Having read the chapter, the students should be able to do each of the following:
Explain why issues of constitutional individual rights or civil liberties have become more complex in contemporary times.
Trace the evolution of the Supreme Court's interpretation of the right of free expression through both the early and modern periods. Important concepts such as prior restraint, libel, and slander should also be understood. Discuss the extension of its guarantees to state governments through the Fourteenth Amendment.
Distinguish between procedural and substantive due process. Outline the historical development of the federal judiciary's application of due process protections.
Review key Supreme Court decisions relating to the right of privacy.
Discuss the significance of the establishment and free exercise clauses in relation to freedom of religion.
Explain how the rights of the accused have been protected through Supreme Court rulings.
Summarize the role of the courts in a free society.
In their search for personal liberty, Americans added the Bill of Rights to the Constitution shortly after its ratification. These amendments guarantee certain political, procedural, and property rights against infringement by the national government. Freedom of expression is the most basic of democratic rights. People are not free unless they can express their views without fear of reprisal. Nevertheless, free expression may conflict with the nation's security needs during times of war and insurrection. The courts at times have allowed government to limit expression substantially for purposes of national security. In recent decades, however, the courts have protected a very wide range of expression in the areas of speech, press, and religion.
The guarantees embodied in the Bill of Rights originally applied only to the national government. Under the practice of selective incorporation, the Bill of Rights has been applied to state governments as well, though slowly and unevenly. In the 1920s and 1930s, First Amendment guarantees of freedom of expression were given protection from infringement by the states. The states continued to have wide discretion in criminal proceedings until the early 1960s, when most of the fair-trial rights of the Bill of Rights were given federal protection.
Due process of law refers to legal protections that have been established to preserve individual rights. The most significant form of these protections consists of procedures or methods (for example, the right of an accused person to have an attorney present during police interrogation) designed to ensure that an individual's rights are upheld. A major controversy in this area is the breadth of the exclusionary rule, which bars the use in trials of illegally obtained evidence. The right of privacy, particularly as it applies to the abortion issue, is also a source of controversy.
Civil liberties are not absolute but must be balanced against other considerations (such as national security or public safety, especially since the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001) and against one another when rights come into conflict. The judicial branch of government, particularly the Supreme Court, has taken on much of the responsibility for protecting and interpreting individual rights. The Court's positions have changed with time and conditions, but the Court has generally been more protective and sensitive to civil liberties than have elected officials or popular majorities.
