United States Bill of Rights

United States Bill of Rights Click here for more free books!

The Bill of Rights is commonly viewed as consisting of the first ten articles of Amendments to the Constitution of the United States of America. But it is the specific guarantees of individual liberties in the first eight amendments that the public normally regards as the Bill of Rights. The Ninth and Tenth Amendments provide generally that rights not specified and powers not delegated to the federal government in the Constitution will remain with the people and the states.

Origin of the Bill of Rights

Comprising a mere 413 words, the Bill of Rights was an outcome of the 1787–1788 debate on ratification of the Constitution. The absence of a bill of rights was the most compelling criticism by opponents of the Constitution. To allay the public's fears of an overbearing federal government, supporters of the Constitution promised to add a bill of rights if the document were ratified. This pledge influenced decisions to ratify the Constitution in key states, such as Massachusetts, Maryland, New Hampshire, Virginia, and New York.

James Madison, a leading advocate of ratification, won election to the House of Representatives and fulfilled his campaign pledge to add civil liberties guarantees to the Constitution. On 8 June 1789, he proposed several amendments derived from declarations of rights in state constitutions and proposals from several state ratifying conventions. On 25 September 1789, by the required two‐thirds majority in both of its chambers, Congress sent twelve amendments to the states for ratification, but the first two failed to be ratified; one called for a fixed schedule of apportionment for the House of Representatives; the other prohibited increases in the pay of members of Congress until after the next biennial election of Representatives. (In 1992, this second rejected proposal was finally ratified by the required three‐fourths of the states and became the Twenty‐seventh Amendment of the Constitution.) On 15 December 1791, Virginia became the eleventh of the fourteen states (Vermont joined the United States in 1791) to ratify the ten amendments that comprise the Bill of Rights; and they became part of the Constitution.

Provisions of the Bill of Rights

The first of the ten amendments includes civil liberties pertaining to religion, speech, press, assembly, and petition. The Second Amendment concerns “the right of the people to keep and bear arms.” The Third Amendment, which prohibits the coercive quartering of troops in private homes, is the only one of the ten amendments that has never been the subject of a case in the federal courts.

The next five amendments (four through eight) specify procedural rights (see Due Process, Procedural). For example, the Fourth Amendment's stipulated safeguards against “unreasonable searches and seizures” spell out in remarkable detail the obligations to be met by both the executive branch's enforcement personnel and hearing and adjudicating appeals arising from their activities. The Fifth Amendment contains among other procedural guarantees the fundamental proviso against compulsory self‐incrimination. The Sixth Amendment provides, among its components, for rights of notification about the nature of an accusation and the procuring of both favorable and unfavorable witnesses, as well as for the “assistance of counsel” for the defense. The Seventh Amendment protects the right to a trial by jury in civil cases, and the Eighth Amendment protects individuals from punishments that are too harsh and fines and bail that are too high.

The Ninth and Tenth Amendments are general statements depicting constitutional structural divisions of power rather than specific, identifiable guarantees on behalf of the individual versus the state. The Ninth commands that the “enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” The Tenth requires that the “powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” It has been, and surely will continue to be, the source of a substantial amount of litigation before the federal courts. For example, in Printz v. United States (1997), the Supreme Court struck down part of a federal gun control law that required local officials to do a background check on a customer before a gun sale could be completed. The Court held that the Tenth Amendment prohibits the federal government from controlling or commandeering certain acts of state or local officials that are powers reserved to the state governments.

Application to the States

The very first phrase of what became Article 1 of the approximately twenty‐five specific rights to be found in the Bill of Rights reads: “Congress shall make no law. …” Although the noun Congress reappears nowhere in the other articles, they were apparently intended to be applicable against the federal government only. Certainly that was the understanding with which most of the states ratified the Bill of Rights. Chief Justice John Marshall, in Barron v. Baltimore (1833), spoke for a unanimous tribunal in ruling that the Bill of Rights applied only against the national government, emphatically not against the states.

The passage of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868 opened new possibilities. This amendment says, “No State shall … deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” Beginning in the 1920s, the Supreme Court developed the Incorporation Doctrine by which it used the Fourteenth Amendment's due process clause to absorb provisions of the Bill of Rights and apply them against state governments. For example, in 1931 the Court incorporated the First Amendment rights to free speech (Stromberg v. California) and free press (Near v. Minnesota) through the Fourteenth Amendment's due process clause to limit the power of state governments and protect civil liberties of individuals. From the 1930s until 1969, the Supreme Court incorporated through the Fourteenth Amendment most of the specific protections of rights in Amendments One through Eight.

Hugo L. Black, an associate justice from 1937 to 1971, provided strong intellectual leadership to shape the Court's application of the Bill of Rights to the states and thereby establish national standards for protection of civil liberties. Justice Black has triumphed—but not quite. Five of the enumerated rights in the Bill of Rights are still “out,” that is, not incorporated—although they are relatively insignificant. Yet ironically and intriguingly, “not quite” also because the Court, led by Justice William O. Douglas in the 1950s and 1960s, and after Douglas's departure notably by Justices William Brennan and Thurgood Marshall until their retirements, has at least partially adopted a position advanced by Justices Frank Murphy and Wiley Rutledge in the key case of Adamson v. California in 1947. There the Court held that if the verbiage of the Bill of Rights guarantees did not suffice to attain “justice” as they believed it to require, then the Court's resort to other, implied or inherent provisions of the Constitution, and even natural law, might be invoked—what some have called “incorporation plus.” That policy, which Justice Black derided as “going upstairs” or which Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes referred to as resorting to a “brooding omnipresence in the sky,” was anathema to the libertarian Alabaman, who was a principled literalist. If it was not written down in the Constitution, it could not be utilized; but if it was spelled out, Justice Black viewed the literal commands of any provision as absolutist, especially the First Amendment's quintet of rights, which Justice Benjamin Cardozo had pronounced as being “the matrix, the indispensable condition, of nearly every other form of freedom.”

When Hugo Black joined the Court in 1937, only those few rights that conformed to Justice Cardozo's fundamental rights test, which he had created in Palko v. Connecticut (1937) earlier that year, had been incorporated, or would soon be by virtue of his classification. Justice Black, however, would steer the Court to a triumphant “selective incorporation,” that is, application to the states on a case‐by‐case basis of most provisions in the Bill of Rights, guarantees that all of the states are now constitutionally bound to follow.

As the Supreme Court concluded its 2002–2003 term, no further provisions of the Bill of Rights had been incorporated since the Fifth Amendment's double jeopardy clause in 1969. Those provisions that remain “out” include (1) grand jury indictment—a segment of the Fifth Amendment; (2) trial by a jury in civil cases in the Seventh Amendment; (3) the excessive bail and fines prohibitions of the Eighth Amendment; (4) the so‐called right to bear arms in the Second Amendment; and (5) the Third Amendment's safeguards against involuntary quartering of troops in private homes. There is an increasing recognition and acceptance, both on and off the bench, that there is a national application under the U.S. Constitution of our fundamental civil rights and liberties.

Under the Supremacy Clause of Article VI, state courts cannot interpret the Bill of Rights (or the Constitution generally) differently than the U.S. Supreme Court. But a number of state supreme courts—in many hundreds of opinions since 1969—have in fact interpreted their own constitutions more liberally than the federal constitution to provide additional protections for their citizens. The Supreme Court has found this to be acceptable provided that the enhanced rights are grounded entirely and exclusively in state law or state constitutions (e.g., Michigan v. Long, 1983). States do not, however, have the authority to reduce civil rights and liberties from what the federal constitution requires.

Consensus and Controversy after Two Hundred Years

In 1991, Americans celebrated the bicentennial of their Bill of Rights. Before the bicentennial and beyond it, Americans agreed generally on the minimal national standards on individual rights that have emerged from the Supreme Court's Doctrine of Incorporation.

Consensus on nationwide application of most provisions of the Bill of Rights, however, has often been accompanied by controversy about the meaning of particular rights in certain circumstances. At the beginning of the twenty‐first century, Americans argued vigorously about various constitutional rights issues. In particular, troubling new issues emerged that pertained to intrusive technology and national security policies stemming from the “war on terror” following the tragedy of 11 September 2001 (see Detainee Cases). In Kyllo v. United States (2001) for example, the Supreme Court maintained traditional Fourth Amendment guarantees by ruling that a thermal imaging device cannot be used without a search warrant to intrusively examine from a distance the interior of a private dwelling. But in United States, v. American Library Association (2003), the Court partially restricted First Amendment freedoms of speech and press via the Internet by upholding the Children's Internet Protection Act. This federal law requires public libraries that receive federal funds to install software in their personal computers to prevent minors from accessing obscene or pornographic content. In Chavez v. Martinez (2003), the Supreme Court's first case stemming from the “war on terror” about the rights of suspects, the majority decided that failure to read “Miranda warnings” prior to questioning the suspect did not necessarily violate Fifth Amendment protection against self‐incrimination.

Strong public interest in the continuing civil liberties controversies shows that the spirit of the Bill of Rights is deeply engraved in the collective consciousness of Americans.

Bibliography

• Akhil Reed Amar, The Bill of Rights: Creation and Reconstruction (1998).
• Hugo Lafayette Black, A Constitutional Faith (1968).
• David J. Bodenhamer and James W. Ely, Jr., eds., The Bill of Rights in Modern America after 200 Years (1993).
• John J. Dinan, Keeping the People's Liberties: Legislators, Citizens, and Judges as Guardians of Rights (1998).
• Leonard W. Levy, Origins of the Bill of Rights (1998).
• Michael J. Perry. We the People: The Fourteenth Amendment and the Supreme Court (1999).
• Bernard Schwartz, The Great Rights of Mankind: A History of the American Bill of Rights (1992)

— Henry J. Abraham

For more information on Bill of Rights, visit Britannica.com.

A major accomplishment of the 1st Congress was the drafting of the first 10 amendments to the Constitution, known as the Bill of Rights, which sets limits on the power of government in order to protect the liberties and rights of individuals from the government's abuse of its power.

Creation of the Bill of Rights “[A] Bill of Rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth, general or particular [that is, federal or state], and what no just government should refuse, or rest on inference,” wrote Thomas Jefferson to James Madison on December 20, 1787.

Jefferson was in Paris, serving as U.S. minister to France, when he received a copy of the Constitution drafted at the federal convention in Philadelphia during the summer of 1787 and fournd that it lacked a bill of rights. Jefferson generally approved of the new Constitution and reported in detail to Madison the many features of the proposed federal government that satisfied him. Then Jefferson declared in his December 20 letter to Madison that he did not like “the omission of a bill of rights providing clearly and without the aid of sophisms for freedom of religion, freedom of the press, protection against standing armies… and trial by jury in all matters of fact triable by the laws of the land.”

A bill of rights consists of statements of civil liberties and rights consists of statements of civil liberties and rights that a government may not take away from the people who live under the government's authority. A bill of rights sets legal limits on the power of government to prevent public officials from denying liberties and rights to individuals, which they possess on the basis of their humanity.

Thomas Jefferson was concerned that the strong powers of government provided for by the U.S. Constitution could be used to destroy inherent civil liberties and rights of the people. He noted with pleasure that the Constitution of 1787 included means to limit the power of government, such as the separation of powers among three branches of government—legislative, executive, and judicial—to prevent any person or group from exercising power tyrannically. However, Jefferson strongly believed that additional guarantees of individual freedoms and rights were needed. He therefore demanded a bill of rights to protect certain liberties of the people, such as freedom to express ideas in public, from infringement by the government. Many Americans agreed with Jefferson, and they supported ratification of the Constitution only on the condition that a bill of rights would be added to it.

James Madison took up this cause at the first federal Congress in 1789. As a member of the Virginia delegation to the House of Representatives, Madison proposed several amendments to the Constitution to place certain liberties and rights of individuals beyond the reach of the government. The Congress approved 12 of these constitutional changes and sent them to the state governments for ratification. In 1791, 10 of these amendments were approved by the states and added to the Constitution. These 10 amendments are known as the Bill of Rights.

Contents of the Bill of Rights Amendment 1 protects freedom of thought, belief, and expression. It says, for example, that the Congress of the United States is forbidden to pass any law “respecting an establishment of religion” or depriving individuals of certain fundamental civil liberties: religious freedom, the freedom of speech and the press, and the right of the people to gather together peacefully and petition the government to satisfy complaints they have against public policies and officials. The history of the 1st Amendment has involved the expansion of individual freedoms and the separation of church and state. For example, the 1st Amendment has been interpreted to mean that government may not establish an official religion, favor any or all religions, or stop individuals from practicing religion in their own way. Further, the right to assembly has been extended to include the right of association in organizations. Finally, the rights of free speech and press are generally understood to be very broad, if not absolute. There are, however, legal limits concerning the time, place, and manner of speech.

Amendment 2 protects the right of the state governments and the people to maintain militia or armed companies to guard against threats to their social order, safety, and security; and in connection with that state right the federal government may not take away the right of the people to have and use weapons.

Amendment 3 forbids the government, during times of peace, to house soldiers in a private dwelling without the consent of the owner. In a time of war the government may use private dwellings to quarter troops, if this is done lawfully.

Amendment 4 protects individuals against unreasonable and unwarranted searches and seizures of their property. It establishes conditions for the lawful issuing and use of search warrants by government officials to protect the right of individuals to security “in their persons, houses, papers, and effects.” There must be “probable cause” for issuing a warrant to authorize a search or arrest; and the place to be searched, the objects sought, and the person to be arrested must be precisely described.

Amendment 5 states certain legal and procedural rights of individuals. For example, the government may not act against an individual in the following ways:

• Hold an individual to answer for a serious crime unless the prosecution presents appropriate evidence to a grand jury that indicates the likely guilt of the individual.
• Try an individual more than once for the same offense.
• Force an individual to act as a witness against himself in a criminal case.
• Deprive an individual of life, liberty, or property without due process of law (fair and proper legal proceedings).
• Deprive an individual of his or her private property for public use without compensating the person fairly.

Amendment 6 guarantees individuals suspected or accused of a crime certain protections against the power of government. This amendment provides to individuals:

• The right to a speedy public trial before an unbiased jury picked from the community in which the crime was committed.
• The right to receive information about what the individual has been accused of and why the accusation has been made.
• The right to face, in court, witnesses offering testimony against the individual.
• The right to obtain favorable witnesses to testify for the defendant in court (that is, the right to subpoena witnesses).
• The right to help from a lawyer.

Amendment 7 provides for the right to a trial by jury in civil cases (common lawsuits or cases that do not involve a criminal action) where the value of the item(s) or the demanded settlement involved in the controversy exceeds $20.

Amendment 8 protects individuals from punishments that are too harsh, fines that are too high, and bail that is too high.

Amendment 9 says that the rights guaranteed in the Constitution are not the only rights that individuals may have. Individuals retain other rights, not mentioned in the Constitution, that the government may not take away.

Amendment 10 says that the state governments and the people of the United States retain any powers the Constitution does not specifically grant to the federal government or prohibit to the state governments, such as the power of the states to establish and manage public school systems.

Expanding the scope of the Bill of Rights

The framers of the first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution intended to limit only the powers of the national government, not those of the state governments. This understanding was supported by the Supreme Court's decision in Barron v. Baltimore (1833). Writing for a unanimous Court, Chief Justice John Marshall concluded that the Bill of Rights could be used to limit the power only of the federal government, not of the states.

However, the passage of the 14th Amendment in 1868 opened new possibilities. This amendment states that “no state…shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”

During the 20th century the Supreme Court has interpreted the due process clause of the 14th Amendment to require state and local governments to comply with most of the provisions of the Bill of Rights. Therefore, state and local governments are now prohibited from encroaching on most of the civil liberties and rights found in the U.S. Constitution. Under provisions of Amendment 14, the federal government has been empowered to act on behalf of individuals against state and local governments or people who would try to abridge other individuals' constitutional rights or liberties. ;, Counsel, right to; Freedom of speech and press; Incorporation doctrine; Gun control and the right to bear arms; Liberty under the Constitution; Madison, James; Privacy, right to; Property rights; Religious issues under the Constitution; Rights of the accused; Searches and seizures; Self-incrimination, privilege against; Student rights under the Constitution.

See also Amendments, constitutional, Assembly, association, and petition, rights to; Civil rights; Constitution, U.S.

Sources

• David J. Bodenhamer and James W. Ely, Jr., The Bill of Rights in Modern America after Two-Hundred Years (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1993).
• Kermit L. Hall, ed., By and For the People: Constitutional Rights in American History (Arlington Heights, Ill.: Harlan Davidson, 1991).
• Leonard Levy, “Why We Have a Bill of Rights”, Constitution 3, no. 1 (Winter 1991): 6–13.
• Milton Meltzer, The Bill of Rights: How We Got It and What It Means (New York: Crowell, 1990).
• Jack Rakove, “Inspired Expedient: How James Madison Balanced Principle and Politics in Securing the Adoption of the Bill of Rights”, Constitution 3, no. 1 (Winter 1991): 19–25.
• Donald A. Ritchie, The Constitution (New York: Chelsea House, 1989).
• Robert Allen Rutland, The Birth of the Bill of Rights, 1776–1791 (New York: Collier, 1962)

The roots of the Bill of Rights--the first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution--lie deep in Anglo-American history. In 1215 England's King John, under pressure from rebellious barons, put his seal to Magna Carta, which protected subjects against royal abuses of power. Among Magna Carta's more important provisions are its requirement that proceedings and prosecutions be according to "the law of the land"--the forerunner of "due process of law"--and a ban on the sale, denial, or delay of justice.

In response to arbitrary actions of Charles I, Parliament in 1628 adopted the Petition of Right, condemning unlawful imprisonments and also providing that there should be no tax "without common consent of parliament." In 1689, capping the Glorious Revolution (which placed William and Mary on the throne), Parliament adopted the Bill of Rights. Not only does its name anticipate the American document of a century later, the English Bill of Rights anticipates some of the American bill's specific provisions--for example, the Eighth Amendment's ban on excessive bail and fines and on cruel and unusual punishment.

The idea of written documents protecting individual liberties took early root in England's American colonies. Colonial charters (such as the 1606 Charter for Virginia) declared that those who migrated to the New World should enjoy the same "privileges, franchises, and immunities" as if they lived in England. In the years leading up to the break with the mother country (especially after the Stamp Act of 1765), Americans wrote tracts and adopted resolutions resting their claim of rights on Magna Carta, on the colonial charters, and on the teachings of natural law.

Once independence had been declared, in 1776, the American states turned immediately to the writing of state constitutions and state bills of rights. In Williamsburg, George Mason was the principal architect of Virginia's Declaration of Rights. That document, which wove Lockean notions of natural rights with concrete protections against specific abuses, was the model for bills of rights in other states and, ultimately, for the federal Bill of Rights. (Mason's declaration was also influential in the framing, in 1789, of France's Declaration of Rights of Man and the Citizen).

In 1787, at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, Mason remarked that he "wished the plan had been prefaced by a Bill of Rights." Elbridge Gerry moved for the appointment of a committee to prepare such a bill, but the delegates, without debate, defeated the motion. They did not oppose the principle of a bill of rights; they simply thought it unnecessary, in light of the theory that the new federal government would be one of enumerated powers only. Some of the Framers also were skeptical of the utility of what James Madison called "parchment barriers" against majorities; they looked, for protection, to structural arrangements such as separation of powers and checks and balances.

Opponents of ratification quickly seized upon the absence of a bill of rights, and Federalists, especially Madison, soon realized that they must offer to add amendments to the Constitution after its ratification. Only by making such a pledge were the Constitution's supporters able to achieve ratification in such closely divided states as New York and Virginia.

In the First Congress, Madison undertook to fulfill his promise. Carefully sifting amendments from proposals made in the state ratifying conventions, Madison steered his project through the shoals of indifference on the part of some members (who thought the House had more important work to do) and outright hostility on the part of others (Antifederalists who hoped for a second convention to hobble the powers of the federal government). In September 1789 the House and Senate accepted a conference report laying out the language of proposed amendments to the Constitution.

Within six months of the time the amendments--the Bill of Rights--had been submitted to the states, nine had ratified them. Two more states were needed; Virginia's ratification, on December 15, 1791, made the Bill of Rights part of the Constitution. (Ten amendments were ratified; two others, dealing with the number of representatives and with the compensation of senators and representatives, were not.)

On their face, it is obvious that the amendments apply to actions by the federal government, not to actions by the states. In 1833, in Barron v. Baltimore, Chief Justice John Marshall confirmed that understanding. Barron had sued the city for damage to a wharf, resting his claim on the Fifth Amendment's requirement that private property not be taken for public use "without just compensation." Marshall ruled that the Fifth Amendment was intended "solely as a limitation on the exercise of power by the government of the United States, and is not applicable to the legislation of the states."

The Civil War and Reconstruction brought, in their wake, the Fourteenth Amendment, which declares, among other things, that no state shall "deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." In those few words lay the seed of a revolution in American constitutional law. That revolution began to take form in 1947, in Justice Hugo Black's dissent in Adamson v. California. Reviewing the history of the Fourteenth Amendment's adoption, Black concluded that history "conclusively demonstrates" that the amendment was meant to ensure that "no state could deprive its citizens of the privileges and protections of the Bill of Rights."

Justice Black's "wholesale incorporation" theory has never been adopted by the Supreme Court. During the heyday of the Warren Court, in the 1960s, however, the justices embarked on a process of "selective incorporation." In each case, the Court asked whether a specific provision of the Bill of Rights was essential to "fundamental fairness"; if it was, then it must apply to the states as it does to the federal government. Through this process, nearly all the important provisions of the Bill of Rights now apply to the states. A partial list would include the First Amendment's rights of speech, press, and religion, the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures, the Fifth Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination, and the Sixth Amendment's right to counsel, to a speedy and public trial, and to trial by jury.

The original Constitution has been amended a number of times--for example, to provide for direct election of senators and to give the vote to eighteen-year-olds. The Bill of Rights, however, has never been amended. There is, of course, sharp debate over Supreme Court interpretation of specific provisions, especially where social interests (such as the control of traffic in drugs) seem to come into tension with provisions of the Bill of Rights (such as the Fourth Amendment). Such debate notwithstanding, there is no doubt that the Bill of Rights, as symbol and substance, lies at the heart of American conceptions of individual liberty, limited government, and the rule of law.

Bibliography:

Irving Brant, The Bill of Rights: Its Origin and Meaning (1965); Robert A. Rutland, The Birth of the Bill of Rights, 1776-1791 (1955).

Author:

A. E. Dick Howard

See also Black, Hugo; Constitution; Freedom of Speech; Freedom of the Press; Ratification of the Constitution; Madison, James; Mason, George; Philadelphia Convention.

Bill of Rights (table)

The first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution, ratified in 1791, which set forth and guarantee certain fundamental rights and privileges of individuals, including freedom of religion, speech, press, and assembly; guarantee of a speedy jury trial in criminal cases; and protection against excessive bail and cruel and unusual punishment.

A list of fundamental rights included in each state constitution.

A declaration of individual rights and freedoms, usually issued by a national government.

As a fundamental guarantee of individual liberty, the Bill of Rights forms a vital aspect of U.S. law and government. It establishes a number of legal principles that have had a decisive effect upon U.S. law and society, including the functioning of the criminal justice system, the separation of church and state, and the exercise of freedom of speech.

The concept of a bill of rights as a statement of basic individual freedoms derives in part from the English Bill of Rights, passed in 1689. This document, which was created after the Glorious Revolution of 1688, established the terms by which William and Mary were accepted as king and queen of England. It forbade the monarchy to suspend laws, raise taxes, or maintain an army without consent of Parliament. It also declared that freedom of speech in Parliament could not be challenged, protected those accused of crimes from "excessive bail" and "cruel and unusual punishments," and provided a number of other privileges and freedoms (1 Will. & Mar., Sess. 2, C. 2).

Nearly a century later, seven of the thirteen states of the newly independent United States of America adopted a bill of rights as part of their state constitutions, and the remaining six included elements of the English Bill of Rights in the bodies of their constitutions. Virginia, the first state to adopt a bill of rights, passed its Declaration of Rights in 1776. Drafted largely by George Mason, Virginia's declaration became a model for later state bills of rights and ultimately for the federal Bill of Rights, and it remains a part of that state's constitution.

At the Constitutional Convention of 1787, the Framers of the U.S. Constitution used the English Bill of Rights and state bills of rights as resources as they sought to define the fundamental principles and institutions of U.S. government. However, they declined to add a bill of rights to the Constitution, on the grounds that the Constitution itself provided adequate protection from intrusive government. Indeed, the Constitution contained some elements of the English Bill of Rights, including Congress's exclusive power to maintain armed forces and, on the federal level, to pass laws and impose

taxes. The Constitution also incorporated other specific rights traditional in English law, including that of habeas corpus, which protects against unlawful imprisonment. However, the Constitution made no mention of other basic rights of constitutional government such as freedom of speech, press, and religion, and the rights of those accused of crimes.

During the Constitution's ratification process, from 1787 to 1789, state ratifying conventions pointed out the lack of such fundamental guarantees in the Constitution and submitted lists of proposed constitutional amendments. The Federalists, who supported ratification of the Constitution, eventually conceded and promised to attach a bill of rights to the document. The leading contributors to the creation of these amendments — which came collectively to be called the Bill of Rights — were Mason, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison, with Madison serving as their principal author and sponsor on the floor of the U.S. House during the First Congress.

On September 25, 1789, twelve amendments to the Constitution were submitted to the states by the required two-thirds majority of Congress. Two of the amendments — which dealt with congressional pay and the apportionment, or assignment, of congressional seats to the states — were voted down by the states. The other ten amendments were ratified by December 15, 1791.

Scholars have described the Bill of Rights as protecting three different types of human rights: (1) rights of conscience, including the First Amendment's freedom of speech and religion; (2) rights of those accused of crimes, such as the Eighth Amendment's protection against excessive bail and fines; and (3) rights of property, such as the Fifth Amendment's provision that no one may be deprived of property without due process of law.

One vital issue in the history of the interpretation of the Bill of Rights has concerned its application to the states. In the case of Barron ex rel. Tiernan v. Mayor of Baltimore, 32 U.S. (7 Pet.) 243, 8 L. Ed. 672, the Supreme Court ruled that the Bill of Rights applied only to the federal government. However, by the 1920s, the Court, using a principle known as the incorporation doctrine, had begun to apply selected elements of the first ten amendments to the states. According to this doctrine, elements of the Bill of Rights may be applied to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which holds that no state shall "deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." Thus in 1925 the Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment protections of freedom of speech applied to the states as well as the federal government (Gitlow v. New York, 268 U.S. 652, 45 S. Ct. 625, 69 L. Ed. 1138). Incorporation gave the Supreme Court wide power to strike down state laws that it deemed to be in violation of the Constitution's Bill of Rights.

By the end of the twentieth century, nearly all provisions of the Bill of Rights had been declared binding on the states. Only five provisions of the Bill of Rights had not been applied to the states: (1) the Second Amendment's right to bear arms; (2) the Third Amendment's prohibition against involuntary quartering of troops; (3) the Fifth Amendment's requirement of grand jury indictment in capital cases; (4) the Seventh Amendment's provision for trial by jury in civil cases; and (5) the Eighth Amendment's prohibition of excessive bail and fines.

States are free to provide additional protections beyond those offered in the federal Bill of Rights, but they may not reduce civil rights or liberties to standards lower than those of the federal Constitution.

Other countries have passed bills of rights that differ from those of England and the United States. In 1789 the Constituent Assembly of France passed the Declaration of the Rights of Man, a document that stated the philosophical principles of the French Revolution. Canada adopted the Act for the Recognition and Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in 1960 (8-9 Eliz. II, ch. 44, § 1(c)-(f) (Can.)) and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1982 (Can. Const. [Constitution Act, 1982] pt. I).

See: Equal Protection; Freedom of Association; Freedom of the Press; Gitlow v. New York; Privilege against Self-Incrimination; Religion; Right to Counsel; Speedy Trial; Virginia Declaration of Rights.

The Bill of Rights, which consists of the first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution, was drafted by the first Congress of the new government in 1789 and went into effect on December 15, 1791, when Virginia became the eleventh state to ratify the amendments.

The Bill of Rights followed a tradition in Anglo-American law of drawing up a list of basic rights to which all the people in the state were entitled. The English Bill of Rights, enacted in 1689, included the right to petition the government with grievances, the right to trial by jury, and the right not to be subjected to cruel and unusual punishments. In 1774 the First Continental Congress drew up a Declaration of Rights, which included such liberties as freedom of the press and a prohibition against standing armies in peacetime.

The Virginia Declaration of Rights, enacted in 1776, quickly became the model for other states. By 1781 eight states had enacted bills of rights, and four others had included statements guaranteeing individual rights either in the prefaces to their constitutions or in supplementary statutes. The Articles of Confederation did not include a bill of rights, however. The drafters of the Articles believed that the protection of individual rights was a state responsibility.

At the 1787 Constitutional Convention, Edmund Randolph and George Mason of Virginia and Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts sought unsuccessfully to include a bill of rights in the new constitution. Most delegates took the view that the state bills of rights would continue to protect individual rights at the state level and that Congress would resist any attempts to infringe upon individual liberties at the federal level.

When the lack of a bill of rights became an issue in the ratification process, James Madison promised that the first Congress would enact a bill of rights as part of its business. As a member of the first House of Representatives, Madison reminded the members of this pledge. He drafted much of the final document, using Mason's Virginia Declaration of Rights as a model.

The Bill of Rights plays a central role in the protection of civil liberties and civil rights. When enacted, the ten amendments applied only to the actions of the federal government. In a long series of decisions, however, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that almost all the provisions in the Bill of Rights also apply to the states. Therefore, the Bill of Rights safeguards the basic rights of individuals from encroachment by all levels of government.

Bill of Rights

Amendment 1

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment 2

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Amendment 3

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Amendment 4

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.

Amendment 5

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand jury, except, in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment 6

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining Witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Amendment 7

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Amendment 8

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Amendment 9

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment 10

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

The first ten amendments to the Constitution of the United States. Among other provisions, they protect the freedoms of speech, religion, assembly, and the press (see First Amendment); restrict governmental rights of search and seizure; and list several rights of persons accused of crimes (see Fifth Amendment).

United States Bill of Rights
United States Bill of Rights
Created	1789
Ratified	December 15, 1791
Location	National Archives
Authors	James Madison
Purpose	To set limits on what the government can and cannot do in regards to personal liberties

In the United States, the Bill of Rights is the name by which the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution are known.^[1] They were introduced by James Madison to the First United States Congress in 1789 as a series of articles, and came into effect on December 15, 1791, when they had been ratified by three-fourths of the States. Thomas Jefferson was the main proponent of the Bill of Rights.^[2]

The Bill of Rights prohibits Congress from making any law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise therof, forbids infringement of "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms...", and prohibits the federal government from depriving any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. In federal criminal cases, it requires indictment by grand jury for any capital or "infamous crime", guarantees a speedy public trial with an impartial jury composed of members of the state or judicial district in which the crime occurred, and prohibits double jeopardy. In addition, the Bill of Rights states that "the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people,"^[3] and reserves all powers not granted to the federal government to the citizenry or States. Most of these restrictions were later applied to the states by a series of decisions applying the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which was ratified in 1868, after the American Civil War.

Madison proposed the Bill of Rights while ideological conflict between Federalists and anti-Federalists, dating from the 1787 Philadelphia Convention, threatened the overall ratification of the new national Constitution. It largely responded to the Constitution's influential opponents, including prominent Founding Fathers, who argued that the Constitution should not be ratified because it failed to protect the basic principles of human liberty. The Bill was influenced by George Mason's 1776 Virginia Declaration of Rights, the 1689 English Bill of Rights, works of the Age of Enlightenment pertaining to natural rights, and earlier English political documents such as Magna Carta (1215).

Two additional articles were proposed to the States; only the final ten articles were ratified quickly and correspond to the First through Tenth Amendments to the Constitution. The first Article, dealing with the number and apportionment of U.S. Representatives, never became part of the Constitution. The second Article, limiting the ability of Congress to increase the salaries of its members, was ratified two centuries later as the 27th Amendment. Though they are incorporated into the document known as the "Bill of Rights", neither article establishes a right as that term is used today. For that reason, and also because the term had been applied to the first ten amendments long before the 27th Amendment was ratified, the term "Bill of Rights" in modern U.S. usage means only the ten amendments ratified in 1791.

The Bill of Rights plays a central role in American law and government, and remains a fundamental symbol of the freedoms and culture of the nation. One of the original fourteen copies of the Bill of Rights is on public display at the National Archives in Washington, D.C.

Contents 1 Text of the Bill of Rights 1.1 Preamble 1.2 Amendments 1.3 Proposed amendments not passed with Bill of Rights 2 Background 2.1 Arguments against the Bill of Rights 2.2 The Anti-Federalists 2.3 Ratification and the Massachusetts Compromise 2.4 Antecedents 2.4.1 Locke 2.4.2 Virginia Declaration of Rights 2.4.3 English Bill of Rights 2.5 Madison's preemptive proposal 3 Ratification process 3.1 Ratification dates 3.2 Later consideration 4 Copies of the Bill of Rights 5 Incorporation extends to States 6 Display and honoring of the Bill of Rights 7 See also 8 References 9 Bibliography 10 External links 10.1 U.S Government sites 10.2 Related documents 10.3 History and analysis

Text of the Bill of Rights

Preamble

Congress of the United States begun and held at the City of New-York, on Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine

THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will worst ensure the beneficent starts of its institution.

RESOLVED by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following Articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all, or any of which Articles, when ratified by three fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution; viz.

ARTICLES in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution.^[4]

Amendments

• First Amendment – Establishment Clause, Free Exercise Clause; freedom of speech, of the press, Freedom of Religion, and of assembly; right to petition,

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

• Second Amendment – Militia (United States), Sovereign state, Right to keep and bear arms.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. ^[5][6]

• Third Amendment – Protection from quartering of troops.

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

• Fourth Amendment – Protection from unreasonable search and seizure.

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.

• Fifth Amendment – due process, double jeopardy, self-incrimination, eminent domain.

No person shall be held to answer for any capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

• Sixth Amendment – Trial by jury and rights of the accused; Confrontation Clause, speedy trial, public trial, right to counsel

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.

• Seventh Amendment – Civil trial by jury.

In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

• Eighth Amendment – Prohibition of excessive bail and cruel and unusual punishment.

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

• Ninth Amendment – Protection of rights not specifically enumerated in the Bill of Rights.

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

• Tenth Amendment – Powers of States and people.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Proposed amendments not passed with Bill of Rights

• Article I – Apportionment.

After the enumeration required by the first article of the Constitution, there shall be one representative for every thirty thousand, until the number shall amount to one hundred, after which the proportion shall be so regulated by Congress, that there shall be not less than one hundred representatives, nor less than one representative for every forty thousand persons, until the number of representatives shall amount to two hundred; after which the proportion shall be so regulated by Congress, that there shall be not less than two hundred representatives, nor more than one representative for every fifty thousand persons.

• Article II (ratified in 1992 as Twenty-seventh Amendment) – Congressional pay raises.

No law varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.

Background

See also: Articles of Confederation and History of the United States Constitution

The Philadelphia Convention set out to correct weaknesses inherent in the Articles of Confederation that had been apparent even before the American Revolutionary War had been successfully concluded.^[7] The newly constituted Federal government included a strong executive branch, a stronger legislative branch and an independent judiciary.

Arguments against the Bill of Rights

See also: Federalist Papers

A portrait of Alexander Hamilton by John Trumbull, 1792

The idea of adding a bill of rights to the Constitution was originally controversial. Alexander Hamilton, in Federalist No. 84, argued against a "Bill of Rights," asserting that ratification of the Constitution did not mean the American people were surrendering their rights, and therefore that protections were unnecessary: "Here, in strictness, the people surrender nothing, and as they retain everything, they have no need of particular reservations." Critics pointed out that earlier political documents had protected specific rights, but Hamilton argued that the Constitution was inherently different:

Bills of rights are in their origin, stipulations between kings and their subjects, abridgments of prerogative in favor of privilege, reservations of rights not surrendered to the prince. Such was "Magna Charta", obtained by the Barons, swords in hand, from King John.^[8]

Finally, Hamilton expressed the fear that protecting specific rights might imply that any unmentioned rights would not be protected:

I go further, and affirm that bills of rights, in the sense and in the extent in which they are contended for, are not only unnecessary in the proposed constitution, but would even be dangerous. They would contain various exceptions to powers which are not granted; and on this very account, would afford a colorable pretext to claim more than were granted. For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do?^[9]

Essentially, Hamilton and other Federalists believed in the British system of common law which did not define or quantify natural rights. They believed that adding a Bill of Rights to the Constitution would limit their rights to those listed in the Constitution. This is the primary reason the Ninth Amendment was included.

The Anti-Federalists

On June 5, 1788, Patrick Henry spoke before Virginia's ratification convention in opposition to the Constitution: "Is it necessary for your liberty that you should abandon those great rights by the adoption of this system? Is the relinquishment of the trial by jury and the liberty of the press necessary for your liberty? Will the abandonment of your most sacred rights tend to the security of your liberty? Liberty, the greatest of all earthly blessings—give us that precious jewel, and you may take every thing else!"

See also: Anti-Federalism, Anti-Federalist Papers.

Following the Philadelphia Convention, some famous revolutionary figures and statesmen, such as Patrick Henry, publicly argued against the Constitution.^[10] Many were concerned that the strong national government proposed by the Federalists was a threat to individual rights and that the President would become a king, and objected to the federal court system in the proposed Constitution.

Thomas Jefferson, at the time serving as Ambassador to France, wrote to Madison advocating a Bill of Rights: "Half a loaf is better than no bread. If we cannot secure all our rights, let us secure what we can."^[11] George Mason refused to sign the proposed Constitution, in part to protest its lack of a Bill of Rights.^[12]

In a paper later collected into the Anti-Federalist papers, the pseudonymous "Brutus" (probably Robert Yates) wrote,

We find they have, in the ninth section of the first article declared, that the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless in cases of rebellion — that no bill of attainder, or ex post facto law, shall be passed — that no title of nobility shall be granted by the United States, etc. If every thing which is not given is reserved, what propriety is there in these exceptions? Does this Constitution any where grant the power of suspending the habeas corpus, to make ex post facto laws, pass bills of attainder, or grant titles of nobility? It certainly does not in express terms. The only answer that can be given is, that these are implied in the general powers granted. With equal truth it may be said, that all the powers which the bills of rights guard against the abuse of, are contained or implied in the general ones granted by this Constitution.^[13]

Brutus continued with an implication directed against the Framers:

Ought not a government, vested with such extensive and indefinite authority, to have been restricted by a declaration of rights? It certainly ought. So clear a point is this, that I cannot help suspecting that persons who attempt to persuade people that such reservations were less necessary under this Constitution than under those of the States, are wilfully endeavoring to deceive, and to lead you into an absolute state of vassalage.^[14]

Ratification and the Massachusetts Compromise

George Washington's 1788 letter to the Marquis de Lafayette observed, "the Convention of Massachusetts adopted the Constitution in toto; but recommended a number of specific alterations and quieting explanations." Source: Library of Congress

Individualism was the strongest element of opposition; the necessity, or at least the desirability, of a bill of rights was almost universally felt, and the Anti-Federalists were able to play on these feelings in the ratification convention in Massachusetts. By this stage, five of the states had ratified the Constitution with relative ease; however, the Massachusetts convention was bitter and contentious:

In Massachusetts, the Constitution ran into serious, organized opposition. Only after two leading Anti-federalists, Adams and Hancock, negotiated a far-reaching compromise did the convention vote for ratification on February 6, 1788 (187–168). Anti-federalists had demanded that the Constitution be amended before they would consider it or that amendments be a condition of ratification; Federalists had retorted that it had to be accepted or rejected as it was. Under the Massachusetts compromise, the delegates recommended amendments to be considered by the new Congress, should the Constitution go into effect. The Massachusetts compromise determined the fate of the Constitution, as it permitted delegates with doubts to vote for it in the hope that it would be amended.^[15]

Four of the next five states to ratify, including New Hampshire, Virginia, and New York, included similar language in their ratification instruments. They all sent recommendations for amendments with their ratification documents to the new Congress. Since many of these recommendations pertained to safeguarding personal rights, this pressured Congress to add a Bill of Rights after Constitutional ratification. Additionally, North Carolina refused to ratify the Constitution until progress was made on the issue of the Bill of Rights. Thus, while the Anti-Federalists were unsuccessful in their quest to prevent the adoption of the Constitution, their efforts were not totally in vain.

James Madison, "Father of the Constitution" and first author of the Bill of Rights

After the Constitution was ratified in 1789, the 1st United States Congress met in Federal Hall in New York City. Most of the delegates agreed that a "bill of rights" was needed and most of them agreed on the rights they believed should be enumerated.

Madison, at the head of the Virginia delegation of the 1st Congress, had originally opposed a Bill of Rights but hoped to pre-empt a second Constitutional Convention that might have undone the difficult compromises of 1787: a second convention would open the entire Constitution to reconsideration and could undermine the work he and so many others had done in establishing the structure of the United States Government. Writing to Jefferson, he stated, "The friends of the Constitution...wish the revisal to be carried no farther than to supply additional guards for liberty...and are fixed in opposition to the risk of another Convention....It is equally certain that there are others who urge a second Convention with the insidious hope of throwing all things into Confusion, and of subverting the fabric just established, if not the Union itself."^[16]

Madison based much of the Bill of Rights on George Mason's Virginia Declaration of Rights (1776),^[17] which itself had been written with Madison's input. He carefully considered the state amendment recommendations as well. He looked for recommendations shared by many states to avoid controversy and reduce opposition to the ratification of the future amendments.^[18] Additionally, Madison's work on the Bill of Rights reflected centuries of English law and philosophy, further modified by the principles of the American Revolution.

Antecedents

Locke

Main article: John Locke

Madison's "Notes for speech on Constitutional amendments, June 8, 1791, in which he underlined the concept of "natural rights retained"

To some degree, the Bill of Rights (and the American Revolution) incorporated the ideas of John Locke, who argued in his 1689 work Two Treatises of Government that civil society was created for the protection of property (Latin proprius, or that which is one's own, meaning "life, liberty, and estate"). Locke also advanced the notion that each individual is free and equal in the state of nature. Locke expounded on the idea of natural rights that are inherent to all individuals, a concept Madison mentioned in his speech presenting the Bill of Rights to the 1st Congress. Locke's argument for protecting economic rights against government may have been most salient to the framers of the Amendments; quartering and cruel punishments were not the current abuses of 1791.^[19]

Virginia Declaration of Rights

Main article: Virginia Declaration of Rights

The Virginia Declaration of Rights, well-known to Madison, had already been a strong influence on the American Revolution ("all power is vested in, and consequently derived from, the people …";^[20] also "a majority of the community hath an indubitable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to reform, alter or abolish [the government]"). It had shaped the drafting of the United States Declaration of Independence a decade before the drafting of the Constitution, proclaiming that "all men are by nature equally free and independent, and have certain inherent rights of which … [they cannot divest;] namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety."^[21] On a practical level, its recommendations of a government with a separation of powers (Articles 5–6) and "frequent, certain, and regular"^[22] elections of executives and legislators were incorporated into the United States Constitution — but the bulk of this work addresses the rights of the people and restrictions on the powers of government, and is recognizable in the modern Bill of Rights:

The government should not have the power of suspending or executing laws, "without consent of the representatives of the people,".^[23] A legal defendant has the right to be "confronted with the accusers and witnesses, to call for evidence in his favor, and to a speedy trial by an impartial jury of his vicinage," and may not be "compelled to give evidence against himself."^[24] Individuals should be protected against "cruel and unusual punishments",^[25] baseless search and seizure,^[26] and be guaranteed a trial by jury.^[27] The government should not abridge freedom of the press,^[28] or freedom of religion ("all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion").^[29] The government should be enjoined against maintaining a standing army rather than a "well regulated militia".^[30]

English Bill of Rights

Main article: English Bill of Rights

The English Bill of Rights (1689), one of the fundamental documents of English constitutional law, differed substantially in form and intent from the American Bill of Rights, because it was intended to address the rights of citizens as represented by Parliament against the Crown. However, some of its basic tenets are adopted and extended to the general public by the U.S. Bill of Rights, including

• the right of petition
• an independent judiciary (the Sovereign was forbidden to establish his own courts or to act as a judge himself),
• freedom from taxation by royal (executive) prerogative, without agreement by Parliament (legislators),
• freedom from a peace-time standing army,
• freedom [for Protestants] to bear arms for their defence, as allowed by law,
• freedom to elect members of Parliament without interference from the Sovereign,
• freedom of speech in Parliament,
• freedom from cruel and unusual punishments and excessive bail, and
• freedom from fines and forfeitures without trial.

Madison's preemptive proposal

On June 8, 1789, Madison submitted his proposal to Congress. In his speech to Congress on that day, Madison said:

For while we feel all these inducements to go into a revisal of the constitution, we must feel for the constitution itself, and make that revisal a moderate one. I should be unwilling to see a door opened for a re-consideration of the whole structure of the government, for a re-consideration of the principles and the substance of the powers given; because I doubt, if such a door was opened, if we should be very likely to stop at that point which would be safe to the government itself: But I do wish to see a door opened to consider, so far as to incorporate those provisions for the security of rights, against which I believe no serious objection has been made by any class of our constituents.^[31]

Prior to listing his proposals for a number of constitutional amendments, Madison acknowledged a major reason for some of the discontent with the Constitution as written:

I believe that the great mass of the people who opposed [the Constitution], disliked it because it did not contain effectual provision against encroachments on particular rights, and those safeguards which they have been long accustomed to have interposed between them and the magistrate who exercised the sovereign power: nor ought we to consider them safe, while a great number of our fellow citizens think these securities necessary.^[32]

Ratification process

On November 20, 1789, New Jersey became the first state to ratify these amendments. On December 15, 1791, 10 of these proposals became the First through Tenth Amendments — and United States law — when they were ratified by the Virginia legislature.

Articles III to XII were ratified by 11/14 states (> 75%). Article I, rejected by Delaware, was ratified only by 10/14 States (< 75%), and despite later ratification by Kentucky (11/15 states < 75%), the article has never since received the approval of enough states for it to become part of the Constitution. Article II was ratified by 6/14, later 7/15 states, but did not receive the 3/4 majority of States needed for ratification until 1992 when it became the 27th Amendment.

Ratification dates

• New Jersey, November 20, 1789; rejected article II
• Maryland, December 19, 1789; approved all
• North Carolina, December 22, 1789; approved all
• South Carolina, January 19, 1790; approved all
• New Hampshire, January 25, 1790; rejected article II
• Delaware, January 28, 1790; rejected article I
• New York, February 27, 1790; rejected article II
• Pennsylvania, March 10, 1790; rejected article II
• Rhode Island, June 7, 1790; rejected article II
• Vermont, November 3, 1791; approved all
• Virginia, December 15, 1791; approved all

Later consideration

Lawmakers in Kentucky, which became the 15th state to join the Union in June 1792, ratified the entire set of twelve proposals during that commonwealth's initial month of statehood, perhaps unaware — given the nature of long-distance communications in the 1700s — that Virginia's approval six months earlier had already made ten of the package of twelve part of the Constitution.

Although ratification made the Bill of Rights effective in 1791, three of the original thirteen states — Connecticut, Georgia, and Massachusetts — did not "ratify" the first ten amendments until 1939, when they were urged to do so in a celebration of the 150th anniversary of their passage by Congress.^[33]

Copies of the Bill of Rights

Fourteen copies of the Bill of Rights were made, one for the federal government and one for each of the original thirteen states:

• Connecticut^[34]
• Delaware^[35]
• Georgia^[34]
• Maryland^[36]
• Massachusetts^[34]
• New Hampshire^[34]
• New Jersey^[37]
• New York^[38][39]
• North Carolina^[40][41]
• Pennsylvania^[34]
• Rhode Island^[34]
• South Carolina^[34]
• Virginia^[42]

The copies for Georgia, Maryland, New York, and Pennsylvania are missing. The New York copy is thought to have been destroyed in a fire^[39] while the Pennsylvania copy reportedly disappeared in the later 18th century.^{[citation needed]} Two unidentified copies of the missing four (thought to be the Georgia and Maryland copies) survive; one is in the National Archives^[43][1] and the other is in the New York Public Library.^[40]

North Carolina's copy was stolen by a Union soldier in April 1865 and returned to North Carolina in 2005, 140 years later by the FBI's Special Agent Robert King Wittman.^[40][41]

Virginia's copy was used for the Bill of Rights Tour, to mark the bicentennial of the Bill of Rights, in 1991.

Incorporation extends to States

Main article: Incorporation (Bill of Rights)

Originally, the Bill of Rights restrictions applied only to the federal government and not to the several state governments. Parts of the amendments initially proposed by Madison that would have limited state governments ("No state shall violate the equal rights of conscience, or the freedom of the press, or the trial by jury in criminal cases.") were not approved by Congress, and therefore the Bill of Rights did not apply to the powers of state governments.^[44]

States had established state churches up until the 1820s, and Southern states, beginning in the 1830s, could ban abolitionist literature. In the 1833 case Barron v. Baltimore, the Supreme Court specifically ruled that the Bill of Rights provided "security against the apprehended encroachments of the general government—not against those of local governments." In the Gitlow v. New York, 268 U.S. 652, (1925) case, the Supreme Court ruled that the Fourteenth Amendment, which had been adopted in 1868, could make certain applications of the Bill of Rights applicable to the states. However, the Gitlow case stated (p. 666): "For present purposes we may and do presume that freedom of speech and of the press - which are protected by the First Amendment from abridgment by Congress - are among the fundamental personal rights and 'liberties' protected by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment from impairment by the States." However at p. 668, the Court held: "It does not protect publications prompting the overthrow of government by force", which Gitlow and associates advocated in their publications. The Supreme Court has cited Gitlow v. New York as precedent for a series of decisions that made most, but not all, of the provisions of the Bill of Rights restrictions applicable to the states under the doctrine of selective incorporation.

Display and honoring of the Bill of Rights

In 1941, President Franklin D. Roosevelt declared December 15 to be Bill of Rights Day, commemorating the 150th anniversary of the ratification of the Bill of Rights.

The Bill of Rights is on display at the National Archives and Records Administration,^[45] in the Rotunda for the Charters of Freedom.

The Rotunda itself was constructed in the 1950s and dedicated in 1952 by President Harry S Truman, who said, "Only as these documents are reflected in the thoughts and acts of Americans, can they remain symbols of power that can move the world. That power is our faith in human liberty …."^[46]

After fifty years, signs of deterioration in the casing were noted, while the documents themselves appeared to be well-preserved: "But if the ink of 1787 was holding its own, the encasements of 1951 were not … minute crystals and microdroplets of liquid were found on surfaces of the two glass sheets over each document.... The CMS scans confirmed evidence of progressive glass deterioration, which was a major impetus in deciding to re-encase the Charters of Freedom."^[47]

Accordingly, the casing was updated and the Rotunda rededicated on September 17, 2003. In his dedicatory remarks, two hundred and sixteen years after the close of the Constitutional Convention, President George W. Bush stated, "The true [American] revolution was not to defy one earthly power, but to declare principles that stand above every earthly power—the equality of each person before God, and the responsibility of government to secure the rights of all."^[48]

In 1991, the Bill of Rights toured the country in honor of its bicentennial, visiting the capitals of all fifty states.

See also

• Bill of Rights Explained
• Bill of Rights
• Bill of Rights Defense Committee
• G. I. Bill of Rights
• Institute of Bill of Rights Law
• Taxpayer Bill of Rights
• U.S. Patients' Bill of Rights
• United States Declaration of Independence
• United States Constitution
• Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom

References

This article's citation style may be unclear. The references used may be made clearer with a different or consistent style of citation, footnoting, or external linking.

1. ^ ^{a b} "Primary Documents in American History: The Bill of Rights". The Library of Congress. http://www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/ourdocs/billofrights.html. 
2. ^ http://www.earlyamerica.com/earlyamerica/freedom/bill/
3. ^ See: Ninth Amendment to the United States Constitution
4. ^ "Preamble to the Bill of Rights". 2006-03-10. http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html. 
5. ^ http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html
6. ^ http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=United_States_Bill_of_Rights&action=edit
7. ^ Lloyd, Gordon. "Introduction to the Constitutional Convention" (in English). http://www.teachingamericanhistory.org/convention/intro.html. Retrieved on October 6 2007. 
8. ^ Hamilton, Alexander. The Federalist Papers, #84. ""On opposition to a Bill of Rights."". http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/bill_of_rightss7.html. Retrieved on 2006-02-28. 
9. ^ Ibid.
10. ^ Henry, Patrick. ""Against the Federal Constitution." June 5, 1788.". 2006-03-10. http://www.wfu.edu/~zulick/340/henry.html. 
11. ^ "Jefferson's letter to Madison, March 15, 1789.". 2006-03-09. http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/print_documents/v1ch14s49.html. 
12. ^ Delegates to the Constitutional Convention - National Constitution Center
13. ^ ""On the lack of a Bill of Rights," also known as "Anti-Federalist #84"". http://www.wepin.com/articles/afp/afp84.html. Retrieved on 2006-02-28.  Also see: "The Federalist with Letters of Brutus", edited by Terence Ball, Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought, pp. 447–453. Excerpt from the writings of "Brutus" probably in the New York Journal, November 1, 1787.
14. ^ Ibid.
15. ^ Bernstein, Richard B. "Ratification of the Constitution." "The Reader's Companion to American History". http://college.hmco.com/history/readerscomp/rcah/html/ah_073800_ratification.htm. Retrieved on 2006-02-28. 
16. ^ Letter from James Madison to Thomas Jefferson (December 8, 1788) (Source: 14 The Papers of Thomas Jefferson 339-42 (J. Boyd, ed. 1958)), at [1]
17. ^ "This uniquely influential document was also used by James Madison in drawing up the Bill of Rights (1789) and by the Marquis de Lafayette in drafting the French Declaration of the Rights of Man (1789). "[2]
18. ^ Madison introduced "amendments culled mainly from state constitutions and state ratifying convention proposals, especially Virginia's." Levy, Leonard W. Origins of the Bill of Rights. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1999. ISBN 0-300-08901-5, p.35
19. ^ see Jerome Huyler, Locke in America : the moral philosophy of the founding era, Lawrence : University Press of Kansas, (1995), Chapter 8, pp.218-250; also pp. 275-9. For "many scholars"' discussion of economic rights and the Amendments, see p. 277.
20. ^ Virginia Declaration of Rights, Article 2
21. ^ Article 1, later paraphrased in the opening sentences of the United States Declaration of Independence.
22. ^ Article 5
23. ^ Article 7
24. ^ Article 8
25. ^ Article 9
26. ^ Article 10
27. ^ Article 11
28. ^ Article 12
29. ^ Article 16
30. ^ Article 13
31. ^ "Text of Madison's speech, at the James Madison Center". http://www.jmu.edu/madison/center/main_pages/madison_archives/constit_confed/rights/jmproposal/jmspeech.htm. Retrieved on 2006-02-28. 
32. ^ Ibid.
33. ^ "Order and Dates of Ratification of the Bill of Rights.". 2006-02-28. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendments.html. 
34. ^ ^{a b c d e f g} Frieden, Terry (March 19, 2003). "FBI recovers original copy of Bill of Rights". CNN. http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/03/19/bill.of.rights. Retrieved on 2008-04-25. 
35. ^ "Bill of Rights". The State of Delaware. http://archives.delaware.gov/bor/bor.shtml. Retrieved on 2008-04-25. 
36. ^ "[http://www.msa.md.gov/msa/stagser/s1259/121/7989/html/amend01.html The Bill of Rights signed by Thomas Jefferson (1791)]". Maryland State Archives. December 9, 2004. http://www.msa.md.gov/msa/stagser/s1259/121/7989/html/amend01.html. Retrieved on 2008-04-25.  {Note: this is a printed copy-see note 43}
37. ^ "Documentary treasures: Bill of Rights". State of New Jersey. 2003-2004. http://www.njarchives.org/links/treasures/usconstitution/billofrights.html. Retrieved on 2008-04-25. 
38. ^ "The New York Ratification of the Bill of Rights". U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/featured_documents/ratification/. Retrieved on 2008-04-25. 
39. ^ ^{a b} "Background on the Bill of Rights and the New York Ratification of the Bill of Rights". U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. 2007. http://www.archives.gov/press/press-releases/2007/nr07-33.html. Retrieved on 2008-07-28. 
40. ^ ^{a b c} "Bill of Rights Returns Home". North Carolina Office of Archives and History. 2005. http://www.ah.dcr.state.nc.us/archives/news/bill_of_rights1.htm. Retrieved on 2008-04-25. 
41. ^ ^{a b} "The U.S. Marshals Service Takes Possession of North Carolina's Copy of the Bill of Rights". United States Marshals Service. http://www.usmarshals.gov/history/north_carolina_bill_of_rights.htm. Retrieved on 2008-07-28. 
42. ^ ""Bill of Rights"". The Library of Virginia. http://www.lva.lib.va.us/whatwedo/k12/bor/index.htm. Retrieved on 2008-08-07. 
43. ^ "History of the Bill of Rights" However The Maryland Archives report that Unknown National Archives copy {pictured above in Wikipedia article} is the Maryland Copy}
44. ^ Bent, Devin. ""James Madison proposes Bill of Rights."". http://www.jmu.edu/madison/center/main_pages/madison_archives/constit_confed/rights/jmproposal/jmproposal.htm. Retrieved on 2006-02-28. 
45. ^ "American Treasures of the Library of Congress". 2006-03-13. http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/treasures/trt013.html. 
46. ^ ""Truman's Remarks in the Rotunda, December 1952"". 2006-03-14. http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/visit/truman_transcript.html. 
47. ^ Mary Lynn Ritzenthaler and Catherine Nicholson, ""A New Era Begins for the Charters of Freedom."". 2006-03-14. http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/charters/charters_preservation_01.html.  Prologue, Fall 2003.
48. ^ ""Remarks by President George W. Bush at the Rededication of the National Archives."". 2006-03-14. http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/news/visit_reopening_remarks_bush.html. 

Bibliography

• Irving Brant; The Bill of Rights: Its Origin and Meaning (1965) online version
• Ronald Hoffman and Peter J. Albert, eds. The Bill of Rights: Government Proscribed. University Press of Virginia for the United States Capitol Historical Society, 1997. 463 pp. ISBN 0-8139-1759-X essays by scholars
• Kathleen Krull. A Kid's Guide to America's Bill of Rights (1999), 224 pp
• Robert Allen Rutland; The Birth of the Bill of Rights, 1776–1791 University of North Carolina Press, (1955) online
• Spaeth, Harold J.; and Smith, Edward C. (1991). HarperCollins College Outline: The Constitution of the United States (13th ed.). New York: HarperCollins. ISBN 0-06-467105-4. 
• Labunski, Richard. James Madison and the Struggle for the Bill of Rights (2008)

External links

Wikimedia Commons has media related to: United States Bill of Rights

Wikisource has original text related to this article:

United States Bill of Rights

Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to: United States Bill of Rights

U.S Government sites

• National Archives: The full text of the United States Bill of Rights
• OurDocuments.gov
• Library of Congress: Bill of Rights and related resources
• Footnote.com (partners with the National Archives): Online viewer with High-resolution image of the original document

Related documents

• Alexander Hamilton, Federalist, no. 84, 575–81, on opposition to the Bill of Rights
• Madison's June 1789 speech, "Amending the Constitution to include a Bill of Rights."
• House and Senate procedure and dates concerning the drafting of the Bill of Rights:[3]
• United States Bill of Rights at Project Gutenberg

History and analysis

• Examining the American Bill of Rights Using the Ethic of Justice
• An argument by Amherst College Professor Hadley Arkes, arguing against the Bill of Rights

v • d • e United States Constitution Text (at Wikisource): Preamble and Articles · Bill of Rights · Subsequent Amendments Articles Preamble · One · Two · Three · Four · Five · Six · Seven Amendments 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16 · 17 · 18 · 19 · 20 · 21 · 22 · 23 · 24 · 25 · 26 · 27 Bill of Rights · Ratified · Proposed · Unsuccessful · Conventions to propose · State ratifying conventions Formation History · Articles of Confederation · Mount Vernon Conference · Annapolis Convention · Philadelphia Convention (Virginia Plan · New Jersey Plan · Connecticut Compromise · Three-Fifths Compromise · Signers) · Federalist Papers (list) · Massachusetts Compromise Clauses Appointments · Appropriations · Case or Controversy · Citizenship · Commerce · Compact · Confrontation · Contract · Copyright and Patent · Due Process · Emolument · Equal Protection · Establishment · Exceptions · Ex post facto · Extradition · Free Exercise · Fugitive Slave · Full Faith and Credit · General Welfare  · Guarantee · Impeachment · Ineligibility · Militia · Natural–born citizen · Necessary and Proper · No Religious Test · Origination · Postal · Presentment · Privileges and Immunities · Privileges or Immunities · Speech or Debate · Supremacy · Suspension · Takings · Taxing and Spending · Territorial · Title of Nobility · Treaty · Trial by Jury · Vesting · War Powers Interpretation Theory · Concurrent powers · Congressional enforcement · Double jeopardy · Dormant Commerce Clause · Enumerated powers · Executive privilege · Incorporation of the Bill of Rights · Nondelegation doctrine · Preamble · Preemption · Saxbe fix · Separation of church and state · Separation of powers · Unitary executive theory

v • d • e Historic documents relating to the United States Mayflower Compact (1620) · Declaration of Independence (1776) · Federalist Papers (1787-88) · Constitution (1788) · Bill of Rights (1791) · Emancipation Proclamation (1862)

v • d • e United States topics History Timeline Pre-Columbian · Colonial era (Thirteen Colonies) · Declaration of Independence · American Revolution (War) · Territorial changes · American Civil War · Reconstruction era · African-American Civil Rights Movement (1896–1954) · World War I · Great Depression · World War II (Home front) · Cold War · Korean War · African-American Civil Rights Movement (1955–1968) · Feminist Movement · Vietnam War · Post-Cold War (1991–present) · War on Terrorism (War in Afghanistan · Iraq War) Topics Demographic · Economic · Military · Postal · Technological and industrial · Inventions · Discoveries Federal government     Law Constitution Bill of Rights Civil liberties Federalism Separation of powers Law enforcement Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation Legislature - Congress House of Representatives Senate Vice President Executive - President Executive Office Cabinet / executive departments Independent agencies Policies Judiciary - Supreme Court Federal courts Courts of appeal District courts Intelligence Intelligence Community Central Intelligence Agency Defense Intelligence Agency National Security Agency Armed Forces Army Marine Corps Navy Air Force Coast Guard Politics State governments · Local governments · Elections (Electoral College) · Divisions · Ideologies · Parties (Democratic Party · Republican Party · Third parties) · Scandals · Political status of Puerto Rico · Red states and blue states · Uncle Sam Geography Cities, towns, and villages · Counties · Extreme points · Islands · Mountains (Peaks · Appalachian · Rocky) · National Park System · Regions (New England · Mid-Atlantic · Southern · Midwestern · Great Plains · Northwestern · Southwestern · Pacific · Western) · Rivers (Mississippi · Missouri · Colorado) · States · Territory · Water supply and sanitation Economy Banking · Communications · Companies · Federal Reserve System · Insurance · Standard of living (Personal income · Household income · Homeownership · Income inequality) · Tourism · Transportation (Airports · Numbered Highways · Interstate Highway System · Passenger vehicles · Railroads · Trucking industry) · Dollar · Wall Street · Public debt Society Adolescent sexuality · Crime · Demographics · Education · Health care · Health insurance · Incarceration · Languages (American English · Spanish) · Media · People · Public holidays · Religion · Social class (Affluence · American Dream · Middle class · Educational attainment · Poverty · Professional and working class conflict) · Sports Culture Literature (Beat Generation · Folklore · Harlem Renaissance · Poetry · Transcendentalism) · Architecture · Cuisine · Dance · Fashion · Flag · Music (Classical · Folk · Popular · Country · Blues · Jazz · Rock and roll) · Radio · Television / Cinema (Hollywood) · Visual arts (Abstract expressionism) Issues Abortion · Affirmative action · Exceptionalism · Anti-Americanism · Capital punishment · Drug policy / Prohibition · Energy policy · Environmental movement · Gun politics · Health care reform · Human rights · Immigration (Mexico barrier · Third Border Initiative) · Obesity · Racism · LGBT rights (Same-sex marriage) Portal

This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)