Bill of Rights
The purpose of the Bill
of Rights is to protect
the minority from the
majority
• Designed to protect the basic rights of
individuals from being taken away by the
government
Amendment One
• Congress may not make rules to
change freedom of religion,
freedom of the press, freedom
of speech, or the right of
people to come together in a
peaceful way (assembly) or to
send petitions to their
government.
Limits to Free Speech
• Clear and Present Danger - cannot use speech to
endanger others or try to incite riots
• 2. Sedition – cannot incite rebellion against or the
overthrow of the government
• 3. Libel – cannot spread false stories that damage a
person’s reputation – except well-known public figures
• 4. Obscenity – cannot express yourself in obscene
fashion – books, e-mails, child pornography etc.
• 5. Fighting Words – cannot use offensive, insulting
language towards people in public places
• 6. False Advertising – companies cannot make false
claims in advertising
• 7. Minors – unlike adults, free speech rights do not
apply fully to minors – R-rated movies, adult bookstores,
school etc.
Amendment two
The people have the right to keep and bear arms.
Amendment Three
During peacetime, the government cannot
make citizens put up soldiers in their
homes.
Amendment Four
People or their homes may not be searched
unreasonably.
• 1. Warrant – special court order giving
permission for search
• 2. Probable Cause – police/government have
reason to believe you have done something
illegal
• 3. Terrorism has changed the rules to some
degree
• Wiretapping
• (from writs of assistance—general search
warrants used by the British to search for
smuggled goods)
Amendment 5
Persons accused of a crime may not be
forced to give evidence against
themselves. Their lives, freedom, and
property may not be taken from them
unfairly (Eminent Domain). A person may
not be put on trial twice for the same
crime (Double Jeopardy) The government
cannot punish anyone without due process.
A Grand Jury decides if there is enough
evidence to formally accuse or INDICT a
person.
Amendment Six
Protects the accused
People accused of serious crimes
have the right to a speedy and
public trial by a jury. They must be
told what charges against him or
her. The indicted have the right to
have a lawyer. They can also hear
and question witnesses testifying
against him or her.
Amendment Seven
In most non-criminal cases, there must be
a right to a jury trial.
Amendment Eight
Punishment may not be
cruel and unusual.
Amendment Nine and Ten
If the Constitution does not
give a certain right to the
U.S. Government, and also
does not forbid a state
government to have the
right, then the states and
the people have it.
The Supreme Court
Supreme Court Case: Hazelwood
School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988)
• 1983 the principal of Hazelwood East High in St.
Louis County Missouri ordered that 2 pages be
deleted from the school newspaper.
The 2 articles included:
• Information of student’s experience with pregnancy
• Another story discussed the impact of divorce on
students.
Principal’s Point of View
• The students in the article could be easily
identified although their names were
withheld
• The sexual content was too much for the
younger students.
• The divorce article actually named a
student
1987 it went to the Supreme Court
Constitutional Issue:
• Does the 1st amendment,
freedom of speech, prevent
school administrators from
regulating student speech in
school-sponsored publications?
Decision
• 5 to 3 against the student editors;
students and adults have different rights in
the same setting. Schools must set high
standards for student speech, higher than
what is in the real world.
• This particular form of speech is different
because it occurred as part as the
curriculum
• The school newspaper is venue for learning
and teaching and schools have the right to
say what should and should not be
published.
Supreme Court Case: New Jersey v.
T.L.O. (1985)
• 1980 a 14 yr old was caught smoking in the bathroom.
• TLO claimed that she had not been smoking and had never
smoked.
• The Vice-principal searched her purse and found cigarettes,
rolling papers, marijuana, a pipe, and a large amount of cash
• She was prosecuted for drug dealing
• TLO’s lawyer argued that the vice-principal violated her 4th
amendment right, against unreasonable search and seizure.
Supreme Court Issue:
• Does the 4th amendment protect
students from searches by school
officials?
• Under what circumstances, if any, can
school officials search students or
their belongings?
• Was the search of TLO’s purse
illegal?
Supreme Court Decision
• School officials act in “loco parentis” in
their dealing with the students, they act as
representatives of the state and therefore
must comply with the restrictions of the
4th amendment
• Requiring a teacher to obtain a search
warrant would interfere with the swift and
informal disciplinary procedures of the
school
Supreme Court Case: Tinker v. Des Moines
(1969)
• 1965 several Des Moines students decided to
protest the Vietnam War by wearing black
armbands to school.
• School principals discovered the plan and
banned armbands-refusal to remove resulted
in suspended
• Three students wore the bands to school and
refused to remove them-they were
suspended Three students wore the bands
to school and refused to remove them-they
were suspended
• The fathers filed a lawsuit in a
federal court asking that suspension
be cancelled.
• They claimed that their freedom of
speech was violated
• The school district argued that the
Vietnam War was too controversial
and feared that the armbands would
cause a strong disturbance. Also, the
disturbance would interrupt the
educational process.
Supreme Court Issue:
• Do students have a right to freedom
of expression at school?
• Do school officials have the right to
limit freedom of expression?
• School officials often misconstrue
student expression: they have
targeted rosary beads and necklaces
as gang symbols: T-shirts with rock
bands
Supreme Court ruled
• that the school had violated their 1st
amendment
• There was no evidence that would lead
officials to forecast disruption or
interference with school
• Therefore schools cannot censor student
expression unless it creates a substantial
disruption
• Students do not shed their rights
completely at the school doors
Supreme Court Case: Wallace v. Jaffree
(1985)
• Jaffree’s 5-year-old son was asked to
recite prayers in an Alabama public
school.
• Jaffree a lawyer said that it violated
the first amendment, freedom of
religion and separation of church and
state.
• Alabama required a 1-minute of silence
for “meditation or voluntary prayer” (the
word prayer was added in 1981.
• Alabama claimed that it asked for
only a moment of silence and did not
require a prayer to any particular
God.
• Jaffree claimed that they were trying
to establish religion in school:
• Son was required to recite, “The
Lord’s Prayer” and “God is Good, God
is Great”
• Students were asked to participate
and if they did not they were teased.
State of Alabama then took it to the
Supreme Court, which considered these
issues
• Was the law authorizing a moment of
silence for meditation or voluntary
prayer an attempt to establish a
religion?
• Is a child’s 1st amendment right to
freedom of religion violated if
voluntary prayer is allowed in the
school?
Decision
• 6-3 Supreme Court said it was
unconstitutional
• Found the word prayer as an
endorsement
• By expanding the law with prayer it
gave it a religious purpose
• Significance: that simply adding a
word shows intension
Kent V. United States (1966)
• Background
Morris Kent, 16, who had been on probation since he was
14 for burglary and theft, was arrested and charged with
three home burglaries, three robberies, and two counts of
rape in Washington, D.C. Because of the seriousness of the
charges and Morris's previous criminal history, the
prosecutor moved to try Morris in adult court.
• Morris's lawyer wanted the case to stay in juvenile court
where the penalties were much less severe. He had
planned to argue that Morris had a mental illness that
should be taken into account when deciding where he would
be tried. Without a hearing, the judge sided with the
prosecutor and sent Morris to adult court, where he was
found guilty and sentenced to 30 to 90 years in prison.
Morris appealed, arguing that the case should have
remained in juvenile court.
Kent V. United States (1966)
• Ruling
The Supreme Court ruled against Morris,
and said that a minor can be tried and
punished as an adult. However, the
Justices said that in deciding whether to
remove a case from juvenile court, judges
must weigh a variety of factors, including
the seriousness of the crime; the juvenile's
age; and the defendant's criminal
background and mental state.
Kent V. United States (1966)
• Impact
• How the courts treat juveniles in the legal system
varies from state to state. In many states, those
under 18 can be tried as adults for crimes such as
murder, sexual assault, or possession or sale of
drugs, with punishments that range up to life in
prison without the possibility of parole. In 2005,
the Supreme Court abolished the death penalty for
juvenile offenders, saying it violated the Eighth
Amendment's protection against "cruel and unusual
punishments."