Protecting Individual Rights CIVIL LIBERTIES

What does this mean? “Most of all, we have got to remember that the law is people… Janet Reno (1995) Meaning: goal of the law to serve people, protecting both individual rights, & rights of those accused of crimes

Making A Difference For a young man, “real life” once was drugs, dropping out of school, problems with NY City police. Then he turned his lilfe around, earned his high school equivalency diploma, joined Youth force, a community group. At age 17, he helped create the group’s South Bronx community Justice Center to resolve neighborhood issues before they became crimes. Teens, including former gang members, worked w/lawyers, community leaders, & probation officers. He advised young kids awaiting trial. He hoped his story would keep them from making the same mistakes he made.

Meaning of Due Process 2 due process clauses 5 th Amendment – cannot be deprived of life, liberty, or property, w/out due process (federal) 14 th Amendment – same as 5 th accept on state and local government levels Meaning: Government must be fair w/regards to rules Due process requires government act and the laws that it acts under must be fair

Rochin vs. CA, 1952 Rochin suspected narcotics dealer. Acting on a tip, 3 deputy sheriffs went to where he was staying. Forced their way in. Deputies found him sitting on bed. Spotted 2 capsules on nightstand. When asked, “Whose stuff was that?” Rochin popped capsules into his mouth. Officers jumped him, but he swallowed them. He was taken to hospital, and his stomach was pumped. Capsules were obtained and they contained morphine. Rochin was convicted of violating State’s narcotics laws

Supreme Court overturned Deputies violated the 14 th Amendment’s guarantee of procedural due process: Illegally broke into his home Struggled to open his mouth Forced him to have contents removed from his stomach

Police Power Power of each state to safeguard our well-being Conflict between police power & individual rights Ex: drunk driving cases Allowed to use 1 or more tests to determine drunkenness Walking straight line Touching nose Breathalyzer test Drawing blood sample Does this requirement violate your rights under the 14 th Amendment (Due Process Clause)?

Does test involve an unconstitutional search for and seizure of evidence? Does it amount to forcing a person to testify against yourself (compulsory self-incrimination)? Is it proper use of police power? Courts side w/police power. Reason: right of society to protect itself against drunk drivers vs. individual rights Courts find the public’s health & safety, morals, and/or welfare more important

Ex: promoting health Limit sale of alcohol & tobacco Make laws to combat pollution Require vaccination of school children Promoting safety Forbid concealed weapons Require use of seat belts Punish drunk drivers Promoting morals Regulate gambling Outlaw sale of obscene materials Outlaw prostitution

Promoting general welfare Pass compulsory education laws Provide help to medically needy Limit profits of public utilities

Right of Privacy Due process creates a right to privacy Right to be free or left alone from unwanted gov’t intrusions (except in limited cases) Ex: Griswold vs. Connecticut, 1965 State law outlawing birth-control counseling & banned use of birth-control devices Court stated in violation of 14 th Amendment Due Process – state had no business policing the marital bedroom Roe vs. Wade, 1973 Most controversial of right to privacy

Supreme Court struck down TX law making abortion a crime except when needed to save mother’s life Court ruled in 1 st trimester, state must recognize a woman’s right to an abortion – cannot interfere w/dr.s decision 2 nd trimester, state acting in interest of women who get an abortion can make reasonable regulations about how, when, and where abortion can take place – cannot prohibit abortion Final trimester, state acting to protect unborn child, can prohibit all abortions except necessary to save life or health of the mother

Most important decision on issue of Roe vs. Wade Planned Parenthood of Southeastern PA vs. Casey, 1992 Court gave this rule: “A state may place reasonable limits on a woman’s right to have an abortion, but these restrictions cannot impose an “undue burden” on her choice of that procedure.” Court applied PA’s new Abortion Control Act Woman seeking abortion must be given professional counseling to persuade her to change her mind Woman must delay abortion least 24 hours after counseling Unmarried female under 18 must have parent consent, or permission of a judge Dr.s and clinics must keep detailed records of all abortions A married woman does not have to tell her husband

Quiz What is meant by due process? What is police power? What is the right of privacy?

Freedom and Security of the Person CIVIL LIBERTIES

13 th Amendment Ending slavery Occasional cases involving involuntary servitude Forced labor Difference between involuntary servitude and duty Selective service – draft Prison for committing a crime After Civil War civil rights cases on basis of 13 th amendment

Right to Bear Arms 2 nd Amendment Allows each state to keep a militia (reservists) Not covered by 14 th Amendment – due process clause Each state then can limit the right to keep and bear arms

Security of Home & Person 3 rd & 4 th Amendment Government must have just cause 3 rd Amendment Forbids soldiers staying in homes w/out owner’s permission 4 th Amendment Prevents writs of assistance – blanket search warrants Provides against unreasonable searches & seizures – must have probable cause

Probable cause Reasonable suspicion of crime Ex: Florida v. J. L., 2000 Miami police given a tip that a teenager had a concealed weapon on him. Police went to bus stop where they were told teenager would be, and searched him finding a gun on him, and arrested him. Supreme Court said police acted illegally due to not having a proper warrant. Police only had a tip, not supported by other evidence. Warrants not always needed Evidence in plain view

Ex: Minnesota v. Carter, men were in a friend’s apartment bagging cocaine. A policeman saw them through an open window. Police entered apartment, seized cocaine, and arrested them. Ex: Lindster v. Illinois, police set up roadblocks on a busy highway trying to find witnesses to a hit-and-run accident. Lindster was stopped, police smelled alcohol on his breath. He failed several sobriety tests. He was arrested for drunk driving. His attorney argued he was forced to stop, who before they stopped him had no probable cause to stop him because did not believe him to have committed a crime.

Lindster lost his case and conviction stood. Arrests Seizure of a person When police making lawful arrest do not need warrant to search Police still need probable cause to arrest Cars Difficult to apply 4 th amendment Courts usually uphold no warrant needed when probable cause in order to search car, boat, airplane or other vehicle. Reason: moveable, disappear while warrant being gotten

Exclusionary rule Evidence obtained from an illegal search cannot be used in court against the person it was taken Ex: Mapp v. Ohio Cleveland police entered Mapp’s home looking for gambling evidence. Police entered forcibly, w/out a warrant. They did not find gambling evidence. Instead found obscene materials. Mapp was sentenced to jail time. Court overturned conviction Reason: evidence against her was found w/out a warrant

Drug testing Involves searching a person Covered under 4 th Amendment Can be done w/out warrant or indication of drug use (random) Ex: Vernonia School District v. Acton, 1995 All student athletes agree drug testing. Later extended to any competitive extracurricular activity Wiretapping Police today need to obtain a warrant to install a bug

Quiz What is probable cause? What is the exclusionary rule, and what is it’s purpose?

Rights of the Accused CIVIL LIBERTIES

Habeas Corpus Writ of habeas corpus Also known as “writ of liberty” To prevent unjust arrests & imprisonments Commands accused go to court, and officer show cause, explain why accused not be released Cannot be suspended except: Rebellion invasion

President Lincoln suspended in 1861 Chief Justice Taney ruled unconstitutional Congress passed Habeas Corpus Act of 1863 giving power to President to suspend Since then has only been suspended 1 other time Hawaii’s governor suspended when Pearl Harbor was attacked Supreme Court ruled governor had no power to do so

Bills of Attainder Legislative act giving punishment w/out a trial Ban placed on “bills of attainder” Legislative bodies cannot pass laws declaring person guilty or state the punishment

Ex Post Facto Laws Law passed after the fact 3 features Criminal law Defining crime or providing for its punishment Applies to act committed before its passage A disadvantage of the accused Neither congress or states can pass such laws Ex: law passed crime to sell marijuana – person who sold before law passed, law cannot apply

Bills of attainder and ex post facto laws threaten individual freedoms

Grand Jury 5 th Amendment guarantees accused right to Formal way a person can be accused of serious crime Federal cases contains people from the area Need to least 12 jurors to return indictment Grand jury is secret Indictment – formal complaint was prosecutor brings before the grand jury If indictment returned on accused then trial is held

Double Jeopardy 5 th Amendment guarantees against Person cannot be tried for the same crime twice Person can violate both federal & state same time Ex: selling narcotics Can be tried then in federal court and state court When jury cannot agree on guilt or innocence – no jeopardy applies

Speedy & Public Trial Speedy trial Provision of 6 th Amendment Person be tried w/out delay 4 criteria determining delayed Length Reasons Delay harmed defendant Did defendant ask for prompt trial Speedy Trial Act of 1974 states must not be more than 100 days

Public trial 6 th Amendment states trial must be public Also part of 14 th Amendment “due process” Cannot be too speedy or too public Judge can limit # & kind of spectators Media can be present, cannot damage right of fair trial

Trail by Jury Also known as “petit jury” “petit” – French word for small 6 th Amendment also states person accused of federal crime tried by impartial jury Jury must come from where crime committed Defendant may ask for “change of venue” Impartial jury may not be found Defendant may waive right to a jury trial If waived, bench trial held – only judge hears case

Jury must have 12 members Federal cases can convict on unanimous vote No one can be kept off jury due to race, color, religion, national origin, or sex

Right to Adequate Defense Provision of 6 th Amendment Person accused of crime has right to best possible defense allowed Defendant has right of following: Be informed of nature & cause of accusation To confront witnesses against him & ? them in court Have required process for obtaining witnesses in his/her favor Have assistance of counsel for defense Can appeal conviction if those rights violated

Self-Incrimination Defendant cannot be forced to testify against his/ her self Burden of proof on prosecution Defendant does not have to prove innocence Defendant can “plead the 5 th ” Judge can deem if “pleading the 5 th ” may make defendant or witness in contempt of court A person can be forced to “rat” on another

Does not protect person from being fingerprinted, photographed, submitting handwriting sample, or appearing in line-up Cannot be forced to confess to crime under pressure

Quiz What does “writ of habeas corpus” want to prevent? Why are bills of attainder and ex post facto laws not allowed? What guarantees does the 5 th Amendment offer the accused?

Quiz What are the provisions of the 6 th Amendment concerning rights of the accused?