| Line 160: |
Line 160: |
| | ===Rights of Criminal Defendants=== | | ===Rights of Criminal Defendants=== |
| | | | |
| − | The basic rights of criminal defendants include: (1) the right to trial by an impartial jury; (2) the right against unreasonable searches and seizures (usually that means a search without a warrant), (3) the right against Double Jeopardy (being retried after being found not guilty); (4) the right to receive a "Miranda warning" (explained below); (5) the right to a hearing before a judge if held in jail (the writ of habeas corpus); and (6) protection against cruel and unusual punishment. There are other rights also. | + | The basic rights of criminal defendants include: (1) the right to trial by an impartial jury; (2) the right against unreasonable searches and seizures (usually prohibiting a search without a warrant), (3) the right against Double Jeopardy (being retried after being found not guilty); (4) the right to receive a "Miranda warning" (explained below); (5) the right to a hearing before a judge if held in jail (known as the writ of habeas corpus); and (6) protection against cruel and unusual punishment. There are other rights also. |
| | | | |
| | The "Miranda warning" is a statement that must be read to all criminal suspects before an officer asks him questions, as established by the Supreme Court decision of ''Miranda v. Arizona'' (1966): | | The "Miranda warning" is a statement that must be read to all criminal suspects before an officer asks him questions, as established by the Supreme Court decision of ''Miranda v. Arizona'' (1966): |
| Line 167: |
Line 167: |
| | The United States protects criminal defendants far more than any other country. Should we? | | The United States protects criminal defendants far more than any other country. Should we? |
| | | | |
| − | Some conservatives agree with liberals in siding with rights of criminal defendants in federal court, because the federal government routinely imposes sentences of 20 years or more for non-violent crimes, or crimes that should be handled at a State or local level, or activities that some may not even consider to be criminal. The Patriot Act was passed to combat terrorism, but it has now been used to investigate non-terrorists also. Almost no conservative is concerned about the rights of terrorists held at Guantanamo Bay, but conservatives are worried about abuse of federal powers against American citizens. The Constitution itself authorizes only a few federal crimes, like treason or misconduct on the "high seas" (oceans). | + | Some conservatives agree with liberals in siding with rights of criminal defendants in federal court, because the federal government routinely imposes sentences of 20 years or more for non-violent crimes, or crimes that should be handled at a State or local level, or activities that some may not even consider to be criminal. Ron Paul opposed the Patriot Act because it can be used by the federal government to harass law-abiding citizens. Few conservatives are concerned about the rights of terrorists held at Guantanamo Bay, but many conservatives are worried about abuse of federal powers against American citizens. The Constitution itself authorizes only a few federal crimes, like treason or misconduct on the "high seas" (oceans). |
| | | | |
| | == Amendments 11-27 == | | == Amendments 11-27 == |
| Line 183: |
Line 183: |
| | *its Due Process Clause | | *its Due Process Clause |
| | | | |
| − | Let's look at each aspect carefully next. | + | Let's look carefully at each of these three concepts. |
| | | | |
| | ==== Equal Protection Clause==== | | ==== Equal Protection Clause==== |
| | | | |
| − | The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment states: "No state shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." That means any law which treats people differently based on their race (skin color) is unconstitutional and cannot be applied. For example, it is illegal for public schools to segregate students based on their race. The U.S. Supreme Court ended segregation in public schools in ''Brown v. Board of Education'' (1954). | + | The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment states: "No state shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." That means any law which treats people differently based on their race (ethnicity or skin color) is unconstitutional and cannot be enforced. For example, it is illegal for public schools to segregate students based on their race. The U.S. Supreme Court ended segregation in public schools in ''Brown v. Board of Education'' (1954). |
| | | | |
| | The Equal Protection Clause prohibits other forms of unequal treatment by government too. The Supreme Court, applying the 14th Amendment, ordered the all-male Virginia Military Institute (VMI) to admit women. But because the Equal Rights Amendment never passed, not all government laws treating men and women differently are unconstitutional. For example, the military can have a men-only military draft. But the military could not draft whites without also drafting blacks, because discrimination by government based on race is '''''never''''' allowed. "Strict scrutiny" is very strict legal standard that applies to any discrimination by government based on race. | | The Equal Protection Clause prohibits other forms of unequal treatment by government too. The Supreme Court, applying the 14th Amendment, ordered the all-male Virginia Military Institute (VMI) to admit women. But because the Equal Rights Amendment never passed, not all government laws treating men and women differently are unconstitutional. For example, the military can have a men-only military draft. But the military could not draft whites without also drafting blacks, because discrimination by government based on race is '''''never''''' allowed. "Strict scrutiny" is very strict legal standard that applies to any discrimination by government based on race. |