# data[].attributes.body
The Declaration of Independence with the people deserve liberty and freedom and to be happy is far from accomplished in all reality. In America we still have messed up things going on. Like for instance at the southern border we have kids being separated from their families and the president unfairly criticizing people that aren’t white that move from place to place to find better living situations and label them as criminals or rapidly or something that is bad and can ruin their lives. He doesn’t give the kids birthright when they are associated with the people that he gave those titles that aren’t white. The president also sending federal troops back into the place that they left for a reason. But this isn’t the only time that this has happened in America with the dehumanizing or in criticizing people of America that don’t fit the “Racial Look” like whites. Back in the day with slavery in all with the African Americans and slavery are different from now with the illegal immigrants. In the rest of the article they tell the history with slavery and the British and how the African Americans ran for their freedom and did anything for it and how slavery evolved from back then and to the declaration of independence and then segregation and all the black idols like Martin Luther King that changed this world and carved it into something better and we still have our ways to go as a country because we are no where near satisfied with what is still going on in this world and happening in the southern parts of our country.

# data[].attributes.body
In this article they talk about a civil lawsuit that happened with a fatal shooting with someone named Ismael Lopez. Ismael had died by a police officer shooting him in his own home. The attorney that was representing the city and that police officer that had the lawsuit against them came up with the argument that the constitution only protects people that aren’t immigrants and don’t have a criminal record. The lawyers for the Lopez’s thought that was just so crazy to say and so over the line. So the argument that the attorney had she said that he was on America’s soil but wasn’t actually apart of what the constitutional 'We, the People of the United States' so because he was an undocumented immigrant it was okay that he was shot and killed in his own home because the constitution doesn’t apply to him. So basically the rest of the article is basically saying what the Lopez lawyers tried to say and do to prove the guilty of the Constitution nd the officer failing them as citizens and they said the amendment where the law can’t just force its way into an house without evidence or reason, and they kept bringing up good arguments but in the end it didn’t matter because both the wife and the husband that died were undocumented immigrants on U.S soil so it didn’t apply to them.

# data[].attributes.body
In the Bill of Rights most of the amendments are the same for both the state and federal laws but there are a few that are different to both of them such as non-unanimous verdicts in a criminal case. This article is about the supreme court not knowing if they should tolerate having a non-unanimous jury verdict in criminal cases.They had an occurrence in court that they didn’t know how they should treat it because usually it’s not allowed in a federal court room but it’s allowed in the state courtroom and that is under the sixth amendment. It also talks about how states like Louisiana are starting to make everything a non-unanimous jury verdict and anything besides that it bars non-unanimous verdicts and there was a case that they were referring to with Mr.Ramos vs Louisiana in 2016 with him on trial for killing a woman and the verdict came to 10-2. So they amended now that if there is a verdict non-unanimous it would be bar and it didn’t help him because it says only applies to cases from 2018. Oregon is the last state that allows non-unanimous verdicts in criminal cases. So in this article they talk more about people not agreeing how the 6th amendment should be handled either either the states or the federal or just both and people keep going back and forth not knowing if non-unanimous verdicts in criminal cases should be with both or not.