Constitution Limitations: Checks And Balances

The U.S. Constitution, composed of a preamble, seven articles, and 27 amendments, has been amended several times to address limitations and shortcomings. The first ten amendments, known as the Bill of Rights, were added to limit government power and protect individual liberties. For instance, the First Amendment protects freedom of speech and religion, while the Fourth Amendment safeguards citizens' privacy and requires warrants for searches. The Second Amendment protects the right to bear arms, and the Third Amendment prohibits forced lodging of soldiers during peacetime. The Twentieth Amendment shortened the transition period for new administrations, and the Twenty-second Amendment limited presidents to two terms. The Equal Rights Amendment aimed to prohibit discrimination by governments based on sex. The Constitution's limitations are influenced by court decisions, especially the Supreme Court, which can examine and strike down laws deemed unconstitutional.

Explore related products

A Treatise on the Constitutional Limitations Which Rest upon the Legislative Power of the States of the American Union

$38.04 $49.95

A Vision For Change: The Founding Of A New Nation: From Concern to Action—The Birth of Akubuland

$2.99

Found

$3.99

Founding (TV Series)

$1.99

Foundling: The Untold Story

$2.99

Found (TV Series)

$2.99

Limitations on government power

The US Constitution, signed on September 17, 1787, and ratified on June 21, 1788, is an important document that outlines the structural framework of the US government and enumerates certain limitations on its power. The Constitution's first three words, "We the People," emphasise that the government's power is derived from the people and that it exists to serve them. Here are some key limitations on government power imposed by the Constitution:

Separation of Powers and Checks and Balances

The Constitution establishes a system of separation of powers, dividing the federal government into three branches: the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. Each branch has specific powers and responsibilities, and they serve as checks and balances on each other's power. This system prevents the concentration of power in a single branch and protects against potential tyranny.

Bill of Rights

The first ten amendments to the Constitution, collectively known as the Bill of Rights, were ratified in 1791 and serve as a critical limitation on government power. The Bill of Rights protects fundamental individual liberties, such as freedom of speech, religion, and the press (First Amendment); the right to bear arms (Second Amendment); protection from unreasonable searches and seizures (Fourth Amendment); and due process rights (Fifth Amendment). These amendments restrict the government's ability to infringe upon the inherent rights of citizens.

Limits on Federal Power

The Constitution also imposes limitations on the power of the federal government by outlining specific powers granted to it, with all other powers being reserved for the states and the people. This federalist system ensures that certain areas, such as the regulation of commerce and printing of money, fall under federal authority, while many other powers remain with the states.

Term Limits for the President

The Twenty-second Amendment, ratified in 1951, limits the President to serving a maximum of two terms in office, totalling eight years. This amendment ensures a regular transition of executive power and prevents the concentration of power in a single individual for an extended period.

Protection from Quartering of Soldiers

The Third Amendment prohibits the federal government from forcing citizens to provide lodging to soldiers in their homes during peacetime without their consent. This amendment safeguards the privacy and property rights of individuals.

Right to Equal Protection and Due Process

While not originally included in the Constitution, the Equal Rights Amendment (proposed in 1972) sought to prohibit discrimination by the federal or state governments based on sex. Although this amendment did not receive enough states' ratifications to be adopted, it reflects the ongoing efforts to expand the limitations on government power and protect the rights of all citizens.

Right to bear arms

The Second Amendment (1791) protects the right of individuals to keep and bear arms. The Supreme Court has ruled that this right applies to individuals, not merely to collective militias. It has also held that the government may regulate or place some limits on the manufacture, ownership, and sale of firearms or other weapons. The Second 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 meaning of the Second Amendment was relatively unresolved by the judiciary until the 2000s. Although the Supreme Court heard some Second Amendment cases in the 1800s and 1900s, litigation in the past quarter-century has clarified the extent of the amendment and gun rights. In United States v. Cruikshank, one of the Court's holdings was that the Second Amendment only prevented the federal government from infringing on a person's right to bear arms. In other words, the Second Amendment's guarantees do not protect people from private actors or state governments that may try to prevent them from bearing arms.

In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Supreme Court analyzed the meaning of "keep and bear arms." Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority, began by looking at the meaning of "arms" in the 1700s. He noted that a 1773 dictionary defined them as "weapons of offence, or armour of defence." A 1771 legal dictionary defined them as "any thing that a man wears for his defence, or takes into his hands, or useth in wrath to cast at or strike another." Justice Scalia wrote that "arms" refers to "weapons that were not specifically designed for military use and were not employed in a military capacity." The Court also analyzed the term "bear," which in the 1700s meant "carry." However, when combined with "arms," the meaning changes to indicate a right to carry arms "for a particular purpose — confrontation."

The Second Amendment has its roots in English history. Scholars and Supreme Court Justices have opined on the right to keep and bear arms, noting how English subjects and American colonists understood it to be a fundamental right. During the Constitutional Convention, the Framers understood the necessity of a citizen militia to resist a potentially oppressive military if the constitutional order broke down. The Second Amendment was requested by several states during the Constitutional ratification debates, reflecting lingering resentment over British attempts to confiscate colonists' firearms at the outbreak of the Revolutionary War. Patrick Henry asked rhetorically whether the colonies would be stronger "when we are totally disarmed, and when a British Guard shall be stationed in every house?" Some historians argue that the primary reason for the Second Amendment was to prevent the need for the United States to have a professional standing army.

Protection from unreasonable searches

The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. It states that people have the right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, and that no warrants shall be issued without probable cause, supported by an oath or affirmation. This amendment ensures that each search or seizure is justified and approved by a judge in advance, protecting people's privacy and freedom from unreasonable government intrusions.

The Fourth Amendment was included in the Constitution to address the Framers' concerns about unjust searches and seizures under English rule. It applies to police searches, arrests, and evidence collection, requiring them to obtain a warrant or have probable cause. The amendment's protections extend to people's homes, offices, and personal belongings.

The Court has interpreted the Fourth Amendment's protections by introducing the concept of a reasonable expectation of privacy. This means that what a person knowingly exposes to the public may not be protected, but what they seek to keep private may be constitutionally protected. For example, entering a phone booth to make a call does not mean that the person gives up their right to privacy in their conversations.

The exclusionary rule is another crucial aspect of the Fourth Amendment. It prevents the prosecution from using illegally obtained evidence in court, deterring law enforcement from conducting illegal searches and seizures. This rule ensures a uniform standard of constitutional rights across the states.

While the Fourth Amendment provides strong protections against unreasonable searches and seizures, there are some exceptions. For instance, in exigent circumstances, a warrantless search may be allowed if obtaining a warrant is impractical. Additionally, states can establish higher standards for protection than what is required by the Fourth Amendment, but they cannot allow conduct that violates it.

Explore related products

The Constitution of the United States and The Declaration of Independence

$1.99

The Constitution of the United States of America: The Declaration of Independence, The Bill of Rights

$9.99

Pocket U.S. Constitution and Declaration of Independence by Cato Institute

$6.94

Pocket Constitution (25 Pack): U.S. Constitution with Index & Declaration of Independence

$22.49 $35

We the People: A History of the U.S. Constitution

$31.99 $39.99

The Constitution of the United States

$1.5

Prohibition of double jeopardy

The Double Jeopardy Clause, as outlined in the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, states that no person shall "be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb". This clause provides four essential protections, including prohibitions against:

• Retrying a person for the same offence if they have already been acquitted or convicted, even if new evidence is found. An exception to this is if the initial trial is deemed fraudulent, as in the case of Harry Aleman, who bribed the trial judge to return an acquittal.
• Trying a person for the same offence in two different courts with overlapping jurisdictions, such as a state court and a federal court.
• Trying a person for the same offence under the same authority twice.
• Trying a person for the same offence if the conviction was reversed on appeal due to insufficient evidence, rather than procedural faults.

The concept of double jeopardy is primarily a procedural defence in common law jurisdictions, and it is not a principle of international law. However, certain international agreements, such as the European Convention on Human Rights and the Schengen Convention, include provisions prohibiting double jeopardy.

Equality of rights

The Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution, passed by Congress on June 13, 1866, and ratified in 1868, was a significant step towards ensuring equality of rights. This amendment extended liberties and rights granted by the Bill of Rights to formerly enslaved people, guaranteeing equal civil and legal rights to Black citizens.

A key component of the Fourteenth Amendment is the Equal Protection Clause, which states that "no State...shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." This clause mandates that individuals in similar situations be treated equally by the law. It was designed to prevent states from discriminating against Black Americans and to validate the equality provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which guaranteed that all citizens, regardless of race, would have equal protection under the law.

The Equal Protection Clause has been central to many landmark cases, including Brown v. Board of Education, which challenged racial segregation in schools, and Roe v. Wade, which focused on reproductive rights. The clause has also been interpreted to prevent the federal government from discriminating, not just state governments.

While the Fourteenth Amendment was a significant step forward, it did not immediately end segregation or racial discrimination. In Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), the Court ruled that "separate but equal" facilities for Blacks and whites did not violate the Equal Protection Clause, cementing racist Jim Crow-era laws. It was not until 1954, in Brown v. Board of Education, that the Supreme Court unanimously overruled this decision, holding that separate schools for Blacks and whites violated the clause's guarantee of equal protection.

The struggle for equality of rights has been a continuous journey in American history, from the Declaration of Independence's promise that "all men are created equal" to the Fourteenth Amendment's extension of legal rights to formerly enslaved people and the ongoing litigation and debates surrounding the Equal Protection Clause.

Frequently asked questions