The Bill of Rights is a document that stands as law in all 50 United States and protects the citizens of the U.S. from various unlawful punishments that would infringe on these rights which are considered universal to all those who legally reside in the country. These amendments are extremely important to us as citizens of the U.S. because they give us a set of guidelines to model our behavior and speech after, as well as allow us to defend ourselves from censorship of various forms that may be cast upon us by government, organizations, or other persons. Just as any law is destined to be tested, the laws set forth in The Bill of Rights have been tested through many court cases tried by the Supreme Court of the United States. These trials serve to clarify the meaning of the law in situations where it's intent is not immediately obvious. Here, we will analyze several court cases and their impact on society, as well as the sociological climate of the populace when these cases were tried. First we will examine Morse v. Frederick, a case on free speech that took place in 2007 and revolved around the legality of a student to present speech that could be considered as promoting or glorifying illicit drug usage. Public opinion has changed somewhat in recent years, from the widespread, publicly accepted and supported “war on drugs” that began in the Reagan era, to a more “libertarian” approach that is held by many. This Libertarian approach holds that as long as the illicit drug use of a person does not infringe on the rights of others in society, or put others in danger, then the drug usage is acceptable in a private setting and should not be illegal. In the year 2013 as many as 58% of Americans held the opinion that marijuana should ... ... middle of paper ... ..."James Dale, First to Challenge Boy Scout Ban on Gays, Calls New Policy 'destructive." Nj.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Dec. 2013. "Landmark Supreme Court Cases." Bill of Rights Institute Landmark Supreme Court Cases Comments. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Dec. 2013. "MCCREARY COUNTY v. ACLU." Oyez.org. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Dec. 2013. "MGM STUDIOS v. GROKSTER." Oyez.org. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Dec. 2013. "Morse v. Frederick (2007)." Bill of Rights Institute Landmark Supreme Court Cases Morse v Frederick 2007 Comments. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Dec. 2013. "MORSE v. FREDERICK." Cornell University Law School. N.p., 19 Mar. 2007. Web. 10 Dec. 2013. "States That Have Decriminalized." NORML.org - Working to Reform Marijuana Laws. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Dec. 2013. Sullum, Jacob. "Gallup Poll Finds 58% Of Americans Favor Legalizing Marijuana." Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 22 Oct. 2013. Web. 11 Dec. 2013.
Milestone Cases in Supreme Court History. info please. Pearson Education, 2007 -. Web. The Web.
Surely, the Bill of Rights, are a set of significant articles that amend our country from what it is today, and what it use to be in the 1900’s, during the Salem Witch trials. If the amendments were in place during that time, the people of the village, in Salem, would not have sufered such cruel and unjust punishment and their rights as citizens would have been protected. Similarly, today the amendments guarantee us, as citizens, vital rights that hold the country united as one. The importances of these editorials go beyond our everyday rights, instead, making us a part of who we are today.
"Ford v. Wainwright." LII / Legal Information Institute. Legal Information Institute, n.d. Web. 19 Feb. 2014.
"Schenck v. United States. Baer v. Same.." LII. Cornell University Law school, n.d. Web. 6 Jan. 2014. .
Washington Law Review, Vol. 86, Issue 4 (December 2011), pp. 841-874 Barnum, Jeffrey C. 86 Wash. L. Rev. 841 (2011)
Schultz, David, and John R. Vile. The Encyclopedia of Civil Liberties in America. 710-712. Gale Virtual Reference Library -. Gale Virtual Reference Library, n.d. Web.
Douglas N. Husak's A Moral Right to Use Drugs In Douglas N. Husak’s A Moral Right to Use Drugs he attempts to look at drug use from an impartial standpoint in order to determine what is the best legal status for currently illegal drugs. Husak first describes the current legal situation concerning drugs in America, citing figures that show how drug crimes now make up a large percentage of crimes in our country. Husak explains the disruption which this causes within the judicial system and it is made clear that he is not content with the current way drugs are treated. The figures that Husak offers up, such as the fact that up to one third of all felony charges involve drugs, are startling, but more evidence is needed than the fact that a law is frequently broken to justify it’s repeal.
To this day, Americans have many rights and privileges. Rights stated in the United States constitution may be simple and to the point, but the rights Americans have may cause debate to whether or not something that happens in society, is completely reasonable. The Texas v. Johnson case created much debate due to a burning of the American Flag. One may say the burning of the flag was tolerable because of the rights citizens of the United States have, another may say it was not acceptable due to what the American flag symbolizes for America. (Brennan and Stevens 1). Johnson was outside of his First Amendment rights, and the burning of the American flag was unjust due to what the flag means to America.
According to the Tenth Amendment in the Bill of Rights: “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.” Though last in the Bill of Rights, it is one of the most powerful and ever changing in interpretation over the course of America’s history. Some historical events that altered its meaning include the Civil War, The Civil Right’s Movement, and even modern event’s like the Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage. In this paper I will discuss how the Tenth amendment has a large effect in both America’s history, but also how it is now portrayed America’s present.
[4] Hickok, Eugene Jr., ed. The Bill of Rights: Original Meaning and Current Understanding. Virginia: University Press of Virginia, 1991
ProQuest Staff. “First Amendment Rights Timeline.” Leading Issues Timelines. 2013: n.p. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web 04 Dec 2013
Pendergast, Tom, Et Al. Constitutional Amendments: From Freedom of Speech to Flag Burning. N.p.: UXL, 2001. Print.
The public has been highly respondent to the idea of legalizing marijuana. Many states are making decisions independently from the federal government. “A growing share of the American public supports liberalizing marijuana laws. For years surveys by CNN and other news organizations have found that most Americans agree pot smokers should not go to jail. In polls taken this year by Zogby, CBS News, and Rasmussen Repor...
Since 1978, 32 states have abandoned the federal prohibition to recognize legislatively marijuana's important medical properties. Federal law, however, continues to define marijuana as a drug "with no accepted medical use," and federal agencies continue to prohibit physician-patient access to marijuana. This outdated federal prohibition is corrupting the intent of the state laws and depriving thousands of glaucoma and cancer patients of the medical care promised them by their state legislatures.
Recreational drug use has been controversial for years. Government has deemed the use of certain drugs to be dangerous, addictive, costly, and fatal. Governmental agencies have passed laws to make drugs illegal and then have focused a great deal of attention and money trying to prohibit the use of these drugs, and many people support these sanctions because they view the illegality of drugs to be the main protection against the destruction of our society (Trebach, n.d.). Restricting behavior doesn’t generally stop people from engaging in that behavior; prohibition tends to result in people finding more creative ways to obtain and use drugs. However, just knowing that trying to control people’s behavior by criminalizing drug use does not work still leaves us looking for a solution, so what other options exist? This paper will discuss the pros and cons about one option: decriminalizing drugs.