# data[].attributes.body
Look up the Bill of Rights and copy the wording for your amendment

# data[].attributes.body
Use your own words to explain what right(s) this amendment really grants us

# data[].attributes.headline
How can this right be interpreted in different ways and even be controversial?

# data[].attributes.subject
How can this right be interpreted in different ways and even be controversial?

# data[].attributes.body
Almost all of these rights can be controversial or be interpreted in different ways. Explain how your right can have different interpretationslm

# data[].attributes.body
Describe a real case where the crux of this right was challenged in court. Try to choose as current of an issue as you can, or, one that is very famous.

# data[].attributes.headline
Amendment 4: No Illegal Searches and Seizures

# data[].attributes.subject
Amendment 4: No Illegal Searches and Seizures

# data[].attributes.headline
Amendment 6: The Rights of the Defendant

# data[].attributes.subject
Amendment 6: The Rights of the Defendant

# data[].attributes.body
People have rights beyond those mentioned in the Constitution.

# data[].attributes.headline
Keoki Firenze, Grace Kara, Adrian Zapanta

# data[].attributes.subject
Keoki Firenze, Grace Kara, Adrian Zapanta

# data[].attributes.body
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.

# data[].attributes.body
A person may not be tried twice for the same crime and does not have to testify against him/herself

# data[].attributes.headline
Amendment 8: Cruel and Unusual Punishment

# data[].attributes.subject
Amendment 8: Cruel and Unusual Punishment

# data[].attributes.headline
By: Shiven Prasad, Catherine Harvey Guedes

# data[].attributes.subject
By: Shiven Prasad, Catherine Harvey Guedes

# data[].attributes.body
The Third Amendment prevents the government from forcing homeowners to allow soldiers to use their homes.

# data[].attributes.headline
How can this right be interpreted in different ways and even be controversial?

# data[].attributes.subject
How can this right be interpreted in different ways and even be controversial?

# data[].attributes.body
This right can be interpreted in different ways and even being controversial is by having the the granted right to speak freely it can grant them to also speak negatively towards other people or another individual which in some case can be misinterpreted.

# data[].attributes.body
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.

# data[].attributes.body
The 6th Amendment guarantees a person charged with a crime has the right to a speedy trial, an impartial jury, and a lawyer. A speedy trial asserts that the judge may not delay the trial of a criminal. An impartial jury is an unbiased jury from the community or district the crime was committed in. The defendant has a right to a lawyer, the price the defendant pays for the expense of the lawyer varies from state to state; Whether they pay for their own, or are appointed one. The judge and jury will also be told the cause of the accusation, and will be faced with witnesses against and/or in favor of the defendant's case.

# data[].attributes.body
civil cases, or lawsuits based on disagreements between people or businesses, have a right to be decided by a jury in federal court.

# data[].attributes.body
The 9th Amendment grants the rights that are not specifically mentioned in the constitution. It allows for upcoming rights to be protected that had not been previously mentioned.

# data[].attributes.body
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.

# data[].attributes.body
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

# data[].attributes.body
Protects our freedom to speak, write, and express in any form. It also allows us to speak freely through differing publications which will not be supressed.

# data[].attributes.body
Freedom of assembly is the right of individuals to gather peacefully for demonstrations, protests, or meetings without government interference.

# data[].attributes.body
Any power not delegated to the Federal Government by the Constitution (expressed, implied, or inherent) is a power of either the State or the people

# data[].attributes.headline
How can this right be interpreted in different ways and even be controversial?

# data[].attributes.subject
How can this right be interpreted in different ways and even be controversial?

# data[].attributes.body
The 6th amendment can be interpreted in different ways because it does not mention the quality of representation, the government can appoint poor legal representation leading to a less fair trial. Another issue with the trial is the lawyer is appointed during critical stages or during the trial, this can be an issue because the defendant can be taken advantage of during police interrogations or other previous stages.

# data[].attributes.body
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms

# data[].attributes.headline
How can this right be interpreted in different ways and even be controversial?

# data[].attributes.subject
How can this right be interpreted in different ways and even be controversial?

# data[].attributes.body
This right can be interpreted in the way that people can assemble on public property to express themselves and can petition their government through assembly, written petitions, mail, or sent electronically. It can be controversial because it often clashes with concerns about public order, national security, and differing interpretations of free speech.

# data[].attributes.headline
Right Granted: "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."

# data[].attributes.subject
Right Granted: "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."

# data[].attributes.body
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

# data[].attributes.body
All powers denied to the Federal Government and not prohibited to the State are therefore reserved to the State

# data[].attributes.body
In De Jonge v. Oregon (1937), the debate centered around whether Dirk De Jonge's conviction under Oregon's criminal syndicalism law, for participating in a Communist Party meeting, violated his First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and assembly.

# data[].attributes.body
This amendment makes it so people are guaranteed to get a jury, that they do not get tried twice for a crime, and they are protected against self-incriminate.

# data[].attributes.body
The 4th Amendment, ratified in 1791, prevents the government from illegally searching people/houses for the sole reason of thinking they committed a crime (no concrete evidence). The amendment makes it so that the government has to have a warrant to search.

# data[].attributes.body
Clarence Earl Gideon was charged in Florida state court with felony breaking and entering. After appearing in court without a lawyer and requesting for one, his request was denied because according to Florida State law, an attorney may only be appointed to indigent defendants in capital cases. Gideon represented himself and was convicted to five years in prison. He petitioned that his constitutional rights were violated from prison and the Supreme Court unanimously agreed that it was required for state courts to appoint attorneys for defendants who could not afford their own counsel.

# data[].attributes.body
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.

# data[].attributes.body
This amendment ensures that the punishment of a crime is fit to the crime, so there is no excessive bail or cruel and unusual punishment imposed on to those accused.

# data[].attributes.body
The Third Amendment protects people's privacy from soldiers trespassing into their home. Soldiers can only be quartered with permission of the homeowner.

# data[].attributes.body
The second amendment gives the people the right to keep and bear arms for self-defense, protection of their rights, and protection of their property.

# data[].attributes.headline
How can this right be interpreted in different ways and even be controversial?

# data[].attributes.subject
How can this right be interpreted in different ways and even be controversial?

# data[].attributes.body
The language of the 10th Amendment does not specifically state the limitations of the authority of the Federal Government (expressed, implied, or inherent). Consequently, there has been debate over the specific powers given to the State versus Federal Government.

# data[].attributes.headline
How is the 8th Amendment interpreted and controversial?

# data[].attributes.subject
How is the 8th Amendment interpreted and controversial?

# data[].attributes.body
It forbids the use of excessive bails or fines in criminal trials, as well as punishments considered to be “cruel and unusual.”

# data[].attributes.headline
Explanation: Protects our freedom of religion and express our religion.

# data[].attributes.subject
Explanation: Protects our freedom of religion and express our religion.

# data[].attributes.body
Heller, case in which the U.S. Supreme Court on June 26, 2008, held (5–4) that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to possess firearms independent of service in a state militia and to use firearms for traditionally lawful purposes, including self-defense within the home.

# data[].attributes.body
The 4th Amendment can be controversial due to the variance in what a "reasonable" search makes up. The government can manipulate the situation to make the case sound reasonable based on the underlying evidence that has been collected. Also, crimes have changed over the course of the US' life, so we have to interpret what new reasonable crimes may sound like.

# data[].attributes.headline
How is the 9th Amendment Interpreted and Controversial?

# data[].attributes.subject
How is the 9th Amendment Interpreted and Controversial?

# data[].attributes.body
The 9th Amendment can be interpreted in various ways depending on the perspective. Some may see it as the ability for new issues to be resolved and new rights to be granted, while others may see it as a lack of consistency and of a firm definition of our rights. The controversy surrounding this Amendment stems from the debate about whether it has the power to grant rights that weren't mentioned in the Constitution. The amendment does not directly define the rights but it can protect certain rights as they come up.

# data[].attributes.body
Brendlin v. California (2007): Police stopped a vehicle to check for expired tags and recognized the driver, Bruce Brendlin, as a parole violator. He was arrested, and methamphetamine was found on him. Charged with parole violation and possession, Brendlin sought to suppress the evidence, arguing the stop was unjustified because the temporary plates indicated a pending renewal application. The State of California conceded on appeal that the stop was indeed unjustified.

# data[].attributes.body
Everyone has the right to freedom of religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private.

# data[].attributes.headline
How can this right be interpreted in different ways and even be controversial?

# data[].attributes.subject
How can this right be interpreted in different ways and even be controversial?

# data[].attributes.body
The Third Amendment was designed to protect colonists from being forced to house British soldiers, leading up to the Revolutionary War. Thus, this amendment was enacted due to privacy issues/reasons; that individuals are protected from governmental intrusion into their homes. The Third Amendment affects modern days today is through technology - spying.

# data[].attributes.body
Engblom v. Carey was a court case in 1982. The dispute was about the housing of National Guards in worker dorms while they were acting as prison workers during a strike. The course case further solidified the Third Amendment and ruled that National Guardsmen are "soldiers" because they are state employees under the Governor. Therefore, the housing of National Guard in worker dorms was violating the Third Amendment.

# data[].attributes.body
The 7th Amendment gives the right to have a jury decide the outcome of certain cases where people argue about money or property. If the case is about something worth more than $20, you can ask for a jury to help make the decision but once the jury decides, it’s hard to overturn their decision.

# data[].attributes.body
Daryl Atkins kidnapped an Air Force Serviceman at a convenience store and stole $60 from his wallet. Even though he had disabilities, sentencing a person with disabilities to death was unconstitutional under the Eight Amendment.

# data[].attributes.body
In this case, the Supreme Court argued that prior restraint on publication (wanting to terminate a newspaper) violated the First Amendment, more specifically, freedom of the press. (1931)

# data[].attributes.body
Printz v. United States (1997) - The Court held that Congress could not require state agencies to perform federal duties under the Necessary and Proper Clause. They argued that while Congress needs the federal government to regulate commerce directly, the Necessary and Proper Clause does not empower it to compel state CLEOs to fulfill its federal tasks for it in this case.

# data[].attributes.body
United States v. Inman (6th Cir. July 2022)

In this case, after a jury found a defendant not guilty of making false statements but still facing blackmail and bribery charges, the Sixth Circuit rejected a district court ruling that prevented the Government from retrying the defendant. As a reasonable jury may have accused the defendant guilty of bribery or extortion even though they had made false claims, the Court determined that judicial delay did not apply because making false statements is not an essential element of either crime.

# data[].attributes.headline
Case Study(Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Inc. v. Comer 2017): This was a case in which the Supreme Court held that a Missouri program denied a grant to a religious school for playground resurfacing, while providing grants to similarly situated non-religious groups, violated the freedom of religion. The Supreme Court ruled that religious schools had the right to benefit from a state-funded playground-resurfacing program.

# data[].attributes.subject
Case Study(Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Inc. v. Comer 2017): This was a case in which the Supreme Court held that a Missouri program denied a grant to a religious school for playground resurfacing, while providing grants to similarly situated non-religious groups, violated the freedom of religion. The Supreme Court ruled that religious schools had the right to benefit from a state-funded playground-resurfacing program.

# data[].attributes.body
One famous case about the 9th Amendment is Griswold v. Connecticut from 1965. In this case, there was a law in Connecticut that said married couples couldn’t use birth control. The Supreme Court decided this law wasn’t fair because the 9th Amendment protects other basic rights, like privacy, even if they’re not directly written in the Constitution.

# data[].attributes.headline
How can this right be interpreted in different ways and even be controversial?

# data[].attributes.subject
How can this right be interpreted in different ways and even be controversial?

# data[].attributes.body
Amendment 7 can be interpreted differently because people might disagree on what kinds of cases deserve a jury, how much power the jury should have, and whether the $20 rule still makes sense today. Some argue that not all civil cases need a jury, while others think it's a basic right. Courts also debate when it's okay to overturn a jury's decision which makes it controversial in certain situations.

# data[].attributes.headline
How can this be interpreted in different ways or be Controversial?

# data[].attributes.subject
How can this be interpreted in different ways or be Controversial?

# data[].attributes.body
The 5th Amendment can be controversial because some think it would let guilty people go free if incriminating evidence comes up after the trial. People also believe that double jeopardy may make it harder to get justice in cases where there has been misconduct or errors.

# data[].attributes.body
One case where Amendment 7 was challenged is Tull v. United States (1987). In this case, a man named Tull was fined by the government for breaking environmental laws. Tull argued that he had the right to a jury trial to decide if he should pay the fine. The government said he didn’t need a jury because it was a civil case and not a criminal one. The Supreme Court decided that Tull did have a right to a jury to decide if he broke the law, but the judge could still decide how much he had to pay.