The three cases show the evolution of the Supreme Court's understanding of how the Bill of Rights should be applied. The Bill of Rights was drawn up to protect the rights of states and individuals from the encroachments of an over-mighty federal government. The landmark case of Barron v Baltimore (1853) established the important legal precedent that the Bill of Rights did not apply to actions carried out by state governments.
In Weeks v United States (1914), the Supreme Court ruled that a seizure of items from a private residence without a warrant constituted a violation of the Fourth Amendment. But, as the case involved the federal government as defendants, the original scope of the Bill of Rights remained. Nevertheless, Weeks was a significant milestone in civil liberties jurisprudence, as it established the so-called "exclusionary principle." This means that incriminating evidence can be excluded from trial if it was obtained via unconstitutional means. The Court's introduction of the exclusionary principle, though related to the actions of the federal authorities, opened the door for a similar challenge to be made in future against state authorities whose actions violated the relevant provisions of the Bill of Rights.
It took quite some time for this to happen, but the Supreme Court duly delivered in Mapp v Ohio (1961). The facts of the case were similar to those in Weeks: incriminating evidence had been seized by the relevant authorities in a manner that violated the plaintiff's constitutional rights under the Fourth Amendment. In its ruling, the Court extended the exclusionary principle to state authorities, whose actions had not previously been covered by the Bill of Rights. In doing so, the Court incorporated the relevant provisions of the Fourth Amendment—which only applied to the actions of the federal government, prior to this case—into the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which applies to the actions of individual states.
Saturday, August 2, 2014
How does Barron v. Baltimore tie into Mapp v. Ohio and Weeks v. US?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Why is the fact that the Americans are helping the Russians important?
In the late author Tom Clancy’s first novel, The Hunt for Red October, the assistance rendered to the Russians by the United States is impor...
-
There are a plethora of rules that Jonas and the other citizens must follow. Again, page numbers will vary given the edition of the book tha...
-
The poem contrasts the nighttime, imaginative world of a child with his daytime, prosaic world. In the first stanza, the child, on going to ...
-
The given two points of the exponential function are (2,24) and (3,144). To determine the exponential function y=ab^x plug-in the given x an...
-
The play Duchess of Malfi is named after the character and real life historical tragic figure of Duchess of Malfi who was the regent of the ...
-
The only example of simile in "The Lottery"—and a particularly weak one at that—is when Mrs. Hutchinson taps Mrs. Delacroix on the...
-
Hello! This expression is already a sum of two numbers, sin(32) and sin(54). Probably you want or express it as a product, or as an expressi...
-
Macbeth is reflecting on the Weird Sisters' prophecy and its astonishing accuracy. The witches were totally correct in predicting that M...
No comments:
Post a Comment