American Government
Equal Protection and Due Process (Module 2.5)
[Prof. Rebecca Lubot, Ph.D. Candidate]
In this module, we'll discuss the remainder of the Bill of Rights four
through ten, as well as the Fourteenth Amendment.
These cemented the right to equal protection and due process into the
Constitution.
The Fourth Amendment protects individuals from overzealous law
enforcement.
They must have probable cause to obtain a search warrant to search or
seize your private property.
The Fourth through Eighth Amendments essentially limited police powers
of the states by guaranteeing fair treatment and legal and judicial
proceedings.
One small exception to that is the Takings Clause of the Fifth
Amendment.
It says that private property cannot be taken for public use without just
compensation.
This provision, along with the due process clause's provisions limiting the
taking of property, can be viewed as a protection of the obtaining, the
use, and the tangible and intangible property for their own benefit.
For example, you have the right to trade your knowledge, skills, and labor
for money through work or for the use of your property or trade money or
goods for other things of value, such as clothing, housing, education, or
food.
The greatest recent controversy over economic liberty has been the
government's use of the right of eminent domain to take property for
redevelopment.
Traditionally, the main use of eminent domain was to obtain property for
transportation purposes like railroads and highways, which require fairly
straight routes to be efficient, but it can often pit low income people
against multinational corporations that have the support of the federal
government.
And President Eisenhower's Federal Highway Act of 1956 bulldozed
entire neighborhoods.
It was the first time in American history that people could drive, though,
from New York City to San Francisco without hitting a single traffic light.
You know the saying about coming from the wrong side of the tracks?
With the Federal Highway Act, you could literally find yourself living on the
wrong side of the highway.
But back to the Fourth through Eighth Amendments.
Some of the most controversial Warren Court decisions, the Warren
Court is also discussed in module 2.2, were those affirming the rights of
accused criminals dealing with interpretations of the Fourth through
Eighth Amendments.
Just after Eisenhower left office in 1961 and the Supreme Court case
Mapp v.
Ohio, the court put into place the exclusionary rule, which says that
evidence gathered illegally cannot be used in a court of law against a
defendant.
The ruling was drawn from the Fourth Amendment, which protects
individuals against unlawful search and seizure.
In 1984, the court enunciated the goodfaith exception principle, stating
that if a warrant was given in good faith even if it was based on faulty
evidence the evidence could still be used in a trial.
This idea was not to protect against criminal behavior but against corrupt
policing.
In Gideon v.
Wainwright 1963, the Warren Court ruled that a person who could not
afford an attorney for his or her own defense had a right to an attorney,
also known as counsel, to be provided at the public's expense.
The next year in Escobedo v.
Illinois, it voided the murder confessions of a man who had been denied
the right to see an attorney.
But the most controversial criminal rights case is still the 1966 Miranda v.
Arizona case in which a divided Supreme Court ruled that an individual
accused of a crime had the rights to remain silent and to have an attorney
present during interrogation.
You have the right to remain silent.
Anything you can say and do will be used against you in a court of law.
You have the right to an attorney.
If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for you.
Do you understand the rights as I have just read them to you? With these
rights in mind, do you wish to speak to me? I'm sure you are all very well
behaved but should you be arrested make sure your Miranda rights are
read to you.
Further, you cannot be imprisoned without a trial.
You are entitled to receive a trial by jury in a criminal case.
The protection of a citizen from imprisonment without a trial is called due
process, one of your rights outlined in the Fifth Amendment of the
Constitution.
The Fifth Amendment also protects individuals against double jeopardy, a
process that subjects a suspect to prosecution twice for the same criminal
act.
No one who has been acquitted, which means found not guilty of the act,
of a crime like that can be prosecuted again for that crime.
But stay out of trouble and study hard and if you do get into trouble again,
the Sixth Amendment outlines your rights in a criminal trial, including the
right to witnesses.
And the Seventh Amendment outlines your rights in a criminal, civil trial
rather, such as disagreements between an individual and a business.
And the Eighth Amendment promises that excessive bail should not be
required nor excessive fines imposed nor cruel and unusual punishments
inflicted.
While the Fourth through Eighth provided what amounted to equal
protection of the laws for all Americans, this was not explicitly guaranteed
until the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1868.
It stated that no state could deny citizens of life, liberty, or property
without due process of the law nor deny any citizens in its jurisdiction
equal protection of the laws.
Court cases that affirm these rights, such as Brown v.
The Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas are discussed in module 2.2,
the development of civil rights and civil liberties.
And you see that due process is mentioned in both the Fifth and
Fourteenth Amendments.
But to finish up with the Bill of Rights, the Ninth and Tenth Amendments
are discussed thoroughly in module 5.1 on federalism but very briefly.
The Ninth Amendment states the enumeration in the Constitution of
certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained
by the people.
Today we take for granted certain rights that are not enumerated in the
Constitution, such as the right to seek opportunities for employment,
opportunities for education, the right to have children, the right to raise a
family.
But in China, for example, the state had a one child policy in place
between 1979 and 2015.
At the time of this filming, the Chinese government is considering a baby
bonus to encourage couples to have a second child, a reversal of the
earlier policy.
The Tenth Amendment states that 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.
This amendment does not limit the power of the federal government in
any meaningful way.
It simply restates what is made obvious elsewhere in the Constitution.
The federal government has both enumerated and implied powers, but
where the federal government does not or chooses not to exercise
powers, the state may do so.
Be sure to continue reading in your textbook and look over this video and
continue answering the questions provided.
