# data[].attributes.headline
"The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation"

# data[].attributes.subject
"The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation"

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that the 19th amendment is to truly an example of equality amongst men and women despite the years to come after years of fight women are able to vote, have an opinion and is no longer trapped in a box that seemed to have been created by the generations before. Women no longer belong in the kitchen cooking for their husbands but marching and protesting for their right not only as Americans and as women this is important because it allows more people to vote and separates power so power among
the people does not only depend on men

# data[].attributes.headline
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

# data[].attributes.subject
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

# data[].attributes.body
I think this is important because it gives us a reminder that this country was built by people that migrated to the New World and it opens the opportunity for others to mover here and build a life with equal treatment.
Emily D.

# data[].attributes.headline
"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."

# data[].attributes.subject
"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."

# data[].attributes.body
The fifth amendment is important because it protects our individual liberty from being abused by the government. By making it harder to convict the people of crimes it helps push back the chances of a tyrannical government that can arbitrarily convict us. The fifth amendment says the government cannot punish without legitimately proving the crimes one has been accused of.

Karina Perez :-)

# data[].attributes.body
"The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution..."

This is my most favorite part of the Constitution because it grants Americans the ability to edit the constitution. It shows humility on the Founders part and it allows the Constitution to continuously evolve.

By being able to edit the constitution, rules of the past could be edited to better suit the culture in the future. For example, when they added 13th Amendment which outlawed slavery, or when they ended alcohol prohibition (the 21st Amendment).

# 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.”

I think this is an important part of the U.S. constitution because the ultimate goal of this provision is to protect people’s right to privacy and freedom from unreasonable intrusions from the government. However this does not guarantee protection from all searches, only ones from the government that are unreasonable under the law.

This amendment balances two important key points, with one side being the intrusion of people’s privacy and the other being legitimate government interest such as public safety. If an officer observes criminal activity he may stop an individual to confirm or dispel his suspicions of criminal activity.
Angel Ortiz

# data[].attributes.body
"No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once."

The twenty-second is my most favorite piece of the constitution because of how and when it came about. Many of the framers of the constitution wanted the president to be appointed by congress for a lifetime appointment. Although, this idea was quickly dropped as it will only make the american equivalent of a monarchy, similar to the tyrannical monarchy that america had been freed from. After George Washington served two terms, he declined a third likely in respect to the office and would set this two term trend for all presidents after until Franklin D. Roosevelt. FDR would serve three terms and die before he could finish his fourth. His political foes would eventually ratify the 22nd amendment in 1951 to bring fairness to the amount of time a party may have control over the executive office.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
On November 5, 1940, President Franklin D. Roosevelt won a third term in office-an unprecedented act that would be barred by a constitutional amendment a decade later.

Roosevelt's decision to break the precedent set by George Washington was made in July 1940, as the United States neared its entry into World War II.

The third-term decision dominated his election campaign against the Republican contender, Wendell Wilkie. In the end, Roosevelt won the election by a wide margin, and he was able to win a fourth election in 1944.

But the popular fallout about the concept of a long-term president led to the ratification of the 22nd amendment in 1951.

"No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once," the amendment read, in a clear reference to Roosevelt.

So why were people so upset with Roosevelt's decision to seek a third term, and even more people opposed enough to approve a constitutional amendment?

Franklin Roosevelt wasn't even the first Roosevelt to seek a third term in the White House. His distant cousin, Theodore Roosevelt, ran unsuccessfully as a third-party candidate in 1912, after declining to run in 1908. President Ulysses S. Grant also sought a third term in 1880, but he lacked enough party support to get a nomination.

The first president, Washington, set the two-term precedent in 1796 when he decided to pass on a third term, setting up a scramble between John Adams and Thomas Jefferson in the fall race. (Continue reading from Constitution Daily, the National Constitution Center's Blog)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On November 5, 1940, President Franklin D. Roosevelt won a third term in office-an unprecedented act that would be barred by a constitutional amendment a decade later. Roosevelt's decision to break the precedent set by George Washington was made in July 1940, as the United States neared its entry into World War II.

# data[].attributes.headline
“..But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this Article was proposed by Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President…” 

# data[].attributes.subject
“..But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this Article was proposed by Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President…” 

# data[].attributes.body
22nd Amendment prevents a president from having too much power and from serving more than two terms or more than ten years. I think this is important because it prevents our country from having a monarchy or dictatorship. It also lets a new president go through the office every eight-year. This amendment helps to limit the presidency because, without the prospect of reelection, I think the president would be more likely to do what he or she thinks is best by holding on to their own ideas rather than what is politically popular.

Ping

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

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

# data[].attributes.body
I think the 8th Amendment is important because without it in place, a lot of people would be killed/tortured unfairly if they might not have done that big of a crime.

# data[].attributes.body
“The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition servitude—”

I believe in the Fifteenth Amendment as it would guarantee protection against racial discrimination in voting. It did not only manage to make a drastic change for African-American men to acquire the right to vote, but it also guaranteed voting rights to all American males of all races. While this amendment provided protection to men of all races, it still developed into constructing a voice for women. Hence, this amendment is quite important for not only giving men of all races the right to vote, but allowing women to share their beliefs and voice through protests, allowing for the further development of the 19th amendment.

# data[].attributes.body
“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.”

I think that this amendment is important because, despite the fact that it’s kind of vague pertaining to what certain powers, it reinforces the idea that there are powers that are reserved for the state governments and powers that are reserved for the federal government. I think many people tend to forget about this and end up believing that the federal government has control over things that state governments are supposed to have control over. For example, during this pandemic, how much a state was closed down or whether someone had to wear a mask or where someone had to wear a mask was left to the states for the most part. Many people said that the “government” hadn’t mandated it (referring to the federal government) so they didn't need to wear one, when it was that state governments were the ones setting most of the rules and regulations for their state. It's kind of like some people forgot that state gov have powers as well.
-Lidia Arenas Guerrero

# data[].attributes.body
"No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years...and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen."

I believe that this provision speaks to the core of the American republic and the vision that the founding fathers had for this nation: that being the ability of a people to elect representatives who understand their concerns and are willing to present them in higher institutions of government. In addition, the statement bridges the  gap between people and the political leaders of their respective state, creating a relationship founded on trust and dependability.

-Woenam Amissah

# data[].attributes.body
“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.“

The third amendment is an extremely important amendment because one should always have the right to allow or deny consent to a soldier that wants to be quartered in an individuals home because that demonstrates the privacy that all individuals are allowed to acquire. Without this amendment, people could possibly start to fear living in their own home given that at any time a soldier can go in anyone’s house. Another reason as to why this amendment is important would be that it states even in times of war, soldiers are still prohibited to go in anyone’s home without the peoples  consent. This is important because it means that even in disastrous events (such as wars), one will still be guaranteed to their privacy and war and conflict will not intervene with that. Overall, this amendment simply is saying that the safety of civilians is put first before the safety of soldier’s, which signifies that soldier’s will continue to protect and respect civilians.

Name: Jasline Saldivar

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
a preference for the Civilian over the Military ," the Third Amendment forbids the forcible housing of military personnel in a citizen's home during peacetime and requires the process to be "prescribed by law" in times of war. This Amendment is not considered controversial and has never been litigated before the United States Supreme Court.

# data[].attributes.body
"The Congress shall have power [...] To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or any department or officer thereof."
___________________________________
This has to be one of my favorite excerpts from the US Constitution because it allows for a lot of leeway (and thus discussion) as to what is considered "necessary and proper." It illustrates the ambiguous nature of the US Constitution and how the framers intended it to be so to allow the power of Congress to be ever changing, dynamic, and responsive to the evolving sentiment of what the public believes ought to be considered necessary and proper. Moreover, it amazes me how much bureaucratic power this since clause possess given that this part of the Constitution has given rise to the formation of countless institutions such as the Federal Reserve which (albeit critical to our modern economy) was not requisite of the Constitution.

# data[].attributes.body
“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.“

This is my favorite amendment because it does protect a wide range of people. It protects people against unjust seizure of private property and they will never be put to trial for the same charge, so there can’t be a person constantly going to trial for the same thing. It may be frustrating for the people that actually did commit the crime but for those falsely accused this amendment protects them. People should always have rights and I believe this amendment hold a lot of power.

-Alena Eshe

# data[].attributes.body
" Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."
I think that the 8th amendment is important because it restrains the government's power to inflict punishments that are too harsh. For example, in  Weems vs. United States (1910), Paul Weems was charged with crimes he committed in the  Philippines. He was kept chained throughout his incarceration, sentenced 15yrs of harsh labor and heavily fined. It was because of this amendment, that his sentence was reversed.
Michelle.A.J

# data[].attributes.headline
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of 🤬.

# data[].attributes.subject
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of 🤬.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that the Nineteenth Amendment is the most important because it gave women the right to vote and have a voice in their country. This changed the United States forever.

# data[].attributes.body
"The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it."

The Writ Habeas Corpus as described in the text is used to bring a prisoner or other detainee before the court to determine if detainment is lawful.
---------------------------------------------------------
I believer this is one of the most important piece of the U.S. Constitution due to the fact that it mentions how to handle those who have been detained in cases where there is a rebellion occurring. The Writ of Habeas Corpus saves us from the burden of having criminals on the street. As well as allowing individuals to argue for their right to not be detained. While this section in particular, mentions Taxes the most and the forbidden act of taking out money from the treasury, i believe one of the most important pieces of this section. Due to the right to detain those who have commit wrong, and the inclusion to lift it only under the necessity of public safety.

# data[].attributes.headline
1st Amendment                                          "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
1st Amendment                                          "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
I think this is an important amendment because it protects our right to speak out against anything that you think is absurd. It is also the most important in my opinion because it helps maintain the government. Freedom of speech, press, assembly and the right to petition are something that should be recognized because in some countries you aren't aloud to speak up your mind and you aren't able to have total control of your thoughts.

Yoselin L.

# data[].attributes.body
The words "We the  People of The United States" signals that power belongs to the people of the US, not to congress or state governments. Because back then it did not mean that but meant to specific states at the time. It rejected the compact state idea of Articles of Confederation.  Now it means the people are sovereign, not the legislatures. The Preamble does not grant any power or authority to the government. It helped inspired many such as African American and women, who might have felt excluded and are now a part.
--Erik S.

# data[].attributes.headline
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.

# data[].attributes.subject
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.

# data[].attributes.body
The most important piece of the Constitution, because it gives the tools for the people to exercise the ultimate execution of American values. It allows the people to give substance to their vote, and ideals. Without a people with the ability to water the tree of liberty, the government can do as they please. Much like the government needs a means to enforcing their will, the people need a means to enforce their own.

Johnathan Scheller

# data[].attributes.headline
5th amendment "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in te land  or naval forces ..."

# data[].attributes.subject
5th amendment "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in te land  or naval forces ..."

# data[].attributes.body
in my opinion the 5th amendment is important because it gives you the right to protect yourself from not having to testify against yourself if you"ve accused of comitting a crime. The fith amendment gives you a relevant number of rights that can grand the jury forbids doblr jeopardy and it will proctect you against self-incrimination.
-maria landaverde

# data[].attributes.body
"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."

I think that this is a particularly important portion of the U.S. Constitution because it limits how much power is vested in the government at the federal level. It also allows for flexibility among different states regarding the states' respective infrastructure and legislation. To take more contemporary examples, roads in California are wildly different than those in, say, New York. In Oregon, controlled substances are fully decriminalized as opposed to practically all other states.

# data[].attributes.body
"...no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

I think this is an important piece of the U.S. Constitution because it shows how the framers wanted to make sure the federal government was open to people from all religions, or none at all.

I also like it because it is kind of obscure, and while almost everyone knows about the 1st Amendment and its implications for religious freedom, far fewer people think about Article VI. That makes it more interesting to me.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
After requiring all federal and state legislators and officers to swear or affirm to support the federal Constitution, Article VI specifies that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." This prohibition, commonly known as the No Religious Test Clause, banned a longstanding form of religious discrimination practiced both in England and in the United States. In doing so, it provided a limited but enduring textual constitutional commitment to religious liberty and equality that has influenced the way Americans have understood the relationship between government and religion over the last two centuries.

In England, religious tests were used to "establish" the Church of England as an official national church. The Test Acts, in force from the 1660s until the 1820s, required all government officials to take an oath disclaiming the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation and affirming the Church of England's teachings about receiving the sacrament. These laws effectively excluded Catholics and members of dissenting Protestant sects from exercising political power. Religious tests were needed, William Blackstone explained, to protect the established church and the government "against perils from non-conformists of all denominations, infidels, turks, jews, heretics, papists, and sectaries."

At the time the United States Constitution was adopted, religious qualifications for holding office also were pervasive throughout the states. Delaware's constitution, for example, required government officials to "profess faith in God the Father, and in Jesus Christ His only Son, and in the Holy Ghost." North Carolina barred anyone "who shall deny the being of God or the truth of the Protestant religion" from serving in the government. Unlike the rule in England, however, American religious tests did not limit office-holding to members of a particular established church. Every state allowed Protestants of all varieties to serve in government. Still, religious tests were designed to exclude certain people-often Catholics or non-Christians-from holding office based on their faith.

Today, nondiscrimination is an essential part of religious freedom, and it therefore may seem odd that the state laws and constitutions simultaneously imposed religious tests while also professing to protect religious liberty. Indeed, some critics, such as Thomas Jefferson, condemned religious tests as repugnant to freedom of conscience. But many Americans in the late 1700s and early 1800s apparently did not view religious tests and religious freedom as inherently contradictory. Some argued that religious tests did not violate freedom of religious conscience because no one had an obligation or entitlement to hold public office. Office-holding, in other words, was a privilege, not a right. Americans thus allowed minority religions to practice their faith while insisting that government power must be reserved for and could only be trusted to Protestants.

Notwithstanding this almost unanimous state consensus, the Framers of the federal Constitution prohibited religious tests for federal office-holding. It is not clear why they did so. There is little record of debate about this provision or discussion as to its merits at the constitutional convention. We do know that the ban on religious tests was controversial during the ratification debates, sometimes evoking passionate criticism of its inclusion in the Constitution. It was elementary to some opponents of the ban that "a person could not be a good man without being a good Christian." Even as prominent a proponent of ratification as John Jay had demonstrated strong support for the use of religious tests within his own state.

Supporters of the Constitution defended the prohibition against test oaths as advancing religious freedom and protecting less politically powerful faiths against discrimination. They also argued that laws requiring religious tests were futile. Men without principles would easily evade the laws' purpose through sham compliance while honest men who followed the dictates of their conscience would be barred from office. The difficult question was how these arguments could be reconciled with the widespread acceptance of religious tests throughout the states.

There is very little case law interpreting the No Religious Test Clause. The foundational ideas of religious liberty and equality, which are intrinsic to the rejection of religious tests, have been developed far more fully in cases interpreting the Free Exercise Clause and the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Thus, the Supreme Court has never held that the Clause applies to state as well as federal office-holding. In other words, unlike most parts of the Bill of Rights, the ban on religious tests has not been formally applied against the states (or "incorporated") under the Fourteenth Amendment. But in Torcaso v. Watkins (1961), the Supreme Court unanimously held that religious tests for state office-holding violate the religion clauses of the First Amendment. "[N]either a State nor the Federal Government can constitutionally force a person 'to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion,'" the Court declared. "[N]either can constitutionally pass laws or impose requirements which aid all religions as against non-believers, and neither can aid those religions based on a belief in the existence of God as against those religions founded on different beliefs."

In a related case, McDaniel v. Paty (1978), the Supreme Court invoked the First Amendment to strike down state laws prohibiting clergy from holding office. Such a disqualification from holding office, the Court explained, unacceptably abridged religious liberty. Here again, the fact that these religion-related exclusions were adopted by many states both before and after the Constitution's ratification did not persuade the Justices that such burdens on religious liberty were permissible.

As is true of virtually all constitutional provisions, the No Religious Test Clause in Article VI only restricts governmental action. Private citizens do not violate the Constitution if they vote against a political candidate because of his or her religion. A harder question, which has provoked considerable contemporary debate, is whether the Clause extends beyond a ban against oaths and prohibits government officials from taking the religious views of an individual into account in selecting or confirming that individual for a federal position-such as an appointment to the Supreme Court.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
After requiring all federal and state legislators and officers to swear or affirm to support the federal Constitution, Article VI specifies that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."