Selective incorporation
Selective incorporation
selective incorporation
Palko vs Connecticut 1937
The shift from total incorporation to selective incorporation in the 1960s was primarily driven by the Supreme Court's desire to balance state and federal powers while ensuring individual rights. Total incorporation would have applied all protections in the Bill of Rights to the states, which was seen as overly broad. Instead, selective incorporation allowed the Court to evaluate and apply specific rights deemed fundamental to the notion of due process under the 14th Amendment. This approach provided a more nuanced framework for protecting individual liberties while respecting states' rights.
Palko v. Connecticut
Some Amendments applied to the States by Amendment XIV.
1st amendment
The "total incorporation" argument holds that the 14th Amendment makes the individual States subject to the restrictions of the earlier Amendments. ALL of them. So if one of the Amendments in the Bill of Rights forbids Congress from infringing a particular freedom, then the State legislatures can't do so either."Selective incorporation" holds that only those Amendments that embody certain "fundamental rights" are applied to the States.
The Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause has been used to apply the Bill of Rights (the first ten Amendments to the Constitution) to the States, under the doctrine of "selective incorporation."For more information, see Related Questions, below.
Federal courts have the ability to overturn state and local practices
Selective incorporation