The Establishment Clause is a provision in the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which proscribes the government from making any law respecting an establishment of religion. It is forbidden for the state or federal government to create a religion and they may not pass any laws that unduly favor one religion over another. This clause is important to protect one’s freedom of religion to practice, and ensure that all religions are treated equally and fairly by the government. Due Process is a provision in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which states “No person shall be, deprived of life, liberty or property without due process” (Beatty & Susan, 2016, pp. 125,126). This clause thwart the government from depriving individuals of their life, liberty, or property without certain steps being taken. This also means that they cannot take away ones’ rights without just reasons and said reasons must be verified by the court. For instance, they cannot interfere with ones’ affairs, like property ownership or freedom of speech, unless their actions are illegal. That’s why due process is …show more content…
important, it provides the basis for fair treatment by the government, it upholds the standards that guilt should be proven not assumed. Judge Chuang concludes that section 2(c) of Trump’s executive order which calls for a ban on immigrants of nationals of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen, does violate the Establishment Clause. Taken into consideration was Donald Trump’s various comments on his despise for people of the Muslim religion, and he failed to contact or acquire any information to support his claim of national security interest, from Department of State, the Department of Defense, the Department of Justice, or the Department of Homeland Security, before the issuance of the executive order. As a result, defendants made the valid claim that “The fact that the White House took the highly irregular step of first introducing the travel ban without receiving the input and judgment of the relevant national security agencies strongly suggests that the religious purpose was primary, and the national security purpose, even if legitimate, is a secondary post hoc rationale” (Case 8:17-cv-00361-TDC Document 149 , 2017, p. 35) Judge Chuang finds that the executive order does violates the equal protection component of the due process clause that protects the deprivation of life, liberty or property. An Injunction on due process is upheld acknowledging that individuals are supposed to be notified and allowed a hearing prior to restricting their right to travel. I agree with Judge Chuang’s ruling as the evidence and testimony of the plaintiffs were profound and compelling.
Even before his presidency Donald Trump expressed, on more than one occasion, his disregard for Muslims and on more Muslims entering the United States. I don’t believe the president should abuse his power by trying to justify his personal vendetta as a national security issue. The right procedures should have been followed, this executive order did not go through the proper channels (through Congress) before it was signed into law. The necessary evidence to support his claims should have been provided. Also, citizens who would have been affected, legal immigrants whose family are now banned (unless they meet one the criteria for exemption/waiver) should have been given time to react (due process) to the new law instead of its immediate
effects. Immigrant employees who do not have a green or U.S citizenship are considered illegal aliens. It is illegal in the United States according to the Federation for American Immigration Reform to “assists an alien whom he should reasonably know is illegally in the U.S. or who lacks employment authorization, by transporting, sheltering, or assisting him to obtain employment, encourages that alien to remain in the U.S., by referring him to an employer, by acting as employer or agent for an employer in any way” (Federation for American Immigration Reform, 1999). Violation of the law will result in imprisonment, criminal fines and forfeiture of property used to commit offense. Therefore, by employing undocumented/illegal aliens I can be fined, imprisoned or lose my business. It is thus crucial for me to reevaluate my employment practices.
The Tenth Amendment was added to the Constitution of 1787 by James Madison due to the problem with its predecessor, the Articles of Confederation. In Article 2 in the Articles of Confederation it states, “Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom and independence, and every Power, Jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.” With states having too much sovereignty this caused an issue. Madison was a Federalist and believed that the federal government should have some control over states, therefore, he proposed the 10th Amendment. By the constitution getting rid of state sovereignty it meant Anti-Federalists fearing the possibility of a federal government with unlimited power. However, the states were able to compromise and ratify the Constitution under the agreement that powers not stated on it are reserved to the states or to the people. The 10th Amendment overall gives clarification that federal power is limited and that states or the have control on the issues not stated on the constitution. However, not everyone agreed to the 10th amendment. It was seen as
After the Revolution, the country was left in an economic crisis and struggling for a cohesive path moving forward. The remaining financial obligations left some Founding Fathers searching for ways to create a stronger more centralized government to address concerns on a national level. The thought was that with a more centralized, concentrated governing body, the more efficient tensions and fiscal responsibilities could be addressed. With a central government manning these responsibilities, instead of the individual colonies, they would obtain consistent governing policies. However, as with many things in life, it was a difficult path with a lot of conflicting ideas and opponents. Much of the population was divided choosing either the
The Tenth Amendment was ratified along with the rest of the Bill of Rights on December 17th, 1791, as well, unlike most other amendments, it gave rights not only to the people, but also to the state governments. The Tenth Amendment was passed in order to delegate powers to the state governments and the people that the national government does not have, this amendment states, “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”
The United States Constitution is a national government that consist of citizen’s basic rights and fundamental laws. This document was signed on September 17, 1787 in Philadelphia by the majority of representatives. Today, the United States Constitution’s purpose is to supply a strong central government. However, before the United States Constitution was developed, many citizens did not support the constitution due to the fact that they found it contradicting and detached from the original goals of the Declaration of Independence. These citizens were known as anti-federalists. Fortunately, George Washington was a supporter of the constitution and had an enormous impact in the public support of the constitution. With a few adjustments, some
The idea of a strong central government will end only in tyranny, with a king as its ruler. We have learned a small, state governing, government, is much more flexible and fitting for a country still grasping for its footing. If America is going to become as great as the founding fathers of our countries wished, we cannot ratify the constitution (text, pg. 159).
Pros and Cons of the Equal Rights Amendment. The Equal Rights Amendment began its earliest discussions in 1920. These discussions took place immediately after two-thirds of the states approved women's suffrage. The nineteenth century was intertwined with several feminist movements such as abortion, temperance, birth control and equality.
“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” (U.S. Constitution).
The First Amendment of the United States Constitution includes the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause. These clauses instruct that legislature shall neither establish an official religion nor unnecessarily restrict the practice of any religion. U.S. Const. amend. I.
The Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia met between May and September of 1787 to address the problems of the weak central government that existed under the Articles of Confederation. The Antifederalists were extremely concerned that the national government would trample their rights. Rhode Island and North Carolina refused to ratify until the framers added the Bill of Rights. These first ten amendments outlined things that the government could not do to its people. They are as such:
The constitution is one of the most valued documents in history. The typical American believes that the Constitution was a successful conclusion to the American Revolution. However, this is false. The Framers of the Constitution were dreamers who congregated together, originally to amend the Articles of Confederation, in Philadelphia in the early Fall of 1787 at the Constitutional Convention. The creation of the constitution was a result of the American Revolution in which delegates fashioned a manual that established a national government, essential laws and granted natural born rights to certain citizens. They wanted to establish strong fundamentals that would guide the newly free nation into a prosperous future. The document is believed
“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.” (First Amendment Center, 2008)
To impel, Trump’s travel ban is flat out illegal. This is in accordance with The Immigration Act of 1965 which was summarized by The New York Times as follows “The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 banned all discrimination against immigrants on the basis
The legal basis for religious freedom cases is founded in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The First Amendment states: “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.” From this statement, two schools of interpretation were born.
The separation of church and state is the government’s neutral position of toward religion. The separation of church and state is not directly found in the United States Constitution. But, this principle is often referred to the freedom of religion in the First Amendment. The First Amendment prohibits the creation of a national religion, but not necessarily the separation of church and state. The true purpose of the First Amendment was to forbid the federal government from establishing a national church, like the British did. The amendment recognizes a “differentiation between the church and the government, it does not mean that they could not cooperate with each other”, said best by Tomas Jefferson. The government is prohibited from supporting or endorsing any religion, or promoting one at the expense of another. The government also cannot appoint religious leaders, force anyone to worship, or provide interpretations of sacred scripture.
The “establishment” or “religion” clause of the First Amendment of the Constitution reads: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” (Education Week, 2003, para. 2). It is from this clause that the idea of separation of church and state comes. It is also the basis for much of the debate regarding the practice of religion in public schools (Education Week, 2003). One of the big questions regarding the religion issue is where to draw the line between separation of church and state and religious freedom. The practice of religion in public schools can balance these two ends by allowing students to individually exercise their religious freedom, so long as they do not interfere with that of other students.