The Right To Safety: Understanding Constitutional Amendments

The US Constitution gives states the power to protect public health and safety, but the Fourteenth Amendment limits how much a state can impact a person's life, liberty, or property. The Fifth Amendment also protects citizens from being deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. The Fourth Amendment, also known as The Right to Privacy, protects citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures. The First Amendment protects freedom of religion, speech, and assembly. The Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms. These amendments were added to the Constitution to limit government power and protect individual liberties.

Explore related products

The Second Amendment: A Biography

$9.99 $18.99

The Second Amendment: Gun Rights and Regulation (University Casebook Series)

$270

Whose Right Is It? The Second Amendment and the Fight Over Guns

$10.57 $14.99

Second Amendment Gun Rights AR Periodic Table Element NRA Sticker 3 Inch Decal

$2.47 $3.99

The Second Amendment: A History of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms in America: From Colonial Roots to Modern Freedom

$13.99

The Second Amendment

$5.99 $5.99

The Fourth Amendment and the right to privacy

The Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution is a key component of the Bill of Rights, which was added to the Constitution to limit government power and protect individual liberties. The Fourth Amendment specifically safeguards citizens' right to privacy, protecting them from unreasonable government intrusion into their homes and lives.

The text of the amendment states:

> "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

This means that the government generally cannot search or seize an individual's person, home, or property without first obtaining a warrant from a judge and having probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed. The amendment was created in response to increasing infringements on privacy in both the colonies and England, where "general warrants" and "writs of assistance" allowed officials to conduct warrantless searches.

The Fourth Amendment has been the subject of much debate in the 20th and 21st centuries, particularly around the issue of mass surveillance. Supporters of these programs argue that they are necessary for national security and the deterrence of crime and terrorism. Critics, on the other hand, argue that these programs are too invasive and violate individuals' right to privacy.

While the Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures, it does not guarantee protection from all searches and seizures. The determination of whether a search is reasonable depends on balancing the individual's rights with legitimate government interests, such as public safety.

The Fifth Amendment and due process

The Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution, part of the Bill of Rights, provides that "no person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime" unless formally charged by a Grand Jury, nor can any person "be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself". It also states that no person shall be "deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law".

The Fifth Amendment's due process clause protects individuals from arbitrary government action and ensures that certain substantive rights are protected from government interference. Due process can be broken down into two types: procedural and substantive. Procedural due process requires the government to provide notice and an opportunity for a hearing before a person is deprived of life, liberty, or property. For example, a person must be given notice and a hearing before losing financial assistance from the state. Substantive due process is less concrete and deals with specific subject areas such as liberty of contract, marriage, or privacy. It hinges on the idea that fundamental rights are not explicitly outlined in the Constitution.

The Fifth Amendment technically only applies to actions by the federal government. However, the Fourteenth Amendment imposes the same due process limitations on the states as the Fifth Amendment does on the federal government. The Fourteenth Amendment limits state police powers and places guardrails around fundamental rights. State legislatures can create laws to promote public safety, but the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments limit how much a state can impact a person's life, liberty, or property.

The Fifth Amendment was passed by Congress on September 25, 1789, and ratified on December 15, 1791. James Madison wrote the Bill of Rights, which includes the Fifth Amendment, to limit government power and protect individual liberties.

The Fourteenth Amendment and police powers

The Fourteenth Amendment of the US Constitution places limits on the inherent "police power" of states to protect public health and safety. This power is broad, allowing states to create laws that promote public safety, such as measures to reduce fire hazards or preserve historic landmarks. However, the Fourteenth Amendment's due process clause restricts how much a state can impact a person's life, liberty, or property without due process of law. This means that public health regulations cannot violate a person's constitutional rights.

The Fourteenth Amendment was enacted in 1866 and expanded the protections of the Fifth Amendment, which states that no person shall be "deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law," to the states. The modern approach to due process breaks it down into two distinct protections: procedural due process and substantive due process. Procedural due process refers to the processes the government must follow when making decisions that could burden individual liberties. For example, it generally requires adequate notice and an opportunity for a hearing before a person can lose financial assistance from their state government. Substantive due process, on the other hand, is less concrete and hinges on the idea that fundamental rights are not explicitly outlined in the Constitution.

The Fourteenth Amendment permits states to have a wide scope of discretion in enacting laws, as long as they do not trammel fundamental personal rights or rely on inherently suspect distinctions such as race, religion, or alienage. State legislatures are presumed to have acted within their constitutional power, even if their laws result in some inequality. The Supreme Court has used substantive due process to protect civil rights, viewing them as closely tied to life, liberty, and property, and therefore subject to strict scrutiny.

While the Fourteenth Amendment limits state police powers, it is important to note that the federal government has limited police powers as well. In United States v. Lopez (1995), the Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution withholds plenary police power from Congress. This ruling highlights the separation of powers between the federal government and the states, with any powers not explicitly granted to the federal government belonging to the states.

In summary, the Fourteenth Amendment's due process clause acts as a check on state police powers, ensuring that states cannot infringe upon individuals' life, liberty, or property without due process of law. This amendment expanded the protections of the Fifth Amendment to the states and established a more nuanced approach to due process, with procedural and substantive components. The Fourteenth Amendment also allows states a wide scope of discretion in lawmaking, as long as fundamental rights are not violated.

Explore related products

To Trust the People with Arms: The Supreme Court and the Second Amendment

$45.18 $59.99

The Second Amendment Primer: A Citizen's Guidebook to the History, Sources, and Authorities for the Constitutional Guarantee of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms

$12.99 $12.99

In Defense of the Second Amendment

$16.69 $29.99

2A Second Amendment Gun Rights NRA Sticker Round 3 Inch Laptop Decal 2 Bullets AR

$2.47

Second Amendment Est. 1791 Right To Bear Arms T-Shirt T-Shirt

$14.99

Second Amendment Written on Flag Sticker 5x3 Inch 2nd 2A Constitution Decal

$2.47

The Fourteenth Amendment and individual liberties

The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, passed by Congress on June 13, 1866, and ratified on July 9, 1868, is considered one of the most consequential amendments, guaranteeing individual liberties and equal protection under the law. It was introduced as part of the Reconstruction Amendments following the Civil War to ensure equal civil and legal rights for Black citizens and address issues affecting freed slaves.

One of the key provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment is the Citizenship Clause, which grants citizenship to "all persons born or naturalized in the United States," thereby granting citizenship to formerly enslaved people. This clause overturned the Supreme Court's decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), which held that Americans descended from African slaves could not become American citizens.

The Fourteenth Amendment also includes the Privileges or Immunities Clause, which prevents states from impeding federal rights, such as the freedom of movement. Additionally, the amendment's Due Process Clause builds on the Fifth Amendment, prohibiting all levels of government from depriving individuals of "life, liberty, or property" without due process of law. This clause ensures that state and local governments cannot infringe on fundamental rights in the name of public health and safety.

The Equal Protection Clause is another significant aspect of the Fourteenth Amendment. It guarantees that no state shall "deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." This clause has been central to landmark Supreme Court decisions, such as Brown v. Board of Education (1954), which prohibited racial segregation in public schools, and Loving v. Virginia (1967), which ended interracial marriage bans.

Furthermore, the Fourteenth Amendment has been interpreted to nationalize the Bill of Rights, making it binding upon the states. While there was initially disagreement over the extent to which the amendment extended the Bill of Rights to the states, Supreme Court rulings in the 20th century, such as Fitzpatrick v. Bitzer (1976), affirmed that it does empower Congress to enforce the Equal Protection Clause and limit state sovereign immunity.

The Second Amendment and the right to bear arms

The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, or Amendment II, protects the right of Americans to keep and bear arms. It was ratified on December 15, 1791, along with nine other articles of the United States Bill of Rights. The amendment states:

> "A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

The Second Amendment was written to limit government power and protect individual liberties. The Founders saw the ability to speak and worship freely as natural rights protected by the First Amendment, and the Second Amendment was intended to safeguard another natural right: the right to self-defence and the protection of life, liberty, and property.

The interpretation of the Second Amendment has evolved over time. Initially, it was primarily concerned with preventing federal overreach and ensuring that state militias could counter foreign invasions. However, in the landmark Supreme Court case District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), it was ruled that the Second Amendment protected the right of individual citizens to keep and bear arms for self-defence, not just for a state-run militia. This decision affirmed that the right to bear arms is an individual right, not dependent on the Constitution.

The McDonald v. Chicago (2010) case further clarified that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment extends the Second Amendment's protections against state and local governments. This means that state and local governments cannot infringe on an individual's right to bear arms. The Supreme Court has also ruled that the Second Amendment does not provide an unlimited right to bear arms and that certain prohibitions and restrictions, such as those forbidding firearm possession by felons or restrictions on dangerous weapons, are constitutional.

Frequently asked questions