2. 4 Civil Liberties Gilles Mingasson/Getty Images
Vehicles are one Fourth Amendment issue that has continuously troubled the Supreme Court. A Department of Homeland Security agent uses technological devices to search a van at the U.S.-Mexico border.
Gilles Mingasson/Getty Images

3. 4 Learning Objectives Trace the constitutional roots of civil
In this chapter, you will learn about the origin of civil liberties given to U.S. citizens through the Bill of Rights and the Fourteenth Amendment. You will first learn about the protections provided under the First Amendment, including freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and freedom of petition. We will then move on to the Second Amendment right to bear arms. In addition to discussing protections under the Bill of Rights, we will also discuss limitations to the Bill of Rights and why there are still questions as to what is and what is not constitutional.
Trace the constitutional roots of civil
liberties.
4.1
Describe the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of religion.
4.2

4. 4
Learning Objectives
Outline the First Amendment guarantees of and limitations on freedom of speech, press, assembly, and petition.
4.3
Summarize changes in the interpretation of the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.
4.4

5. 4
Learning Objectives
Analyze the rights of criminal defendants found in the Bill of Rights.
4.5
Explain the origin and significance of the right to privacy.
4.6

6. 4
Learning Objectives
Evaluate how reforms to combat terrorism have affected civil liberties.
4.7

7. Roots of Civil Liberties: The Bill of Rights
4.1
Roots of Civil Liberties:
The Bill of Rights
The first ten Amendments make up the Bill of Rights and were added to the U.S. Constitution in response to fears that the Constitution had failed to provide adequate legal protection for individuals.
The Federalists felt a Bill of Rights would be unnecessary as the Constitution guarantees popular sovereignty. The Anti-Federalists, on the other hand, feared that the new national government would become too powerful. Without spelling out the protections offered to citizens, the Anti-Federalists would most likely not have ratified the Constitution.
Later, the Fourteenth Amendment added state governments to the equation and provided individuals the right to 'due process.'
The Incorporation Doctrine: The Bill of Rights Made Applicable to the States
Selective Incorporation and Fundamental Freedoms

8. The Incorporation Doctrine:
4.1
The Incorporation Doctrine:
The Bill of Rights Made Applicable to the States
The Bill of Rights protected individuals against actions by the federal government, but not by actions of the state. This changed with the addition of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Fourteenth Amendment requires state and local governments to guarantee that all individuals receive the rights outlined in the Bill of Rights.
In 1897, the Supreme Court ruled that states were accountable for substantive due process. States had to prove that state laws were not a misuse of power in regulating the health, welfare, and morals of citizens.
Applying due process to rights listed in the Bill of Rights is called the incorporation doctrine.
Fourteenth Amendment
Bill of Rights applies to actions of states, not just federal government.
Due process clause
Applied to Bill of Rights
Substantive due process

9. 4.1 When did the Court first articulate the
doctrine of selective incorporation?
Until Gitlow v. New York (1925), involving Benjamin Gitlow (shown on the right, testifying before Congress), the executive secretary of the Socialist Party, it generally was thought that, despite the Fourteenth Amendment, the limitations of the Bill of Rights did not apply to the states. After Gitlow, the Court gradually bound states to most of these provisions through a process known as selective incorporation.
AP Images

10. Selective Incorporation and Fundamental Freedoms
4.1
Selective Incorporation and Fundamental Freedoms
The Court used the doctrine of selective incorporation to determine which rights in the Bill of Rights apply to states under the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Fundamental freedoms protected under selective incorporation include the rights defined by the Court as essential to order, liberty and justice. States are bound by these rights and must ensure that individuals have these rights. Fundamental freedoms include freedom of press, freedom of speech, and freedom of assembly.
Fundamental freedoms protected under selective incorporation
Rights that states must protect
Freedom of press
Freedom of speech
Freedom of assembly

11. TABLE 4.1 When did selective incorporation make the Bill of Rights applicable to the states?
As you can see in this table, not all rights have been incorporated under the Fourteenth Amendment.
continued on next slide

12. TABLE 4.1 When did selective incorporation make the Bill of Rights applicable to the states?
As you can see in this table, not all rights have been incorporated under the Fourteenth Amendment.

13. 4.1 What does the Bill of Rights
include?
The first 10 amendments to the Constitution
All of the amendments to the Constitution
The first 14 amendments to the Constitution
A list of basic freedoms outlined in the Preamble to the Constitution

14. 4.1 What does the Bill of Rights
include?
The Bill of Rights includes the first ten amendments to the Constitution. They protect rights of the individual against government tyranny. The Fourteenth Amendment protects the right of individuals to due process of law.
The first 10 amendments to the Constitution
All of the amendments to the Constitution
The first 14 amendments to the Constitution
A list of basic freedoms outlined in the Preamble to the Constitution

15. First Amendment Guarantees: Freedom of Religion
4.2
First Amendment Guarantees: Freedom of Religion
The First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibit the free exercise thereof." It is clear that the government cannot establish a national government, and that individuals to exercise the religion of their choice freely.
However, as with many civil liberties, there are restrictions to freedom of religion. The separation of church and state has long been a topic of debate in the United States.
The Establishment Clause
The Free Exercise Clause

16. The Establishment Clause
4.2
The Establishment Clause
It's clear that the establishment clause prohibits the government from sanctioning an official religion. Issues involving the separation of church and state are highly controversial.
Prayer in schools went largely undisputed until the 1960s when in Engel v. Vitale (1962), the Court ruled that a mandatory prayer in public school classrooms was unconstitutional.
As a result of controversy surrounding the separation of church and state, the Court established a three-part test known as the Lemon test. This test is derived from the Lemon v. Kurtzman case of A law or government practice is allowed if it:
has a secular purpose
does not inhibit or advance religion
3) does not create an excessive entanglement of government and religion.
Separation of church and state
Lemon test
Must have secular purpose
Must not advance or prohibit a religion
Must not entangle government with religion

17. 4.2 Should children be required to pray in public schools?
School prayer is just one of the thorny questions the Supreme Court has addressed under the establishment clause. Though the Court has usually decided against prayer in schools, even when it is student-led, many educational institutions maintain this practice.
Bettmann/ Corbis

18. Free Exercise Clause 4.2 Free exercise clause not absolute
The free exercise clause holds that "Congress shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise [of religion]." Like the establishment clause, the free exercise clause is not absolute.
The free exercise of religion allows individuals to engage in religious activities without government interference, as long as the acts fall within acceptable norms. So snake handling, even if part of a religious observance, would not be allowed, especially if a state could show a compelling reason to prohibit it.
Free exercise clause not absolute
Some religious rites considered illegal
State must provide compelling reason to limit exercise of religion.

19. 4.2 Which of the following is not part
of the Lemon test?
Let's see how well you understand how the Court determines the constitutionality of religious practices by answering this brief question.
Law must neither advance nor inhibit religion.
Law must not foster government entanglement with religion.
Law must not impose costs on religious
organizations.
d. Law must have a secular legislative purpose.

20. 4.2 Which of the following is not part
of the Lemon test?
The so-called Lemon test is used to determine if a law regarding religious practice is constitutional. A law is constitutional if it neither advances nor prohibits religion, if it has a secular legislative purpose, and if it does not foster an excessive government entanglement with religion.
Law must neither advance nor inhibit religion.
Law must not foster government entanglement with religion.
Law must not impose costs on religious organizations.
d. Law must have a secular legislative purpose.

21. 4.3
First Amendment Guarantees: Freedoms of Speech, Press, Assembly, and Petition
Some First Amendment rights have historically been set aside to accommodate the needs of the government during times of war. This section will provide the background about the freedom of the press, speech, and assembly and petition.
Freedoms of Speech and the Press
Protected Speech and Press
Unprotected Speech and Press
Freedoms of Assembly and Petition

22. Freedoms of Speech and the Press
4.3
Freedoms of Speech and the Press
Alien and Sedition Acts
Censored criticisms of the government
Slavery, Civil War, and Rights Curtailments
Speech again censored
World War I and anti-government speech
The First Amendment protects individuals against prior restraint of speech. This means that government cannot prohibit or censor publications or speech. However, in 1798, Congress passed the Alien and Sedition Acts, which banned publications critical of the government. After the election of Thomas Jefferson, those who were convicted under these Acts were pardoned.
Before, during, and after the Civil War, freedom of speech was again restricted. Publications in favor of slavery were not permitted in the North and those opposing slavery were not permitted in the South. President Lincoln suspended free press protections of the First Amendment.
Freedom of speech continued to be curtailed between 1890 and 1900, when people were prosecuted for seditious speech, and in the early twentieth century as Socialists and Communists who appealed to the growing immigrant populations were targeted for their views on government.
In 1919 the Supreme Court ruled that speech could be punishable by law if it presented a clear and present danger to society. Any speech that would directly incite or advocate illegal action could be prohibited. However, in 1969, the court decided that even speech that advocates for illegal action is constitutional if it is not likely to produce such actions.

23. Protected Speech and Press
4.3
Protected Speech and Press
As we have discussed, Congress attempted to prohibit publications critical of the government as early as The issue of prior restraint arose again in the 1970s in New York Times Co. v. U.S. In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that the government could not block the publication of the Pentagon Papers, secret Department of Defense documents obtained by the New York Times.
The court has ruled that symbolic speech is also protected under the First Amendment. Symbolic speech implies expression through symbols or signs. Some famous decisions in favor of symbolic speech included the Court's ruling that students had the right to wear black armbands to protest the Vietnam War, and that state laws prohibiting burning are unconstitutional.
Hate speech, which belittles a person or group, is another difficult issue. It is not protected when it is conducted to intimidate groups or to disrupt activities.
Limiting prior restraint
Symbolic speech
Hate speech

24. 4.3 How broad is the right to symbolic speech? Clay Good/Zuma Press
In a 2007 case, the Supreme Court ruled that a school district was within its rights to suspend a student for displaying this banner, because it was intended to promote illegal drug use, even though it occurred off school property.
Activity: Flag burning is a form of symbolic speech. Hold a debate on adopting a constitutional amendment to prohibit burning the American flag. One side should prepare arguments supporting the individual's right to freedom of expression; the other should focus on potential negative consequences to the public interest of burning the flag.
Clay Good/Zuma Press

25. Unprotected Speech and Press
4.3
Unprotected Speech and Press
Unprotected speech
Libel and slander
Fighting words
Obscenity
While most speech is protected under the First Amendment, libel, slander, fighting words and obscenity are not. Statements that defame an individual's character with malice and a clear intent to provide false information are not protected. When these words are written, they are called libel. When they are spoken, they are called slander.
Fighting words are words that "by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of peace." Fighting words are not subject to the restrictions of the First Amendment.
The Supreme Court ruled in Roth v. United States that obscenity is not constitutionally protected but defining what is obscene has proven elusive. Standards vary both from place to place and from time to time.
In Miller v. California, the Court attempted to clarify its obscenity doctrine. Materials were obscene if they appealed to a 'prurient interest', showed 'patently offensive' sexual conduct, or lacked 'serious literary artistic, political, or scientific value.' The judges of these three criteria were to be average people applying local, not national, standards.
The Court ruled that the PROTECT Act, which outlaws the sale of pornography to minors, is constitutional, although the Internet has made it difficult to restrict access to pornography to minors.

26. Freedoms of Assembly and Petition
4.3
Freedoms of Assembly and Petition
Freedom to assemble hinges on peaceful conduct. Without this, leaders and attendees may be subject to governmental regulation and even arrest, incarceration, or civil fines. The freedom to assemble has often been controversial, especially in times of war.
The Supreme Court has rarely addressed the right to petition government. But, in 2010, the Court found that the disclosure of petitioners does not violate First Amendment rights. If individuals choose to sign a ballot initiative, then those names must be disclosed.
Freedom to assemble hinges on peaceful conduct.
Subject to rules regarding free speech
Right to petition government about issues

27. How do we use our right to assemble?
4.3
How do we use our right to assemble?
The First Amendment rights to assembly and petition are often seen in the form of protests, marches, and rallies. Here, protestors in California march in support of gay marriage rights following a federal appellate court's ruling on that issue.
Adam Lau/AP Images

28. 4.3 What standard is not considered
when defining obscenity?
Before we continue, see if you can answer this question about how obscenity is defined. Do you remember the criteria?
Is it based on community norms?
Is it sexually offensive?
Does it have artistic or political value?
Is it harmful to minors?

29. 4.3 What standard is not considered
when defining obscenity?
Obscenity is measured against the first three questions. Minors are prohibited access to obscenity.
Is it based on community norms?
Is it sexually offensive?
Does it have artistic or political value?
Is it harmful to minors?

30. Second Amendment: Right to Keep and Bear Arms
4.4
Second Amendment: Right to Keep and Bear Arms
The Framers added the Second Amendment to ensure that Congress could not disarm state militias.
In Dred Scott v. Sanford, the right to bear arms was listed as a basic right of citizenship. This does not limit the government from taxing or regulating the sale of firearms, but individuals have the right to own them through legal means.
Through the early 1920s, few state laws were enacted to regulate firearms. In 1934, Congress passed the National Firearms Act during Prohibition, in response to the explosion of organized crime and the increase in automatic weapons. However, despite controversy over gun control, the Court has upheld the right of citizens to own firearms for personal use.
Included to prevent Congress from disarming state militias
Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857)
The right to bear and carry arms a basic right of citizenship

31. 4.4 What was an original intent of the Second Amendment?
Can you answer this brief question about the right to bear arms?
To require colonists to keep and bear arms
To disarm the state militias
To regulate the sale of firearms
To preserve the right to revolt against the government

32. 4.4 What was an original intent of the Second Amendment?
The Second Amendment was included to prevent Congress from passing laws that would disarm state militias. The implied purpose was to preserve the right to revolt against the tyranny of government.
To require colonists to keep and bear arms
To disarm the state militias
To regulate the sale of firearms
To preserve the right to revolt against the government

33. The Rights of Criminal Defendants
4.5
The Rights of Criminal Defendants
The Fourth Amendment and Searches and Seizures
The Fifth Amendment: Self-Incrimination and Double Jeopardy
The Fourth and Fifth Amendments and the Exclusionary Rule
Multiple amendments to the Constitution provide protection for those who have been accused of a crime. Several clauses in the Bill of Rights protect people who are accused of a crime by preventing individuals from being mistreated by overzealous law enforcement officials.
Writs of habeas corpus require law enforcement officials to provide proof that an individual is being held lawfully. Ex post facto laws, which are laws that make an act punishable even if the act was legal when it was committed, are prohibited. Bills of attainder, which punish persons or groups for crimes without the benefit of a trial, are also prohibited. This section will discuss the protections provided by the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendments.

34. Rights of Criminal Defendants
4.5
Rights of Criminal Defendants
The Sixth Amendment and the Right to Counsel
The Sixth Amendment and Jury Trials
The Eighth Amendment and Cruel and Unusual Punishment
Multiple amendments to the Constitution provide protection for those who have been accused of a crime. Several clauses in the Bill of Rights protect people who are accused of a crime by preventing individuals from being mistreated by overzealous law enforcement officials.
Writs of habeas corpus require law enforcement officials to provide proof that an individual is being held lawfully. Ex post facto laws, which are laws that make an act punishable even if the act was legal when it was committed, are prohibited. Bills of attainder, which punish persons or groups for crimes without the benefit of a trial, are also prohibited. This section will discuss the protections provided by the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendments.

35. The Fourth Amendment and Searches and Seizures
4.5
The Fourth Amendment and Searches and Seizures
The Fourth Amendment of the Bill of Rights protects citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures. Police must have warrants to search homes and to obtain the warrants they must have have probable cause—that is, they must have enough information suggesting that a crime has taken place and that an individual or location is linked to the crime.
As with many civil liberties, there are exceptions to the rule. Law enforcement officials do have the right to search an individual's pockets, purse, or car as long as what they obtain was within the view or reach of the individual at the time of the arrest.
Protection from unreasonable searches
Warrants
Probable cause

36. The Fifth Amendment : Self-Incrimination and Double Jeopardy
4.5
The Fifth Amendment : Self-Incrimination and Double Jeopardy
The Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination means that the burden of proof is on the prosecution. If you are accused of a crime, you cannot be compelled to testify against yourself. You are innocent until the state proves that you are guilty, and you don't have to help the prosecution prove their case against you.
It is possible, indeed likely, that someone who is arrested may say something incriminating under interrogation, without being aware of their constitutional rights to remain silent, to have an attorney present during questioning, and to be provided with an attorney if they cannot afford one. In the 1966 case of Miranda v. Arizona, the Supreme Court ruled that arresting officers must inform accused persons of these rights.
In addition to the previously mentioned protections, someone cannot be tried twice for the same crime. This is known as double jeopardy.
Protection against self-incrimination
Miranda v. Arizona (1966)
Right to remain silent
Knowledge that what you say can be used against you
Right to an attorney present during questioning
Right to have an attorney provided if you cannot afford one
Double jeopardy

37. 4.5
Why was Ernesto Miranda important to the development of defendants' rights?
Even though Ernesto Miranda's confession was not admitted as evidence at his retrial, the testimony of his ex-girlfriend and the victim was enough to convince the jury of his guilt. He served nine years in prison before he was paroled. After his release, he routinely sold autographed cards inscribed with what are called the Miranda rights now read to all suspects. In 1976, four years after his release, Miranda was stabbed to death during a card game. Two Miranda cards were found on his body, and the person who killed him was read his Miranda rights upon his arrest.
AP Images

38. The Fourth and Fifth Amendments and the Exclusionary Rule
4.5
The Fourth and Fifth Amendments and the Exclusionary Rule
The exclusionary rule bars the use of illegally obtained evidence. It was extended to the states in the 1961 case of Mapp v. Ohio, making such evidence inadmissible in state courts.
But the courts have recently upheld many exceptions, such as when the evidence could have been obtained by legal means or the police did not realize the seizure was improper. There is widespread public support for preventing criminals from going free on a technicality. The Court has ruled in favor of some good faith exceptions if law enforcement officials believed that the search they were conducting was legal.
Mapp v. Ohio (1961)
Exceptions to the exclusionary rule
'Good faith' mistakes

39. The Sixth Amendment and Right to Counsel
4.5
The Sixth Amendment and
Right to Counsel
The Sixth Amendment guarantees the right to counsel in federal courts. But most trials happen in state courts and most defendants cannot afford an attorney. It was not until 1932 that this right was incorporated, and the state required to pay for an attorney for the indigent, and then only for capital crimes. In 1963, in the famous case of Gideon v. Wainwright, the Court extended this right to anyone accused of a felony, and subsequent rulings have extended it to crimes in which imprisonment could be imposed.
In 2008, the Court ruled that the right to counsel began at the time of the individual's first appearance before a judge.
Sixth Amendment right to attorney
Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
State must provide attorney for indigent
Right to counsel begins with first appearance before a judge

40. The Sixth Amendment and Jury Trials
4.5
The Sixth Amendment and Jury Trials
When cases do go to trial, defendants have the right to an impartial jury that is not racially biased.
Defendants also have the right to confront witnesses to prevent false testimony and to be informed of evidence that may exonerate them.
In 1954, the Supreme Court ruled that Hispanics were entitled to a jury trial that included Hispanic peers. Gender discrimination was often a question, especially concerning cases regarding rape and murder. Ultimately, the Court determined that the equal protection clause prohibits discrimination on the basis of gender.
Speedy and public trial by impartial jury
Right to confront witnesses
Jury of peers
Racial peers
Gender

41. The Eighth Amendment and Cruel and Unusual Punishment
4.5
The Eighth Amendment and Cruel and Unusual Punishment
The Constitution forbids cruel and unusual punishment but it does not define it. It is up to the sensibilities of the age. The Court has not ruled that the death penalty is in itself cruel and unusual punishment, but has upheld restrictions on its use.
In Furman v. Georgia, the Court ruled that because the death penalty had been unfairly applied to African Americans, it was cruel and unusual punishment. However, the Court later ruled that the death penalty was not unconstitutional unless it could be proved that racial discrimination applied to the particular case.
In recent cases, the Court has upheld the use of lethal injection as a method of execution, and made it more difficult for death row inmates to appeal their sentences.
Public support for the death penalty is high in the U.S., but advances in DNA technology that demonstrate that innocent people have been executed may cause that support to wane.
Cruel and unusual punishment not defined
Furman v. Georgia (1972)
Protecting the wrongfully convicted

42. 4.5 How do states vary in their application of the death penalty?
This cartoon offers a social commentary on the frequent administration of the death penalty in Texas, which leads the nation in the number of executions. The state of Texas has accounted for one-third of the nation's executions since 1976, a fact that is particularly remarkable after considering that the death penalty is illegal in 16 states and rarely used in many others.
Nick Anderson. Cartoonist Group. Reprinted with permission. All rights reserved

43. 4.5 Because of the ____, lawyers
cannot select jurors on the basis of gender.
We've discussed protections afforded to the accused, including the right to a trial by a jury of their peers. What completes this sentence?
Fifth Amendment
Civil Rights Act of 1964
role of political correctness
equal protection clause

44. 4.5 Because of the ____, lawyers
cannot select jurors on the basis of gender.
The Court ruled that the equal protection clause prohibits jury selection on the basis of gender. Lawyers cannot exclude male or female jurors whom they think might not be sympathetic to their case.
Fifth Amendment
Civil Rights Act of 1964
role of political correctness
equal protection clause

45. Right to Privacy 4.6 Birth Control and Contraceptives Abortion
While the Constitution does not specifically outline the right to privacy, it was acknowledged as early as 1928 by Justice Louis Brandeis, who explained that privacy is 'the right to be left alone— the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men.' In this section, we will discuss privacy in terms of reproductive rights and sexual rights.
Birth Control and Contraceptives
Abortion
Homosexuality

46. Birth Control and Contraceptives
4.6
Birth Control and Contraceptives
Until the 1960s, contraceptives were often restricted in states. In many states they could not be sold to minors, if at all. Connecticut banned the sale of all forms of birth control and prohibited doctors from discussing contraceptives with married women.
Griswold v. Connecticut concerned a Connecticut law prohibiting the use of birth control by married couples. The Court argued that the rights in the Constitution implied a right to privacy that extended to the behavior of married couples in the privacy of their bedroom. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled that the Connecticut state law was unconstitutional and later expanded the right to privacy to include the right of unmarried individuals to have access to contraceptives.
Right of women to obtain contraceptives
Griswold v. Connecticut (1965)

47. Griswold v. Connecticut (1965)?
4.6
What was the outcome of
Griswold v. Connecticut (1965)?
In this photo, Estelle Griswold (left), executive director of the Planned Parenthood League of Connecticut, and Cornelia Jahncke, its president, celebrate the Supreme Court's ruling in Griswold v. Connecticut (1965). Griswold invalidated a Connecticut law that made selling contraceptives or disseminating information about contraception to married couples illegal.
Bettmann/Corbis

48. Abortion 4.6 Roe v. Wade Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992)
One of the most famous and controversial cases in Supreme Court history concerns the application of the implied right to privacy to the issue of abortion. In 1973, in the case of Roe v. Wade, the Court ruled that the right to privacy protects a woman's decision to terminate a pregnancy but that this right is not absolute.
Following the result of Roe v. Wade several state legislatures and city councils sought to counteract the Court's decision. They enacted statutes and ordinances to make obtaining abortions more difficult by specifying expensive medical procedures and other matters during the second trimester.
In 1992, in its decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the Supreme Court made it easier for states to place restrictions on abortion services by stating that such restrictions could not place an "undue burden" on a woman seeking an abortion in order to pass constitutional muster. What states consider to be an "undue burden" varies widely.
Roe v. Wade
Prohibits state bans on abortion
Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992)
Restrictions cannot place undue burden on woman.

49. Homosexuality 4.6 Right to privacy extends to private sexual behavior
Griswold v. Connecticut determined that married couples have the right to privacy regarding their personal lives. This right was extended to private sexual relations between men in Lawrence v. Texas.
Right to privacy extends to private sexual behavior
Lawrence v. Texas (2003)

50. Which case led to greater discussion of gay rights issues?
4.6
Which case led to greater discussion of gay rights issues?
Tyron Garner (left) and John Geddes Lawrence (center), the plaintiffs in Lawrence v. Texas (2003), are shown here with their attorney. The ruling in this case proved to be a huge victory for advocates of gay and lesbian rights, as it deemed anti-sodomy laws unconstitutional. Following this decision, states began to debate laws related to marriage and other rights for same-sex couples.
David J. Phillip/AP Images

51. 4.6 What was the decision in
Griswold v. Connecticut based on?
Do you recall what this case established? Please answer this brief question before we continue.
Right to privacy
Right to information about family planning
Right to abortion
Right to sexual conduct

52. 4.6 What was the decision in
Griswold v. Connecticut based on?
The Court decided that laws banning contraceptives and information about birth control were protected by the right to privacy. Although the Constitution does not explicitly state this right, there are enough protections in the amendments to suggest that individuals have rights that extend to privacy and "the right to be left alone."
Right to privacy
Right to information about family planning
Right to abortion
Right to sexual conduct

53. Toward Reform: Civil Liberties and Combating Terrorism
4.7
Toward Reform: Civil Liberties and Combating Terrorism
Historically, there have been situations in which civil liberties have been suspended, particularly during wartime. This was also the case following the September 11, attacks. The government temporarily suspended many civil liberties through the USA PATRIOT Act, the Military Commissions Act of 2006, and subsequent secret memos from the Department of Justice.
The First Amendment
The Fourth Amendment
Due Process Rights

54. The First Amendment 4.7 USA PATRIOT Act Limits on freedom of speech
The USA PATRIOT Act, as well as the Military Commissions Act, contain varying degrees of civil liberty infringements.
The USA PATRIOT Act violates the First Amendment right of freedom of speech by barring citizens from telling others that they have been subjected to search orders. The FBI can investigate people who exercise their freedom of speech, without needing to demonstrate that such speech is considered illegal.
The media was under strong constraints to report only positive aspects of the Bush administration's efforts to combat terrorism.
Freedom of religion was ignored in the treatment of detainees in Iraq, when Muslims were subjected to acts that violated their religion.
USA PATRIOT Act
Limits on freedom of speech
Constraints on media

55. 4.7
The Fourth Amendment
The USA PATRIOT Act infringes upon Fourth Amendment rights in four areas. First, it enables the government to obtain and examine an individual's private records that are held by a third party, including libraries, doctors, and universities.
Government officials can search an individual's property without first notifying the individual.
Third, according to the ACLU the Act "expands a narrow exception to the Fourth Amendment that had been created for the collection of foreign intelligence information."
Government can trace not just the contents of communication between individuals, but collect information about who is sending and receiving the information.
Activity: Review with your class the current status and provisions of the Patriot Act. An online text can be found at the Electronic Privacy Information Center (epic.org/privacy/terrorism/hr3162.html). Debate the limits of civil liberties in a post- 9/11 world. Are certain tradeoffs between liberty and security necessary?
The USA PATRIOT Act and impact on illegal search and seizure
Private records
Search of private property
Collection of foreign intelligence
Information about who is sending and receiving communications

56. Due Process Rights 4.7 Reduced rights of habeas corpus
Illegal incarceration and torture are federal crimes, and individuals have the right to habeas corpus, or to know why they are being detained. However, in 2006, the Bush Administration argued otherwise under the Military Commissions Act and eliminated the right to challenge 'detention, transfer, treatment, trial or conditions of confinement' of detainees. The detention facilities at Guantanamo Bay have sparked intense debate and may violate human rights.
Detainees have been denied the right to trial by jury and access to evidence against them. Legal counsel is limited.
Detainees have also been subjected to cruel and unusual punishment, in violation of the Eighth Amendment.
Reduced rights of habeas corpus
Detention facilities
Right to trial by jury
Cruel and unusual punishment

57. 4.7 What are living arrangements like for detainees?
Prisoners of the war on terrorism live in maximum-security prisons where their civil liberties are often compromised. Here, military police escort a detainee to his cell at Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp.
Shane T. McCoy/Department of Defense/HO/Reuters

58. 4.7 Which rights have been affected
by the USA PATRIOT Act and the
Military Commissions Act?
Let's test your understanding of topics we have discussed in this section.
The right to trial by jury
The protection from illegal search and seizure
The right to obtain legal counsel
All of the above

59. 4.7 Which rights have been affected
by the USA PATRIOT Act and the
Military Commissions Act?
These measures have compromised many constitutional guarantees. Supporters say they are needed to protect national security.
The right to trial by jury
The protection from illegal search and seizure
The right to obtain legal counsel
All of the above

60. 4
Discussion Questions
Overall, have the Court's rulings on civil liberties strengthened citizens' rights or weakened them in favor of government restrictions?
Are there any notable trends over time?

61. 4 Further Review Listen to the Chapter Study and Review the Flashcards
Study and Review the Practice Tests