Your Right To Vote Is Not In The U.S.A. Constitution & History Of U.S.A. Voting Rights

The Right To Vote Is Not In The U.S.A. Constitution If you’re looking for the right to vote, you won’t find it in the United States Constitution or the Bill of Rights. Two of the most important cases at the Supreme Court this year address voting rights, and both legal controversies focus on the right to vote. But rather than denials of the right to cast a ballot, they address the more subtle forms of manipulation grounded in how votes are counted. Underlying the public discussion of these election law controversies, and many others, is a misunderstanding about the Constitution: the assumption that the right to vote is clearly protected.

Show more

Moore v. Harper questions the constitutionality of attempts to rein in partisan gerrymandering, manipulation of the geographic boundaries of electoral districts to advantage the party controlling the map. Merrill v. Milligan deals with racial gerrymandering, which changes electoral boundaries to advantage one race over another.

The Bill of Rights recognizes the core rights of citizens in a democracy, including freedom of religion, speech, press and assembly. It then recognizes several insurance policies against an abusive government that would attempt to limit these liberties: weapons; the privacy of houses and personal information; protections against false criminal prosecution or repressive civil trials; and limits on excessive punishments by the government.

But the framers of the Constitution never mentioned a right to vote. They didn’t forget – they intentionally left it out. To put it most simply, the founders didn’t trust ordinary citizens to endorse the rights of others.

They were creating a radical experiment in self-government paired with the protection of individual rights that are often resented by the majority. As a result, they did not lay out an inherent right to vote because they feared rule by the masses would mean the destruction of – not better protection for – all the other rights the Constitution and Bill of Rights uphold. Instead, they highlighted other core rights over the vote, creating a tension that remains today.

Relying on the elite to protect minority rights Many of the rights the founders enumerated protect small groups from the power of the majority – for instance, those who would say or publish unpopular statements, or practice unpopular religions, or hold more property than others. James Madison, a principal architect of the U.S. Constitution and the drafter of the Bill of Rights, was an intellectual and landowner who saw the two as strongly linked.

At the Constitutional Convention in 1787, Madison expressed the prevailing view that “the freeholders of the country would be the safest depositories of republican liberty,” meaning only people who owned land debt-free, without mortgages, would be able to vote. The Constitution left voting rules to individual states, which had long-standing laws limiting the vote to those freeholders.

In the debates over the ratification of the Constitution, Madison trumpeted a benefit of the new system: the “total exclusion of the people in their collective capacity.” Even as the nation shifted toward broader inclusion in politics, Madison maintained his view that rights were fragile and ordinary people untrustworthy. In his 70s, he opposed the expansion of the franchise to nonlanded citizens when it was considered at Virginia’s Constitutional Convention in 1829, emphasizing that “the great danger is that the majority may not sufficiently respect the rights of the Minority.”

The founders believed that freedoms and rights would require the protection of an educated elite group of citizens, against an intolerant majority. They understood that protected rights and mass voting could be contradictory.

Scholarship in political science backs up many of the founders’ assessments. One of the field’s clear findings is that elites support the protection of minority rights far more than ordinary citizens do. Research has also shown that ordinary Americans are remarkably ignorant of public policies and politicians, lacking even basic political knowledge.

Is there a right to vote? What Americans think of as the right to vote doesn’t reside in the Constitution, but results from broad shifts in American public beliefs during the early 1800s. The new states that entered the union after the original 13 – beginning with Vermont, Kentucky and Tennessee – did not limit voting to property owners. Many of the new state constitutions also explicitly recognized voting rights.

As the nation grew, the idea of universal white male suffrage – championed by the commoner-President Andrew Jackson – became an article of popular faith, if not a constitutional right.

After the Civil War, the 15th Amendment, ratified in 1870, guaranteed that the right to vote would not be denied on account of race: If some white people could vote, so could similarly qualified nonwhite people. But that still didn’t recognize a right to vote – only the right of equal treatment. Similarly, the 19th Amendment, now more than 100 years old, banned voting discrimination on the basis of sex, but did not recognize an inherent right to vote.

Debates about voting rights
Today, the country remains engaged in a long-running debate about what counts as voter suppression versus what are legitimate limits or regulations on voting – like requiring voters to provide identification, barring felons from voting or removing infrequent voters from the rolls.

These disputes often invoke an incorrect assumption – that voting is a constitutional right protected from the nation’s birth. The national debate over representation and rights is the product of a long-run movement toward mass voting paired with the long-standing fear of its results.

The nation has evolved from being led by an elitist set of beliefs toward a much more universal and inclusive set of assumptions. But the founders’ fears are still coming true: Levels of support for the rights of opposing parties or people of other religions are strikingly weak in the U.S. as well as around the world. Many Americans support their own rights to free speech but want to suppress the speech of those with whom they disagree. Americans may have come to believe in a universal vote, but that value does not come from the Constitution, which saw a different path to the protection of rights.

Opinion Biden says if you’re black and don’t vote for him, you’re not black. He’s right When the popular black radio host Charlamagne tha God told Joe Biden at the end of a spirited but friendly interview that he needed to come back on his show because “We got more questions,” Biden shot back:

“You got more questions. If you have a problem figuring out if you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black.”

Good one, Joe.

As ridiculous as it was to say that to a black radio and TV personality who, among other things, wrote a book he calls a “self-help guide for the hood,” here’s the thing: Biden was right. He just didn’t have the right to say it.

As a political and social liberal — who is also black — I was dismayed that anyone, black or white, voted for Donald Trump in 2016. But I was particularly appalled when I saw anyone black campaign for him. The only person I gave a pass to was Omarosa Manigault Newman — because she, at least, truly had a business reason to vote for the guy who had made her famous on “The Apprentice” and could possibly get something out of his becoming president. And she did — she landed some vague White House job that she eventually quit before writing an unflattering memoir of her brief stint there.

I would be the last black person to suggest that black Americans are a monolithic group who all believe the same things. When it comes to electing the president of the United States, all Americans should care about voting rights, social programs, truthfulness and candor from our leaders, the environment, the meting out of justice, diversity in government offices, and the makeup of the Supreme Court. (As resilient as she is, Ruth Bader Ginsburg cannot live forever.) But when voting rights are subverted, the safety net is attacked, environmental regulations abandoned and income inequality widened, the repercussions hit black people hardest.

Charlamagne was right to remind Biden on his show, “The Breakfast Club,” that Democrats take black voters for granted. That’s true. The Democratic Party has a history of assuming: Who else will black people vote for? And the Republican Party often acts as if it lost black folks from the get-go.

When Trump declared in 2016 at a political rally that black voters should choose him, asking them what did they have to lose, what had the Democratic Party done for them? I marveled, “Nice try.” But at the same time, it was preposterous. The New York Times documented a history of racial bias decades ago at rental properties owned by Trump and his father.

Biden and the Democratic Party are a better choice than Trump and the Republican Party. It’s as simple and sometimes depressing as that. And not voting at all is dangerous. It only ups the possibility that Trump wins. Republicans vote, they don’t stay home. Even in a quarantine.

Race and politics are so odd. President Clinton could possibly have gotten away with saying what Biden said because he was jokingly, affectionately, referred to as the first black president. Clinton seemed to genuinely bond with black folks — a result, I think, of his Southern roots and his effortless ability to bond with everyone, black, white, man, woman, child.

And President Obama, precisely because he is black, could never have gotten away with saying what Biden said because suddenly he would look like a flaming militant.

Biden’s willingness to speak outside the boundaries of political correctness is refreshing. When he yelled at a Detroit auto plant worker (and this was when he was still campaigning for the Michigan primary and needed votes) and refused to placate him on gun rights — “I’m not taking your gun away at all. You need 100 rounds?”— I thought, “Fantastic.” Finally, a candidate stands up to the gun-obsessed.

But Biden went too far this time. And, within hours, he had apologized, saying he should not have been so cavalier. Charlamagne didn’t miss a beat when Biden said it. “It don’t have nothing to do with Trump. It has to do with the fact I want something for my community,” he told Biden. Biden should go back on his show and respond to that.

The 19th Amendment passed 100 years ago today. The evolution of American voting rights in 244 years shows how far we've come and how far we still have to go.

The 19th Amendment was ratified on August 18, 1920, granting women the right to vote. The founding fathers saw voting as a fundamental component of the democracy and perfect union they sought to create.

But women, African Americans, Native Americans, and Asian Americans were systematically denied the right to vote for centuries. Here's a look at how voting rights in America have evolved over the centuries, and what issues remain today.

Women won the right to vote when the 19th Amendment was ratified 100 years ago on August 18, 1920.

Voting is one of America's most cherished democratic liberties, and it has a long and storied history. While the founding fathers saw voting as a fundamental component of the democracy and perfect union they sought to create, the right to vote was denied for many populations for centuries of US history.

In the beginning of the republic, voting was mainly restricted to property-owning white men, which would later be extended to all men. While the right to vote was eventually granted to women with the 19th Amendment in 1920, white women were the main beneficiaries.

Men and women of color would continue to fight to battle discriminatory voting practices for decades even after technically receiving the right to vote, culminating in the historic civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s, which led to landmark legislation that transformed American voting rights.

But even today, activists and civil rights groups are continuing to fight voting laws they argue are discriminatory.

Here's a look at how voting rights in America have evolved over the centuries, and what issues remain today:

1776 and before: Only men who owned property, who were mainly white, Christian, and over 21, have the right to vote.

The earliest settlers of colonial America brought over many of the laws and customs of England with them to the United States. One of those laws stipulated that only "free holding" men, or those who owned property and paid taxes, could vote.

Those men were overwhelmingly white, Protestant, and over the age of 21, meaning only a small subset of the population could vote. Just 6% of those in new America were eligible to vote to elect the first president, George Washington, in 1789.

After the United States of America declared independence from Britain in 1776 and won the Revolutionary War in 1783, it was left up to the individual states as to how to determine who could vote.

Over time, individual colonies and states steadily began expanding the right to vote to all white men, not just property owners.

1848: Abolitionists and pro-women's suffrage groups first meet and organize in Seneca Falls.

In 1848, prominent abolitionist activists such as former slave and author Frederick Douglass and women's suffrage advocates like Susan B. Anthony, Lucretia Mott, and Elizabeth Cady Stanton (pictured) convened together for the first time in Seneca Falls, New York.

The convention, which is now considered the birth of the women's suffrage movement in the US, took place over two days.

The attendees all wrote and signed a Declaration of Sentiments modeled after the Declaration of Independence listing their grievances and demands, calling on women around the country to organize for greater property and economic rights — and the right to vote.

In a play on a famous line from the Declaration of Independence, they wrote: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men and women are created equal."

Just one of the attendees of the convention, Charlotte Woodward Pierce, who was 19 at the time, lived long enough to see all women receive the right to vote in 1920.

1856: The right to vote was extended to all white men.

In 1856, North Carolina became the last state to remove property ownership as a requirement for voting, meaning all white men could vote by this time.

1868: The 14th Amendment grants African Americans citizenship, but not the right to vote.

After the Civil War and the end of slavery, Congress passed the 14th Amendment to extend citizenship to freed slaves. The amendment directs that "no State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States."

This amendment gave freed African Americans citizenship, but they wouldn't get the right to vote for two more years. And even then, Southern states used a variety of tactics to suppress African American turnout for nearly a century afterwards.

1870: The 15th Amendment prevents federal or state governments for denying the right to vote to citizens based on race.

The 15th Amendment to the US constitution directs that 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 of servitude."

While this extended the right to vote to black men in the South, political leaders of post-Civil War Reconstruction and Jim Crow enacted a slew of measures to keep African Americans from the polls.

These included making black voters pass literacy tests, mandating voters to pay a tax to cast a ballot, requiring black voters to get a white person to "vouch" for them, white-only Democratic primaries in Southern states, and outright voter intimidation and violence against African-Americans at the polls.

1872: Activists Susan B. Anthony and Sojourner Truth are arrested or turned away for trying to vote.

Women's suffrage activist Susan B. Anthony was famously arrested along with 15 other women, and prosecuted for attempting to vote in the presidential election of 1872 in Rochester, New York. President Trump pardoned Susan B. Anthony on August 18, 2020.

In Detroit, former slave and fellow activist Sojourner Truth was similarly turned away when she demanded a ballot at her polling place.

The next several decades would see a surge in women's suffrage activism, including marches, lobbying, and more militant methods such as breaking windows of buildings during marches, and going on hunger strikes.

1890: Wyoming becomes the first US state to grant women the right to vote.

Thirty years before voting became a Constitutionally protected right for women, Wyoming first ensured women's suffrage at the state level. While Wyoming enacted partial suffrage for women beginning in 1869, it didn't become a state until 1890.

After Wyoming granted suffrage to women, 18 other states, which were mostly Western and newly admitted to the Union followed suit in granting women the right to vote and serve on a jury of their peers.

Historians argue that places like Wyoming and other Western states were more likely to grant women's suffrage not only because they were newer and more open to embracing equal rights for women, but because such states, which were often sparsely populated, wanted to attract more women to move there.

1920: The 19th Amendment grants suffrage to women, but not all Native American and Asian women have citizenship.

The historic 19th Amendment to the US constitution prohibited states from denying citizens the right to vote based on sex, but many historians note that voting remained inaccessible for women of color for several decades to follow.

While African-American men got the right to vote in 1870 and African-American women in 1920, discriminatory Jim Crow-era voting policies and voter intimidation kept many black Americans from the polls in the American South.

Meanwhile, Native American and Asian-American women were often denied citizenship by the federal government, meaning they could not vote on account of them not being recognized as citizens.

1924: The Indian Citizenship Act is passed, giving Native Americans full citizenship, but many states still disenfranchise them at the polls.

The United States has a long, painful, and complicated history with its treatment of Native Americans, and voting rights is no exception.

In 1876, a federal court ruled that Native Americans could not vote because they were not properly citizens under the 14th Amendment.

Ten years later, Congress passed the Dawes Act, which allowed Native Americans to gain citizenship if they renounced their tribal citizenship, and created a process for Native Americans to apply for naturalization in 1890.

Native Americans and other racial minority groups who had served in World War I were also granted citizenship and the right to vote in the late 1910s.

While Congress granted citizenship to all Native Americans in 1924, many state-level discriminatory policies — such as banning people living on a reservation or enrolled in a tribe from voting, or instituting fees and "competency tests" — kept them from the polls for decades.

1952: The McCarran-Walter Act grants all Asian Americans the right to become citizens and vote.

Beginning in the 19th century, immigrants from Asia began coming to the US for work, but the US federal government systematically denied them citizenship and the right to vote for centuries.

Firstly, the Naturalization Act of 1790 only allowed "free white citizens of good character" to become naturalized citizens. The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 specifically prohibited Chinese immigrants from becoming citizens and voting.

The US federal government granted voting rights to Filipino men who served three years in World War I in 1925, and gradually began naturalizing more and more Asian immigrants.

The McCarran-Walter Act of 1952 finally lifted all restrictions on Asian immigrants becoming naturalized citizens, fully opening up Asian Americans to become citizens and exercise their right to vote.

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 expanded Asian-American voting rights even further by adding protections and accommodations for voters with limited English, such as access to translators and ballots in multiple languages.

1961: The 23rd Amendment gives residents of the District of Columbia the right to vote for presidents, but not Congressional representation.

On many DC license plates you'll see the phrase "taxation without representation" — and it's because residents of the District of Columbia paid taxes, but couldn't vote in presidential elections until the early 1960s.

While DC is allotted three electoral votes in presidential election years, they have no representation in Congress. A 1978 amendment to give DC congressional representatives ultimately failed in Congress.

1965: Congress passes the historic Voting Rights Act, removing discriminatory barriers that kept many people of color from voting.

After decades of hard-fought civil rights activism, Congress passed and President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the landmark Voting Rights Act into law, outlawing several racially discriminatory practices intended to keep people of color from voting.

While the 24th Amendment had already outlawed poll taxes in 1964, the VRA banned literacy tests, which election officials in the South used to keep African Americans — who had disproportionately high rates of illiteracy from centuries of being denied education — from voting.

The VRA also directed the Department of Justice to oversee voter registration efforts in counties where less than half of the African-American population was registered, and required that places with a history of discrimination obtain pre-clearance from the DOJ before implementing any new voting policies.

But the 2013 Supreme Court decision in Shelby County v. Holder rolled back the pre-clearance provision of Section 5 the VRA, which no longer required counties with histories of racial discrimination to be "covered" under the act.

1971: The voting age is lowered from 21 to 18 in light of the Vietnam War to ensure that those old enough to fight could vote.

Congress voted to lower the federal age from 21 to 18 in 1971 by overwhelmingly passing the 26th Amendment to the Constitution.

The change came about largely at the hands of young men drafted to fight in the Vietnam War, who argued that if they were old enough to go to war for their country, they were old enough to have a say in their government.

Today, some argue that the voting age should be lowered even further to 16, given that teenagers not only have a stake in their government, but possess what researchers call the necessary "cold cognition" to logically process facts and make informed decisions.

1993: The National Voter Registration Act is passed, making it easier to register at DMVs and public assistance centers.

The NVRA streamlined the voter registration process by allowing people to register to vote while obtaining or renewing driver's licenses at Departments of Motor Vehicles or other public assistance centers instead of having to apply by mail.

2000: A federal court rules that citizens of US territories like Puerto Rico and Guam cannot vote in federal elections.

While the residents of several US territories such as Puerto Rico, Guam, and the US Virgin Islands pay federal taxes and serve in the military at disproportionately high rates compared to the US general population, they don't have the right to vote in federal elections.

Just months before the 2000 presidential election, a federal appeals court in Boston overruled a decision made in Puerto Rican Federal District Court ruling that Puerto Ricans had the right to vote in presidential elections by virtue of being American citizens.

Since Article II of the US Constitution requires that the president be elected from electors chosen by the states, territories will not be able to elect presidents without a Constitutional amendment allowing them to do so, or by gaining statehood.

US territories elect delegates who they send to Congress to be their voice on Capitol Hill, but those delegates, like the delegates who represent Washington, DC, do not have voting power.

What voting rights issues remain today?
While voting rights in America have come a long way toward ensuring equal ballot access for all, many scholars and activists argue that the overtly racist Jim Crow laws of the past have given way to discriminatory policies, like voter ID laws, cuts to early voting, polling place closures, and limits to pre-registration.

Strict voter ID laws and other restrictions enacted by Texas and North Carolina in the wake of the Shelby County v. Holder were struck down in federal court, with one federal appeals court finding that North Carolina's law targeted "African Americans with almost surgical precision."

Among voting issues and controversies in recent years, in 2018, former Georgia Secretary of State and current Governor Brian Kemp was accused of putting 53,000 voter registration applications "on hold" for mismatched names, and incorrectly purging 340,000 voters from the rolls.

In North Dakota, where most Native Americans who reside on reservations only have a PO box, the US Supreme Court upheld a state law requiring voters to bring an ID to the polls with a residential address. The ruling left Native communities scrambling to obtain proper IDs just weeks before the election.

Along with the predominately non-white citizens of American territories like Guam and American Samoa, almost 6 million taxpaying Americans with felony convictions were barred from voting in the 2018 midterms due to state-level felon disenfranchisement laws.

In November 2018, voters in Florida approved a constitutional amendment overturning the state's disenfranchisement law for good, allowing around 1 million formerly disenfranchised residents to vote. The following year, the Florida Legislature passed a law that requires people with felony convictions to pay off any court fines and fees before they can register to vote, which critics say discriminates against poorer residents who cannot afford to do so. In July 2020, the Supreme Court allowed Florida to keep this law in place — it continues to be appealed.

The Supreme Court is back in session, with new controversial cases that stand to change many Americans’ lives – here’s what to expect Following a dramatic year of controversial rulings, the Supreme Court began hearing new cases on Oct. 3, 2022, with a full agenda.

The court overturned abortion rights and expanded gun rights in June 2022 as the new conservative supermajority began to exert its influence.

Some of the court’s most important upcoming cases focus on the future of affirmative action, equal treatment of LGBTQ people, and the control of election laws. The court will hear the cases in the fall and then likely issue rulings in spring 2023.

As a close observer of the court, I think this term’s rulings will continue to reject the court’s previous liberal decisions and instead reflect a conservative interpretation of the historical meaning of the Constitution. At least three of those upcoming rulings are likely to profoundly influence people’s everyday lives in the United States.

Affirmative action
College admissions and scholarships can alter the trajectory of a life.

College administrators want diverse student populations but are less clear about which categories – including race, ethnicity, gender, sexual identity and wealth – should influence admission and financial aid decisions. When it comes down to the specifics of which people are underrepresented in higher education, and which are overrepresented, the questions become thorny.

Many different groups feel that they are being mistreated when their specific circumstances and histories are taken into account.

The Supreme Court will hear two lawsuits on Oct. 31, 2022, brought by the anti-affirmative action organization Students for Fair Admissions. This group argues that Harvard and other schools blatantly discriminate against Asian students. But the claim is a proxy for all other preferences grounded in identity, including those in favor of Black applicants and those disadvantaging whites.

The two cases – one against Harvard and the other against the University of North Carolina – address private as well as public institutions.

Nine states currently have laws that ban affirmative action in college admissions. The extent and focus of existing diversity policies vary widely.

Universities justifying their diversity policies argue that the 14th Amendment and its guarantee of “equal protection of the laws” encourage giving an advantage to historically oppressed groups.

The opponents of affirmative action argue that the 14th Amendment was meant to uphold racial neutrality, meaning all individuals should be treated the same, regardless of race. In this view, the Constitution forbids considering race in almost any decisions that influence individual advancement.

The core conflict is whether the equal protection clause protects equality or equity.

If is it equality – the same treatment of all races, regardless – this supports the argument that universities may not give preferences to applicants of one race over another.

If the 14th Amendment is found to guarantee equity – or trying to create equal outcomes for all by favoring historically disadvantaged groups – this supports the argument that affirmative action policies are constitutionally sound, and perhaps even required in public institutions.

The current court, with a conservative majority, almost certainly favors the argument that the equal protection clause endorses equality, not equity.

In a 2007 ruling on public high schools, for example, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that “the way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”

LGBTQ equality versus religious liberty
Another major case, 303 Creative v. Elenis, asks the court whether state law can compel a private business to serve LGBTQ clients – or whether the First Amendment protects business owners who violate those laws on religious grounds.

The controversy focuses on a website designer who wants to expand her business to offer personal wedding sites – but not for same-sex couples, as required by Colorado’s nondiscrimination laws.

The case comes close to addressing the long-standing conflict between a person’s free exercise of religion, guaranteed by the First Amendment, and a state’s power to enforce the equal treatment of all citizens.

But the question presented in this case focuses on the website designer’s free speech and artistic expression, rather than the religious motivation at the heart of the conflict.

The court’s recent history of supporting religious liberty suggests that the website designer will prevail.

Who controls election laws
The third major case this term – Moore v. Harper – is about the control of election law and what is known as the independent state legislature theory.

The somewhat arcane question is whether only the U.S. Constitution controls state legislatures’ decisions regarding federal elections rules within their states or whether state constitutions and courts can also oversee the election laws that apply to national elections.

In this case, the court will rule on whether the North Carolina Supreme Court can strike down and replace the Legislature’s congressional map, which the state court found was gerrymandered in violation of the North Carolina Constitution.

In an atmosphere of political distrust and accusations of election fraud, the court will determine who controls federal election law within each state.

The constitutional text on this question is admittedly unclear.

Supporters of the independent state legislature theory argue that because the Constitution states that congressional election rules “shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof,” this power applies solely to state legislatures.

This interpretation means that election rules are not constrained by state constitutions, which often have additional protections of “free and equal” elections, enforced by state courts. Instead, only the U.S. Constitution could constrain state legislatures – and only federal courts, including the Supreme Court, could review these decisions.

Critics of the independent state legislature theory argue that even though the U.S. Constitution tasks state legislatures with overseeing election law, ordinary checks and balances that constrain those legislatures still apply. This would mean that other state officials and state courts maintain their usual role in limiting the power of the legislature, which was not meant to be fully independent.

Concerns about independent state legislatures are partly driven by two fears. One is that if legislatures are truly independent, they may impose discriminatory laws that benefit their party – often Republicans at the state level.

The other fear is that Republican legislatures may attempt to alter the final slate of electors in the 2024 presidential election if former President Donald Trump runs and loses the popular vote in states with GOP legislatures.

This case is partially about trust – whether Americans trust state legislatures or state courts to oversee legitimate elections. And trust among the American public is in short supply.

The year at the court
The outcomes of this term’s cases will deeply influence American lives and values, especially for college applicants, LGBTQ citizens and people with strong religious beliefs.

The state legislature case is the most difficult to understand, and also perhaps the most influential, because it reflects the broader decline of trust in elections and the growing suspicions of fraud along many dimensions. I believe that this case – however resolved – will lower perceptions of the legitimacy of many future election outcomes.

https://bri-wp-images.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/Bill-of-Rights.pdf

The Bill of Rights is one of the three founding documents. It was strongly influenced by the Virginia Declaration of Rights, written by George Mason as well as English documents such as the Magna Carta, the Petition of Right, the English Bill of Rights, and the Massachusetts Body of Liberties.

First 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.

Second Amendment
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.

Third Amendment
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.

Fourth Amendment
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.

Fifth Amendment
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense 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.

Sixth Amendment
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 defense.

Seventh Amendment
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 reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Eighth Amendment
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Ninth Amendment
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Tenth Amendment
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.

Who Wrote the Bill of Rights
The first ten amendments to the Constitution make up the Bill of Rights. James Madison wrote the amendments as a solution to limit government power and protect individual liberties through the Constitution. For example, the Founders saw the ability to speak and worship freely as a natural right protected by the First Amendment. Congress is prohibited from making laws establishing religion or abridging freedom of speech. The Fourth Amendment safeguards citizens’ right to be free from unreasonable government intrusion in their homes through the requirement of a warrant.

Why was the Bill of Rights added to the Constitution?
The Constitution lacked limits on government power. Federalists advocated for a strong national government. They believed the people and states automatically kept any powers not given to the federal government. Anti-Federalists wanted power to remain with state and local governments and favored a bill of rights to safeguard individual liberty.

Madison, then a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, altered the Constitution’s text where he thought appropriate. However, several representatives, led by Roger Sherman, objected, saying that Congress had no authority to change the wording of the Constitution. Therefore, Madison’s changes were presented as a list of amendments that would follow Article VII.

The House approved 17 amendments. Of these, the Senate approved 12, which were sent to the states for approval in August 1789. Ten amendments were approved (or ratified). Virginia’s legislature was the final state legislature to ratify the amendments, approving them on December 15, 1791.

https://www.ushistory.org/documents/amendments.htm

Bill of Rights and Later Amendments
Bill of Rights
Amendment 1 Freedoms, Petitions, Assembly
Amendment 2 Right to bear arms
Amendment 3 Quartering of soldiers
Amendment 4 Search and arrest
Amendment 5 Rights in criminal cases
Amendment 6 Right to a fair trial
Amendment 7 Rights in civil cases
Amendment 8 Bail, fines, punishment
Amendment 9 Rights retained by the People
Amendment 10 States' rights

The Bill of Rights became law on December 15, 1791. On the 150th Anniversary of that historic date, December 15, 1941, this program was broadcast to an estimated 63 million listeners (almost half of the U.S. population).

Later Amendments
Amendment 11 Lawsuits against states
Amendment 12 Presidential elections
Amendment 13 Abolition of slavery
Amendment 14 Civil rights
Amendment 15 Black suffrage
Amendment 16 Income taxes
Amendment 17 Senatorial elections
Amendment 18 Prohibition of liquor
Amendment 19 Women's suffrage
Amendment 20 Terms of office
Amendment 21 Repeal of Prohibition
Amendment 22 Term Limits for the Presidency
Amendment 23 Washington, D.C., suffrage
Amendment 24 Abolition of poll taxes
Amendment 25 Presidential succession
Amendment 26 18-year-old suffrage
Amendment 27 Congressional pay raises

Original Ten Amendments: The Bill of Rights
Passed by Congress September 25, 1789.
Ratified December 15, 1791.

Amendment I
Freedoms, Petitions, Assembly

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.

Amendment II
Right to bear arms

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.

Amendment III
Quartering of soldiers

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.

Amendment IV
Search and arrest

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.

Amendment V
Rights in criminal cases

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; 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.

Amendment VI
Right to a fair trial

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 defense.

Amendment VII
Rights in civil cases

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.

Amendment VIII
Bail, fines, punishment

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Amendment IX
Rights retained by the People

The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X
States' rights

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.

Later Amendments
Amendment 11
Lawsuits against states

The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.

February 7, 1795.

Amendment 12
Presidential elections

The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate;--The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;--The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. [And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President.]* The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.

June 15, 1804.
Superseded by Section 3 of the Twentieth Amendment.

Amendment 13
Abolition of slavery

Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce these article by appropriate legislation.

December 6, 1865.

Amendment 14
Civil rights

Section 1. 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. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

July 9, 1868.

Amendment 15
Black suffrage

Section 1. 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 of servitude.

Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

February 3, 1870.

Amendment 16
Income taxes

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

February 3, 1913.

Amendment 17
Senatorial elections

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislature.

When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.

This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution.

April 8, 1913.

Amendment 18
Prohibition of liquor

Section 1. After one year from the ratification of this article, the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.

Section 2. The Congress and the several States shall have concurrent power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Section 3. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress.

January 16, 1919. Repealed by the Twenty-First, December 5, 1933.

Amendment 19
Women's suffrage

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any States on account of sex.

Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

August 18, 1920.

Amendment 20
Terms of office

Section 1. The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.

Section 2. The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting shall begin at noon on the 3d day of January, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.

Section 3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.

Section 4. The Congress may by law provide for the case of the death of any of the persons from whom the House of Representatives may choose a President whenever the right of choice shall have devolved upon them, and for the case of the death of any of the persons from whom the Senate may choose a Vice President whenever the right of choice shall have devolved upon them.

Section 5. Sections 1 and 2 shall take effect on the 15th day of October following the ratification of this article.

Section 6. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission.

January 23, 1933.

Amendment 21
Repeal of Prohibition

Section 1. The eighteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.

Section 2. The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited.

Section 3. The article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by conventions in the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress.

December 5, 1933.

Amendment 22
Term Limits for the Presidency

Section 1. 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. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this Article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.

Section 2. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission to the States by the Congress.

February 27, 1951.
Amendment 23
Washington, D.C., suffrage

Section 1. The District constituting the seat of government of the United States shall appoint in such manner as the Congress may direct:

A number of electors of President and Vice President equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives in Congress to which the District would be entitled if it were a state, but in no event more than the least populous State; they shall be in addition to those appointed by the States, but they shall be considered, for the purposes of the election of President and Vice President, to be electors appointed by a State; and they shall meet in the District and perform such duties as provided by the twelfth article of amendment.

Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

March 29, 1961.

Amendment 24
Abolition of poll taxes

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

January 23, 1964.

Amendment 25
Presidential succession

Section 1. In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become President.

Section 2. Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.

Section 3. Whenever the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, and until he transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary, such powers and duties shall be discharged by the Vice President as Acting President.

Section 4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.

February 10, 1967.

Amendment 26
18-year-old suffrage

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.

Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

June 30, 1971.

Amendment 27
Congressional pay raises

No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.

May 7, 1992. (Note: Congress submitted the text of this amendment as part of the proposed Bill of Rights on September 27, 1789. The Amendment was not ratified together with the first ten Amendments.)

HISTORIC DOCUMENTS
Magna Carta
The Letter of Columbus to Luis De Sant Angel Announcing His Discovery
The Mayflower Compact
Pennsylvania Charter of Privileges
Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death
The Declaration of Independence
Articles of Confederation
Constitution of the United States
Bill of Rights and Later Amendments
Petition from the Pennsylvania Society for the Abolition of Slavery
To those who keep slaves, and approve the practice
Washington's Farewell Address
The Star Spangled Banner
The Monroe Doctrine
Harkins to American People
Daniel Webster's "Seventh of March" Speech
Lincoln's House Divided Speech
Lincoln's First Inaugural Address
The Emancipation Proclamation
Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address
The Gettysburg Address
The Pledge of Allegiance
The American's Creed
FDR's Infamy Speech
The Economic Bill of Rights
Ask Not What Your Country Can Do For You

https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/white-papers/the-declaration-the-constitution-and-the-bill-of-rights

The Declaration and Bill of Rights reflect a fear of an overly centralized government imposing its will on the people of the states; the Constitution was designed to empower the central government to preserve the blessings of liberty for “We the People of the United States.” In this sense, the Declaration and Bill of Rights, on the one hand, and the Constitution, on the other, are mirror images of each other.

The case of the missing 13th amendment to the Constitution. - https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/the-case-of-the-missing-13th-amendment-to-the-constitution

The Real 13th Amendment restricting lawyers from serving in government was ratified in 1819 and removed from US Constitution during the tumult of the Civil War. -
https://www.let.rug.nl/usa/essays/general/the-missing-13th-amendment/

https://www.thirdamendment.com/8SCIDLJ577.pdf

https://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/mulr/vol94/iss1/5/

If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive or retain any title of nobility or honors, or shall, without the consent of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office or emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them.

This amendment went “missing” right about the time of the war of 1812. Could this be the reason King George burned Washington DC down? No Titles of Nobility. That means no lawyers can hold office. This is huge news that goes pretty much ignored by the mainstream press, however it cannot be ignored. This amendment has been seen and verified in eighteen other states so far, that were published and approved by those State Legislatures as the “official” documents.

Show less