# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
5th Amendment 1.The 5th amendment 1791, passed by congrass september 25,1 ....The 5th Amendment.The Fifth Amendment.Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the ....Fifth Amendment Activities | United States Courts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The AR-15 semiautomatic rifle has been called "America's gun," but it also has a dark history.

Credit: Shutterstock

A former Supreme Court justice is calling for its repeal. One in five Americans want to see it go. The president has come out swinging in its defense.

The Second Amendment has emerged as a dubious target in the U.S. gun debate after a March 27 New York Times op-ed by former justice John Paul Stevens suggested that repealing the amendment would be a "simple" way to move toward gun law reform. A survey conducted in February by The Economist and YouGov found that 21 percent of Americans favor repealing the Second, which reads "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." [ 5 Milestones in Gun Control History]

President Donald Trump tweeted in response that "THE SECOND AMENDMENT WILL NEVER BE REPEALED," while many activists for gun-law reform said that repeal was not a goal.

"I think a proposal to amend the Constitution to substantially change the Second Amendment would more likely be used by the NRA [National Rifle Association] to galvanize their supporters and maybe even engage less active gun owners," Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI) told The Atlantic.

So that's modern politics. But what of Stevens' assertion that repeal would be "simple?" There's historical precedent for that. Only one constitutional amendment has ever been enacted to repeal another. The Twenty-First Amendment, ratified in 1933, repealed the Eighteenth Amendment, ratified in 1919, which had instituted Prohibition.

The Eighteenth Amendment prohibited the manufacture, sale or transportation of "intoxicating liquors," but the resulting explosion in black markets, bootlegged liquor and organized crime turned public opinion against Prohibition, according to The National Constitution Center.

Public support for the Eighteenth Amendment was never particularly overwhelming anyway, according to The Mob Museum in Las Vegas. In 1922, just three years after the ban on alcohol went into effect, 20 percent of people wanted to see the Eighteenth Amendment repealed, and 40 percent wanted to see modifications to the Volstead Act, the legislation designed to enforce the amendment, according to the museum's online Prohibition history.

By the late 1920s, public opinion was increasingly souring on Prohibition, especially after the 1929 Saint Valentine's Day Massacre, the execution-style killing of seven members of Chicago's North Side Gang. According to the Mob Museum, even Prohibition advocates were over the Eighteen Amendment: Pauline Sabin, the first female member of the Republican National Committee and a former advocate of Prohibition, switched sides in 1929 and started campaigning for repeal. It would be a bit like Wayne LaPierre, the executive vice president of the National Rifle Association, suddenly deciding to oppose the Second Amendment today.

Meanwhile, as the Great Depression sent unemployment skyrocketing and shantytowns named "Hoovervilles" after President Herbert Hoover popped up around cities, anti-Prohibition advocates declared that repealing the Eighteenth Amendment would open up new sources of revenue for the government and new sources of employment for the destitute.

"By repealing an experiment which, however rightfully intentioned, has failed with lamentable consequence, we should raise vast revenues for the government, we should greatly help agriculture, we should substantially decrease unemployment." John J. Raskob, the chairman of the Democratic National Committee at the time, was quoted as saying in a 1931 economic report. (That report concluded that repeal would bring in almost $1 billion to the federal treasury annually.)

In 1932, Franklin Roosevelt campaigned, in part, for repeal, also using the economic argument for taxing alcohol sales. He won handily over Hoover, who was widely blamed for the Great Depression. The now Democrat-controlled House and Senate started plotting out the Twenty-First Amendment shortly after the election.

Article V of the Constitution provides two paths to amending the Constitution. The first requires two-thirds of state legislatures to call a Constitutional Convention. The Twenty-First Amendment went the second route: Congress called for the amendment with a more than two-thirds majority vote, sending it to the states, which were required to hold referendum votes. These votes would then bind delegates to a convention in each state, where there were straight yes-and-no votes on whether to approve the amendment. According to the Mob Museum, the goal was to avoid "dry" state representatives from holding up the amendment.

The process moved swiftly. Congress passed the repeal of Prohibition on Feb. 21, 1933. Utah approved the amendment on Nov. 7, 1933, providing the necessary two-thirds majority to send it back to Congress, which ratified the amendment on Dec. 5, 1933.

Original article on Live Science.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Easy Would It Be to Repeal the 2nd Amendment? History Has an Answer

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A former Supreme Court justice is calling for its repeal. One in five Americans want to see it go. The president has come out swinging in its defense. The Second Amendment has emerged as a dubious target in the U.S.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
ENO staff brings treats to lunch with 1st Amendment review Friday

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Third Amendment to the United States Constitution was adopted in 1791. It is part of the Bill of Rights, which is made up of the first ten amendments.

It says that people can't be forced to house soldiers in their homes during peacetime. During wartime, soldiers can only be housed in people's homes according to law.

Although the amendment seems outdated today, it was very important to the American people when the Constitution was signed.

What does the Third Amendment say?
"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."
Why was the Third Amendment needed?

You might wonder why the Third Amendment was even included in the Constitution. A whole amendment about soldiers living in people's homes? Was it really that big of a problem?

Actually, yes. Remember that before American independence, the colonists were ruled by the British. In 1765, the British government passed something called the Quartering Act.

The Quartering Act required the colonies to house British soldiers in barracks provided by the colonies. If barracks were not available, the soldiers could live in inns, stables, or uninhabited houses and barns.

The Quartering Act meant that the colonies were responsible for supplying food and shelter to British soldiers. The colonists were angry because it meant that their taxes were paying for British soldiers.

Sometimes, the soldiers would even live in the colonists homes. Some houses had multiple soldiers, making space limited. The colonists were also expected to feed the soldiers, which could get expensive. Plus, the soldiers were not always kind to their hosts.

This practice continued during the Revolutionary War, with colonists being forced to shelter and feed soldiers if asked.

So, when creating the Constitution, the American people wanted to make sure that this could never happen again. Soldiers could only live in people's homes during wartime, when national security was the most important priority.

Does the Third Amendment matter today?

Today, the Third Amendment is the least used constitutional amendment. In fact, the Supreme Court has never based a ruling on this amendment.

Since the Revolutionary War, few wars have been fought on American soil. In addition, our modern government provides housing for U.S. soldiers.

Still, some people argue that the Third Amendment shows the importance of an individual's right to privacy.

They say the Third Amendment implies that the government should not intrude into people's homes or their family and personal lives.

The amendment is also the only part of the Constitution that talks about the relationship between the military and individuals.

Some legal scholars have suggested that the amendment can apply to the militarization of the police and to the government's response to natural disasters and terror attacks.

Other Interesting Facts About the Third Amendment

Founding Father Patrick Henry said that the quartering of soldiers was "one of the principal reasons for dissolving the connection with Great Britain." It was an extremely important issue to the colonists.

The U.S. government did house soldiers in private homes during the War of 1812 and the Civil War.

The Third Amendment is sometimes called the "runt piglet" of the Bill of Rights, but its historical significance remains.
Bill of Rights

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Third Amendment to the United States Constitution was adopted in 1791. It is part of the Bill of Rights, which is made up of the first ten amendments. It says that people can't be forced to house soldiers in their homes during peacetime.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Your Right Against Unreasonable Searches and Seizures

Michigan Fourth Amendment Litigation

CALL US TODAY AT 248-850-5824

Think of the Fourth Amendment as Your Personal Right to Privacy

Some would argue that the Fourth Amendment is what makes America the greatest country in the world. Think of the Fourth Amendment as your personal right to privacy. The Fourth Amendment prohibits the government from any unwanted interference in your personal affairs (from stopping you while walking down the street, to coming into your house, to searching your other personal belongings) without probable cause - or reasonable suspicion of ongoing criminal activity, in rare circumstances. It is Michigan Litigation Law's goal to ensure that all Americans understand their rights, and develop a true understanding of why it truly is so great to be an American!

The Fourth Amendment provides you the following rights:

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.

In May of 2018 the United States Supreme Court, in a unanamous decision, opined that "[f]ew protections are as essential to individual liberty as the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures." Byrd v. United States, 584 U.S. ___ (2018). The Court explained that "[t]he Framers made that right explicit in the Bill of Rights following their experience with the indignities and invasions of privacy wrought by "general warrants and warrantless searches that had so alienated the colonists and had helped speed the movement for independence." Chimel v. California, 395 U. S. 752, 761 (1969). Ever mindful of the Fourth Amendment and its history, the Court has viewed with disfavor practices that permit "police officers unbridled discretion to rummage at will among a person's private effects." Arizona v. Gant, 556 U. S. 332, 345 (2009)."

When Can the Police Stop and/or Search you Without a Warrant?

What Can you Do if Your Rights Were Violated?

Things to Watch out For Regarding Warrants:

In the News:

Michigan Fourth Amendment Rights:

The Fourth Amendment protects your right against government intrusion. The Fourth Amendment has been interpreted by the United States Supreme Court to provide you with a general right to privacy. Of course, the plain language of the Fourth Amendment forbids the government (usually the police) from seizing or searching your "person" - aka "Stop and Frisk", and also forbids the government from seizing or searching your home, any of your personal property (your effects), and your papers (letters, text messages, etc.).

The plain language of the rule states that the government may not search or seize your person, house, papers, or effects without probable cause, however, the Supreme Court has created an exception in the case of "Stop and Frisk" and allows the police to stop individuals who the police "reasonably suspect" is involved in "ongoing" criminal activity.

These rules are very important, and not that difficult to learn yourself. However, these rights are regularly violated by the police, and usually no one hears about it unless the evidence is "suppressed" in a court hearing. However, there are numerous occasions in which nothing is found to "suppress" and Michigan Litigation Law plans to put an end to this.

If the police have recently stopped you while walking or driving, and failed to provide a legitimate reason for stopping you - for example, claiming there was a report of innocent conduct, like someone knocking on a door in the area - remain calm and comply with everything the officers order you to do. You are of course welcome to assert your rights, however, dealing with the police can be an unpredictable experience, and Michigan Litigation Law would suggest remaining calm, complying with the officers' orders, and calling us at Michigan Litigation Law at your first possible chance.

Any time the government violates your Fourth Amendment rights, not only will any evidence found be suppressed in any subsequent criminal prosecution, but Congress provided for a civil cause of action, known colloquially as a "1983 action."

Michigan Litigation Law is an expert in 1983 litigation and has a unique specialty in the area of illegal "stop and frisks." The United States Supreme Court just recently reaffirmed in 2016 that a "stop and frisk" conducted without "reasonable suspicion of ongoing criminal activity" allows for monetary damages. Thus, even if a misdemeanor was reported having occurred in the past, the police have no right to stop you.

Call a Michigan Fourth Amendment Attorney

CALL US TODAY AT 248-850-5824

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Your Right Against Unreasonable Searches and Seizures Some would argue that the Fourth Amendment is what makes America the greatest country in the world. Think of the Fourth Amendment as your personal right to privacy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A quick guide on how the 7th Amendment is your best friend as a consumer.
We all love the constitution. It's the awesome 230 year-old document that sets the U.S. apart from all other countries. It's the foundation of our country and that's why we want to talk to you a little bit about the 7th Amendment.

We all know the 1st, 2nd, 13th, 15th and 19th Amendments pretty well. But do you know the rest of them? More specifically, are you really familiar with the 7th Amendment?

If your answer is no, keep reading to learn more about this awesome amendment as we answer the when, what and why the 7th is important.

When was the 7th Amendment passed: 1791.
What the 7th Amendment says:
What the 7th Amendment means: It guarantees every American's right to jury trial, made up of our peers, for civil cases valued at $20+ dollars (and it also prevents the courts from overturning a jury's finding of facts, but this blog isn't going to focus on that so much).

Why is the 7th Amendment important: The right to a jury trial is an essential part of a fair and just society. In addition, it means the wrongdoings of a company - like Wells Fargo opening fake accounts in your name - can't hide from the public if someone tries to hold them accountable. It also means that you can join together with other people harmed by Wall Street to bring them to justice through a "class action" suit, which would otherwise be unaffordable for a single person.
How the 7th Amendment is being threatened:
If you've been keeping up with the news lately, you'll have noticed Congress held several recent hearings on Equifax and Wells Fargo. These companies were under scrutiny by the public for abusing their powers and taking advantage of American citizens for the sake of profit - and keeping it out of the news via subverting the 7th Amendment.

How? Part of their contracts include using mandatory arbitration agreements so they can prevent consumers from joining together to take them to court over their wrongdoings. They use the arbitration process to have 100% control over the legal system - they can pick the location, the time, and sometimes even the arbiter - and 9 times out of 10, win. And, since arbitration is private, that's why it took the public years to find out about Wells Fargo's fraudulent bank accounts.

Your 7th Amendment right to jury trial is taken away via forced arbitration if you've signed this kind of contract. The 7th Amendment is your best friend as a consumer because it allows you to hold companies accountable for any harm they have caused you - and once your 7th Amendment rights are stripped away, your chances of seeking justice are practically nonexistent.

What you can do to protect our 7th Amendment: Sign our petition TODAY letting Coloradan lawmakers know that forced arbitration clauses are a serious problem and it's time to address them >>

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A brief guide to the 7th Amendment - and how it may end

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A quick guide on how the 7th Amendment is your best friend as a consumer. We all love the constitution. It's the awesome 230 year-old document that sets the U.S. apart from all other countries. It's the foundation of our country and that's why we want to talk to you a little bit about the 7th Amendment.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Sixth Amendment contains rights beyond the well-known right to an attorney in criminal matters. There are six constitutional rights in the Sixth Amendment. They are procedural rights designed to protect an individual's inalienable natural rights of life and liberty found in the Declaration of Independence.

The Sixth Amendment is part of the Bill of Rights, passed by the First Congress in 1789, completing a promise of the proponents of the Constitution regarding limits on the Federal government to be added once the Constitution was ratified. The Bill of Rights was ratified in 1791.
The Sixth Amendment
The Sixth Amendment reads:
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 where in 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.
A summary of Sixth Amendment rights:

Originally these rights were only guaranteed to persons charged with federal crimes. The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment has extended these rights to cover state criminal proceedings.
Speedy Trial
The right to a speedy trial has been defined by statute in most jurisdictions, placing time limitations during which a criminal trial must take place, or else the charges must be dismissed.

Time calculations are often complicated. A defendant may waive his speedy trial rights, or may waive it in stages. If the defendant delays a trial, the time that passes does not count against the time defined by speedy trial statutes. There is a four part test to determine if speedy trial rights have been violated:

Length of Delay: A delay of a year or more from the date on which the speedy trial right "attaches" (the date of arrest or indictment, whichever first occurs) was termed "presumptively prejudicial"

Reason for the delay: The government may not delay a trial for its own benefit, but a trial may be delayed for the testimony of an absent witness or other practical reasons.

Time and manner in which the defendant has asserted his right: If a defendant agrees to a delay or causes it himself when the delay is beneficial to the defendant, he cannot later claim violation of his speedy trial right.

Degree of prejudice to the defendant by the delay.

Public Trial
The public trial right is not absolute. The prosecution or defense may request a closed trial. The right to a public trial must be balanced against the right to a fair trial. If the court finds a public trial will interfere with the trial's fairness, the proceedings may be closed. These are rare circumstances.
Impartial Jury
The jury trial right depends upon the offense charged. Charges with a potential penalty of less than six months in jail, carry no right. The place of the trial and the jurors are to be selected from the area where the crime was committed.[1]

An impartial jury consists of unbiased individuals, and the jury selection process of voir dire, allows the prosecution and defense to question potential jurors in an effort to discover juror bias. An attorney may challenge a juror's service for bias, and if the judge agrees that juror will not be on the jury. Voir dire is a complex process designed to select a jury that does not favor either side.
Notice of Accusation
After bond has been set, typically the first formal court proceeding after an arrest is an arraignment. At arraignment the defendant is told of the charges in the indictment. The indictment must allege all elements of the crime with such precision that the defendant would be able to avoid double jeopardy if he were to be prosecuted at a later date for the same actions.
Confrontation and Subpoena of Witnesses
This provision is commonly known as the "confrontation clause". The defendant's right to question witnesses against him grows out of the rule against hearsay. Hearsay is a statement made out of court about a fact relevant to the case by someone other than the person testifying. Since the defense cannot challenge the credibility of the person not in court, hearsay cannot be used in court.

A defendant can have the court order witnesses to appear for the defense. A court will issue a subpoena for defense witnesses upon request.[2]
Counsel or Attorney
The courts have ruled that a defendant has the right to an attorney once judicial proceedings have begun against him. The extent to which this right is in effect has been expanded over time. A critical case in expanding the right to counsel was Gideon v. Wainwright in which an indigent man wrote the Supreme Court from a Florida prison about how he was convicted without counsel. That case extended the right to counsel to state courts, resulting in the system of Public Defenders throughout the country.

The right to counsel has also been incorporated into the well-known Miranda warnings along with the Fifth Amendment 's right to remain silent.
Natural Law Rights and Positive Law Rights
Sixth Amendment rights are positive[3] law rights, created to protect the natural law rights of life and liberty[4]. If the government is attempting to punish someone by taking away their liberty[5] Sixth Amendment procedures must be followed for the actions of the government to be legal.[6]

[1] A defendant may request a "change of venue" if there is evidence that he would be unable to get a fair trial in the place where the crime took place.

[2] The court may require the defense to show the witnesses are relevant to the case before issuing the subpoena.

[3] There is the common law, which is the accumulation of judicial opinions. Positive law has been written by a legislature as a statute or ratified as part of a constitution.

[4] The right to benefit from the fruits of one's labor is a natural right as well. If, as punishment for a crime, the government seeks to impose a fine, the government is moving to seize a person's property. Sixth Amendment procedures exist to protect an accused property rights as well.

[5] Or in the case of a capital offense, execute him and take away his life.

[6] The duty of defense counsel is to be certain that the government follows the law.

Comments

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Sixth Amendment, One Amendment, Six Constitutional Rights

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Sixth Amendment contains rights beyond the well-known right to an attorney in criminal matters. There are six constitutional rights in the Sixth Amendment. They are procedural rights designed to protect an individual's inalienable natural rights of life and liberty found in the Declaration of Independence. The

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Eighth Amendment is very short in words, but very important. It states that "excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel or unusual punishments inflicted." For each crime committed, excessive bail cannot be imposed. So for a relatively simple crime such as theft of a small object they cannot order you to pay bail of millions of dollars, a few hundred would be more likely. The same is said for excessive fines. Traffic court cannot give you a fine of a week's pay for running a stop sign. 62

The last part is even more important. Cruel and unusual punishment means that you cannot be punished for your crimes in completely exorbitant ways. The courts are not permitted to tie you to pole and whip you. They are not permitted to slowly lower you into boiling oil, or things of that nature. Punishment is handed out in civilized ways, imprisonment or loss of freedoms.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
8th Amendment - Citizenship for New Applicants

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Eighth Amendment is very short in words, but very important. It states that "excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel or unusual punishments inflicted." For each crime committed, excessive bail cannot be imposed.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Date Ratified: December 15, 1791

Era: Launching the New Nation (1789-1816)

Overview: The ninth amendment of the U.S. Constitution was passed on December 15, 1791 as a part of the Bill of Rights. It is the broadest description of all in the Bill of Rights stating that those rights not listed in the Constitution are also protected by the government. So, people do, in fact, have many other rights even though not directly enumerated in the Constitution.

Impact on US History: This was highly significant to U.S. history because it prevented the government from taking away any other natural rights earned by citizens. However, since this was not written very specifically, people have claimed certain rights over the years that have been denied by the government. This was important to point out that not all of these "rights" were safe or moral, so it was the government's duty to make this amendment more specific throughout our history.

Impact on Today: Our lives today have changed as a result of the ninth amendment because we now have the freedom to do almost anything we choose, as long as it is not something dangerous affecting the well-being of others.

Justification: I selected this amendment because this shows how brilliant the founding fathers were when creating this new constitution. After carefully studying previous history, they decided it was possible for our government to be oppressive to citizens in the future, similar to today with taxes, so they gave us more rights the government cannot take away. People are meant have a feeling of security in our nation as it is a democracy after all.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
9th Amendment - Top 15 Influences On Today

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Date Ratified: December 15, 1791 Era: Launching the New Nation (1789-1816) Overview: The ninth amendment of the U.S. Constitution was passed on December 15, 1791 as a part of the Bill of Rights. It is the broadest description of all in the Bill of Rights stating that those rights not listed in the Constitution are also protected by the government.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
National Constitution Center - The 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
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.