Changes

'''Incorporation doctrine''' consists of the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] applying nearly all of the [[Bill of Rights]] against the states by way of the [[Fourteenth Amendment]]. This was initiated by the [[Warren Court]] in the 1950s and 1960s, and has addressed each right in a piecemeal manner as presented to the Court. The doctrine was explained in detail in ''[[Gideon v. Wainwright]]''. As of 2009 it remains undecided whether the [[Second Amendment]] right to bear arms is also incorporated against the states.

'''Incorporation''' is a legal doctrine applied by the U.S. judicial system which applies the liberties and protections of [[Bill of Rights]] in the jurisdiction of the state and local governments. This means the same limitations which apply to laws written and executed at the federal level must also be observed by lower level governments. For the first 150 years of constitutional interpretation, the Bill of Rights applied against only the federal government. Incorporation is an interpretation of the [[U.S. Constitution]] and is not institutionalized meaning incorporation is not written into the legal framework of the U.S., rather it has been interpreted into the framework by justices on the [[U.S. Supreme Court]]. This means that rights could be unincorporated though this is unlikely due to the tradition of legal precedent.

For the first 150 years of constitutional interpretation, the Bill of Rights applied against only the federal government, and not against state or local government.

Rights and privileges of the citizens are currently incorporated by means of the [[Fourteenth Amendment]]. The Due Process Clause read “substantively” allows justices to apply a more modern meaning to the Fourteenth Amendment that incorporates “fundamental rights necessary to our system of ordered liberty.”<ref>''McDonald v. Chicago'' (2010), Samuel Alito's majority opinion</ref> The first piece of the Bill of Rights to be incorporated was just compensation of the [[Fifth Amendment]] in 1897 in the case ''Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Co. v. City of Chicago''.  The writer of the majority opinion in that case was [[John Marshall Harlan|Justice John Marshall Harlan]] joined by 6 other justices. The last amendment to be incorporated was the [[Second Amendment]] in the 2010 case ''McDonald v. Chicago''.

Justice [[Hugo Black]] of the Warren Court was a leading proponent of incorporation doctrine; Justice [[Potter Stewart]] was a critic of it.  

Another theory to incorporation is use of the Privileges and Immunities Clause also embedded in the text of the Fourteenth Amendment. This was used by lawyers during the [[Slaughterhouse Cases]] in the 1870s but without success because the Court choose to read this provision with the legislative intent as applying only to freed slaves. In his concurring opinion in the 2010 case ''McDonald v. Chicago'', [[Clarence Thomas|Justice Clarence Thomas]] argues that the Privilege and Immunities Clause should be revisited as the proper vehicle through which the Bill of Rights is incorporated.<ref>''McDonald v. Chicago'' (2010), Clarence Thomas concurring opinion with the majority</ref>

 

Historically the doctrine has been interpreted as selective incorporation. Not every right in the Constitution applies to the state and local governments. The Supreme Court has evaluated arguments on a case-by-case basis to determine the necessity of incorporating the right in question. [[Hugo Black|Justice Hugo Black]] was a leading proponent of total incorporation: the idea that the entire Bill of Rights should be incorporated en bloc through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

[[Category:law]]

[[Category:law]]