...law: those who support it and those who oppose it. Those who support the Patriot Act have consistently countered that the provisions of the Act are necessary to protect the people from future terrorist attacks, and that the law does an adequate job of protecting individual civil liberties; while those who oppose it argue that the Act is an egregious assault on individual liberties as it violates their constitutional rights. The hypothesis of this paper is to dissect and analyze Sections of the Patriot Act to see if they are in violation of the United States Constitution. Specifically the paper will analyze Sections 505, 215 of the Patriot Act to see if they violate the Constitution. The first violation in question comes from Section 505 of the Patriot Act. Section 505 expands the Federal Bureau of Investigation or the FBI’s authority to issue National Security Letters or NSLs demanding customer records from various public establishments. According to the American Civil Liberties Union (2011), an organization dedicated to the protection of the constitutional rights of the people, “The National Security Letter provision of the...
Words: 1895 - Pages: 8
...legislative districts. He wanted to postpone the election’s for seat in the General Assembly because, he alleged, the apportioning had not occurred since a 1901 law had required, almost 60 years. Baker said that the elections were ignoring certain population shifts, mainly the fact that people were moving towards the cities. He alleged that because of this “migration”, his vote did not count as much as someone who lived in a rural area, thus violating the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. The case was dismissed in the district courts, so Baker appealed (3) The Supreme Court ruled that because Baker had the right and the appropriate facts, the case could he evaluated, however, the Supreme Court could not. They said that they had the jurisdiction to oversee the matter and stated other examples of when they had intervened in the past to correct violations, however they said that since no questions could be answered, the case was merely a justiciable issue. Griswold v. Connecticut...
Words: 3463 - Pages: 14
...The case of Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier started at the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri in 1987. The defendant in the case was Hazelwood and the plaintiff was Kuhlmeier. Kuhlmeier was claiming that the principal of Hazelwood East High School removed two articles from the school sponsored newspaper that when the principal removed the two articles he violated their first amendment right to a free press. The ruling from the first court was that there was no violation of the first amendment and that school authorities may remove sensitive topics from school sponsored activities as long as he has a reasonable basis for removing the information. The ruling from that court was overturned by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals...
Words: 311 - Pages: 2
...Charles Schenck's arrest violated his unalienable rights given to him by the U.S. Constitution. The charges confronting Charles Schenck of his supposed violations of Espionage and Sedition Acts should not be validated. Charles Schenck was the General Secretary of the Socialists party of America who had distributed 15,000 leaflets opposing the United States mandatory drafting process, arguing that it was immoral. The government argued that it was a clear violation of the Espionage and Sedition Acts of June 15, 1917. However, the Espionage and Sedition Acts were unconstitutional and a violation of the First Amendment. The Espionage and Sedition Acts shouldn’t prohibit Schencks right to free speech. In the “Supreme Court Majority Opinion: Schenck...
Words: 399 - Pages: 2
...Twelve amendments to the United States Constitution were proposed by the 1789 Joint resolution of Congress (“Bill of Rights Transcript Text,”n.d.). Of these twelve proposed amendments ten were ratified on December 15, 1791 (“Bill of Rights Transcript Text,”n.d.). These ten amendments constitute the Bill of Rights. Article VI of the United States Constitution provides the right of citizens to be protected against unwarranted search and/or seizure. Amendment IV further specifies and adds to these rights which include no search of body, home or persons without probable cause and no warrant issued without probable cause supported by oath or affirmation and warrant. The amendment further demands specific information will be provided related to...
Words: 941 - Pages: 4
...Should schools have the right to violate first and fourth amendment rights by requesting access of students’ Facebook accounts? The position that is being taken is no, it is against the first and fourth amendment rights for schools to access students’ Facebook accounts. The different views of this argument include the schools system’s side and the students’ side. Students believe that they are entitled to first and fourth amendment rights within the school. The school is violating the first and fourth amendments by requiring a Facebook password from the student in many cases. For example, a student is in trouble when writing on their profile and their opinion doesn’t match what the school views as appropriate. The school would then then punish the student and also require that the student provides a facebook password to access their personal account. The school’s side, which includes the faculty, principal and school administration, believes that students do not have full first and fourth amendment rights when on school property. A student then loses the rights associated with freedom of speech, press, assembly, and search and seizure in many cases. An examination of recent court cases and articles that contribute to the argument will be mentioned, including surveys and interviews of a sample of the student population at Eastern Michigan University to provide arguments and counterarguments that indicate that schools violate the first and fourth amendment when schools request access...
Words: 1414 - Pages: 6
...a lot of critique regarding the legitimacy of the document. It was argued that the Patriot Act was in violation with the First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the Bill of Rights. Especially the alleged violations regarding the Fourth Amendment were heavily debated. To determine...
Words: 1597 - Pages: 7
...Max McClellan 9/20/15 APUSH Schneider The Bill of Rights Supreme Court Cases Case 1: Texas vs. Johnson (1989) A.) Gregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag outside of the convention center where the 1984 Republican National Convention was being held in Dallas, Texas. Johnson burned the flag to protest the policies of President Ronald Reagan. He was arrested and charged with violating a Texas statute that prevented the desecration of a venerated object, including the American flag. A Texas court tried and convicted Johnson. He appealed, arguing that his actions were "symbolic speech" protected by the First Amendment. The Supreme Court agreed to hear his case. B.) Does the burning of the American flag constitute as "symbolic speech” which...
Words: 1587 - Pages: 7
...Max McClellan 9/20/15 APUSH Schneider The Bill of Rights Supreme Court Cases Case 1: Texas vs. Johnson (1989) A.) Gregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag outside of the convention center where the 1984 Republican National Convention was being held in Dallas, Texas. Johnson burned the flag because he was angered by Reagan’s policies. He was arrested and charged with violating a Texas statute that prevented the desecration of a venerated object, including the American flag. A Texas court tried and convicted Johnson. He appealed, arguing that his actions were "symbolic speech" protected by the First Amendment. B.) Does the burning of the American flag constitute as "symbolic speech” which is protected by the First Amendment? C.) The burning of the flag was found to be considered as free speech which is protected by the First Amendment. D.) The majority of the court believed Johnson’s acts to be a representation of symbolic speech. While many might be angered by the action, Johnson’s right of free speech cannot be taken away. F.) Writing for the dissent, Justice Stevens argued that the flag's unique status as a symbol of national unity outweighed "symbolic speech" concerns so the government could lawfully prohibit flag burning. Case 2: Escobedo vs. Illinois (1964) A.) Danny Escobedo was arrested without a warrant for the murder of his...
Words: 1676 - Pages: 7
...Week Two Assignment Kacy Lane Klingle POL303: The American Constitution Lawrence Olson February 29, 2016 The topic I am going to cover in this paper is Privacy Rights. The one thing I will cover is the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism or the USA Patriot Act. This Act has caused numerous concerns over the years of the federal government over stepping their bounds on their tactics of intelligence gathering after the terrorist attacks on September eleventh two thousand and eleven. This paper will discuss some advantages of the patriot act such as sharing intelligence between the federal, state, and local governments. As well it will cover harsher penalties for hackers. The paper will also cover some of the disadvantages of the Patriot Act. Such as screening peoples phone calls and E-mails possibly infringing on a persons’ Fourth Amendment rights. The first thing this paper is going to discuss is how the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism or the USA Patriot Act. The Patriot Act helps throughout the multiple levels of the government, from federal to the local government. One way is within this act it allows the multiple levels of the government to share information between organizations. “The Act removed the major legal barriers that prevented the law enforcement, intelligence, and national defense communities from talking...
Words: 879 - Pages: 4
...as an interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment by the Supreme Court that holds evidence seized in violation of the U.S. Constitution cannot be used in court against a defendant (Dempsey, J., Forst, L., 2011). What this rule pretty much means is that any evidence that is found to be seized in violation of the U.S. Constitution can be suppressed in court and not used against the arrested subject. The exclusionary rule evolved in U.S. law through a series of Supreme Court cases. Since at least 1914, the Supreme Court has been concerned with the use of illegal means by the police to seize evidence in violation of the Constitution, and then using that evidence to convict a defendant in court (Dempsey, J., Forst, L., 2011). The court continually warned state courts and law enforcement agencies that they must amend their procedures in order to comply with the U.S. Constitution or risk the exclusionary rule being imposed on them as well. By 1961, the Supreme Court, noting that the state courts had not amended their procedures to conform to the Constitution, applied the exclusionary rule to the state courts and law enforcement agencies, as well as federal ones. The following cases Weeks vs. United States, Rochin vs. California and Mapp vs. Ohio, I will compare and contrast each individual case. I will also explain the effects that the ruling decision by the Supreme Court had on evidence obtained from police search and seizure. The first case I will focus on is Weeks vs. United...
Words: 1442 - Pages: 6
...Amendment IV of the United States Constitution states that the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized (Cornell University). This Amendment refers to people’s right to privacy and freedom in their home from government intrusion and illegal search and seizure. To claim protection under the Fourth Amendment, individuals must show in a court of law expectation of privacy, which is to say an expectation that is recognized as reasonable under the circumstances. Kentucky v. King 563 U.S. 452 (2011) is just one of many cases in which the defendant exercises their rights under the Fourth Amendment. Kentucky v. King 563 U.S. 452 (2011) In the case of Kentucky v. King the Fourth Amendment was the main argument. The courts...
Words: 981 - Pages: 4
...2014 the Supreme Court granted writ of certiorari in Heien v North Carolina which was the first argued case during their new term. This case presents the question of whether a police officer’s mistake of law can provide the individualized suspicion that the Fourth Amendment requires to justify a traffic stop (Brief of Petitioner 2). This case arose in 2009 when police stopped Nicholas Heien in North Carolina for driving with one broken brake light. The officer issued Heien a citation for his light and then proceeded to ask him if he could search his car, which Heien consented to. During the search, the officer discovered a sandwich bag that contained 54.2 grams of cocaine and Heien was arrested on the spot for drug trafficking (Oyez Project). He plead guilty to two counts of drug...
Words: 3506 - Pages: 15
...They decided that the Fifth Amendment was only applicable to the National Government and that it did not restrict state legislation. Therefore the Court ruled in favor of Baltimore, saying they were not required to provide compensation. Reynolds v. United States Question: Did Reynolds have the ability to raise claims during the Attorney General’s interim rule? And is it appropriate for the Supreme Court to resolve the split between the circuit courts? Background: Billy Joe Reynolds pleaded guilty to knowingly not registering for the SORNA or Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act. He then appealed the case and challenged that because of the interim rule of the Attorney General that the Act was unconstitutional. Decision: The Court ruled in favor of Reynolds with...
Words: 2966 - Pages: 12
...constitutional right. In the Fifth Amendment the exclusionary rule states that no one shall be made in a criminal trial case to be a witness against themselves, and that nobody shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without applying due process of law. The exclusionary rule is in the fourth amendment and is intended to protect people from searches that are illegal and seizures. To protect against self-incrimination and to protect people from prosecution from evidence gathered by the police that is very illegal and violates the Fifth Amendment. In the sixth amendment the exclusionary rule applies to the violations which make sure every citizen has the right to counsel. The exclusionary rule is used and applies to anyone who lives in the United States. “The courts finally decided on the exclusionary rule, the rule that says that evidence illegally seized may not be used as evidence, as a means of enforcement. “We’re sorry" doesn't quite cut it. The courts gave as their rationale for the rule the concept of "unclean hands." If the courts, the symbol of our highest justice, use evidence they know to be illegally obtained, they condone through their use of the evidence the illegal action and they then find themselves with "unclean hands." (Hill) In Weeks v. United States during it the exclusionary rule was brought up. In the case the court held that evidence that was taken by the police was illegally taken by police who is in violation of the fourth amendment and it...
Words: 1290 - Pages: 6
