Bill of Rights, Federal, State and the Local Enforcement Agencies - Research Paper Example

Bill of Rights Paper Bill of Rights Bill of Rights refers to first ten amendments of the US constitution. Thinkers like Thomas Jefferson feared that US constitution contained few explicit guarantees for personal liberty. He wrote to James Madison requesting for a Bill of Rights proposal to the Congress. The Congress approved the Madison’s draft. Upon revision of the draft, the Congress approved the Bill of Rights that became law. Primarily, Bill of Rights was symbolic until the Supreme Court established power of striking down the unconstitutional legislation by Madison in 1803. This applied to the federal legislation only, until Fourteenth Amendment in 1866 that extended the power to include the state law (Pederson, 2010). The first article was not ratified, but the second was ratified as 27th amendment in 1992. Ratification of article three was in 1791 and resulted to ten separate amendments collectively called Bill of Rights. Bill of rights constitutes ten separate amendments. The amendments deal with issues regarding free speech, unjust searches, religious liberty, unusual and cruel punishment. When proposing the amendment, 2/3 of the two houses of Congress proposed the amendment while 2/3 of state legislatures called for a national convention through the congress. When ratifying the amendment, 3/4 of state legislatures approved it and 3/4 of ratifying conventions within the states approve it (Amar, 2005). The First Amendment Congress should make no laws respecting the religion establishment, or preventing free exercise whatsoever; or abridging the freedom of speech; or the right of peaceful assemble, and the petition to government for the redress of their grievances. This amendment comprises of the establishment clause speech, free press, petition and assembly. It restricted the actions by the federal government without the State binding. Supreme Courts applied clauses of the first amendment from 1920s to 1940s. The first amendment encompasses actions by both the local governments and the local states. It applies to legislatures, juries, executive officials, courts and agencies (Amar, 2005). However, first amendments only apply to the restrictions imposed by government. The freedom of expression protected the citizens against speeches on antiwar, violence, racism and procommunist. The government unauthorized civil law suits regarding peoples’ speech except it is within recognitions of the exceptions by First Amendment. The article by Chris Neefus criticised the First Amendment of United States Constitution. It entailed the burning Quran likened to shouting Fire within a crowded theatre, hence not protected by the first amendment. In the article, the first amendment right to pastor Terry Jones’s freedom of assembly and speech was to be protected if he burned the Holy Quran (Amar, 2005). The Fourth Amendment This amendment states the right of security of people in their houses, papers, persons and effects, opposed to unreasonable seizures and searches, violations avoided, also no warrants should issue, save for probable cause, held by the by affirmation, and specifically describing the search place, and things or persons to be seized. This amendment underwent modest changes reflecting the significance of interpretation of Madison’s version on rights to secure homes, papers and property, and the oath of affirmation. Principally, the fourth amendment protects privacy rather than the property. It has discarded procedural and fictional barriers based on property concepts (Amar, 2005). The Fifth Amendment According to this amendment, no person should be apprehended to answer for capital, or the otherwise infamous crime, except on a presentment or indictment of grand jury, apart from in cases regarding land or the naval forces, or the militia while in actual service during the time of war or in public danger; nor should any person be subjected to the same offense or be put in jeopardy of limb or life; nor shall anybody be obliged in criminal cases to witness against himself, or be denied liberty of life or property, devoid of due law process; nor shall the private property be grabbed for public use, devoid of just compensation. The Fifth Amendment articulates the procedural safeguards towards protection of the right to the criminally accused and assures the security for liberty, life and property. The amendment comprises of five clauses represented distinct and related rights. Grand jury pertains the exceptions in cases; the double jeopardy protects against a second prosecution after conviction and multiple punishments while the self-incrimination protects citizens accused of crimes from testifying against themselves; the due process protects liberty, life and property from the federal government impairment while the takings ‘clause’ mentions on property and the right to fairness in acquisition of private property (Baldez et al., 2006). The Sixth Amendment According to this amendment, in all the criminal prosecutions, the person accused shall enjoy right to speedy and public trial, through impartial jury of the district and the state where crime has been committed, and in which the district shall have previously ascertained by the law, and be informed on the nature and the cause of accusation, and be confronted with witnesses against him or her, and obtain witnesses to favour him, and have assistance of counsel for the defence. This amendment outlined procedures in criminal courts. The jury and public trial requirements outlined in the sixth amendment essentially comprise the due process. The clause seeks for fairness and transparency within the criminal laws. Accused persons should be confronted using witnesses against them. The criminal is entitled to legal counsel and equal custodial interrogations (Lewis, 2007). The Fourteenth Amendment The people born or naturalized within the United States subject to jurisdiction are citizens in United States. It restricted states on enforcing laws that abridged immunities and privileges of the citizens. Similar to the first amendment, the fourteenth amendment restricted deprivation of right to life, property or liberty without any due process by the law (Lewis, 2007). Apportioning of representatives in the several states depended on their numbers with the exception of Indians. The amendment highlighted the requirements during elections for the Congress representatives and the legislature members. The amendment outlined laws on the validity of public debts authorized by law. This included debts incurred during payment for the bounties and pensions to suppress the insurrection or rebellion. However, Congress was empowered to enforce the provisions in this amendment based on appropriate legislation (Lewis, 2007). Relationship between the Amendments in the Bill of Rights The first amendment protects the citizens freedom of speech, free press, petition and assembly and is restricted the actions of the federal government while the fourth amendment protected people houses, papers and properties. The Fifth Amendment protects liberty, life and property from the impairment by the federal government. The fourteenth amendment protects all the rights contained in first, fourth and fifth amendments from the state infringement. The chief concern for the two amendments is fairness and justice (Baldez et al, 2006). They protect and preserve fundamental rights to ensure that deprivation to these rights is dealt with according to the procedural safeguards. On the other hand, elements of trial in the sixth amendment protect the relevant rights of the accused. Government deprives life, liberty and property to a person when all rules are followed. Bill of Rights protects the rights and freedom of individuals. Citizens worship freely and express themselves free of restrictions. Citizens are protected from searches and seizures. Private property is protected while the administration of justice and security promotes security and shields citizens with criminal records from danger (Pederson, 2010). Objectives and challenges in enforcement of criminal justice and security In its historical development, United States has constantly pursued justice and security. Administration of security and justice presupposes meeting of the requirements as well as safety public criteria without discriminating rights stipulated in U .S. Constitution. The violation of Bill of Rights by the state is unclear. I, IV, V, VI, and XIV amendments aimed at creating the need for reconsideration of the importance of the human rights against the need for promoting the public safety and the administration of justice (Falk, 2010). The law enforcement agencies and the federal states experience challenges towards execution of their objectives. The agencies accommodate public through protecting them from unfair treatment. However, the jurisdictional boundaries limit the execution of their duties. The Federal Protective Services in US deals with federal law enforcement. This police force promotes law enforcement services to federally leased facilities, buildings and properties. This applies during significant events like national terrorism. However, other criminal matters on protection and security may be out of jurisdiction. As a result, the agencies cannot formulate laws. The government set outs the laws; this is a considerable challenge to the agencies (Falk, 2010). Roles of federal and local courts system United States has two judicial systems; state and local courts, and federal courts system. The state government established the state and the local court while the federal court system was established by the Congress under United States Constitution authority. The constitution allows for unlimited power for handling case laws. However, the federal court system handles selective cases based on state court’s decisions (Pohlman, 2005). Objectives of juvenile justice system Juvenile justice system in US entails two principal objectives, different from other agencies. Firstly, the juvenile system protects juveniles from abuse, mistreatment or neglect while in jail. This is enhanced through informing the juvenile prisoners their rights. The constitution in US gives the right to the criminals regarding fairness in the sentence and imprisonment. Secondly, juvenile justice aims at eliminating the death penalty for the juveniles. The year 2005 saw the accomplishment of this objective (Zimring, 2005). Role of private security organization About 80% of US ground is under the protection by the private security organizations. However, the rest is protected by the public security organization. The private and the public security organizations have equal roles in protecting the nation. The public security organizations deals with the international terrorism and the private security organizations handle the domestic terrorism. The public prefers the private to public security organizations due to mistrust of the public security organizations. However, trusts to public security organizations are achieved trough working with the private security organizations where the two learn from each other diminish the inequalities (Amar, 2005). The law enforcement agencies use more precise guidelines to the individual cases presented to them. These procedures eliminate the challenges facing the law enforcement agencies. The procedures would enhance efficiency in execution of duties by law enforcement agencies (Pohlman, 2005). Conclusion Challenges facing federal, state and the local enforcement agencies are quite complex. Elimination of these challenges enhances efficiency in execution of their duties. With respect to the civil rights and the public safety, roles of state, federal and the local courts are crucial. The court systems work together for the success of the entire court system in United States. The juvenile justice system is objected at leading out the death penalty for people under 18years with same culpability as the adults. Furthermore, the private and public security organizations collaboration enhances meeting of the needs for the public and enhance trust in the two organizations. References Amar, R. A. (2005). Americas Constitution: A Biography. New York: Random House. Baldez, L., Epstein, L. & Martin, A. D. (2006). Does the U.S. Constitution Need an Equal Rights Amendment? The Journal of Legal Studies 35 (1), 243-83. Falk, G. (2010). The American Criminal Justice System: How It Works, How It Doesnt, and How to Fix It. London: ABC-CLIO. Lewis, A. (2007). Freedom for the Thought That We Hate: A Biography of the First Amendment. New York: Basic. Pederson, C. E. (2010). The U.S. Constitution & Bill of Rights. Minnesota: ABDO. Pohlman, H. L. (2005). Constitutional Debate In Action: Criminal Justice. New York: Rowman & Littlefield. Zimring, F. E. (2005). American Juvenile Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Read More