Chapter 4(Patterson) and Chapter 5(Barrons) Synthesis

Like the other parts of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights were not perfect even after it was edited and established. There were many complaints, questions, and loopholes about each amendment in the Bill of Rights, leading to several state and Supreme Court cases that were necessary in order to narrow down the definitions of each amendment. 

For example, the freedom of expression was especially hard to perfectly define since it included the freedoms of speech, press, assembly, and petition. Every citizen is guaranteed the right to say, write, and express their ideals and thoughts in public; however, there is a point where the freedom of expression can endanger the lives of other nearby people. For example, in the case of Schenk v. United States, Schenk was printing and distributing material that went against the U.S efforts in WWI. Such actions could potentially spark danger within the nation, and the Supreme Court ruled that it was a "clear and present danger". It showed that the freedom of speech is not absolute since speech that can cause danger among the public (such as yelling "BOMB!' in a movie theater when there is no bomb) in unacceptable. In case of New York Times v. Sullivan, the NY Times was published derogatory ads claiming Alabama officials mistreated student civil rights activists. The Court ruled that the NY Times was not guilty of libel since its publishing were all 100% true. The case showed that true media statements have full protection and establish an official definition of libel: material written down with malice and disregard for the truth.

The first amendment gives every person the freedom to pursue and worship any religion they please. In addition, the concept of "separation between church and state" is also established. The establishment clause states that the government is to remain neutral when it comes to religion related matters. In the case of Engle v. Vitale, it was ruled that schools could no longer set aside time for reciting prayers, as church and state had to be separated. The Supreme Court also banned religious displays on public property when the display is overtly religious and lacks historical context. This was taken to a further step in the case of Lee v. Weisman, which prohibited clergy from reciting prayers at graduation ceremonies. In the case of Van Orden v Perry, a copy of the Ten Commandments was placed on the Texas monument. Since the Ten Commandments on Texas monument had been installed half a century earlier, they were completely acceptable. However, in the case of McCreary County v. American Civil Liberties Union, the copies of the Ten Commandments placed on 2 Kentucky were not acceptable since they were recently established and because  the officials most likely had hidden religious motives. In the case of Lemon v Kurtzman, there was the debate of whether if there should be state funding of salaries for religious school teachers who taught secular subjects like English and Math. The Court ruled that such an action would require government entanglements with religion and even if the teachers were teaching secular classes, there was still the possibility that they could still use the opportunity to promote religion. As a result of this case, the Court created the Lemon test:
1) must have a secular purpose
2) principle cannot inhibit or advance religion
3) must not cause excessive government entanglement with religion
Interesting fact: Secular textbooks in religious schools are fine since they have little religious content.

The right to bear arms has caused a great deal of controversy since guns are very dangerous weapons that can kill if misused. In the case of District of Columbia v. Heller, a law in Washington DC banned guns and required any legal ones to be unloaded. The Supreme Court ruled this to be unconstitutional since the 2nd amendment guaranteed each person the right to bear arms. In the case of United State v. Miller, the National Firearms Act of 1934 was deemed constitutional since its requirement to register weapons before shipped did not have any link to a state militia. This prequisite was later added onto by the 1993 Brady Bill, which required a minimum waiting period before the purchase of handgun.

The right to privacy is a conflict that is still constantly debated about today. Even today, the topic of abortions is still being debated about whether if it truly moral or not. In the case of Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court ruled that all abortions are protected by the constitution and women had to right do so within the first 3 months of pregnancy. The case of Planned Parenthood v. Casey tried to reverse the Roe v. Wade decision, but failed. It did however, require minors to wait 24 hours after receiving parental approval before getting an abortion. The Map v. Ohio case established the idea of the exclusionary rule, when police can only obtain the evidence within the scope of a warrant. Any other evidence found could not be used in the trial. There are exceptions; however, as shown in the cases of Nix v. Williams, where evidence that would be inevitably discovered with a legal warrant would be acceptable, and United States v. Leon and Herring v. United States, where evidence obtained in good faith and following the 4th amendment would be allowable. These case showed that the exclusionary rule was not absolute.

As stated in the the 5th and 6th amendments, every accused person has the procedural due process rights. The most famous case would be Miranda v. Arizona, when Miranda was convicted of rape and kidnapping, and confession without being told his rights. The Supreme Court ruled that the Miranda had the right to a fair trial, lawyer, and to remain silent when accused, and that such rights were given in the constitution. These rights were later called the "Miranda Rights". In the case of Gideon and Wainwright, Gideon requested the assistance of a lawyer, only to have it denied to him since Florida law only provided free assistance in cases punishable by death. The Supreme Court ruled that the lawyer requirement also extended to state felonies. As a continuation of the Miranda case, the Johnson v. Zerbst case ruled that every person is guaranteed the right to a lawyer, and if not affordable, that a lawyer will be paid and provided by the government. 

The 8th amendment of the Bill of Rights protects every person from cruel and unusual punishment, but not from the death penalty. The Greg v. Georgia case asserts this by ruling that punishment by death does not violate Constitution. However, there are certain regulations and exceptions to the death penalty. For example, the cases Atkins v. Virginia and Panetti v. Quarterman ruled that death penalty cannot be used on the mentally retarded.

The Bill of Rights are still being debated about today. There are still many arguments on how we can limit, yet respect the idea of free speech at the same time in order to prevent it from being blatantly offensive, as shown with the WBC. In addition, the right of privacy is still very difficult to define. While people's private lives must be well respected, they must sometimes be exploited for the sake of security for the nation, as shown with the NSA. For this very reason, America is still determining the exact definitions and scopes of the foundation and rules it was built upon.