14th Amendment Due Process And Equal Protection Clause – Although the powers of the legislative branch are prohibited in Article I of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights contains most of the constitutional protections afforded to criminal defendants. The Bill of Rights The first ten amendments to the Constitution. are the first ten amendments to the Constitution. In addition, the Fourteenth Amendment, which was added to the Constitution after the Civil War, has a host of protections for criminal defendants in the due process and equal protection clauses.

The Bill of Rights was originally written to apply to the federal government. However, US Supreme Court precedent has upheld that

14th Amendment Due Process And Equal Protection Clause

A constitutional amendment implicit in the due process concept of organizational freedom must be incorporated into the protections of the Fourteenth Amendment and applied to the states. Duncan v. Louisiana, 391 U.S. 145 (1968), accessed October 20, 2010, http://caselaw. lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=391&invol=145. This doctrine is known as selective corporation The application of the constitutional protections of the Bill of Rights to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment. , and includes nearly all of the constitutional protections in the Bill of Rights. So while the original focus of the Bill of Rights may have been to limit the federal government, modern interpretations of the Constitution ensure that its protections also extend to all levels of state and local government.

Roe V. Wade’s Future And The 14th Amendment’s Anniversary

The due process clause Clause in the Fifth Amendment (applicable to the federal government) and the Fourteenth Amendment (applicable to state government) provides that no individual shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law. declares, “No one shall … be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law.” The due process clause in the Fifth Amendment applies to

Federal criminal offenses and prosecutions. The federal due process clause is reflected in the Fourteenth Amendment, which guarantees due process of law in

Criminal prosecutions. Most states have a similar provision in their constitutions.Missouri Constitution, art. I, § 10, accessed October 10, 2010, http://www.sos.mo.gov/pubs/missouri_constitution.pdf.

Substantive due process The government cannot unreasonably interfere with an individual’s substantive constitutional rights. protect individuals from the unreasonable loss of substantial rights, such as the right to free speech and the right to privacy. Procedural due process The government cannot punish individuals criminally without giving notice and an opportunity to be heard. protect individuals from being criminally punished without warning and an opportunity to be heard. Substantive and procedural processes ensure that individuals are not deprived of life (capital punishment), liberty (imprisonment), or property (forfeiture).

The 14th Amendment: What It Says About Birthright Citizenship

Void due to vagueness A criminal statute that is so imprecisely worded that it gives too much discretion to law enforcement, is applied unevenly, and fails to give notice of what is criminal , violating the right to due process. challenging the wording of a statute under the due process clause. A statute is void for ambiguity if it uses words that are indefinite or ambiguous. Statutes that are not precisely drafted do not give the public notice of exactly what type of conduct is criminal. As well as

, they give too much discretion to law enforcement and are unevenly enforced.U.S. v. White, 882 F.2d 250 (1989), accessed October 6, 2010, http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1266702233593752485&hl=en&as_sdt=2&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr. With room for a vagueness challenge, the statute must be so vague that “men of ordinary intelligence must guess at its meaning,” concluded Connally v. General Construction Co., 269 U.S. 385 (1926), at Oct. 3, 2010, http:// /supreme.justia.com/us/269/385/case.html. which is an objective standard.

A state legislature enacts a statute criminalizing “improper dress on public beaches.” Larry, a law enforcement officer, arrests Kathy for wearing a two-piece bathing suit on the beach because he believes women should wear one-piece bathing suits. Two days later, Burt, another law enforcement officer, arrests Sarah for wearing a one-piece bathing suit on the beach because he believes that women should not be seen in public in bathing suits. Kathy and Sarah can attack the statute on its face and as applied as a loophole for vagueness. The term “inappropriate” is vague and can mean different things to different people. So it gives too much discretion to law enforcement, is subject to uneven application, and doesn’t give Kathy, Sarah, or the public enough warning of what behavior is criminal.

Statute is overbroad A statute that criminalizes both constitutionally protected conduct and constitutionally unprotected conduct, violating the right to due process. if it criminalizes both constitutionally protected conduct and constitutionally unprotected conduct. This challenge is different from void for vagueness, although some statutes can be attacked on both grounds. An overarching statute criminalizes

Pdf] A Pluralist Theory Of The Equal Protection Clause

A state legislature enacts a statute making it a crime to photograph “naked individuals under the age of eighteen.” This statute is apparently overbroad and violates due process. Although it is constitutionally prohibited

The Fourteenth Amendment states in relevant part, “no State…shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” The equal protection clause Clause in the Fourteenth Amendment that prohibits the state government from enacting arbitrarily discriminatory statutes. applies to the

Government. State constitutions generally have a similar provision.California Constitution, art. I, § 7, accessed October 4, 2010, http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_1. The equal protection clause prevents the state government from implementing criminal laws that

In an unreasonable and unjust manner. The due process clause of the Fifth Amendment prohibits the federal government from discriminating if the discrimination is so unjust that it violates due process of law.Bolling v. Sharpe, 347 U.S. 497 (1954), accessed October 4, 2010, http://scholar. google.com/scholar_case?case=16234924501041992561&hl=cy&as_sdt=2&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr.

Is There A Right To Privacy In The Constitution?

The prohibition on governmental discrimination is not absolute; it depends on the class of people targeted for a particular treatment. In general, court scrutiny is intensified according to a sliding scale when the subject of discrimination is an arbitrary classification. Arbitrary means random and often includes characteristics that an individual is born with, such as race or national origin. The most arbitrary classifications require strict scrutiny, meaning that the criminal statute must be supported by a

Government interest. Statutes containing non-arbitrary classifications must have a rational basis and be supported by a

Criminal statutes that classify individuals on the basis of race must be strictly scrutinized because race is an arbitrary and unjustifiable classification. Modern courts do not uphold criminal statutes that classify on the basis of race because the government has no interest in treating citizens of a different race more or less harshly. //www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0388_0001_ZO.html.

Differentiate, and do often. Criminal statutes that punish felons more severely when they have a history of criminal conduct, for example, three-strikes statutes, are supported by legitimate government interests of specific and general deterrence and incapacitation. Note that the basis of discrimination, a criminal defendant

Th Amendment: Simplified Summary, Text & Impact

, rational, not arbitrary like race. So although these statutes differ, they are constitutional in accordance with the equal protection clause. The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment is just like a similar provision in the Fifth Amendment, which only limits the federal government. It states that no person shall be “deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law.” “Due process” usually refers to fair procedures. However, the Supreme Court has also used this part of the Fourteenth Amendment to outlaw certain practices. For example, the Court has ruled that the Due Process Clause protects rights that are not specifically listed in the Constitution, such as the right to privacy regarding sexual relations. In Roe v. Wade (1973), the Court ruled that this right to privacy includes a woman’s decision to have an abortion. In addition, the Court used the Due Process Clause to extend the Bill of Rights to states over time through a practice known as “incorporation.”

The Fourteenth Amendment promises that all persons in the United States shall enjoy “the equal protection of the laws.” This means that they cannot be discriminated against without good reason. All laws differ, because governments have to make choices about what is legal. For example, a law prohibiting burglary discriminates against burglars. But the Equal Protection Clause requires that a state have a good reason or “rational basis” for such choices. In some areas where there has been a history of unjust action in the past – such as discrimination based on race or gender – the state must bear a much higher burden to justify such classes.

Racial discrimination has a long and damaging history in the United States. In Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), the Supreme Court upheld separate public facilities based on race, in a doctrine of “separate but equal.” But in Brown v. Board of Education (1954), overturned this doctrine regarding public schools by the Court, ruling that “separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.” Even in cases of affirmative action, where the government seeks to counteract the effects of past discrimination in education and employment, the Supreme Court has ruled that racial classifications are “inherently suspect”. As a result, the Court decided in Ricci v. DeStefano (2009) stated that the city of New Haven, Connecticut, could not invalidate a promotion exam for firefighters simply because a disproportionate percentage of racial minorities did not pass.

The Equal Protection Clause also applies to illegal immigrants in some cases. In Plyler v. Doe (1982), the Supreme Court struck down a law in Texas that prohibited children who were not legal residents from attending public schools for free. The Court held that “the Texas

Chapter 5 Constitutional Authority To Regulate Business.

14th amendment equal protection clause meaning, due process and equal protection clause, equal protection clause, 14th amendment equal protection clause, 14th amendment equal protection clause text, the 14th amendment equal protection clause, what is the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment, the equal protection clause, 14th amendment due process clause, 14th amendment equal protection clause cases, due process clause 5th and 14th amendment, equal protection clause amendment