the boundaries of those rights

Describe the rights to assemble and associate protected by the First Amendment and their limitations

4.3

4Edwards Learning Objectives

4.4

Describe the right to bear arms protected by the Second Amendment and its limitations

Characterize defendants’ rights and identify issues that arise in their implementation

4.5

4

4.6

Edwards Learning Objectives

Outline the evolution of a right to privacy and its application to the issue of abortion

Assess how civil liberties affect democratic government and how they both limit and expand the scope of government

4.7

4.8

4Edwards Learning Objectives

Civil Liberties And Public Policy 4

http://media.pearsoncmg.com/ph/hss/SSA_SHARED_MEDIA_1/polisci/presidency/Edwards_Ch04_Civil_LIberties_Seg1_v2.html

Video: The Big Picture 4




http://media.pearsoncmg.com/ph/hss/SSA_SHARED_MEDIA_1/polisci/presidency/Seg2_CivilLiberties_v2.html

4Video: The Basics



TABLE 4.1: The Bill of Rights – WHY THESE?

4.1


Origins and application Bill of Rights – Then and Now

Where does the idea of individual liberties guaranteed by the Bill of Rights come from?? Classical Liberalism and the Social Contract

“We hold these truths to be self-evident…”

Who or what did the Bill of rights apply to in 1791?Barron v. Baltimore

Bill of Rights and the States: The process of incorporation 14th Amendment?? Is there anything here that might impact the states in regard to the Bill of Rights?

Due Process Clause Equal Protection Clause

4.1



4.1Incorporation Cases

Your Task is to Identify: Background of the case (5w’s)HoldingWhich Amendment/Protection incorporated?

1.Gitlow v. New York Speech2.Near v. Minnesota Press3.DeJonge v Oregon Assembly4.Cantwell v Connecticut Free Exercise5.Everson v Board of Education Establishment Clause6.McDonald v Chicago 2nd Amendment7.Mapp v. Ohio Search and seizure (4th)8.Aguilar v Texas warrant requirement (4th)9.Malloy v Hogan self incrimination (5th)10.Benton v Maryland Double Jeopardy (5th)11.Gideon v Wainwright Right to Counsel (6th)12.Robinson v California Cruel and unusual punishment (8th)

TABLE 4.2: The Incorporation of the Bill of Rights

4.1


Bill of Rights – Then and Now Popular support

Rights supported more in theory than practice Let the Clan speak??NIMBY

Civil liberties are not absolute Limitations?? Balanced against other values: security for instance….Patriot

Act??

4.1


The Ten Commandments 4.1


It is up to the Court to determine complex civil liberty issues.

Is this recognition of historic importance or an impermissible use of government power to establish religion?


4.1Video: In Context




a. Freedom of religion

b. Freedom of speech

c. Freedom of Assembly

d. Freedom from excessive bail

4.14.1 Which right was the first to be incorporated?


4.1 Which right was the first to be incorporated?

a. Freedom of religion

b. Freedom of speech

c. Freedom of Assembly

d. Freedom from excessive bail

4.1


Freedom of Religion

Establishment Clause

Free Exercise Clause

4.2

Distinguish between the two types of religious rights protected by the First Amendment and determine the boundaries of those rights

TPS: Should there be strict separation of religion and government?. Why or why not?


Separation of Church and State?Distinguish between the two types of religious rights protected by the First Amendment and determine the boundaries of those rights

Separation of Church and State

Church and government are constitutionally separated from

one another.

However, the government supports churches and religion in a variety of ways,

including tax exemption.

A wall of separation?


To The First! TPS

• Explain the significance of the following first Amendment Protections:

– Establishment clause– Free Exercise Clause


Freedom of Religion

Establishment Clause• Guards against establishing a

mandated religion.• In effect, freedom from

religion

Free Exercise Clause• Guards against the

government interfering in the exercise of any religion.

• In effect, freedom for religion.

Two guarantees of religious freedom:


Establishment ClauseCase Studies:

1.Engel v. Vitale (1962)

2.Abington School District v. Schempp (1963)

3.Epperson v Arkansas (1968)

4.Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971)

5.Stone v. Graham (1980)

6.Wallace v. Jaffree (1985)

7.Edwards v. Aquillard (1987)

8.Lee v. Weisman (1992)

9. Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (2002)

• Case Background

• Holding

• Precedent


http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1961/1961_468/

http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_89


http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1986/1986_85_1513/

The Lemon Test

• The purpose of the aid must be nonreligious.

• The aid can neither advance nor inhibit religion.

• Aid must not excessively entangle the government

with religion.

The Lemon Test is based on Lemon v. Kurtzman, 1971.

PA Non-Public schools reimbursement Act


Religion and Education The Supreme Court has had to consider many Establishment

Clause cases that involve religion and education.

Released Time students can be released during school hours to attend religious classes, as long as the classes do not take place in a public facility

Prayers and the Bible the use of prayer and the Bible in a religious way is not allowed in school or at school functions Abbington v. Schempp

Student Religious Groups are allowed to meet in the school on the same basis as other student organizations

Evolution a doctrine cannot be preferred or prohibited according to its relation to a religious theory

Aid to Parochial Schools the Supreme Court uses the Lemon test to determine what public funding of church-related schools is acceptable



Other Establishment Clause CasesSeasonal Displays

• Lynch v. Donnelly, 1984— allowed the display of a nativity scene along with other nonreligious objects on public land

• County of Allegheny v. ACLU, 1989—prohibited an exclusively Christian holiday display

• Pittsburgh v. ACLU, 1989—allowed a multi-faith holiday display

Chaplains• The Supreme Court ruled in

Marsh v. Chambers, 1983 that it was permissible for chaplains to open daily sessions of Congress and State legislatures

http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1256







The Free Exercise Clause

Limits• Actions that violate social duties or

disrupt social order are not covered under the Free Exercise Clause.

–Examples:–Bigamy–Using poisonous snakes during religious ceremonies–Schoolchildren who have not been vaccinated–Faith healing of children (Wisconsin)

snake handlingFaith healing

Free Exercise Upheld• The Court has found many

government actions to be counter to the Free Exercise Clause.–Examples:–Amish children cannot be forced to go to school after grade 8 (Wisconsin v. Yoder 1972)–Ministers are allowed to hold elective office–Unemployment benefits cannot be denied to someone who quit their job because of religious beliefs


Belief versus practice Not all practices protected

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwBVcsWYJd8

http://www.wsaw.com/home/headlines/Marathon-Co-Faith-Healing-Case-5-Years-After-Kara-Neumann-Died-199960551.html


Snake Handling: TPS Should it be protected?


School Prayer 4.2


Muhammad AliDraft dodger or conscientious objector?

4.2


Free Exercise Clause

Belief versus practice Cannot violate rights of others Example case of the Amish: WI v Yoder Discrimination in employment based on Religion

Religious groups are exempt from employment discrimination laws…however they loose tax-exempt status if they discriminate based on race.

Strict scrutiny Compelling state interest Narrowly tailored

4.2

Laws that have the effect of restricting religious practices are subject to strict scrutiny. They must show a compelling state interest in restricting the activity and be narrowly tailored to use the least restrictive means possible to achieve the state’s secular purpose.


Can belief be regulated?..Can Practice?

4.2 Which of the following is not part of the Lemon test?

a. A law must neither advance nor inhibit religion.

b. A law must not foster government entanglement with religion.

c. A law must not impose costs on religious organizations.

d. A law must have a secular legislative purpose.

4.2


a. A law must neither advance nor inhibit religion.

b. A law must not foster government entanglement with religion.

c. A law must not impose costs on religious organizations.

d. A law must have a secular legislative purpose.

4.24.2 Which of the following is not part of the Lemon test?


Freedom of Expression

Prior Restraint

Free Speech and Public Order

Obscenity

Libel and Slander

Symbolic Speech

Free Press and Fair Trials

Commercial Speech

Regulation of the Public Airwaves

Campaigning

4.3


Prior Restraint

Near v. Minnesota (1931) Unconstitutional censorship Does not apply to students Exception for national security

4.3


Freedom of Speech

• “A function of free speech…is to invite dispute. It may indeed best serve its high purpose when it induces a condition of unrest, creates dissatisfaction with conditions as they are, or even stirs people to anger.”

Justice Douglas Associate Justice of the Supreme Court

The Free Exchange of Ideas Freedom of Speech and

Freedom of Press guarantees are meant to:

• Protect each person’s right of free expression, whether spoken, written, or communicated in any other way.

• Protect all persons’ right to a complete discussion of public affairs.

Freedom of Speech and Press do not protect:

• Libel, the false and malicious use of written words

• Slander, the false and malicious use spoken words

• Obscenity• Words that incite others to

commit crimes - Hate Speech and fighting words.

Libel and Slander

Defamation Libel = written Slander = spoken Standards for conviction high

Public figures New York Times v. Sullivan (1964) Intentionally malicious

Private individuals…Lower standard Defamatory falsehood Negligence

4.3


Why a higher standard for public officials?

Free Speech and Public Order Schenck v. United States (1919)

in 1919, the Court upheld the conviction of Charles Schenck for distributing leaflets urging men to resist the draft. Wartime trade-offs – Security for liberty “Clear and present danger” standard Dangerous or merely inconvenient?

4.3


Seditious Speech

Congress has enacted three major laws to prevent sedition and seditious speech:

• The Alien and Sedition Acts—made scandalous or false criticism of the government illegal. Expired before Thomas Jefferson took office in 1801.

• The Sedition Act of 1917—made it a crime to encourage disloyalty or spread anti-government ideas during a time of crisis. Upheld by the Supreme Court in instances of “clear and present danger.”

• The Smith Act of 1940—forbade advocating violent overthrow of the government, and belonging knowingly to any group that does. The Supreme Court still upholds the constitutionality of the law, but over time has modified it so that it is difficult to enforce. Advocating belief vs. action

Sedition is the crime of attempting to overthrow the government by force, or to disrupt its lawful activities by violent acts. Seditious

speech is speech that urges such conduct.

Senator Joseph McCarthy 4.3


Anticommunism Smith Act (1940)

prosecutionsDuring the Cold War,

anticommunist sentiment was

especially fervent, and the

federal government sought to

prosecute anyone connected

with the Communist Party. They

used the Smith Act, which

forbade advocating the violent

overthrow of the government, to

prosecute party leaders even in

the absence of evidence that

they were urging people to

commit violence.

Free Speech and Public Order

“Imminent lawless violence” standard Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969) As we’ve discussed, the Court allowed the prosecution of people who

were accused of being communists. In later years, as in the case of Brandenburg, the Court narrowed its interpretation, finding that it’s permissible to advocate the violent overthrow of the government in the abstract as long as doing so does not incite

anyone to “imminent lawless violence.”

4.3


Hate Speech and Fighting Words

Hate Speech and Fighting WordsYOUR MOMMA

IS SO UGLY, I COULD

BARELY TAKE HER ON A

DATE!

AT LEAST I DON’T HAVE A

NASTY MULLET!!!

HOW DARE YOU MOCK MY MULLET!?!?!? THEM’S

FIGHTIN’ WORDS!!

Hate Speech

• The court has allowed for penalty enhancement for hate crimes. However, as a society, we have refused to “outlaw” hate speech.- In such cases we rely on the incitement test.

- Hate Crime in Chappel Hill

Obscenity Roth v. United States (1957)

Obscenity not constitutionally protected But what is obscene?

Miller v. California (1973) Appeals to prurient interest Patently offensive Lacking serious literary or artistic value Average people/local standards

Regulating adult contentThe public supports restricting the availability of pornographic materials to minors, and

the courts have upheld such restrictions. The problem is that advances in technology make it more difficult to prevent access to minors while allowing it for adults.

4.3


Violent video game?? 4.3


In 2011, the Court ruled that a California law banning the sale or rental of violent video games to minors violated the First Amendment because the games communicate ideas. Depictions of violence have never been subject to regulation the same way obscene materials have. Should they be?

Symbolic Speech

Examples of symbolic speech Wearing an armband Burning the U.S. flag Marching in a parade

Limitations Burning draft cards Threats

4.3


Symbolic Speech

• Symbolic speech is expression by conduct.

• Picketing, the patrolling of a business site by workers on strike, is a prevalent form of symbolic speech.

• Supreme Court rulings show that the blanket of symbolic speech covers only so much. It does not cover destroying draft cards (United States v. O’Brien, 1968) but it does encompass flag burning (Texas v. Johnson, 1989, and United States v. Eichman, 1990).

Free Press and Fair Trials

Can press coverage compromise the right to a fair trial? Sheppard Case Courts have not upheld restrictions Trials are public Sequestering juries

Zurcher v. Stanford Daily (1978) Journalists cannot withhold evidence News outlets are Subject to search warrants

4.3


Commercial Speech and Regulation of the Public Airwaves

Advertising Federal Trade Commission (FTC) No false claims Prohibitions on advertising legal services

Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Licensing and regulations Not applicable to cable and satellite

4.3


Commercial SpeechCommercial Speech is speech for business purposes, usually

advertising.

• For many years, it was believed that the 1st and 14th amendment guarantees did not protect advertising.

• In a handful of decisions in the 1970s, the Court held that advertising was protected, but not without exceptions.

• Exceptions include: barring false and misleading advertisement, advertising illegal goods or services, and the promotion of tobacco products on the radio or television.

Howard Stern 4.3


Campaigning

Election Campaign Act of 1971 limited campaign contributions to candidates

Buckley v. Valeo (1976) Spending money to influence elections is protected speech

McCain-Feingold Act (2002) Banned soft money contributions Banned certain advertising

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010) Overturned restrictions on political broadcasts funded by third parties such as

corporations…Corporations have 1st Amendment protectons.

4.3


Case Studies• The St. Patrick’s Day Parade (430) Hurley v Irish American GLIB

• Speech in Cyberspace (433) Reno v ACLU

• The Public Official’s Lawsuit for libel (435) New Your Times v Sullivan

• The Case of the Offensive Speaker (436) Terminiello v Chicago

• The Case of Parade Permit Fees (443) Forsythe County v Nationalist Movement

• Background• Question• Decision and rationale

4.3 What is the current standard for constitutionally protected speech?

a. The “imminent lawless violence” standard

b. The “I know it when I see it” standard

c. The “clear and present danger” standard

d. None of the above

4.3


a. The “imminent lawless violence” standard

b. The “I know it when I see it” standard

c. The “clear and present danger” standard


4.34.3 What is the current standard for constitutionally protected speech?


Freedom of Assembly

Right to Assemble

Right to Associate

4.4


Right to Assemble

Gathering to make a statement Conflict with public order Time, place, manner restrictions No viewpoint discrimination

Fine line with harassment Abortion providers

4.4


Ku Klux Klan 4.4


The Supreme Court has generally upheld the right of any group, no matter how controversial or

offensive, to peaceably assemble, as long as the group’s demonstrations remain on public property.

Westboro Baptists 4.4


Right to Associate

NAACP v. Alabama (1958) Membership lists protected

Military recruiters Public schools cannot prohibit them…Free speech

4.4


4.4 What sort of restrictions can be placed on freedom of assembly?

4.4

a. Time

b. Place

c. Manner

d. All of the above


a. Time

b. Place

c. Manner

d. All of the above

4.44.4 What sort of restrictions can be placed on freedom of assembly?


Right to Bear Arms

Controversial right

Subject to national, state, and local restrictions

National Rifle Association (NRA) Dems on gun control and NRA

State militias or individuals?

District of Columbia v. Heller (2008)

McDonald v. Chicago (2010)

4.5


Gun show U.S. Gun Ownership4.5


4.5 When was the Second Amendment incorporated?

a. 2010

b. 1791

c. 1868

d. 2008

4.5


a. 2010

b. 1791

c. 1868

d. 2008

4.54.5 When was the Second Amendment incorporated?


4.6Criminal rights


One of the most important principles of constitutional law is that defendants in criminal cases have rights. Police must have probable cause or a search warrant in order to conduct a legal search or seize incriminating evidence. Here police officers read the suspect his rights based on the Supreme Court’s decision in Miranda v. Arizona.

Defendants’ Rights

Searches and Seizures

Self-Incrimination

Right to Counsel

Trials

Cruel and Unusual Punishment

4.6


FIGURE 4.1: The constitution and the Stages of the Criminal Justice System

4.6


Searches and Seizures

Fourth Amendment Probable cause Search warrants Various cases, lots of exceptions

Exclusionary rule Mapp v. Ohio (1961)

War on terrorism USA Patriot Act (2001)

4.6


The Fourth Amendment

• “ The right of the People to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.”

• What is the problem with this part of the 4th?


Origins of the 4th

• Writs of Assistance– Open ended, or general warrants…open to the

abuse of power

“The right to be let alone – the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized man.”

Justice Brandeis


Under the 4th

• Searches and seizures must be reasonable and warrants for searches and arrests must be specific.– A constant balance between catching criminals

and protecting privacy


Under the 4th• Reasonable expectations of privacy:

– The 4th protects people, not places…wherever a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy.

• Katz vs. U.S. 1967 (Wiretap on Phone booth)

– Anything a person knowingly exposes even in his/her home is not covered by the 4th.

– CA vs Greenwood: garbage bags on the curb…not protected.

– Kyllo vs. U.S: thermal imaging for pot…is prohibited


Under the 4th• Reasonable searches and seizures

– Almost always require probable cause…Exceptions:• Stop and Frisk (police)

– Police may seize contraband and weapons

• Airport Searches– Metal detectors/scanners/pat-downs/strip searches

• Sobriety Checkpoints– Must be random

• Consent searches– Who can give consent?...landlord….roommate…?

• Random Drug testing– Public employees– Students

» Police need probable cause…schools do not


Part 2 of the 4th: the Warrant Clause

• “…and no warrants shall be issued, 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.”


The Warrant Clause

• All warrants must be based on probable cause– “…a reasonable belief that a particular person has

committed a particular crime.”– Officers must present evidence to a judge in order

to obtain a warrant.• The warrant specifies “who and where” specifically


The Warrant Clause• Exceptions:

– Arrests for a crime in action: can search the immediate area w/o a warrant (must still file probable cause report (i.e. police report) with the local court within 48 hrs.)

– Incident to lawful arrest– Plain view– Exigent (emergency) situations– Hot pursuit– Vehicles


The Exclusionary Rule

• Evidence obtained without a warrant may not be used against a defendant in a court of law.”

• Exceptions– Police believed the warrant was lawful…”good

faith”– Inevitable Discovery


Five in the Fifth?

Grand Jury Indictment

Double Jeopardy

Self Incrimination

Due Process

Just Compensation

4.6


1. Grand Jury Indictment


Grand Jury Indictment“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…”

* The indictment clause covers civilians accused of serious crimes.

* The Grand jury (23 citizen peers) determines whether there is sufficient evidence to prosecute

* Meet in secret with prosecutor (why secrecy?)* Unlike a Petit Jury (6-12 people), a grand jury does not determine guilt.

* Has never been incorporated to the states


2. Double Jeopardy“…nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be

twice put in jeopardy of life or limb…”• Life or limb…and prison sentences• Exceptions to Double Jeopardy

– Hung juries– Appeals by the defendant– Separate state and federal charges– Prosecution appeals for a tougher sentence

(except for death penalty…the state only gets one shot (no pun intended) to put a person to death)

– Civil cases that result from a criminal case…OJ


3. Self-Incrimination“…nor shall be compelled tin any criminal case to be a witness against himself,…”

Presumption of innocence Burden of proof on prosecution

Taking the 5th, is not an admission of guilt

Includes any and all coerced confessions (Miranda v. AZ…)”coercion is inherent in all custodial questioning.”

Any statements made prior to Miranda rights cannot be used against you along with any evidence found as a result of those statements

4.6


3. Self-Incrimination“…nor shall be compelled tin any criminal case to be a witness against himself,…”

Exceptions to the 5th

Does not protect “deception” (undercover policing)

Public safety exception…”Where’s the bomb?”

If immunity is granted a witness may be compelled to testify

Applies to “testimonial evidence” only Does not apply to blood samples, fingerprints, police line-ups,

handwriting samples etc.

Note: lie detectors are considered to be testimonial…can you refuse to take the test?...

4.6


4. Due Process“…nor be deprived of life, liberty , or property, without due process of law;…”

Due Process? Found in two places – 5th, 14th

An effort to avoid arbitrary actions by government

Specifies defined, uniform criminal procedures

2 types of due process: Substantive due process examines the substance of the law. Does

the law violate some right not specifically granted in the Constitution (fed segregation of schools in D.C. 1954)

Procedural Due Process sets out uniform defined procedures

Fair Jury trial

Presumption of innocence

Guilty beyond a reasonable doubt

4.6

5. Just Compensation“…nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

Eminent Domain Remember Barron v Baltimore(1833)?? Unfortunately for

Barron his case came prior to the passage of the 14th Amendment.

Must be for public benefit

Compensates owner for fair market value only

4.6


5th Amendment Case Study Miranda v. Arizona (1966)

Right to remain silent Knowledge that what you say can be used against you Right to an attorney present during questioning Right to have an attorney provided if you cannot afford one

4.6


Right to Counsel and Trials

Sixth Amendment right to attorney Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) State must provide attorney for indigent

Habeas corpus Not held without charge

Speedy and public trial by impartial jury

War on terrorism: The Patriot Act and GITMO

4.6


“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial,…” Speedy??

Long delays can damage the reputation of the accused witness testimony becomes suspect with long delays Typically no more than 100 days from arrest to trial

Public? A safegard agains using the courts as an “…instrument

of persecution.” Too Public??? Remember…Sheppard v. Maxwell (1966)

Can move venue (Chai Vang) Can sequester the jury (OJ Simpson) Can forbid cameras…but cannot ban media coverage (gag

orders)

6th


“…by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have previously been ascertained by law,…”

Trial by jury appears in three places in the Constitution: Art III, 6th, 7th Amendments …however, the vast majority of criminal cases are plea

bargained (95%)

Jury trial standards Federal – 12 member unanimous decision State – 6-12, not all unanimous (except in Death

Penalty Cases) Impartial Jury: Jury Selection Video Local Jury

6th


“…and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation,…”

The right to “know the charges” Arraignment (by grand jury or presentment)

Hear the charges Enter a plea

6th


“…to be confronted with the witnesses against him,…”

The “confrontation clause” Witnesses cannot testify in secret Witnesses subject to cross-examination Prohibition “of hearsay”

6th


“…to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor,…”

Subpoena Court order forcing a witness to testify Must be shared with the prosecution

6th


“…and to have assistance of council for his defense.”

Right to Council Giddeon v Wainwright

6th


Timeline: 2001: 1200 prisoners detained

- Names withheld

2004: Supreme Court refuses to rule on Constitutionality of detentions of suspected terrorists

Hamdi v. Rumsfeld: Court rules that detainees have a right to challenge detention before a judge

2006: Hamdan v Rumsfeld: Court rules Bush Policy of trying detainees on Guantanamo with military tribunals unconst. (No authorization by Congress)

-In response Congress passes the Military Commission s Act- Denies access to the court system to detainees- Allows indefinite detention without prosecution

2008: Boumediene v Bush: Foreign terror suspects held at GITMO have the right to challendge detentions in U.S. Courts – MCA is Unconstitutional

GITMO TODAY

Guantánamo Bay prisoners 4.6



Eighth Amendment Not defined Incorporated in 1962 Prison overcrowding, Life for Juvenile offenders Death Penalty??

3,300 on death row (CA, TX, FL have over ½) Furman v Georgia 1972

Uniform standards Gregg v. Georgia (1976) Death penalty not cruel and unusual McCleske v. Kemp (1987)

Does not violate equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment Even though More CP where victims are white

4.6



Eighth Amendment Today…Decline in executions

Illinois Moratorium DNA Evidence?

Ford v. Wainwright (1986) prohibits execution of mentally ill Atkins v Virginia (2002) prohibits execution of mentally retarded Roper v Simmons (2005) prohibits execution of minors. Coker v Georgia (1977) and Kennedy v. Louisiana (2008) prohibit

death penalty in rape crimes where the victim was not killed

4.6



4.6Video: In the Real World


Explore Civil Liberties: Should the Government Apply the Death Penalty?

http://media.pearsoncmg.com/long/long_edwards_mpslgia_16/pex/pex4.html

4.6

Right to Privacy

Is There a Right to Privacy?

Eternal Controversy over Abortion

4.7


Is There a Right to Privacy?

How privacy is implied in Constitution Religion: Right to exercise private beliefs Search and seizure: Right to privacy in your home Right to be left alone…1st, 3rd, 4th

Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) Court states right to privacy implied

4.7


Controversy over Abortion Roe v. Wade (1973)

Prohibits state bans on abortion However a woman’s right to an abortion is not absolute

Balancing test…dual interests State interest in protecting women’s health State interest in protecting prenatal life

as a pregnancy progresses and the fetus becomes more viable, states can enact increasingly stringent restrictions on abortion

Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) From “strict scrutiny” to “undue burden”

…made it easier for states to place restrictions on abortion services by stating that such restrictions were unconstitutional only if they placed an “undue burden” on a woman seeking an abortion.

Health codes, admitting privileges, etc.

4.7


4.7FIGURE 4.3: The Abortion Debate and the “single issue voter” phenomenon


4.7 What famous Supreme Court case prevented states from outlawing abortion?

4.7

a. Planned Parenthood v. Casey

b. Roe v. Wade

c. Griswold v. Connecticut



a. Planned Parenthood v. Casey

b. Roe v. Wade

c. Griswold v. Connecticut


4.74.7 What famous Supreme Court case prevented states from outlawing abortion?


Understanding Civil Liberties

Civil Liberties and Democracy

Civil Liberties and the Scope of Government

4.8



Video: Thinking Like a Political Scientist

4.8


Civil Liberties and Democracy

Democracy depends upon freedom of expression Need information to make decisions Majority rule versus minority rights Elites have protected minorities

4.8


Civil Liberties and the Scope of Government

Liberty and individualism prevail

Can’t hide from vast government Technology enables more intrusion Irony that more government is needed to provide more

protection

4.8


4.8 How does the Constitution limit democratic rule?

a. By preventing a minority from passing unpopular laws

b. By preventing the majority from restricting minority rights

c. By preventing a minority from overruling the majority

d. All of the above

4.8


a. By preventing a minority from passing unpopular laws

b. By preventing the majority from restricting minority rights

c. By preventing a minority from overruling the majority

d. All of the above

4.84.8 How does the Constitution limit democratic rule?



4Video: So What?

4Further Review: On My PolisciLab

Listen to the Chapter

Study and Review the Flashcards

Study and Review the Practice Tests

Documents

Edwards Learning Objectives Trace the process by which the Bill of Rights has been applied to the states Distinguish the two types of religious rights