The Constitution
Round 2
In this Seminar
• Review the Amendments to the
Constitution
• Introduce a case study that we will be
using for the rest of the course
• Examine the impact of the Constitution on
our case study
• Review some more recent Supreme Court
decisions and their impact on us
Constitutional Amendments
• The 1st 10 are collectively know as the “Bill of Rights”
• Adopted by Congress in 1789 they were ratified under
the Article 5 process in 1791
• Interesting fact is that the Amendments when initially
adopted only applied to the federal government, not the
states
• The Supreme Court through a series of cases starting in
1897 used the 14th Amendment “Due Process” clause to
apply these rights against the states
• This is known as “the doctrine of incorporation”
The Bill of Rights
• 1. Congress shall make no law respecting
the establishment of religion or prohibiting
the free exercise therof; or abridging the
freedom of speech, or of the press; or the
right of the people to peaceably assemble,
and to petition the Government for a
redress of grievances
• 2. Right to bear arms
Bill of Rights
• 3. No quartering of soldiers in times of peace
without permission
• 4. Protection against unreasonable searches
and seizures and no Warrant shall issue without
probable cause
• 5. Use of grand juries for capital crimes, right
against self incrimination, can’t be deprived of
life, liberty or property without due process of
law. Property can’t be taken for public use
without just compensation
Bill of Rights
• 6. Right to a speedy and public trial, by an
impartial jury, to be informed of the nature
and cause of the accusation, to confront
witnesses
• 7. Civil suits exceeding $20 shall have the
right to a trial by jury
• 8. Excessive bail shall not be required, nor
excessive fines imposed, and no cruel or
unusual punishment
Bill of Rights
• 9. The listing of these rights shall not be
construed to deny or disparage others
retained by the people
• 10. 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.
Bill of Rights
• Interesting to note with these Amendments
is that there are no definitions
• Constitutional law is the development of
the meaning of these rights over the years
• Interpretations have made clear that no
rights are absolute
Constitutional Amendments
• 11. Judicial authority of Federal Courts did not
extend to cases brought against a State by one
of its citizens
• 12. Changes in the Electoral College
• 13. Abolished slavery
• 14. Contains the “equal protection” and “due
process” clause which have been used
frequently by the Court over the years to extend
and protect a variety of rights.
Constitutional Amendments
• 15. Protected the right to vote against
discrimination on account of race, color or
previous servitude (Note women still do
not have the right to vote guaranteed by
the Constitution for another 50 years
• 16. Power to set up income taxes
• 17. Deal with Senate vacancy’s
• 18. Prohibition
Constitutional Amendments
• 19 Women given the right to vote in 1920
• 20. Set the dates of the start of terms for
the President etc
• 21. Repealed prohibition
• 22. Term limits for the President
• 23. Handled how Washington DC votes for
the Electoral College would be handled
Constitutional Amendments
•
•
•
•
24 No poll tax
25. Succession plans for the Presidency
26. 18 years olds can vote
27. Pay increases for Congress can not
take effect until there is an intervening
election
Constitution
• There are very few Amendments for a
government that has changed so much over the
years
• Most of the changes we have seen have come
from the increasingly broad interpretation of
powers under the Constitution and from
legislation
• This is a more efficient way to handle issues
since Constitutional amendments take a long
time and once done are hard to change
• Prohibition is a great example of how the
Constitution should not be used
Case study
• Our family is John and Susan Applegate. John
and Susan are in their mid 40’s. They have 3
children Erica 17, Matthew 15, and Jessica 10.
Their children attend the local public school. This
family is very politically active and John and
Susan encourage their children to be active as
well. Recently in a hotly contested school board
election over the issue of school uniforms, they
encouraged their oldest 2 children to stage a
protest on school grounds and burn a set of
uniforms as a protest.
• What potential Constitutional rights apply?
The Applegate’s
• The 1st Amendment states “Congress shall
make no law … abridging the freedom of
speech… or the right of the people to
peaceably assemble…”
• The rights of “free speech and “peaceable
assembly” are both potential rights that are
being asserted by the Applegate’s in this
situation
Applegate’s
• What is “free speech”
• The Constitution does not define “free
speech” nor does it seem to allow any
restrictions as it states “Congress shall
make no law…”
Applegate’s
• The basic right of free speech allows individuals
to express themselves without interference or
constraints by the government
• Not everything will qualify however. The
Supreme Court has recognized some limitations
where the speech may cause a breach of the
peace or violent action. Obscenity, fighting
words, and advocating illegal action have all
been found outside the protection of the 1st
amendment.
Applegate’s
• Speech includes more than spoken or written words.
• The Court has also varied the protection depending on
the location of the “speech”. Public forums like public
parks, sidewalks etc traditionally enjoy the strongest
protection for free speech.
• Limiting speech in one of these areas is subjected to
strict scrutiny by the Court and any statute or ordinance
must serve a compelling governmental purpose and be
narrowly tailored to meet that interest.
Applegate’s
• In Tinker v. The Des Moines Independent School
Board, 393 U.S. 503 ( 1969), three students
wore black armbands to public school to protest
the Vietnam war. The schools had a policy
banning this practice and any student doing so
would be suspended and allowed to return only
when they agreed to abide by the policy.
• The Court held that the 1st Amendment applied
to public schools and the wearing of the
armbands was Constitutionally protected
symbolic speech
Applegate’s
• In Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989) the
Court affirmed its long standing interpretation
that “speech” does not end with the spoken or
written word. If there is an “intent to convey a
message” it will be speech.
• This case overturned a conviction for flag
burning. This cases invalidated laws in 48 out of
the 50 states at that time. Subsequent efforts by
Congress to ban flag burning as a form of
protest have also been struck down under this
Amendment in United States v. Eichman, 496
U.S. 310 (1990).
Applegate’s
• One of the most recent pronouncements of the
Court on the 1st Amendment right of free speech
confirmed the right of the Westboro Baptist
Church to picket at funerals in Synder v. Phelps
decided March 2, 2011, at least under some
circumstances.
• The Court determined that the “content” of the
signs used by church members “plainly related
to public, rather than private, matters. The
placards highlighted issues of public import…”
Applegate’s
• “Peaceful assembly” is also a protected
right of the 1st Amendment and is often
used as a means to protest the action of
government
• Burning the American flag at a protest was
considered protected as we discussed
earlier
• Protests can take many forms from
marches, to picketing, to sit-ins etc.
Applegate’s
• In Nationalist Socialist Party v Skokie, 432
U.S. 443 (1977), the Court ruled that the
Nazi party could not be prohibited from
marching because the content of their
message may lead to violence
• Interesting side note to this case was the
fact the Socialist Party was represented by
the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union)
Applegate’s
• If you were on the Court and were
reviewing the case, what would influence
your decision in this type of case?
Supreme Court cases
• Brown v. Plata, examining California’s prisons
the Court found that overcrowding in the prison
system was leading to a denial of 8th
Amendment rights against “cruel and unusual”
punishments
• The result is that the California prison system
has about 33,000 to many inmates for its current
capacity and California must take steps to
correct the problem under an initial 2 year
deadline
Supreme Court cases
• Under Article 5 of the Constitution the government has the power to
take private property for public use with compensation.
• Recent cases have confirmed however that this “taking” does not
have to be actually used by the public rather it must be disposed of
in such a manner as it benefits the public
• In Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S 469 (2005), a majority of the
Court allowed a city to take property for resale to a private developer
because the city had a specific development plan it was
implementing as part of urban renewal and economic development
• Interesting side note is that the project was eventually abandoned
because of the inability of the developer to obtain financing. The city
had, however, already paid to move Kelo’s house leaving the land
as an empty lot.
Supreme Court cases
• A great way to keep track of the cases is
at http://www.supremecourt.gov/
• It is always better to read the case than to
rely on those news reports. 
• Next lecture will be a review in preparation
for the Midterm Exam
• If you have areas you would like to see
covered please email me ASAP at
Lburns@kaplan.edu