Changes

'''Amendment I'''

'''Amendment I'''

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.

: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.

'''Amendment II'''

'''Amendment II'''

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.

: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.

'''Amendment III'''

'''Amendment III'''

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

:No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

'''Amendment IV'''

'''Amendment IV'''

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.

: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.

'''Amendment V'''

'''Amendment V'''

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

:No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

'''Amendment VI'''

'''Amendment VI'''

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

:In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

'''Amendment VII'''

'''Amendment VII'''

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

:In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

'''Amendment VIII'''

'''Amendment VIII'''

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

:Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

'''Amendment IX'''

'''Amendment IX'''

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

:The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

'''Amendment X'''

'''Amendment X'''

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 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.

It took about 2.5 years for these amendments to be ratified by three-quarters of the states in order to become part of the Constitution, on December 15, 1791.

It took about 2.5 years for these amendments to be ratified by three-quarters of the states in order to become part of the Constitution, on December 15, 1791.

== Applying the Bill of Rights ==

== Applying the Bill of Rights ==

Thousands of attorneys spend all their time applying the Bill of Rights to specific cases.  The U.S. Supreme Court has extended nearly all of the Bill of Rights to apply against state and local government, even though most of them were originally intended to apply against only the federal government.

Thousands of attorneys spend all their time applying the Bill of Rights to specific cases.  Originally intended to apply against only the federal government, not state and local governments.  But after the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment after the Civil War, the U.S. Supreme Court began applying provisions in the Bill of Rights against the States.  Today almost every provision of the Bill of Rights has been applied against state or local government.

That means every action by a government official, whether employed by the federal, state or local government, must comply with the Bill of Rights.  Every police stop of a motorist, every regulation of speech, and every criminal prosecution must abide by those Ten Amendments.

This means every action by a government official, whether working for the federal, state or local government, must comply with the Bill of Rights.  Every police stop of a motorist, every regulation of speech, and every criminal prosecution must abide by those Ten Amendments.

All Ten Amendments in the Bill of Rights are important, but the First and Fourth Amendments are litigated the most in courts.  Other amendments are just as important but do not arise often in actual cases.  For example, the Second Amendment protects an individual right to own guns, as held by the U.S. Supreme Court in ''D.C. v. Heller''.  But only a few cases a year are decided based on the Second Amendment.  Courts still allow government to regulate gun ownership, and courts almost never invalidate those regulations.  

All Ten Amendments in the Bill of Rights are important, but the First and Fourth Amendments are litigated the most in courts.  Other amendments are just as important but do not arise often in actual cases.  For example, the Second Amendment protects an individual right to own guns, as held by the U.S. Supreme Court in ''D.C. v. Heller''.  But only a few cases a year are decided based on the Second Amendment.  Courts still allow government to regulate gun ownership, and courts almost never invalidate those regulations.  

The Seventh Amendment establishes a right to a jury trial in most cases, which is a fundamental right almost unique to the United States (95% of the jury trials in the world occur in the United States).  But the right is clear and there is not much to discuss about it, so lawyers do not spend much time litigating about the meaning of the Seventh Amendment.

The Third and Ninth Amendments are almost never relevant to a case. The Seventh Amendment, is often used but rarely discussed: it establishes a right to a jury trial in most cases, which is a fundamental right almost unique to the United States (95% of the jury trials in the world occur in the United States).  But the right is clear and there is not much to discuss about it, so lawyers do not spend much time litigating about the meaning of the Seventh Amendment.

But many thousands of cases each year do depend on legal arguments about the meaning and scope of the First and Fourth Amendments.  The First Amendment protects freedom of speech, which is probably the most important right in all of the Constitution.  it is unique to the United States; England does have a constitutional right to freedom of speech, even today.  Each year the U.S. Supreme Court accepts several cases relating to freedom of speech, and it is a popular issue in lower courts.   

But many thousands of cases each year do depend on legal arguments about the meaning and scope of the First and Fourth Amendments.  The First Amendment protects freedom of speech, which is probably the most important right in all of the Constitution.  it is unique to the United States; England does have a constitutional right to freedom of speech, even today.  Each year the U.S. Supreme Court accepts several cases relating to freedom of speech, and it is a popular issue in lower courts.