Bill of Rights.
Are the Bill of Rights kind of the same thing as The Constitution?
Not exactly. The Bill of Rights are an important part of the Constitution. They’re the first ten amendments and contain essential rights to protect all U.S. citizens. They’re also a reality check for the federal government in spelling out what it can’t do to its citizens.
So there’s ten Amendments in the Constitution?
Actually, there’s 27 now, including one of my faves, the 19th, which gave women the right to vote. This Amendment was passed in 1920, or, 132 years after the Constitution was ratified.
The Constitution is pretty great because its writers wanted to create a foundation of guaranteed rights, but they also realized that it would get added to over the years. They made it very difficult to add new amendments to ensure that only the most important and foundational rights were included.
But the Bill of Rights is still made up of just the original first ten Amendments.
Is the First Amendment that important?
Uh, is breathing oxygen important?
The First Amendment guarantees your right to worship as you want. Or not at all.
We call this freedom of religion.
It also guarantees a couple other things I love, including freedom of speech, which means you have the right to speak freely and not be censored or punished by the government for doing so. Of course it gets more complicated than that, which is why the legal profession makes bank over what constitutes “free speech” and what doesn’t. But that’s the basic idea: the U.S. is a country where your right to speak and express yourself freely is among the first rights guaranteed in the Constitution.
As if the First Amendment isn’t important enough, there’s one more part: freedom of the press. This guarantees the right to publish stories and content, including that which is critical of the current government, without fear of being punished or censored. This is huge. The first 44 Presidents, despite cantankerous and sometimes antagonistic relationships with the press, recognized the importance and value of a free press as champions and patriots of America.
May the 46th President also be such a person.
What’s the deal with all the 2nd Amendment bumper stickers?
This is the one about guns. Specifically, the right to bear arms. For some, this is the most important one, even more so than the rights the First Amendment guarantees. It basically says you have the right to own arms. Interpreting “arms” is a little like interpreting the Bible. If it was as simple as some people think it to be, than everyone would be on the same page. But “arms” was written at a time when there weren’t automatic, semi-automatic, flamethrowers, or nuclear weapons, so protecting and “not infringing” the right to bear arms is a difficult one. Where should the line be drawn?
There are a lot of different opinions about regulating arms (i.e. guns). But at a basic level, #2 says you have the right to keep and bear arms.
Is the Third Amendment even necessary?
Well, would you like soldiers barging into your home and setting up for the long haul; commandeering your bedrooms and bathrooms and kitchen and television? The colonists knew what that was like; many had experienced the privacy invasion of British soldiers showing up and expecting to be put up. So the Authors wanted to make sure this was a protected right: the right to not have soldiers living in your home.
How come I don’t see a bunch of trucks with ‘Protect the Fourth Amendment’ bumper stickers?
I don’t know. Maybe you’re driving on the wrong highways in the wrong states. The Fourth Amendment protects against “unreasonable searches and seizures,” and perhaps it’s one of those protections that doesn’t totally make sense until you need it. Have you ever heard someone say “well, I don’t care if the government is tapping my phone, I don’t have anything to hide!” Or something similar?
Here’s the blunt reality: whoever says something like that is either lying, dumb, intellectually lazy, or the most boring person on the face of the planet. Probably the third one. Let me rephrase: whoever says that may not be dumb or intellectually lazy, but they are certainly saying something dumb and not very astute. Our Constitutional protections keep individuals, all individuals in theory, from being harassed or illegally searched. Essentially, it means that law enforcement can’t just show up, flash a badge, and search your house or your business or your person or your phone without reasonable suspicion and/or a warrant. This is a big deal. And very different from what the 1870s colonists dealt with when British soldiers came a-knockin’.
This is a very simple interpretation. Attorneys make big bucks and big careers interpreting this specific Amendment. So there’s lots of exceptions and explanations. For example, it’s much easier, legally speaking, for police to stop and search your car then it is for them to show up on your doorstep and search your house. You should probably go read Malcolm Gladwell’s Talking to Strangers. He talks about some of this, and different theories and approaches to police stopping motorists and how it relates to location. Highly recommend.
Was Ashley Judd in a movie a long time ago about the Fifth Amendment?
You might be thinking of the 1999 thriller Double Jeopardy, which starred Tommy Lee Jones (incidentally, the old college roommate of Al Gore) as a parole officer chasing down Ashley Judd’s character, who escaped from prison after allegedly killing her husband. The Bill of Rights were ratified in 1791, and this film came out in 1999, which is approximately 208 years later, so the short answer is that no, the Fifth Amendment was not inspired by the Ashley Judd movie.
The Fifth Amendment, however, does provide basic protections for how people can be arrested and charged. One of these is the famous idea of ‘double jeopardy,’ which basically says a person can’t be tried twice for the same offense. There are asterisks all over that one, but that’s the basic idea.
The Fifth Amendment protects people from simply being arrested or charged without cause. It’s also ground zero for that classic reference from every detective show or legal show ever that involves having the right to not testify against yourself (“pleading the Fifth”), and that every person has the right to due process and to not have their property yanked away…at least without “just compensation.”
There’s plenty of tricky wording and potential exceptions to keep lawyers on all sides keeping their families fed and their crypto accounts bountiful.
About the 6th: I’m a law-abiding citizen. Why do we need more amendments protecting criminals?
Some people believe the United States of America is a special nation, existing as the favorite of God and a shining beacon of perfection and apex of humanity to the rest of the world. Are we special? Are we God’s favorite? Well, just like a good parent answering the same question to their multiple children, it’s fair to respond the same:
”Yes, you’re all special.”
”Yes, you’re all my favorite.”
That’s a muddled way of saying that a) the U.S. is not perfect, so let’s keep working to make it stronger, better, and more kind, and b) let’s be humble and realize we’re unique and special, and so is every other country in some way. That being said…one of the ways that I think the U.S. is most unique and special is in the way it provides protections for ordinary people against the misuse and abuse of power and does something really, really great:
In criminal cases, a person is presumed to be innocent until suitable evidence is presented to prove them guilty by a jury of their peers.
This can be enormously frustrating, as we latch onto stories in which criminals, or supposed criminals, get off free, or get off light, or don’t seem to be facing their eventual punishment fast enough. I get it. But at the same time, it is wonderful to live in a country where there is the Rule of Law and where you know these will protect you as well. Think about it: the idea that your innocence is assumed and presumed and the burden is not on you to prove your innocence, but rather, for the state to prove your guilt.
So, frustrating though it may be sometimes, the 6th Amendment provides additional protections for people accused of a crime. Notice I didn’t say “criminal,” because you’re not a criminal until convicted.
Amendment VI gives an accused person the right to a speedy and public trial. Think of the alternative: you’re accused of a crime, arrested, and held indefinitely, secretly, until you finally face a secret tribunal to decide your fate.
It also mandates that you get an impartial jury within the district where the crime was committed, to be informed of the accusations against you, and to face witnesses testifying against you, as well as to call witnesses of your own and to retain an attorney. It’s helpful here, as well, to imagine the alternative:
An alternative might be that you’re arrested in one state, but moved to another of the Prosecution’s choosing. You are then put on trial without knowing precisely what crime you committed or who it was against. You’re unable to defend yourself against your actual accuser, to question or face witnesses against you, to provide witnesses on your behalf, or to request legal counsel. That’s the alternative.
This Amendment’s a great one too. A frustrating one, but I love this one because it reminds me of the sacred responsibility we have to defend the rights of all, even when it’s difficult and maddening.
Is the 7th Amendment really more criminal stuff? Couldn’t they have just lumped all of it into a single Amendment and made it easier to remember?
Sure, perhaps so. I don’t have a great answer to this one. Except…that maybe the early architects of this country had fresh memories and scars of how easy it was for individual rights to get trampled on by those in power unless they were explicitly made clear in the simplest way possible. I’m conjecturing here, but perhaps they wanted to make sure that each of these main points remained main points and didn’t get buried in one giant paragraph of legalese.
Amendment VII gives alleged criminals the right to trial by jury. That’s the simple version. Of course this refers to criminal trials initiated by the State - “the State” being the government, on any level. This is important because it gives people the opportunity for their fate to be determined, based on the evidence, by a representative group of their peers within the locale where the crime took place, rather than facing a single judge or panel of magistrates to determine their guilt or innocence.
It seems like these Amendments are getting more and more detailed. Why is a whole Amendment (the 8th) dedicated to bail?
Great point. You might have noticed that there’s several in a row dealing with the rights of individuals against the government. Getting the point that this was a major deal for the Founders? Amendment VII protects against excessive bail or fines or cruel and unusual punishment. Again, we get used to a certain standard of living and a certain level of protection and safety. We take these things for granted, which is why it’s so helpful (I think) to consider the alternatives if these Amendments didn’t exist. Remember, these Amendments are explicitly protecting every person’s rights.
So again, imagine that you’re arrested. You’ve stolen a loaf of bread, Jean Valjean style, and you’re waiting trial. Bail is set at $10 million dollars (or approximately 238 bitcoin, at its current price of 42,000). Does that seem excessive for someone who stole a loaf of Dave’s Whole Grain? Yes, I agree.
What about fining them a million dollars? Does that seem excessive? Again, yes.
Cruel and unusual punishment? Let your imagination go wild. And be grateful that we’re protected explicitly against such happenings by the BOR number 7.
Amendment 9 is confusing.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
I get it. Let’s get all Socratic and define some of the terms. The important word here is “enumeration.” This basically means “to number.” So “the enumeration in the Constitution” refers to “things that are listed.”
And what is the Bill of Rights about? These Ten Amendments are about enumerating - or we could say specifying - various individual rights. But what about things that aren’t listed? You might be combing through, looking through stuff about traveling across states, or voting, or making choices about your body. They’re not in there.
They’re not included in the Bill of Rights. Here’s the important part: The Ninth Amendment says that just because they’re not listed (enumerated, or sometimes expressed or delegated), does not mean you don’t have those rights. It’s basically covering itself by saying, ‘there’s a lot of other rights that you have, and we’re not going to list all of them here, so just because they’re not listed does not mean you don’t have them.”
Make sense? It’s a great example of blanket coverage future-proofing (I just made this phrase up). Later on, certain Amendments would explicitly protect some of these basic rights because people, being human, couldn’t collectively agree en masse that they were important enough to support (things such as voting rights for all citizens, for example).
Be thankful for this Amendment. It provides Constitutional protection for things it doesn’t explicitly list in the first ten amendments - or at least, it prevents the Bill of Rights from being potentially weaponized to the point where someone could say: “we can do this because it doesn’t say we can’t.”
On a geek note, there are 27 enumerated powers (a.k.a. expressed or delegated powers) that the Federal Government has, as stated in the Constitution.
I’m a little hazy on the 10th as well.
The powers not delegated to the United States by Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Yeah, that is a little confusing.
Think of what “United States of America” means. Break it down. Basically, it’s a single country, made up of 50 individual states, that are not confederated…they are united. That means that each state receives the protections and the mandates of the Federal Government. And that means, for example, that individual states can’t tamper with the Bill of Rights and start deciding they’re going to ignore Amendment 5, or modify Amendment 1, or delete Amendment 7. Can’t do that.
But - every state has unique challenges and mandates to best serve its population, under the umbrella and protection of the Constitution - including the Bill of Rights. Each state needs the autonomy and independence to make many types of decisions, such as how to collect local taxes and local commerce, issue licenses, hold elections, etc.
These, and many others, are examples of things individual states can do. They can’t do things like declare war, mint money, form their own army, etc.
The Tenth Amendment kind of clarifies the relationship between a State Government and the Federal Government.
Other constitutional notes Coming Sometime (below)
Other amendments of interest, including the 15th, 19th, 24th, and 26th
Branches of government
Executive
President
Cabinet positions
Legislative
Senate
House of Representatives
Bill becomes law
Judicial
Supreme Court
Rule of Law
Voting process / elections
Primaries
Caucuses
Conventions
Campaigns
Immigration
A short history
Statistics
Visas
Permanent residency