The fourth revision bill initially forced the notion that "everyone's house is his castle" to ensure that the government searches unlawfully for property and forfeits. It prevents arbitrary arrests and forms the basis of laws related to search warrants, smoking cessation and search, security checks, eavesdropping and other forms of surveillance and is the center of many other criminal laws and privacy protection laws. We must not infringe the right to protect the security of people in personnel, dwelling, documents and influences, and should not violate unfair search and seizure and shall not issue any warrant. Place, sealed person or thing However, the focus of the fourth revision and the fifth revision is different. The fourth amendment will protect the freedom of privacy and interests of individuals and prevent unfair interference by the state. In addition, the default metric for the validity of the fourth revision is based on the assurance of possible causes 230 The possible cause of this standard is to ensure that there are some individual suspicions to prove interference 224. Arizona v. Gant, 556 US 332 (2009 court, for example, limits the ability of the police to search the car of the accused - the arrest incident - as a result the accused is still arrested while in the car's room, There was a reason to believe that there was evidence of the accused 's arrest on the vehicle. Most of the criticisms on the Patriot Act are seems to be a violation of Article 4 of amendment. The 4 th revision prohibits government officials from doing 'unfair search and seizure'. Normally, in the fourth amendment, law enforcement officials seek to obtain arrest warrants for possible reasons before searching for their homes. If you suspect that the target is a foreign spy, please relax the FISA standard. The Patriot Act legislates these standards further. American Civil Liberties Union and other organizations began intense exercise against the law of the Patriot and challenged some of the provisions of the Federal Court. The report of the American Citizen Freedom Association 's 2009 report "Returning to patriotism: seeking reconsideration of the Patriot Act" wrote as follows. "The Patriot Act infringed our most basic rights, checking and balancing the Constitution." Instead of limiting the fourth amendment, I will consider identifying possible causes and issuing warrants instead of following federal statutory regulations. However, these ordinary things are very important to my hypothesis. In other words, the story established by the court - from bad actors / bad behavior patterns to good fellow actionists / allowed patterns of action - pushed up our legal system to constitute an acceptable police conceptual behavior The reform of the story led to a bill contradicting somewhat contradicting the wording and interpretation of the fourth revision. This view doubts whether the September 11 terrorist attacks were used by the opportunistic legislature to abolish the founder's freedom. A balanced field: a new exclusion theory on post-PATRIOT law, American Christian Halliburton

The Fourth Amendment was written in the late 1700s due to strong support for aid and general warrants. Writs Assistance gives officials the right to enter property of every family without reasonable excuses. (Grolier Encyclopedia) On December 15, 1771, the fourth amendment was approved in the Bill of Rights. The amendment will protect people's rights to privacy and security. (Encarta Online) The fourth amendment states that "We must not infringe on the safety right concerning its personnel, residence, documents and influence and should not infringe unfair search and foreclosure. Supported by vows and oaths The fourth revision was written for applying to physical search rather than electronic search. With the advent of new technology, the court tried to apply the fourth revision to the electronic data, but as a result, the influence of the revision was diluted. Below are some of the relevant rulings applicable to intercepting communications related to non-government intelligence agencies. Olmsted v. United States (1928) is an early ruling that the Supreme Court did not acknowledge that eavesdropping by the government is "search" or "detention" because wire transfers were eavesdropped outside the suspect's home and there was no real violation . . It's a place. Therefore, the court stated that the fourth amendment does not apply and that the Fed does not need to agree to acquire arrest warrants or wiretapped suspects' home. After that, the ruling was overturned in the next incident. The rights of the 4th and 5th revisions are in the hot spot. The fourth revision is a clear counterattack to protect our privacy. But what if a person gets data from his pacemaker? Where are the regulations of HIPPA falling? Equipment that a person must use to maintain life can be used in the court to prove that they are guilty. Is this consistent with the fifth amendment, the right of a person not to prove his sin? In another strange case, people use the information stored in smart tanks and use them to challenge their absence from crime scenes of criminal cases. "Is this different from extracting data from a computer equipped with a car," people insisted. You can have your own car, it is not a third party. But is Fitbit looking at the open field for the police?

The rights of US citizens may not be rejected or deleted by the United States or other countries, depending on gender. Article 19 of the amendment to the US Constitution is known to prohibit American citizens from voting for sex reasons. More specifically, it gives women the right to vote. The nineteenth amendment occurred because women's suffrage campaigns of the United States fought women's voting rights at the state level and at the national level. The 19 th revision proposal basically dismissed the unanimous decision of the former Supreme Court - the 14 th revision proposal did not specify that it is legal for women to vote in elections. Senator Aaron A. Sargent first proposed Congress' 19 th revision in 1878, but was not approved until 1920. The 19 th revision bill states that the US Constitution prohibits US citizens from being deprived of voting rights based on gender. The 19 th revision is an important turning point for many women in the United States. It gives women the freedom they did not have before. Before this revision proposal was passed, many women did not explain themselves and could not judge with male characters. It was until the 19 th revision of 1920 was passed. The amendment gives women power, giving them social justice and many political rights. Before 1920, women did not have the right to vote. They are called "second-class citizens". Women are at home to help and organize the necessities of their families. I have something ... See more content The 19 th revision is a very important amendment to the Constitution as it gives the women the right to vote in 1920. As you can imagine, in the 15th amendment, the federal government or state government denies that the voting rights of US citizens are illegal. For some reason, this does not apply to women. The 19 th revision proposal changed this practice by treating all citizens illegally as a voting right regardless of gender. A campaign that allows women to vote through the 19 th revision is a campaign for voting rights. You may have heard of women who are important players of Suffrage movement, such as Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cadistanton. The voting right continues since the civil war, but the revision of 13th, 14th, 15th does not cover women's voting rights. These women will be the first authors of the 19 th revision, although it will take forty years to consider the ratification of the 19 th revision.

In the 2008 lawsuit in the District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court revised the second amendment to protect the rights of individuals possessing firearms unrelated to military service, for traditional legitimate purposes such as self-defense at home We decided to use weapons for. " The second amendment is unique in that it is the only revision of the Bill of Rights that has a reasonable preamble: "A well-managed militia is necessary for free national security ... "Unlike the first amendment, the qualification for the second amendment brings a clear awareness of the political nature of the rights of weapons. However, although the political intention of the first revision was explained, the second revision was not so. Rather, it is regarded as a means of protecting the country and its citizens, not personal assistance, aid in the age of crisis. Secondary amendments or second amendments to the US Constitution are part of amendments and the Bill of Rights. In other words, people have the right to hold and carry weapons. On December 15, 1791, the second amendment was incorporated into the US Constitution along with other revisions of the Bill of Rights. James Madison introduced the second revision and the Bill of Rights to the US Constitution. Militias: In the early days of American history, all men between the ages of 16 and 60 must be part of their local militia in their towns and communities. In the meantime, most people used and owned guns. By law, it is obligatory to pay a small fee to a few people who do not own or own a gun, rather than participate in the military service of the community. This is the historical reality when the second amendment was passed as part of the first 10 amendments of the Bill of Rights. The exact wording of the second amendment states that "Freedom for the security of the country requires well-managed militia, people have the right to hold and carry weapons and should not be violated" . Even at the time of internal tension, I also proved the rationality of the second revision. The black slave rebellion and confrontation with Indians continued, and many people fear their lives. This situation proves the private ownership rights of small arms: citizens must protect themselves and their property. It was dangerous at that time that the new country did not have armed citizens to protect it, the citizens could not protect themselves. If you consider historical conditions, ownership of the weapon is then required.

It is forbidden to transport or import to any state, region or property in the United States to provide or use drunk in violation of the law. Unless required by the Constitution, within seven years from the date of parliament submission to the state the provision must be approved as a constitutional amendment according to many state conventions, otherwise the provisions will not function. The 21st amendment of the US Constitution abolished the 18 th revision and the national revision to prohibit the sale of alcohol. The 21st amendment Part II is interpreted as giving each country the authority to enact the laws of the country to regulate the manufacture, distribution and sale of alcohol within its territory. Federal alcohol management law in 1935 with the authority to regulate the sale of alcohol in the District of Columbia, government-owned military reservations and tribal reservations. The 21st revision was passed by Congress and approved in February 1933. By December 1933 the amendment was promptly approved and 36 necessary states (necessary) approved the amendment. This is the first and only fix to explicitly abolish another fix. Constitutional drinking is not permitted soon in many areas, but drinking is allowed in other areas. Beginning with the prohibition of the 21st amendment, the dry law is reserved, but the province allows the state to develop its own drinking and drinking laws. This is another simple fix that ended the ban in the US. With the support of the ban campaign, the ban was imposed through the 18 th revision. The twenty-first revision recognizes the severe failure of the ban, which leads to people not respecting the law and selling illegal alcohol to people who desire it. The abolition of the 18th revision did not fully legalize alcohol all over the country. After the 21st amendment, many states decided to stick to the anti-drug law for a long time. This is called "dry method". Even today, there are some restrictions on when and where adults can buy alcohol. Other provinces may enact laws prohibiting alcohol intake unless the local government agrees to a referendum (vote) on this issue.

Secondary amendments or second amendments to the US Constitution are part of amendments and the Bill of Rights. In other words, people have the right to hold and carry weapons. On December 15, 1791, the second amendment was incorporated into the US Constitution along with other revisions of the Bill of Rights. James Madison will introduce a second amendment and the Bill of Rights to the US Constitution There are two important text versions in the second revision, but the only difference is punctuation and uppercase and lowercase letters. The text of the second revision of the "Constitution of the United States" and "Bill of Rights" is as follows. "For the security of a free country, we need well-managed militia.The people have the right to keep and carry weapons and should not be infringed." The second amendment is just a sentence. However, there are some very important phrases that need to be considered. The following is a description of the second revision key phrase. Militias: In the early days of American history, all men between the ages of 16 and 60 must be part of their local militia in their towns and communities. In the meantime, most people used and owned guns. The law mandates that a small number of people who do not use or own a gun pay a small fee rather than participate in military service in that area. These militias protected these communities from attacks in India, acted as police as needed, and requested defense in the state or the United States as needed. Carrying weapons: When writing the second amendment, weapons mean weapons. The word weapon does not necessarily mean only a gun, but it is certain that it contains a gun. The second amendment did not explain specifically the type and type of weapons and did not list which weapons are considered weapons. When you have a weapon, it means that you have a weapon. You can have weapons inside the house or in your house No infringement: The second amendment does not give the right to carry weapons. Furthermore, the remainder of the Bill of Rights does not explain rights. These rights are considered natural rights or rights granted by God. In the Bill of Rights, the second amendment only reminds the government that people should not try to prevent this right. The second amendment is unique in that it is the only revision of the Bill of Rights that has a reasonable preamble: "A well-managed militia is necessary for free national security ... "Unlike the first amendment, the qualification for the second amendment brings a clear awareness of the political nature of the rights of weapons. However, although the political intention of the first revision was explained, the second revision was not so. Rather, it is regarded as a means of protecting the country and its citizens, not personal assistance, aid in the age of crisis. Secondary amendments or second amendments to the US Constitution are part of amendments and the Bill of Rights. In other words, people have the right to hold and carry weapons. On December 15, 1791, the second amendment was incorporated into the US Constitution along with other revisions of the Bill of Rights. James Madison introduced the second revision and the Bill of Rights to the US Constitution. Militias: In the early days of American history, all men between the ages of 16 and 60 must be part of their local militia in their towns and communities. In the meantime, most people used and owned guns. By law, it is obligatory to pay a small fee to a few people who do not own or own a gun, rather than participate in the military service of the community. This is the historical reality when the second amendment was passed as part of the first 10 amendments of the Bill of Rights. The exact wording of the second amendment states that "Freedom for the security of the country requires well-managed militia, people have the right to hold and carry weapons and should not be violated" . Even at the time of internal tension, I also p

This is another simple fix that ended the ban in the US. With the support of the ban campaign, the ban was imposed through the 18 th revision. The 21st revision recognizes the severe failure of prohibition. The abolition of the 18th revision did not fully legalize alcohol all over the country. After the 21st amendment, many states decided to stick to the anti-drug law for a long time. This is called "dry method". Even today, there are some restrictions on when and where adults can buy alcohol. Other provinces may enact laws prohibiting alcohol intake unless the local government agrees to a referendum (vote) on this issue. (If the 21st amendment is passed, it will violate the 18th amendment of the Constitution as a US law.) It is forbidden to transport or import state, region, or property in the US to provide or use a drunkard in violation of that law. (This controversial clause makes it possible for states and local governments to prohibit sales or to own or distribute alcohol) This provision will not function unless approved by a number of domestic conventions as a "constitutional" amendment within seven years from parliamentary filing date to the state, as required by the Constitution. The 21st revision was passed by Congress and approved in February 1933. By December 1933 the amendment was promptly approved and 36 necessary states (necessary) approved the amendment. This is the first and only fix to explicitly abolish another fix. Constitutional drinking is not permitted soon in many areas, but drinking is allowed in other areas. Beginning with the prohibition of the 21st amendment, the dry law is reserved, but the province allows the state to develop its own drinking and drinking laws. The 21st amendment of the US Constitution abolished the 18 th revision and the national revision to prohibit the sale of alcohol. The 21st amendment Part II is interpreted as giving each country the authority to enact the laws of the country to regulate the manufacture, distribution and sale of alcohol within its territory. Federal alcohol management law in 1935 with the authority to regulate the sale of alcohol in the District of Columbia, government-owned military reservations and tribal reservations. The 21st revision was passed by Congress and approved in February 1933. By December 1933 the amendment was promptly approved and 36 necessary states (necessary) approved the amendment. This is the first and only fix to explicitly abolish another fix. Constitutional drinking is not permitted soon in many areas, but drinking is allowed in other areas. Beginning with the prohibition of the 21st amendment, the dry law is reserved, but the province allows the state to develop its own drinking and drinking laws. This is another simple fix that ended the ban in the US. With the support of the ban campaign, the ban was imposed through the 18 th revision. The 21st revision recognizes the severe failure of prohibition. The abolition of the 18th revision did not fully legalize alcohol all over the country. After the 21st amendment, many states decided to stick to the anti-drug law for a long time. This is called "dry method". Even today, there are some restrictions on when and where adults can buy alcohol. Other provinces may enact laws prohibiting alcohol intake unless the local government agrees to a referendum (vote) on this issue.

The right to a national vote of the United States will not be rejected or deleted by the United States or other countries due to race, color of skin, or conditions of previous slavery. African Americans gained the right to vote in 1870 and approved the 15th amendment of the US Constitution, the third amendment of the so-called civil war or reconstruction amendment. However, before the Voting Rights Act of 1965 gives a meaningful way to vote for African Americans, the 15 th revision prohibiting discrimination in "voting by race, color, or previous slavery conditions" Despite the clear wording of her, 95 years passed. In March 1963, before Washington, an important event in American history, a battle began to ensure that the word of the 15th amendment was more than just a feeling of the sky. But the success of the parade has inspired civil rights leaders to pursue meaningful rights to vote for African Americans - and other rights that have been deprived for a long time. The decision of the Supreme Court 's Supreme Court at Shelby' s intersection is the latest issue for blacks to win votes in 'unfinished March.' Constitutional amendments 13, 14, 15 are also called reconstruction amendments and are essential for providing citizenship and protection to African Americans. The thirteenth revision officially abolished slavery. The 14th amendment defines African-American as an equality citizen of the United States. This amendment reversed the case of Dread Scott v. Sanford in 1857 and Roger B. Tenney, Supreme Court Secretary Roger B. Tenney wrote that black Americans are not citizens, he said, "Caucasians should not do it" . "Finally, the 15th amendment gives African-Americans the right to vote North African Americans are constant advocates of these amendments, and their own liberated compatriots and for themselves for equality It represents a battle of. In 1965, Congress passed the "Voting Rights Act" according to the theory established by the 15th Amendment. It did not cover the content of the 15th amendment but added several new provisions suspected of protecting the rights of voters. Basically, it lay the foundation for the racial discrimination and racism we saw in San Juan County today. In addition to breaking the 15 th revision, the restructuring revealed that members of San Juan County were affected by members who are not bound by the US Constitution and Utah State Law. The committee manages the county's wallet, but there is no need to pay the property tax etc.

When the United States entered World War I in 1917, the National Women's Rights Association (NAWSA) encouraged its supporters to participate in war. The organization believes that women should be voted because they are patriots, carers, and mothers. Women's expertise to maintain families and families will improve politics and society The war efforts of NAWSA combined with the advertisement attracted by the White House picket of the National Women's Party (NWP) came to widely support women's suffrage. President Woodrow Wilson had previously refused to support voting rights, but in September 1918 he made a speech to support the women's vote in the Senate. "When we became a women's partner in this war, he sought a patriotic debate over the election; we must admit that they are a kind of suffering, sacrifice, and diligent partnership.Privileges and rights A partnership? " The 19 th revision proposes that "the rights of US citizens shall not be rejected or deleted by any country by the United States or sex." In June 1919, Congress passed this revision bill. And the state representatives, in order to ensure that they are subsequently approved by the state Following the approval of the 19 th revision on August 18, 1920, women activists continued to use the political reform society. NAWSA has become a female voter alliance. In 1923, the NWP introduced Equal Rights Modification (ERA) that prohibits discrimination by men and women. Even today, the alliance of women's voters and efforts by electronic auction continue Women in Colorado can now vote, but they continue to promote nationwide voting rights. In 1919, the US Congress finally voted against the 19 th revision. This is called approval. After Congress has approved the 19 th revision, at least 36 states need to vote for it to become a law. Article 19 of the amendment to the American Constitution is known to prohibit American citizens from voting for sexual reasons. More specifically, it gives women the right to vote. The nineteenth amendment occurred because women's suffrage campaigns of the United States fought women's voting rights at the state level and at the national level. The 19 th revision proposal basically dismissed the unanimous decision of the former Supreme Court - the 14 th revision proposal did not specify that it is legal for women to vote in elections. Senator Aaron A. Sargent first proposed Congress' 19 th revision in 1878, but was not approved until 1920. The 19 th revision bill states that the US Constitution prohibits US citizens from being deprived of voting rights based on gender. The 19 th revision is an important turning point for many women in the United States. It gives women the freedom they did not have before. Before this revision proposal was passed, many women did not explain themselves and could not judge with male characters. It was until the 19 th revision of 1920 was passed. The amendment gives women power, giving them social justice and many political rights. Before 1920, women did not have the right to vote. They are called "second-class citizens". Women are at home to help and organize the necessities of their families. I have something ... See more content

- Weaknesses and voting pressures can not be handled (making decisions or mixing with the crowd) "Although the 19th Constitutional Amendment gives women the right to vote, approval of the 19th revision did not show a turning point as there were no other major changes since women's rights occurred. As examples of common examples, you can answer questions by referring to examples and related evidence: Cady Stanton, Susan B. Anthony, Article 19 of the amendment to the US Constitution is known to prohibit American citizens from voting for sex reasons. More specifically, it gives women the right to vote. The nineteenth amendment occurred because women's suffrage campaigns of the United States fought women's voting rights at the state level and at the national level. The 19 th revision proposal basically dismissed the unanimous decision of the former Supreme Court - the 14 th revision proposal did not specify that it is legal for women to vote in elections. Senator Aaron A. Sargent first proposed Congress' 19 th revision in 1878, but was not approved until 1920. The 19 th revision bill states that the US Constitution prohibits US citizens from being deprived of voting rights based on gender. The 19 th revision is an important turning point for many women in the United States. It gives women the freedom they did not have before. Before this revision proposal was passed, many women did not explain themselves and could not judge with male characters. It was until the 19 th revision of 1920 was passed. The amendment gives women power, giving them social justice and many political rights. Before 1920, women did not have the right to vote. They are called "second-class citizens". Women are at home to help and organize the necessities of their families. I have something ... See more content

First Amendment The concept of modern American freedom of speech comes from the freedom of press freedom principle and religious freedom that has developed in the UK since the 17th century. The importance of allegations against unauthorized media like John Milton and religious tolerance to people like John Locke is the beginning of the concept of "freedom of speech". By 1791 when the first amendment was approved the concept of "freedom of speech" was widely accepted as a major issue in this amendment and a very important issue. The first amendment can be said to be the most important modification to the Bill of Rights, as it protects the means of autonomy of the country. It is worth noting that even though the proposed policy does not have the opportunity to survive the legal challenge, the protected first amendment freedom will be attacked by the Trump regime. However, in many cases it is important to remember the dark era when the US government conspired with the country's most important ideal of freedom and equality, with the support of the people. The more awkward chapter in the history of the Americans includes "foreigners and incitement law", the Japanese American imprisonment during World War II, and the long night of Jim Crow. Today, many Americans are correctly reviewing these injustices with fear and shame. The first amendment appeared for the first time in the early 20th century when the main threat to the state's political speech environment was suppression of opponents by the state. The law of the first modification was shaped by that age. It focuses on protecting government spokespeople as if they are rare and delicate butterflies are threatened by horrible monsters, telling the world of information shortage. But today the speaker is like a moth - their supply is obviously infinite. The great reduction in publishing barriers, especially when lecturers gathered at bright events of mass controversy, the information was enriched. Speaking paradoxically, low-cost voice makes it easy to turn voice into a weapon as a voice control tool. Unfortunately, cheap speech can be used for attacks, harassment, and silence just as they are used for clarification and discussion. There is much confusion about the first amendment, what it can say, what you can say. Many people believe that they can say or publish freedom of speech online as the first amendment can prevent the government from prosecuting them regardless of the desire of them. Freedom of speech makes it possible to say whatever people want, but it does not necessarily have no result. - When the American Constitution was approved, it mainly involved the structure of the government and there was little freedom for individuals. However, the state also requires the Bill of Rights to address individual rights issues. As a result, the Constitution was adapted and changed by adding modifications.

The 19th Amendment to the Constitution of Japan (1920) stipulates that men and women have equal voting rights. The amendment stipulates that the right of referendum is "not rejected or deleted by the United States or any country for sex." The 14 th revision (1868) implies this equality, but most states continue to limit or prohibit women's suffrage The women's rights movement that began in the early 1930s was intertwined with the fight against slavery abolition, so the 19 th revision proposal proposed by Congress in 1878 was proposed. This amendment is a controversial issue since over 40 years ago. The women's rights movement became radical, published and demonstrated by Congress for adoption, and then approved by the state. During World War I, women's service in the industry strengthened this political behavior and therefore adopted amendments. Rogers, D W. , Spirit of voting and American democracy: Essay on voting and voting rights in the United States (1992) Recruitment: (1) Legally brought to home: We adopted a child. (2a) I agree: We will adopt the recommendation. (2b) Formal approval: In 1920, the government passed the 19 th revision bill All provinces, including ones that dismissed the 19 th revision, approved the amendment. The last state is Mississippi. This is a symbolic measure as the 19 th revision was approved by the 36 th country. Alaska and Hawaii are not yet nationalized, so the amendment can not be approved Article 19 of the amendment to the American Constitution is known to prohibit American citizens from voting for sexual reasons. More specifically, it gives women the right to vote. The nineteenth amendment occurred because women's suffrage campaigns of the United States fought women's voting rights at the state level and at the national level. The 19 th revision proposal basically dismissed the unanimous decision of the former Supreme Court - the 14 th revision proposal did not specify that it is legal for women to vote in elections. Senator Aaron A. Sargent first proposed Congress' 19 th revision in 1878, but was not approved until 1920. The 19 th revision bill states that the US Constitution prohibits US citizens from being deprived of voting rights based on gender. The 19 th revision is an important turning point for many women in the United States. It gives women the freedom they did not have before. Before this revision proposal was passed, many women did not explain themselves and could not judge with male characters. It was until the 19 th revision of 1920 was passed. The amendment gives women power, giving them social justice and many political rights. Before 1920, women did not have the right to vote. They are called "second-class citizens". Women are at home to help and organize the necessities of their families. I have something ... See more content The 19 th revision is a very important amendment to the Constitution as it gives the women the right to vote in 1920. As you can imagine, in the 15th amendment, the federal government or state government denies that the voting rights of US citizens are illegal. For some reason, this does not apply to women. The 19 th revision proposal changed this practice by treating all citizens illegally as a voting right regardless of gender. A campaign that allows women to vote through the 19 th revision is a campaign for voting rights. You may have heard of women who are important players of Suffrage movement, such as Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cadistanton. The voting right continues since the civil war, but the revision of 13th, 14th, 15th does not cover women's voting rights. These women will be the first authors of the 19 th revision, although it will take forty years to consider the ratification of the 19 th revision.

The sixth amendment states that in all criminal proceedings, the accused responds quickly to trial of criminal trial by a fair jury of the country and its area, the crime, the area where the law is prescribed, and the right to file a notification To have it. The nature and cause of the allegation: In the face of a witness to him, there is an essential procedure for winning a witness for him and obtaining assistance from a lawyer to protect him. The sixth revision also includes guarantee of "proper notice". This means that the sixth amendment "will be applied to the state through the Proper Procedures provision of the 14 th revision to ensure that the criminal defendant has basic rights to clearly understand the nature and cause of assertion against him The main purpose of the information is to provide the defendant with sufficient detailed allegations so that he may prepare for defense. The defendant also said, "We have fundamental right to clearly understand the nature and causes of allegations to fully prepare defenses allegations that must be defended in order to have reasonable grounds by reasonable procedures The defendant was given the right to know about it, it was not unexpected at the trial. " The sixth amendment also applies to the state through the Proper Procedure provision of the Fourteenth Amendment and guarantees that the criminal defendant has the right to clearly inform the nature and cause of the assertion against him. The Sixth Amendment guarantees the right for defendants to become lawyers in all criminal proceedings. The purpose of the right to a lawyer of the sixth revision is to secure the proper function of the conflict judgment system by protecting the defendant's right to a fair trial and providing a qualified attorney as defendant in defense against "prosecution power" . It is a country. When the government starts a confrontation trial by "formal complaint, preliminary hearing, prosecution, information, or trial", the right of the sixth amendment will be "attached". To judge whether a specific incident or proceeding constitutes the commencement of confrontational criminal proceedings it is necessary to review the rules of criminal proceedings in the jurisdiction in which the crime was enforced and to review the case of the formal prosecution period by the Supreme Court It must be handled. The sixth revision was approved on December 15, 1791. It guarantees the right of federal court criminal proceedings and determines that these rights are fundamental and important. The sixth amendment granted the defendant the right to accelerate and initiate the trial to a fair jury. The accused is informed about the nature and cause of the allegation and has the right to face the witness and his favorable witness. In this paper, we comprehensively analyze the above rights and introduce the history of the sixth revision. First and sixth amendments to the US Constitution. The Freedom of Protection of the First and Sixth Amendment states that the defendant 's right to a fair trial may be contradictory with respect to the court' s trial. After all, most academic research concluded that the tension between the two modifications could be resolved, which is conducive to the realization of the television broadcasting process, 1 other conditions are the same. 2 So the argument that there are no reasonable reasons that the federal court should prohibit television broadcasting procedures is extended because there are so many states that television will allow court cases to be broadcast. Empirical and normative analysis on the impact of TV court litigation Ralph E. Roberts Jr.

For many years, the federal government has strengthened control over the public education in the United States. The most noteworthy progress in the past decade is the 2001 "Lack of children left behind" law and the "Edward Renaissance Act" which is part of President Obama 's comprehensive reconstruction plan. As of September 30, 2010, 97.4 billion dollars were allocated under the Ministry of Education Revival Law (Ministry of Education). As federal intervention drastically increased, American citizens should expect positive results. Article 9 of educational reform in 1972 is a comprehensive Federal Civil Rights Act prohibiting gender discrimination in education. It covers all students and faculty of educational institutions or programs funded by the federal government, such as local school districts, universities, universities, for-profit schools, vocational education institutions, libraries, museums and so on. Article 9 of the educational revision in 1972 forbids sex discrimination in educational institutions receiving financial aid from the Federation. Unlike the Constitution, Article 9 applies to many private institutions. However, like the Constitution, Article 9 does not expressly prohibit the implementation of gender-specific education by institutions subject to the Constitution. As explained by the original Senate sponsors, this measure is a "powerful integration approach to providing women with strong legal protection against permanent and harmful discrimination that is to make American women" Therefore, in Article 9, Article 9 prohibits institutions or agencies involved in it from doing discrimination plans or activities by sex, unless special exceptions are applied4. Article 9 of the educational revision in 1972 ("Article 9") is a federal law prohibiting gender discrimination in federal financial support educational institutions, programs and activities. This law applies to the benefits of academic, extracurricular (student body, sports), research, vocational training, other acceptance to the graduate school from other pre-school days, or federal funding. Even if only one program or activity receives funds from the Federation, the whole organization falls under Article 9. Several educational institutions, such as certain religious groups, military training schools, university brotherhood associations, and female student club associations, do not fall under Article 9, even if they are funded by the federal government.

The revised Article 1 guarantees the freedom of religion, speech, assembly and petition. It prohibits Congress from promoting both religion and personal religious practice. It guarantees freedom of speech by prohibiting Congress's right to speak or limiting individual freedom. It also guarantees citizens the right to peaceful gatherings and petitions to the government. The first fix, sometimes called fix 1, is the first amendment of the US Constitution, one tenth of the amendment of the Bill of Rights. The first amendment establishes religion, prevents freedom of speech, prevents people from practicing religion, prevents the press from printing what he wants, and exercises the right to peaceful gatherings or demonstrations It is stipulated that it is illegal to enact laws that impede things. It is the government. Religious Freedom: The first revision of the US Constitution prevents the government from establishing or establishing public religion in the country. American citizens can participate freely in churches, mosques, synagogues, temples and other places of their choosing. They can also opt to not participate in any religion. Thanks to the first amendment, we can practice our religion The first amendment to the initial amendment of the US Constitution is part of our citizens' rights bibliography. The first amendment is probably the most important part of the US Constitution. Because it protects the freedom of citizens' faith, speech, writing and writing, peaceful gatherings, and freedom of dissatisfaction with the government. In addition, the amendment requires separation between the church and the state. First amendment to the US Constitution Discussion on the initial revision On December 15, 1971, the first X revision to the Constitution took effect. The first modification of X to the Constitution is called the Bill of Rights. The first amendment was written by James Madison as the American citizen demanded freedom. The first amendment was implemented to protect American freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of assembly and freedom of petition. The content of the first revision is as follows. The first and most important modification to our constitution is the first modification. This amendment will establish our freedom as a new federal citizen. In particular, the first amendment guarantees freedom of speech and press freedom. Since establishing these rights, they have often been questioned. People say, "How much is liberty?", "When this is more ... I show more ... Our freedom is a ridiculous subject, and we have a lifetime to consider some important information In order to revoke other rights guaranteed to all citizens, such as privacy and fair judicial proceedings, and to prevent erroneous information from being deliberately or unintentionally leaked out We promise to do things that can not be done with great new products, other products

"Everyone of our democracy deserves fairness and justice and we have this right in our constitution," said Mrs. Johnston, the wife of Mrs. Johnson (Eisler and Hixson 419). Currently, half of our country is not protected by the Constitution (Eisler and Hixson 419). Equality rights amendment (ERA) was introduced when concluding that women were not protected by constitutional gender discrimination despite the vote by Alice Paul in 1923. It has been 75 years since the revision proposal was proposed for the first time and women have not yet gained equal rights under the law. Equal rights amendment is a amendment to the US Constitution that guarantees equal rights for women. It was originally proposed by women's voting rights, 1923 Alice Paul. But it did not pass. Later, in order to gain more support from Congress he joined the Order of Hayden This supplement limited the actual equality of the modification and distinguished gender from the legal category. This overturned the initial supporters of correction. In 1973, the amendment was finally passed by both houses of Parliament and the original supporters also agreed. To be part of the US Constitution, three quarters of states need to approve it, but the deadline has passed through three states. Twenty states have similar features in their respective state constitutions, but equality rights amendment is not yet part of the US Constitution. I got the necessary benefits in the House and the Senate, but there were six fixes that did not receive the necessary support from the Legislature. The latest is a revision of equality rights, which is a very simple statement ("Equality of rights under the law should not be deprived by the United States or another country") supported by both parties in 1972. That method quickly broke up Congress and got the nod in most states. Other modifications consistent with a similar fate include allowing states to be in the District of Columbia. Like ERA, the approval period for D.C. correction has ended. However, other modifications approved in the past are not restricted and may still be approved - at least in theory In 1972, the draft amendment to equality rights has been put on hold in Parliament for nearly 50 years, is currently approved and sent to the state for approval. The wording of "correcting rights" is written as follows: "The United States or any country can not refuse or reduce the equality of rights under the law due to gender." In the community Opportunities to actively participate in women's rights movement. Unlike many other difficulties struggling in Congress and the courts, this issue is determined by each province. Organizations of women in various organizations organize members to provide fundraising activities and public support for ERA. The parade was performed in major provinces and attracted hundreds of thousands of supporters

By eliminating the right to carry a gun, we merely weaken these guardians' protection of those who should protect us. The intentions of lawmakers trying to confiscate these rights are not threatened and they are trying to protect Americans. What they do not realize is that the only way you can fully convince someone is safe is to allow them to have something to keep themselves safe. If a thief tries to rob someone, they are more likely to decide to think twice and not to commit sin. They know who is seeking money, and they may carry weapons if they plant fears. "Perhaps the most important battlefield for the second amendment is whether there is a right to bring the gun outdoors and, if so, how well the country and location can regulate this right" . A Brady Center litigation program to prevent gun violence. "This decision is based on the fact that compliant Californians who live in counties with hostile sheriffs now completely ignore the fact that they can not carry guns for personal protection outside their home, We will make it impossible to self-defend. "The Secretary-General of the Institute's Legislative Behavior Research Institute stated in a statement Like the Second Amendment, some of today's revisions do not controversial. When it passed, Congress did not discuss the second amendment. It is not considered controversial, it is not considered important - it has not been taken seriously by anyone. When we think about the Bill of Rights, we mainly consider the first amendment - freedom of speech, press freedom, freedom of religion, etc. Many members believe that these are trivial, and Congress does not even consider such a thing. Or it should be decided by state, because they have not reached a sufficiently significant level. In Congress, few people think that the adoption of the Bill of Rights is not a big deal. This is one of the most amazing aspects of my research in this book. Regarding Article 5, there are two important issues that need to be understood, how to modify the document of the Constitution. The first thing is that it is difficult to revise the constitution. Second, the importance of amendment is far less than most people think. The revision has changed the content of the Constitution, but - important points - even if the text of the Constitution remains unchanged, a very important change will occur. In fact, the Constitution is definitely changed, but the amendment is not the main way these changes occur. Article 5 of the Constitution stipulates how to revise the Constitution, that is, to add provisions to the text of the Constitution. The Constitution is not easy to modify: Since the adoption of the Constitution, the Constitution has added 27 amendments.

A research paper on the first amendment explores the privacy rights of US citizens. You can write your research paper in any part of the first amendment. Learn to write political science research papers on constitutional issues and political science topics Generally speaking, this is a relatively simple proposition, but it becomes complicated when a person's rights conflict with the rights of others. My opinion is that even if some people's privacy is hindered, they must maintain freedom of speech and press freedom. Freedom of the press, dissemination of information and freedom of expression are not particularly different Both are basic expression protection. Media does not have any special rights or privileges and can not be used by citizens in general. This means that the general public has the same level of rights as the press, but on the contrary, the press is the representative of the people. When public records are hidden by the media, that information is generally hidden. The problem is a person who decides what these exceptions are, with a few exceptions. Some claim that people and politicians have the right to protect their privacy. For example, does the public have the right to know whether politicians have alcohol problems or other secrets? Necropsy is also a controversial field and the privacy of the deceased's family is contrary to the public's right to know. These families may oppose necropsy, but failing to publicize such information can be a precedent for not publishing other documents. As it may result in snowball effects, records must be published to the public to protect public rights to all other documents. The Kennedy family succeeded in suppressing the results of John F Kennedy autopsy report through legal loopholes. When he was assassinated, all the documents related to the president were not the property of the government but the property of the president. Therefore, until 1981 the law was changed, they were not legitimate official documents. In 1970, student at Roten School, Martin Redish and ambitious law professor sat down to write a paper. He is a clear opposition liberal Democrat and has a strong view on the range of the first amendment. In his thesis, Redish has made a provocative leap and claimed that new protection measures should be applied to "economic motives" of speech and political speech. He uses tobacco advertising as its representative example. President Nixon has signed a law prohibiting the advertisement of tobacco and prohibiting warning labeling on each package. The first amendment to the first amendment is part of the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights is our right as a citizen living in the United States of America. In this article we will cover three articles of the first amendment and highlight one case for each clause. These include examples of discussing freedom of expression, cases of discussing separation of churches from states, and cases of discussing freedom of association. 1) Discuss the location and protection method of at least one important incident related to the three first amendments On September 17, 1787, the US Constitution was signed by the representative of the Philadelphia Constitutional Council and was signed by George It was directed by Washington. For state freedom and colonization, the General Assembly in 1787 was asked to draft a new legal system for the United States. This new constitution is still aimed at enhancing the power of the federal government while protecting the rights of citizens.

Discussion In recent years, people are discussing the idea of ​​incorporating L1 into the language education system. A strong opposition to L1 indicates that it prohibits the use of L1 in the classroom entirely, but many people believe that L1 is a tool to improve student TL learning. In this section we will explain the pros and cons of using L1 in the classroom and further evidence to support the benefits of native language learning and education process. Use of L1 in one classroom In the 20th century, not only was the avoidance of the use of L1 in the classroom guided by the teacher's idea, but it was carried out with many language education policies and guidelines. The theme of the 5th - 8th American History essay competition is the 19th amendment of the Constitution. The author of this paper was asked to discuss the pros and cons of this amendment, which gave all women in the US the right to vote and retain voting sites in a position advantageous to the people living in the United States in 1919 . In the essay competition of the "women's suicide movement campaign" for elementary school fifth graders, six graders, seventh graders, and eight graders, each class received the first prize, the second prize, the third prize. The national winner will be given a monetary reward. Bede said that this paper was first judged at Lexington, then the winners will continue to participate in the state convention before continuing to the national convention. In addition to being a local president of the essay, Bard is also the president of the country. 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th grade: American history. Thesis Theme of 2018-2019: Article 19 of the amendment of the US Constitution was adopted by the US Congress on June 4, 1919 and approved on August 18, 1920. With this amendment, all American women are entitled to run for election. . At that time many Americans thought this was the fundamental change in the American constitution. Imagine that you lived in 1919, and the women's suffrage movement has influenced Americans politically and socially. Discuss the pros and cons of this new amendment passed by the US Congress Students will learn about the process of modifying the Constitution. They review the details of the revision process and discuss their strengths and weaknesses. Students' partners and teams create convincing presentations, share them with classes, and receive revision support in classroom activities, assignments and courses. Citizen participation is necessary in a democratic society and strengthens constitutionalism, so students will also understand the relationship between the political process and the power of the government. Students develop the ability to make reasonable and informed decisions about their personal freedoms based on a balance with stability of common interests, understand past influences and their historical significance, and now I will master the problem of.

In 1972, after the feminist movement, a propositional law was enacted to raise employment rates and employment practices of female agencies by federal funds. In 1969, the professor and future women activist, Bernice Sandler, used to fight for the work of the University of Maryland the presidential command created by President Johnson many years ago. . Sandler complained to the Ministry of Labor for the first complaint and stated that his rights were not taken into account. The main event that affected school education by gender in the United States was the adoption of the ninth revision of education revision in 1972. "Women and gender encyclopedia" explains topic 9 as 'opportunity equal opportunity, equitable access and full integration, an opportunity to fully participate in all school education functions regardless of gender', 2001 Year). Many feminists struggled to pass this law. The goal is to prohibit discrimination against all sexes in educational programs that are receiving financial aid from the government. A special statement on the website of the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology: "Under the sex, anyone in the United States is excluded from participation in any educational program or activity, interested or subject to discrimination It is not possible. Chapter 9 of the Education Reform Act of 1972 is a federal law prohibiting gender discrimination in educational programs that accept Federal Funds. Chapter 9 explains all public schools and universities, and some private schools and universities. It is interpreted to prohibit discrimination based on gender inequality, including that the school could not protect students from harassment of gender relations. This means that article 9 should protect sex change students from harassment and discrimination based on gender identity. This problem has not yet been completely resolved in the court, but the civil rights bureau of the US Department of Education, which implements Article 9, agrees. Chapter 9 also requires schools to respond appropriately to reports of sexual harassment and sexual violence by students including transgendered students. If the student seems that his rights under Article 9 are infringed, he can appeal to the civil rights office.

Statement by Benjamin Franklin shows that focusing on security can greatly reduce the freedom of American citizens, especially the American Constitution. The second amendment states: "... People have the right to hold and carry weapons, they must not be violated." Former representative killed Gabriel Gifford; and recent developments in a new town in Connecticut; Los Angeles International Airport; and Westfield Garden Plaza Shopping Center, New Jersey The second amendment is unique in that it is the only amendment in the Bill of Rights with a legitimate preamble: "Freedom controlled militia is necessary for the safety of free countries ... Unlike the amendment, a qualified introduction of the second amendment clearly recognizes the political nature of arms rights, but the first amendment was interpreted for its political intention, but the second amendment Instead, it is regarded as a means to protect the country and its citizens, not to assist the country in the age of individual rights, crisis. As part of the Bill of Rights, the second amendment "adopts" the 14th revision, it applies not only to the federal government but also to the state government, which is subject to intense debate in the second amendment. It is judged that not all of the first 10 revisions of the Bill of Rights are applicable to the state 2. In the early development of the 14 th correction, there was strong support for inclusion of all the provisions of the law. Rights 23 Many law scholars believe that the second amendment reflects the structural view of the federal state. This is different from traditional Federal government and government dichotomy. The second amendment assumes people in the third "pole" that, in federal structure, tyranny is to balance the other two to prevent civilian individual freedom from being abolished It has been claimed. "When the government becomes autocratic, protecting the guns from the public will put pressure on the government to force the government to stick to the democratic process, because they are afraid of the people's uprising, they were robbed The rights of weapons are consistent and the Supreme Court has granted this right in its early decision.

The Bill of Rights is a very important document for US citizens. The Bill of Rights is the beginning of the US Constitution, which consists of the first 10 amendments to define our fundamental rights as US citizens. That guarantees that our freedom can not be deprived from us. However, I think there are a couple of fixes to fix in 10 items, which will be the eighth amendment. The contents of the Eighth Amendment is "There is no excessive bail, excessive fine, cruel and unusual punishment" (Legal Dictionary). This right arises from "the fundamental principle of justice, that is, punishment of crime should graduate and be proportional to crime". All dignity. . Like other extended words of the Constitution, the prohibition of "cruel and abnormal punishment" is explained in the sentence by considering the history, tradition and precedents, considering the purpose and function of the constitutional design It must be. In order to implement this framework, we need to establish adequacy and refer to "a decent criterion that shows progress in a mature society" in order to determine which punishment is cruel and unusual as they are disproportionate I confirmed the sex. If the eighth amendment proposes a normal rule of law, the role of the court should be actually what that law is. However, the announcement of the eighth amendment by the courts always reflects "decent standards of developmental development" in our society, and for those judges at the time, these standards are distinguished from our practices It is meaningless to do. . Scalia's claim on this. Since Trop talks about "progress of mature society", Trop v. Dulles, 356 US 86, 100-101 (1958), so it is misleading to say that it is considering "the changing reflection of society". Since Trop considers universally changing tolerance in punishment, please consider longer things. See notes 133 to 135 below and attached text. On the other hand, it is appropriate to say that Trop can exclude another judicial analysis of the trend if it concludes that the judge will expand the ban on the first atrocities. Constitutional historicism: Test of the evolutionary standard of the eighth revision William C. Heffernan

Modification Article 1 "It is necessary to see it before it is announced." Almost all American journalism students will hear 10 unavoidable words before distributing school newspapers. Recently, student journalists were strictly censored by Hazelwood v. Courmayer Supreme Court ruling in 1988. One of the main effects of this ruling is that since the Supreme Court considered the first amendment, "Congress shall not enact any law ... the deprivation of freedom of speech or freedom of press" (revised I, A6) , Time is sufficient to protect student journalists and the state must find solutions themselves (Foerstel 217). The first amendment is to restrict the government. When I finally checked, Brooke Baldwin was not a member of Congress (although she was a member of a specially protected press by the first amendment), and she stopped Travis' freedom of speech I did not go through the law to do. As a host of CNN, she exercises her privilege and finished her interview with guests who no longer think she will add something to the discussion. We can discuss whether it is the right way to deal with this situation, but with the first fix we can not answer this question. Definition: The first 10 amendments to the US Constitution are also known as the Bill of Rights. Amendments are amendments or supplements to the US Constitution. The first 10 amendments (the Bill of Rights) were approved in 1791. In the US Constitution, you can make amendments to the Constitution. So far, the Constitution revised 27 items including the top ten. The term 'The Bill of Rights' was born in the UK and the 1689 Bill of Rights was mentioned, which declared Congress the best for the principal and enumerated several basic rights and freedoms. The American Revolutionary War began on April 18, 1775. 15 May 1776, Congress recommended that all colonies form their own government and prepare their own state constitution. The Declaration of Independence was adopted on July 4, 1776, announcing the separation of colonies from the UK and making it to the United States. In 1776 our government developed a constitution. The first amendment or the Bill of Rights is the right to freedom of expression. "Congress enacted a law prohibiting the respect of religious beliefs, prohibiting freedom of speech, or prohibiting press or citizens from opening peaceful gatherings, and correcting complaints from the government It will not be ". And please read whatever we want. Judge Thurgood Marshall says: "If the first amendment meant something, it was unanimously passed in 1969 that it should sit alone in his house or what kind of movie he can read" According to the ruling of the Supreme Court, this indicates the importance of the first amendment. Legally, there is no doubt that we have the right to access the review materials. Clearly we have the right to review censorship

Congress shall not enact legislation on banning religious beliefs and free exercise, loss of freedom of speech and freedom of press, or the rights of people to peaceful gatherings and the right to seek relief from the government. In the United States, due to the first revision of the US Constitution, American citizens are entitled to a peaceful gathering and urge the government to rectify their dissatisfaction. Most notably, Fix 1 is well known and is often said to give freedom of speech. Even before the approval of the amendment, Americans protested like the Boston Tea ceremony. Protest was always a way to influence the change of the United States. One question to ask is as follows. Is there a right way to protest and a wrong way? Other protests that influenced the United States since the amendment was approved were protests against war such as Vietnam, Desert Shield / Desert Storm, Civil Rights Movement, and recent democratic movement. The first revision of the US Constitution will protect the freedom of speech, religion, and press. It also protects the right to peaceful protests and petitions the government. This amendment was passed in 1791 with the other nine fixes. These amendments constitute a written document protecting the civil liberties under the Bill of Rights - US law. Over the years, the meaning of the first amendment has been ongoing interpretation and controversy. The groundbreaking case of the Supreme Court involves protesting the right for the United States to be involved in the external war, burning the flag and publishing confidential documents

Introduction The fourth amendment of the US Constitution was drafted by a constitutional scholar to protect it from the rights of government violations. Staff are not allowed to enter the house and search without warrants and possible reasons. However, using GPS technology, the government can collect the same information without leaving the office. Therefore, GPS based monitoring raises the protection issue provided by the fourth amendment. The current fourth amendment precedent provides little protection against undocumented supervision. "Fourth Amendment" One of the thresholds in law is whether "search" was done or not. The original fourth revised case law relied on the ownership of citizens - that is, when the government invaded "people, houses, documents or effects" to actually obtain information, the original meaning of the fourth revision "Survey" within the range of "Survey" was done. That's right. Olmsted v. The court ruling of the early 20th century such as United States (1928) applies to physical intrusion cases but does not apply to surveillance of other forms of police (eavesdropping etc.) Consider the fourth revision right It was. Silverman v. In United States (1961), the court stated that the amendment states "in the core position people have the right to retreat to their homes and there is no unjust government violation." The Fourth Amendment came from colonial opposition to arbitrary search by British settlers and exposed inflammatory constraints. Police harassment, intimidation, arbitrary search insults are very powerful and will help to trigger the American Revolutionary War. Therefore, the fourth amendment was regarded as an important part of the founder's constitution. However, the ruling of the Supreme Court in the interpretation of the Fourth Amendment has undergone tremendous changes in the years following the announcement of the drug war. Today's decision is the top of the death of our eighth amendment - a different law. Like all these legal grounds, it does not find support in the texts and history of the Eighth Amendment, and these conditions make the death penalty inappropriate, so it does not even support the current social attitude. There are few people who think that this court 's view clearly is only the personal opinion of its members. In my opinion, the more Christian countries are, the less likely it is to be regarded as immoral. Post Christian In Europe, the abolitionists received the most strong support from the church and received the least support. I think death is not a big deal to believe in Christians. It is a big deal to deliberately kill an innocent person. Losing his soul is a serious sin. But did you lose this life in exchange for the next life?

The first amendment in the United States is based on freedom. Freedom of speech, freedom of choice, freedom of worship, freedom to do whatever you want within the law. American law is aimed at protecting and protecting these liberties. The reason for the existence of the United States is because settlers fled from England and regained monarchy and regained their freedom. There are few freedom in monarchy and dictatorship. The first amendment can be said to be the most important modification to the Bill of Rights, as it protects the means of autonomy of the country. It is worth noting that even though the proposed policy does not have the opportunity to survive the legal challenge, the protected first amendment freedom will be attacked by the Trump regime. However, in many cases it is important to remember the dark era when the US government conspired with the country's most important ideal of freedom and equality, with the support of the people. The more awkward chapter in the history of the Americans includes "foreigners and incitement law", the Japanese American imprisonment during World War II, and the long night of Jim Crow. Today, many Americans are correctly reviewing these injustices with fear and shame. Protection and privacy between government regulations and citizens' freedom as defined in the first amendment. The controversial problem of the first amendment law is controversial. The boundary of this rule was promoted as the first amendment protects citizens from government interference in freedom of expression. One of the most common but controversial issues in the First Amendment is copyright and infringement. Although the theme may not look big Each one of us can select the people we are associated with and this right is reflected in the first amendment. This is the only recent revision to the firearms conflict center. Americans claim that our Constitution gives us the right to combine guns and freedoms. In all these discussions on the Constitution, I would like to clarify the misnomer. It is related to the source of these rights. Constitution No, I will not dare. The founders did not say that they are writing articles that give us rights. They wrote a document to show what we already have. They believe that these rights are essential; that is because we exist. The US Constitution provides for the rights we have and limits the ability of the government to forcibly deprive these rights. It does not give us rights. They are already ours

The basis of this amendment today depends on the words of our ancestors. The Constitution insists that "people" formed their own government. Which "people" are mentioned in this document? Americans have struggled to define "people" for a long time. Blacks, women and homosexuals all dealt with this problem, and today young people are becoming a challenging group. Because students are usually under review, we do not enjoy protection from the first amendment. Schools claim that they protect the vast majority of rights, but in fact they infringe personal rights by denying their first amendment right. The first amendment can be said to be the most important modification to the Bill of Rights, as it protects the means of autonomy of the country. It is worth noting that even though the proposed policy does not have the opportunity to survive the legal challenge, the protected first amendment freedom will be attacked by the Trump regime. However, in many cases it is important to remember the dark era when the US government conspired with the country's most important ideal of freedom and equality, with the support of the people. The more awkward chapter in the history of the Americans includes "foreigners and incitement law", the Japanese American imprisonment during World War II, and the long night of Jim Crow. Today, many Americans are correctly reviewing these injustices with fear and shame. Protection and privacy between government regulations and citizens' freedom as defined in the first amendment. The controversial problem of the first amendment law is controversial. The boundary of this rule was promoted as the first amendment protects citizens from government interference in freedom of expression. One of the most common but controversial issues in the First Amendment Law is copyright and infringement. Although the theme may not look big Each one of us can select the people we are associated with and this right is reflected in the first amendment. This is the only recent revision to the firearms conflict center. Americans claim that our Constitution gives us the right to combine guns and freedoms. In all these discussions about the Constitution, I would like to clarify the misnomer. It is related to the source of these rights. Constitution No, I will not dare. The founders did not say that they are writing articles that give us rights. They wrote a document to show what we already have. They believe that these rights are essential; that is because we exist. The US Constitution provides for the rights we have and limits the ability of the government to forcibly deprive these rights. It does not give us rights. They are already ours

The fourth amendment stipulates that people have the right to "unfair unfair searches and seizures in their people, homes, documents and effects", but the problem here is that this is a public search in the plan Whether this also applies to. Whether the field and purpose and the fourth modification also protect these. In order to repeat the court's decision on this matter, I will ask Oliver v. We will file a complaint with United States (1984) and California. There are three preliminary points. First, this section does not provide an exhaustive list of exceptions and exemptions of the fourth amendment. However, it should explain the tolerance of the whole regime. Secondly, in this article, I do not take any views on intense and long-lasting debates about existing exemptions and the appropriate scope of exceptions. Instead, I just described the existing doctrine. Thirdly, I recognize that the collection of information that is not protected by the fourth amendment may be subject to legal or regulatory regulations. As explained in the third section below, we found that these types of restrictions are not satisfactory as a general problem; more importantly, even with strict collection rules the aggregation problem still remains It causes a threat of privacy. Because these exceptions apply to vehicle search, I will discuss the five most frequently encountered exceptions to the fourth revised arrest warrant. When describing each exception, the background, requirements, and scope of the search are resolved. Regarding the scope of the search, the article will focus on four specific areas: car room, car trunk, unlocked container in the car, and locked container in the car. In the first article of this series, we will search vehicles based on consent. In subsequent articles, we will cover about car arrest search, car search based on exception of moving car (Carroll Doctrine), car search as part of inventory handling, search for legitimate Terry parked car.

The fourth revision of the lifetime constitutional revision is the most important revision of staff in the field of criminal justice. This amendment laid the foundation of the criminal justice system and imposed mandatory guidelines for government officials. When the Constitution was first enacted its sole purpose was to impose restrictions on the federal government. As a living document, the Constitution has changed over the years and is always interpreted to keep up with the diversity and usage of technology in the United States. The fourth amendment of the US Constitution is short, only 54 words, but very powerful. As explained in the first part of this series, the Constitution and its revision are generally applicable only to the government. However, the fourth revision is an exception to this general rule. This is because unlike most revisions of the Constitution, it prescribes rights. If there is amendment to the Constitution that is familiar to NSA employees, it is the fourth time. This is a reasonable standard of the fourth revision. So, you told me - I am not a lawyer, and I do not want to be a person - you quote me, regarding the fourth fix it is a problem. Constitution The constitutional standard is "reasonable". We believe - I am convinced that we are legitimate because what we do is reasonable Article 5 of the Constitution states as follows. "This constitutional amendment ... as part of this constitution, three quarters or four quarters of every nation's legislature is approved After the necessary number of provinces approves the amendment it is" all intents And it will be effective for the purpose. " A country can not invalidate its amendment after it has come into effect. The only way to undo the fix is ​​to make another fix. In addition, it will be held in Dillon. v Gloss and Congress can determine a reasonable period of time that the proposed amendment must be approved.

Transfer of the fourth revised document Today, I received an incident to dispute the right to violate the Personal Fourth Amendment. This case also doubts the rights of our streets, communities and town authorities to take action to strengthen and protect the whole population against specific citizens. In accordance with the applicable law, we need to analyze carefully to account for the record of events that occurred in order to judge who is in the most reasonable position in this situation. There are three main problems in the fourth revised case law. Government activities are "search" and "seizure", a possible cause of search and seizure, and a way to solve the infringement of the rights of the fourth revision. Earlier court rulings limited the scope of amendments to property revisions or individual intrusions, but Katz v. In the case of United States (1967), the Supreme Court stated that its protection scope extended to infringe personal privacy and physical location. Most searches and attacks require arrest warrants, but the court sets out a series of exceptions on consent investigation, automobile investigation, obvious evidence, emergency situations, border surveys and other circumstances. The Supreme Court of the United States has decided to apply this judgment to judicial review to determine whether the fourth amendment this week is entitled to unjust search and foreclosure and whether his fifth amendment infringes the right to testify I submitted a problem. In a unanimous decision, the court ruled that the agent illegally searched and sealed and kept this week's letter. This groundbreaking ruling brought about an "exclusion rule" prohibiting the use of the evidence obtained in illegal search. As a result of examining concrete information of Ms. Bennett, the court is highly likely to judge that the defendant's fourth revision right is not infringed. Article 4 of amendment stipulates as follows. "The citizens' rights for guaranteeing personnel, residence, documents and efficacy against unfair search and foreclosure are not infringed and no warrant is issued, especially to explain the places and people to search. The opinion of the Ganias court properly considered that the fourth revision right of Ganias was infringed and correctly recognized the importance of the special requirement 43 × 43. The "special requirements" of the fourth revision limits the scope of the search and requires that the warranty explicitly indicates the content being searched and the location of the search. See the US Constitution. Fixed. IV. In the context of electronic evidence. The hard drive contains detailed personal information including communication, employee list, web history, and financial information.

In his House, James R. Mann of Illinois Province served as chairman of three committees. He served as a minority leader from the 62nd to the 65th Congress in the House of Representatives. On this day Secretary of State Collbridge confirmed that the 19 th revision - expanding the voting for women - was approved as part of the Constitution. Tennessee approved the amendment on August 18, 1920. More than a year ago, the House of Representatives voted to pass the amendment dated May 21, 1919. James R. Mann, Chairman of the Illinois State Women's Election Administration Committee, announced the revision of Susan B. Anthony, which was promoted by voting rights lobbyists and succeeded in linking the defense of the United States with the expansion of domestic democracy. The bill gained momentum as America mobilized the First World War with the help of many women. The Man declared, "It is ripe in this period, people are ready, the beneficiaries of this amendment are enthusiastic, can fulfill the citizens' duties pleasantly and fulfill them." In spite of the dissenting opinion, the bill on the suffrage rule greatly exceeded that of the House of Representatives from 304 to 89. After approval, women nationwide participated in 1920 11. The 67th Parliamentary Election this month (1921-1923). Article 19 of the amendment to the US Constitution is known to prohibit American citizens from voting for sex reasons. More specifically, it gives women the right to vote. The nineteenth amendment occurred because women's suffrage campaigns of the United States fought women's voting rights at the state level and at the national level. The 19 th revision proposal basically dismissed the unanimous decision of the former Supreme Court - the 14 th revision proposal did not specify that it is legal for women to vote in elections. Senator Aaron A. Sargent first proposed Congress' 19 th revision in 1878, but was not approved until 1920. The 19 th revision. After this amendment was approved in 1920, all women in the US were allowed to vote. In 1787, men were always regarded as heads of households. Only they can vote. But women are getting more and more. By 1848, they worked together to gain voting rights. After 72 years, the lawmakers finally believe that women can vote as wisely as men. 22nd amendment With this amendment, the president's term of office is limited to two terms. George Washington began the presidential tradition for two years. President Franklin Roosevelt was elected for the fourth consecutive year and became the first person to break this tradition. Many Americans believe that his four conditions made him too strong. This national consciousness helped to approve the revision of 1951.

The fifth revised research paper on due process outlines Miranda versus Arizona because it applies to the US Constitution. The "fifth amendment" study focuses on the "Constitution". This often stipulates that "you can not be forced to become a witness in a criminal case". The fifth amendment of the Constitution provides guarantees for proper procedures and requires that "everyone should be deprived of life, freedom or wealth without proper legal proceedings." The guarantee of proper procedure by the fifth revision is usually interpreted as expanding only the right of proper proceedings to federal lawsuits. The fifth amendment requires appropriate legal proceedings. Modern court interpreted this amendment broadly. Since its earliest application, the courts continue to expand the protection given to the accused. In the fifth amendment, it is stipulated that "in any criminal case, no one shall be compelled to become a witness and shall not be deprived of life, freedom or property without proper legal proceedings" ing. However, the earlier history of American law showed that self discrimination is not highly protected. In fact, even through torture it is even possible to force confessions in 1897. However, the courts continue to define the definition of involuntary confessions, such as refusing to contact friends and family members, denying attorney's request, fraud and so on. The most famous example of refusal of proper procedure is Miranda v. Arizona, 384 US 436 (1966). The Supreme Court judged that the defendant did not properly understand their rights and that these convictions could not be subject to constitutional review. Due to Miranda's ruling, all defendants must understand their own agencies and their privileges against voluntary discrimination. Abolition or amendment of the Miranda rules proposed by the Supreme Court in Miranda v. Arizona case, 384 US 436 (1966) will not lead to further convictions due to the substantial protection of the fifth amendment to self-abstention. The Miranda Rule states that the defendant has full access to the appropriate legal proceedings and that it can be assumed by other equally effective rules, not rights, justice-established procedures and evidence rules It is a procedural safeguard that guarantees to be. Procedural replacement or judicial decision. At the same time there is an additional guarantee to prohibit the use of compulsion during the trial, in order to obtain a confession, the custody of the police is considered essentially psychologically mandatory. Double Jeopardy has been one of the core foundation of the criminal justice system since its founding. The fifth revision of the Constitution stipulates that no one can be tried twice because of the same crime. Within the scope of a criminal judgment, this rule applies to three situations: an individual can not be prosecuted for exempted crime, you can not prosecute with a crime convicted already, for the same crime two objects Fine that can not be The third procedural protection in the fifth amendment is the right not to be forced to become a witness in any criminal case. This right is often referred to as the fifth revised privilege, or, more generally, "the fifth revision" right. The Supreme Court repeatedly confirmed the most natural understanding of these words: criminal case defendants can not enforce. Testimony - In other words, if she refuses to answer questions related to her claim, she is not summoned to prison and is not despised by the court (usually leading to immediate imprisonment). Constitutional grounds: Miranda's warning is based on the guarantee of the fifth amendment that "you can not be forced to become a witness in any criminal case". The fifth amendment protects you from crime, which is evidence of personal proof. It is reasonable to think that it can be used to deal with people in criminal cases. In general, the fifth amendment applies only to natural persons - it does not apply to compani

"For the security of free countries, we need well-managed militia, the rights of people holding and carrying weapons should not be infringed." - Second fix. Throughout history, this 27th word is causing intense debate. The focus of the discussion is that there are people who claim that gun control policy is unconstitutional and that no one does not say that it is necessary to reduce crime. What does gun control mean now? If you use 'human background investigation' to analyze who is responsible for having a gun, this sounds sound appropriate for everyone. The second amendment is unique in that it is the only amendment in the Bill of Rights with a legitimate preamble: "Freedom controlled militia is necessary for the safety of free countries ... Unlike the amendment, a qualified introduction of the second amendment clearly recognizes the political nature of arms rights, but the first amendment was interpreted for its political intention, but the second amendment Instead, it is regarded as a means to protect the country and its citizens, not to assist the country in the age of individual rights, crisis. As part of the Bill of Rights, the second amendment "adopts" the 14th revision, it applies not only to the federal government but also to the state government, which is subject to intense debate in the second amendment. It is judged that not all of the first 10 revisions of the Bill of Rights are applicable to the state 2. In the early development of the 14 th correction, there was strong support for inclusion of all the provisions of the law. Rights 23 Many law scholars believe that the second amendment reflects the structural view of the federal state. This is different from traditional Federal government and government dichotomy. The second amendment assumes people in the third "pole" that, in federal structure, tyranny is to balance the other two to prevent civilian individual freedom from being abolished It has been claimed. "When the government becomes autocratic, protecting the guns from the public will put pressure on the government to force the government to stick to the democratic process, because they are afraid of the people's uprising, they were robbed The rights of weapons are consistent and the Supreme Court has granted this right in its early decision.

Article 6: Human rights on the security of personnel, residences, documents and property shall not be infringed by illegal search and seizure and shall not issue warrants, the place to be searched, the person or object to be sealed. "- Foreword of amendments to the US Constitution I have chosen the fourth amendment for two reasons: - It recognizes the right that can not be inevitably taken from a person. However, the focus of the fourth revision and the fifth revision is different. The fourth amendment protects individual privacy and free interests from unfair interference by the state. In addition, the default metric for the rationality of the fourth amendment is based on the assurance of the probable causes 230 Criteria for probable cause assure that there is some individual doubt to prove interference 224. Arizona v. Gant, 556 US 332 (2009) For example, the court restricted the ability of the police to search for the accused 's car - the arrest incident - as a result the accused was still arrested while in the car' s room. With ID 335 The defendant reserves the right to search for the property of a third party under the Fourth Amendment. This statement is contrary to the plaintext of the fourth revision and can not be justified in accordance with our decision to use the interpretation based on the revised property or the reasonable expectation of the privacy test adopted by Katz. By allowing Carpenter to oppose the investigation of possessions of third parties, the court threatened to completely change the second principle of the fourth amendment. Based on the fourth revision of property, the distinction between the individual 's fourth right of amendment and the third amendment right is clear. We first ask the subject of the survey, such as house, document, effect etc. Whether it is a defendant, if so, whether the government "infringed" to obtain controversial evidence. Jones, 565, USA, 411, n. When the court was held in Katz, "Sovereign v. Cook County, 506 US 56, 64 (1992), the rights of individuals and the rights of third parties are obvious," property right was not the only measure against the fourth revision " Boundary. Under the guidance of the tested Katz, if a law enforcement officer violates the parties' "reasonable" or "reasonable" privacy expectations, the parties may activate the fourth amendment.

Congress should not enact legislation concerning petition to the government to rectify religious beliefs and free exercise, freedom of speech and freedom of press, people's rights to peaceful gatherings, and complaints It will not. The first fix is ​​the first fix and the most important fix. This amendment will establish our freedom as a new federal citizen. In particular, the first amendment guarantees freedom of speech and press freedom. The first amendment is to restrict the government. When I finally checked, Brooke Baldwin was not a member of Congress (although she was a member of a specially protected press by the first amendment), and she stopped Travis' freedom of speech I did not go through the law to do. As a host of CNN, she exercises her privilege and finished her interview with guests who no longer think she will add something to the discussion. We can discuss whether it is the right way to deal with this situation, but with the first fix we can not answer this question. Definition: The first 10 amendments to the US Constitution are also known as the Bill of Rights. Amendments are amendments or supplements to the US Constitution. The first 10 amendments (the Bill of Rights) were approved in 1791. In the US Constitution, you can make amendments to the Constitution. So far, the Constitution revised 27 items including the top ten. The term 'The Bill of Rights' was born in the UK and the 1689 Bill of Rights was mentioned, which declared Congress the best for the principal and enumerated several basic rights and freedoms. The American Revolutionary War began on April 18, 1775. 15 May 1776, Congress recommended that all colonies form their own government and prepare their own state constitution. The Declaration of Independence was adopted on July 4, 1776, announcing the separation of colonies from the UK and making it to the United States. In 1776 our government developed a constitution. The first amendment or the Bill of Rights is the right to freedom of expression. "Congress enacted a law prohibiting the respect of religious beliefs, prohibiting freedom of speech, or prohibiting press or citizens from opening peaceful gatherings, and correcting complaints from the government It will not be ". And please read whatever we want. Judge Thurgood Marshall says: "If the first amendment meant something, it was unanimously passed in 1969 that it should sit alone in his house or what kind of movie he can read" According to the ruling of the Supreme Court, this indicates the importance of the first amendment. Legally, there is no doubt that we have the right to access the review materials. Clearly we have the right to review censorship

The sixth revision was approved on December 15, 1791. It guarantees the right to federal court criminal proceedings and judges that these rights are fundamental and important. The sixth amendment granted the defendant the right to accelerate and initiate the trial to a fair jury. The accused is informed of the nature and cause of the allegation and has the right to confront the witness who testified with the witness. In this paper, we comprehensively analyze the above rights and introduce the history of the sixth revision. The sixth revision of the US Constitution outlines common points. According to author Siegel and Wooler (2013), the rights of witnesses are consistent with the sixth revision (page 388). The accused has the right to face a person accusing them with illegal or inappropriate acts that pose a threat to the community. This applies to all defendants in federal and state courts. In such a case, the jury candidate may influence the information that may affect the recognition of the accused before the trial starts, and how to interpret the evidence provided during the trial Even information is provided. The sixth revision of the US Constitution guarantees the right of criminal defendants to a fair trial. News, printed materials, and electronic media reserve the right to disclose information on defendants and criminal proceedings. According to Sixth Amendment, individuals facing criminal proceedings are entitled to effective assistance from lawyers. When a criminal action is brought against an individual, the lawyer's right based on the sixth revision is triggered. Criminal actions are initiated through formal claims, preliminary hearing, information provision, prosecution or trials. If the suspect is not officially charged, arrest does not necessarily mean the start of a criminal proceeding, therefore it does not always trigger the protection of the sixth amendment. The right to defend the sixth amendment applies to all "critical stages" in criminal proceedings. The Supreme Court judged that important steps include trials, post-indictment lineups, post-indictment trials, litigation negotiations and guilty actions.

On July 28, 1868, as the day when our country made progress, the 14th amendment became part of the US Constitution. The 14th amendment brings new hope and inspiration to the oppressed people. It is believed to be the basis for restoring the status and prosperity of the United States. Regardless of race, religion, sex, sexual orientation or social status, this amendment allows "equal protection under the law". It is designed to protect newly released slaves. The 14th amendment of the US Constitution guarantees the rights of religious citizens. Considering the first amendment to ensure free exercise of religion, the first part of the 14th amendment, within its scope, by guaranteeing "equal protection of the law" by all people, It is a US citizen and the state where it resides. You can not enact or enforce a law that weakens the privilege or immunity of a citizen of the United States and you can not deprive others of life, freedom or property without proceedings of the law, deny anyone who is within the jurisdiction of the law can not. Equal protection As a US citizen, we are entitled to proper procedures. Proper treatment rights are part of 15th and 14th revisions. If we face a criminal proceeding, we are entitled to fair treatment. The 14 th revision warrants that citizens have the right to life, freedom, and property. Citizens must be given a fair opportunity to prove their innocence. According to amendments to Articles 15 and 14, the right to proper procedure is that the government can not deprive our lives, freedoms or wealth without proper proceedings. Among the amendments adopted during the reconstruction period, the 14 th revision may be quoted most frequently by the courts. In the last decade, the 14th revision was mentioned in cases involving companies, education, abortion, immigration, government bonds and police power - to name a few examples! How do you see the relevance of the 14 th revision to the above problem? Learn this problem in detail and find the answer. For over a decade I have written about the citizenship provision of the 14 th revision and its meaning for undocumented children. In the book "The Restoration of Democracy: The Fourteenth Reform and the Equal Rights Struggle After the American War" published in 2006, I wrote the process of the Senate expanding the language of citizenship in May 1866. In the subsequent academic paper "Citizenship provision:" legislative history ", I commented in detail on this exact provision of the discussion (you have been warned). I am here, here, here and here for the congenital citizenship issue of the Atlantic Ocean.

Prohibited by the 18 th revision of 1919 and enforced by the Worcester Act of the same year has made progress for ten years and results were mixed. A legislation to prevent it was declared and Congress decided to abolish the 18 th revision for a variety of reasons, such as a serious reduction in government revenue due to alcohol tax and a substantial increase in illegal acts. Public opinion in the late 1920s opposed alcohol bans. This also extends to lawmakers shocked by black market, theft, "alcohol poisoning" acts, and other organized or other forms of crime arising from what is prohibited. On 20th February 1933, Congress approved the three parts of the 21st amendment. Article 11 The revision to Article 18 of the US constitution is abolished It is forbidden to transport or import any state, region or property in the United States in order to transport or use drunkards in violation of the law. Article 1 Unless otherwise specified in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of parliament submission to the state, the provision will be approved by the treaties of several countries as a "constitutional" amendment, otherwise The clause does not work. As with the revision that was abolished, there is also a schedule in the 21st amendment. Section 3 stipulates that if all approved operations do not complete in 7 years, Congress needs to start over from the beginning. The last section also explains the formulation of the Special Ratification Treaty with the sole purpose (the sole amendment so designed). The state is obliged and promptly approves the amendment. The first is Michigan, the third is Utah. Therefore, on December 5, 1933, the 21 th revision was passed, and the 18 th revision was instantaneous. However, Section 2 of the 21st amendment transfers the enforcement of the alcohol law to the state and prohibits the importation of substances if it is prohibited by state law. As a result, the Federal government statement, which proved to have no legal enforcement at the national level, became a national statement and shifted the burden of enforcement to the state level. The result is a new income: liquor license Despite the efforts of the Heber J. Grant church and the LDS church, the Utah Council helped to approve the 21st amendment, and Utah can be regarded as the 36th state to approve the 21st revision as a law Utah, it passed the day the state passed the amendment of the state of Pennsylvania and Ohio. All 38 states who decided to hold a meeting passed the amendment, and only 36 states (4 out of 48 states) were approved. Even if Utah does not pass it, it will become a law In February 1933, the Congress proposed the 21st amendment to the Constitution, passed a resolution to abolish the 18 th revision and the Bolstead law. This resolution effectively simplifies the process as a one-count, one-balloting vote, rather than a state ballot, as the state protocol is necessary for the state protocol to approve the amendment. In December of that year, Utah approved the amendment and became the 36th state which gained the majority needed as a discontinuation. Since 1933, some states continued to be banned throughout the state, but bans were abandoned in all states by 1966. Since then, alcohol regulation in the United States has been largely dependent on the local level. This is another simple fix that ended the ban in the US. With the support of the ban campaign, the ban was imposed through the 18 th revision. The 21st revision recognizes the severe failure of prohibition. The abolition of the 18th revision did not fully legalize alcohol all over the country. After the 21st amendment, many states decided to stick to the anti-drug law for a long time. This is called "dry method". Even today, there are some restrictions on when and where adults can buy alcohol. Other provinces may enact laws prohibiting alcohol intake unless the local government agrees to a referendum (vote) on this issue.

In the United States, the first amendment of the US Constitution gives American citizens the right to open peaceful meetings and urges the government to rectify their dissatisfaction. Most notably, Fix 1 is well known and is often said to give freedom of speech. Even before the approval of amendment, Americans protested like the Boston Tea ceremony. Protest was always a way to influence the change in America. One question is as follows. Are there correct and wrong ways to protest? Since the amendment was approved, other protests that influenced the United States were to protest war such as Vietnam, Desert Shield / Desert Storm, Civil Rights Movement, and Recent Democratic Movement. The first amendment is to restrict the government. When I finally checked, Brooke Baldwin was not a member of Congress (although she was a member of a specially protected press by the first amendment), and she stopped Travis' freedom of speech I did not go through the law to do. As a host of CNN, she exercises her privilege and finished her interview with guests who no longer think she will add something to the discussion. We can discuss whether it is the right way to deal with this situation, but with the first fix we can not answer this question. Definition: The first 10 amendments to the US Constitution are also known as the Bill of Rights. Amendments are amendments or supplements to the US Constitution. The first 10 amendments (the Bill of Rights) were approved in 1791. In the US Constitution, you can make amendments to the Constitution. So far, the Constitution revised 27 items including the top ten. The term 'The Bill of Rights' was born in the UK and the 1689 Bill of Rights was mentioned, which declared Congress the best for the principal and enumerated several basic rights and freedoms. The American Revolutionary War began on April 18, 1775. 15 May 1776, Congress recommended that all colonies form their own government and prepare their own state constitution. The Declaration of Independence was adopted on July 4, 1776, announcing the separation of colonies from the UK and making it to the United States. In 1776 our government developed a constitution. The first amendment or the Bill of Rights is the right to freedom of expression. "Congress enacted a law prohibiting the respect of religious beliefs, prohibiting freedom of speech, or prohibiting press or citizens from opening peaceful gatherings, and correcting complaints from the government It will not be ". And please read whatever we want. Judge Thurgood Marshall says: "If the first amendment meant something, it was unanimously passed in 1969 that it should sit alone in his house or what kind of movie he can read" According to the ruling of the Supreme Court, this indicates the importance of the first amendment. Legally, there is no doubt that we have the right to access the review materials. Clearly we have the right to review censorship

The revision of the 21st amendment of the Amendment to the Constitution (1933) formally abolished the federal ban that was promulgated before the 18 th revision in 1919. While public attention is often focused on the end of the ban, it is important to note that the 21st amendment gives the state more room for managing domestic and foreign alcohol management It is important. As long as the state does not violate the commercial transaction terms of the Constitution, you can regulate the transport and import of alcohol. This amendment is (a) the only amendment specifically abolishing other amendments, and (b) is the only amendment adopting the state approval treaty, not the state legislature. Correction Section 1 - With this, the 18 th amendment of the US Constitution was abolished Section 2 - Any State, Territory or possession prohibited from transporting or importing to the United States in order to conduct or use drunk violations in violation of the law, Section 3 - This provision will not function unless approved by several national conventions as a "constitutional" amendment within seven years from parliamentary filing date to the state in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution. This amendment will take effect in the next 13 years. It was abolished by approving 21st revision in 1933. The 21st revision was approved on 5th December 1933. Among the 27 amendments of the US Constitution, it abolished the previous amendment and is the only revision ratified by the state. Section 1 Production, sale, or transport of sickness from the United States and its jurisdictions for beverages one year from the date of approval under this Article is prohibited. The 18 th revision is the only amendment abolished from the US constitution by incorporating the 21 th revision. The 18 th revision demands prohibition on the manufacture, sale or transport of alcoholic beverages. The 18 th revision, which is known as a citizen ban, excludes religious ceremonies and prohibits the use of "drunkards". It is noteworthy that drinking is not banned in the 18th revision but only sales, manufacturing, and transportation of alcoholic beverages are done. As a result of the ban campaign, many countries have implemented the concept of alcohol prohibition before the approval of the 18 th revision. Therefore, the 18 th revision was immediately approved as a law The last two cases included in our reading materials considers the invalidation of the 21st revision to the 18th revision. The first case, LaRue v. In California (1972), the court concluded that the 21st amendment defined the primary amendment and allowed the state to regulate the expression at the agency providing alcohol service. These restrictions may violate the first amendment (if applicable elsewhere). However, in 1996, 44 Liquormart, Inc. v. Rhode Island, the court dismissed the previous conclusion and revealed the 21st amendment, but it may allow alcohol limitations, otherwise it violates commercial terms, never changes the scope of the first amendment It will not be satisfied. Therefore, the court concluded that restrictions on alcohol price advertisement in Rhode Island violated the first amendment.

The first amendment is the first part of the Bill of Rights and it is generally the most important part of the US Constitution, as it guarantees the basic national individual freedom in religion, speech, journalism, peaceful gathering and petition freedom It is considered to be. It is a government. Because of the rights granted by the first amendment, Americans have expressed freedom that they express themselves, express their thoughts, pray without interference, make peaceful protests and consider their opinions You can live in a country where you can live. It is not fortunate enough for many people of other nationalities to say. The first amendment can be said to be the most important modification to the Bill of Rights, as it protects the means of autonomy of the country. It is worth noting that even though the proposed policy does not have the opportunity to survive the legal challenge, the protected first amendment freedom will be attacked by the Trump regime. However, in many cases it is important to remember the dark era when the US government conspired with the country's most important ideal of freedom and equality, with the support of the people. The more awkward chapter in the history of the Americans includes "foreigners and incitement law", the Japanese American imprisonment during World War II, and the long night of Jim Crow. Today, many Americans are correctly reviewing these injustices with fear and shame. Protection and privacy between government regulations and citizens' freedom as defined in the first amendment. The controversial problem of the first amendment law is controversial. The boundary of this rule was promoted as the first amendment protects citizens from government interference in freedom of expression. One of the most common but controversial issues in the First Amendment is copyright and infringement. Although the theme may not look big Each one of us can select the people we are associated with and this right is reflected in the first amendment. This is the only recent revision to the firearms conflict center. Americans claim that our Constitution gives us the right to combine guns and freedoms. In all these discussions about the Constitution, I would like to clarify the misnomer. It is related to the source of these rights. Constitution No, I will not dare. The founders did not say that they are writing articles that give us rights. They wrote a document to show what we already have. They believe that these rights are essential; that is because we exist. The US Constitution provides for the rights we have and limits the ability of the government to forcibly deprive these rights. It does not give us rights. They are already ours

The first amendment of the first amendment prohibits Parliament from enacting the law, regulating speech or publication prior to publication, or punishing it after announcement. In many cases many states passed freely contradictory law guaranteed by first amendment. However, broadcasting has always been considered a special exemption from the Freedom of Expression for two reasons. 1) The most important reason is the lack of spectrum and 2) persuasive power of the medium. Because the radio and television enter the house and they can be heard and seen by children without teachers, the government believes that the special responsibilities of American citizens are being kept. The first amendment is to restrict the government. When I finally checked, Brooke Baldwin was not a member of Congress (although she was a member of a specially protected press by the first amendment), and she stopped Travis' freedom of speech I did not go through the law to do. As a host of CNN, she exercises her privilege and finished her interview with guests who no longer think she will add something to the discussion. We can discuss whether it is the right way to deal with this situation, but with the first fix we can not answer this question. Definition: The first 10 amendments to the US Constitution are also known as the Bill of Rights. Amendments are amendments or supplements to the US Constitution. The first 10 amendments (the Bill of Rights) were approved in 1791. In the US Constitution, you can make amendments to the Constitution. So far, the Constitution revised 27 items including the top ten. The term 'The Bill of Rights' was born in the UK and the 1689 Bill of Rights was mentioned, which declared Congress the best for the principal and enumerated several basic rights and freedoms. The American Revolutionary War began on April 18, 1775. 15 May 1776, Congress recommended that all colonies form their own government and prepare their own state constitution. The Declaration of Independence was adopted on July 4, 1776, announcing the separation of colonies from the UK and making it to the United States.

The sixth revision was approved on December 15, 1791. It guarantees the right to federal court criminal proceedings and judges that these rights are fundamental and important. The sixth amendment granted the defendant the right to accelerate and initiate the trial to a fair jury. The accused is informed of the nature and cause of the allegation and has the right to confront the witness who testified with the witness. In this paper, we comprehensively analyze the above rights and introduce the history of the sixth revision. The sixth revision of the US Constitution outlines common points. According to author Siegel and Wooler (2013), the rights of witnesses are consistent with the sixth revision (page 388). The accused has the right to face a person accusing them with illegal or inappropriate acts that pose a threat to the community. This applies to all defendants in federal and state courts. In such a case, the jury candidate may influence the information that may affect the recognition of the accused before the trial starts, and how to interpret the evidence provided during the trial Even information is provided. The sixth revision of the US Constitution guarantees the right of criminal defendants to a fair trial. News, printed materials, and electronic media reserve the right to disclose information on defendants and criminal proceedings. According to Sixth Amendment, individuals facing criminal proceedings are entitled to effective assistance from lawyers. When a criminal action is brought against an individual, the lawyer's right based on the sixth revision is triggered. Criminal actions are initiated through formal claims, preliminary hearing, information provision, prosecution or trials. If the suspect is not officially charged, arrest does not necessarily mean the start of a criminal proceeding, therefore it does not always trigger the protection of the sixth amendment. The right to defend the sixth amendment applies to all "critical stages" in criminal proceedings. The Supreme Court judged that important steps include trials, post-indictment lineups, post-indictment trials, litigation negotiations and guilty actions.

Congress shall enact laws relating to religious beliefs and free exercise, freedom of speech and loss of press freedom, the rights of people to peaceful gatherings, and the right to demand dissatisfaction of the government It will not. The first and most important modification to our Constitution is the first modification. "This revision establishes our freedom as a new federal citizen." The first revision guarantees freedom of speech and freedom of press. The first amendment is to restrict the government. When I finally checked, Brooke Baldwin was not a member of Congress (although she was a member of a specially protected press by the first amendment), and she stopped Travis' freedom of speech I did not pass the law to do. As a host of CNN, she exercises her privilege and finished her interview with guests who no longer think she will add something to the discussion. We can discuss whether it is the right way to deal with this situation, but with the first fix we can not answer this question. Definition: The first 10 amendments to the US Constitution are also known as the Bill of Rights. Amendments are amendments or supplements to the US Constitution. The first 10 amendments (the Bill of Rights) were approved in 1791. In the US Constitution, you can make amendments to the Constitution. So far, the Constitution revised 27 items including the top ten. The term 'The Bill of Rights' was born in the UK and the 1689 Bill of Rights was mentioned, which declared Congress the best for the principal and enumerated several basic rights and freedoms. The American Revolutionary War began on April 18, 1775. 15 May 1776, Congress recommended that all colonies form their own government and prepare their own state constitution. The Declaration of Independence was adopted on July 4, 1776, announcing the separation of colonies from the UK and making it to the United States. In 1776, our government has created a constitution. It is the first 10 amends or our Bill of Rights. The first amendment or the Bill of Rights is the right to freedom of expression. "Congress enacted a law prohibiting the respect of religious beliefs, prohibiting freedom of speech, or prohibiting press or citizens from opening peaceful gatherings, and correcting complaints from the government It will not be ". And please read whatever we want. Judge Thurgood Marshall says: "If the first amendment meant something, it was unanimously passed in 1969 that it should sit alone in his house or what kind of movie he can read" According to the ruling of the Supreme Court, this indicates the importance of the first amendment. Legally, there is no doubt that we have the right to access the review materials. Clearly we have the right to review censorship

The Abortion Right and Boxer - Snow Correction February 15, 2001 was the first day of introduction of the 2001 World Democratic Act by Senator Barbara boxer, Olympia Snow and Lincoln Chaffee. This law prevents the United States from imposing undemocratic and dangerous restrictions on overseas providers. Representatives of Nita Lowey and Nancy Johnson also propose appropriate regulations during the holidays. Senator boxers and Roy representative enacted the law to respond to President Bush's "global ban rules" on January 22, 2001, in commemoration of the 28th anniversary of Roy's policy. Boxers propose to elect president and vice president by referencing a constitutional amendment. Electoral colleges will no longer exist. If two-thirds of the Senate and the House of Representatives and three quarters of the Legislature pass the amendment plan, that revision proposal will come into force. How is this paradoxical result mathematically possible in recent elections? This is because all election votes will be awarded to the statewide champions, except for the two countries (Maine State and Nebraska State). Even if the candidate can win only the state government, 100% compensation will be given for the state election ballot. Mr. Trump won all the electoral votes won by the weakest benefits like Michigan State and gained 50.1% of the bipartisan votes, so we won the big victory in a large general election. Should the United States maintain that election university? This constitutional amendment will supersede a national referendum Diplomatic Democratic senator Barbara boxer proposed a bill to abolish electoral colleges through revision of the Constitution, but in Republican controlled parliament, it is unlikely that White House will be acquired in this process. In addition, three-quarters of states must approve the amendment and many countries believe that the small country is reluctant to give up the unbalanced power. But this may change as the presidential campaign concentrates their attention to a few swaying countries (like Michigan and Wisconsin's own danger as indicated last month). 94% of the presidential campaign campaign was held in one quarter of the state, as FairVote and popular vote were promptly pointed out. The 38 ignored countries accounted for three quarters of the country and are sufficient to pass corrections that increase the estimate of the presidential election.

For many years America has been built on freedom. Freedom of speech, freedom of choice, freedom of worship, freedom to do whatever you want within the law. American law is aimed at protecting and protecting these liberties. The first amendment guarantees the freedom of religion, speech, news, assembly and petition. It assures the citizen that the federal government should not restrict freedom of worship. It forbids Congress in particular to set up an official church to support the government. The first amendment is to restrict the government. When I finally checked, Brooke Baldwin was not a member of Congress (although she was a member of a specially protected press by the first amendment), and she stopped Travis' freedom of speech I did not go through the law to do. As a host of CNN, she exercises her privilege and finished her interview with guests who no longer think she will add something to the discussion. We can discuss whether it is the right way to deal with this situation, but with the first fix we can not answer this question. Definition: The first 10 amendments to the US Constitution are also known as the Bill of Rights. Amendments are amendments or supplements to the US Constitution. The first 10 amendments (the Bill of Rights) were approved in 1791. In the US Constitution, you can make amendments to the Constitution. So far, the Constitution revised 27 items including the top ten. The term 'The Bill of Rights' was born in the UK and the 1689 Bill of Rights was mentioned, which declared Congress the best for the principal and enumerated several basic rights and freedoms. The American Revolutionary War began on April 18, 1775. 15 May 1776, Congress recommended that all colonies form their own government and prepare their own state constitution. The Declaration of Independence was adopted on July 4, 1776, announcing the separation of colonies from the UK and making it to the United States. In 1776, our government has created a constitution. It is the first 10 amends or our Bill of Rights. The first amendment or the Bill of Rights is the right to freedom of expression. "Congress enacted a law prohibiting the respect of religious beliefs, prohibiting freedom of speech, or prohibiting press or citizens from opening peaceful gatherings, and correcting complaints from the government It will not be ". And please read whatever we want. Judge Thurgood Marshall says: "If the first amendment meant something, it was unanimously passed in 1969 that it should sit alone in his house or what kind of movie he can read" According to the ruling of the Supreme Court, this indicates the importance of the first amendment. Legally, there is no doubt that we have the right to access the review materials. Clearly we have the right to review censorship

The second amendment has little problem of instigating Americans, it is not a problem of increasing crime and violence. This problem can be easily linked with the availability of firearms. "Argument on whether the gun is a sacred tradition and whether it is the right guaranteed by the second amendment of the US Constitutional Renewal or whether the gun is a terrible risk of crime and violence" ("firearm management") People believe that the abolition of the second amendment can solve the problem. It is not in America. There is a clever second fix. Right to carry weapons. "For the security of a free country, we need well-managed militia, people have the right to keep weapons and carry them, we can not violate." Is not it not only dexterity? Instead, it is very powerful. Always strong, I know, never give up. We are now in the area inside our history. NHS is conceived in the ashes of war and is a way to restore the country. For British, health is a fundamental right and there are occasional differences in how to act, but this principle is still consistent. Using American model, according to one's own free will, citizen's rights is to ensure personal health management of service points, we can already see the beginning of the formation of differences. NHS seems to be the privilege of goods everywhere in the pond. An entity that provides services but has not paid The Second Reform Absolutist often quotes to prove that the founder strictly adheres to the rights of weapons that they believe to be force majeure. The founder believed that the second amendment clause was a public right "as militia gathered in the town square", but the modern understanding of gun ownership was private . This is not only the founder's intention abused but also the result of infringing the indivisible right of "pursuit of life, freedom, and happiness". The National Rifle Association (NFA) believes that the rights of individuals possessing weapons are described in the second revision (The Arms to Arms Arms, 2008). US gun control: Do you apply the second amendment clause "carrying with weapons" as a US citizen in the second revision of the past, the present and the future so that you can protect your family? If you think so, you may be wrong. According to the article "Firearm management in the world of sociology" (2001), the answer depends on the interpretation of the second revision of the Constitution of the United States of America.

Canada and International Law ISP Division A: Thesis NRA (National Rifle Association) is a non-profit, non-partisan organization whose purpose is to protect the second amendment of the US Bill of Rights ("well-managed militia, freedom Security of the country) Proposal for promoting gun ownership and gun handling, firearm safety and gun control (National Rifle Association, National Rifle Association). Today's Nuclear Regulatory Committee promises support for shooting, promotes firearm safety, responsibility and freedom, and protection from violation of the second amendment right ("What is NRA"). They took a very strong position in protecting the rights of the second amendment. They believe that the right to hold and carry weapons is the rights of individuals and we strive to oppose laws that infringe on their rights. AFA was founded in 1993. It aims to protect the constitutional right to carry weapons while supporting the management of fair and reasonable firearms. They are trying to hold players' arms, rifles, shotguns at the expense of casual shooting arms and pistols (Lissabet, 'Return' 3). This approach was proposed as a compromise to protect the rights of the second amendment. They support the second amendment and also support the implementation of more stringent gun control (Lissabet, 'Anti-Federalism' 4). AFA belongs to many former NRA members of its members. The National Rifle Association (NRA) was disappointed with the broader view of the second amendment that has consistently refused to change the right to possess weapons under the Constitution for ten years since Heller's decision. In November 2017, the National Rifle Association was particularly outraged when the judge refused to accept the challenge of the Maryland state capacity magazine or semi-automatic weapons prohibition, making the AR - 15 out of the constitution. On February 20, only Clarence Thomas was dissatisfied with the High Court's refusal to hear California law, asking to purchase a gun for 10 days. His objections over 14 pages complained that the lower court handled the "second amendment" and that the Supreme Court's right to possess weapons is "unwelcome right".

The monks are self-destructive to express freedom from religious intolerance, and civilians stand in front of military tanks to stop destroying their cities. Others burned or torn the flag to show their beliefs on issues ranging from racial discrimination to war. The flag is not the most violent of the three examples, but because the flag is a symbol of freedom, it should be prohibited by amendment. Polls show that most Americans are hoping to ban the flag and supporters of the amendment stated that they are trying to stop judges from disappointing the people's will ing. They said that burning American flags in public places - rarely seen in recent times - is an insult that remains a table for the founder of the country and is a disgrace for Americans who fight tyranny They say. Senator Daniel K. Inouye (D Hawaii) said on yesterday's speech, the burning flag "obscenity, pain, and patriotism". "But I believe that Americans have sacrificed their lives in many wars to ensure that all Americans have the right to express themselves. Congress did not pass a constitutional amendment banning the national flag. Even those who oppose the banner's incineration are not in favor of limiting the Bill of Rights to slander. They believe that expressing political views is more important than protecting the country's symbols, even if it is uncomfortable (92). In the past and the present, Americans treated this banner freely. They are proud of it, but it is in the shape of a pillowcase where we go to sleep, a carpet where we enter the foot, the porcelain we eat, and the furniture we sit. The flag is used for ceremonies, parades and many other events. Elementary school students wore a flag color to form the "living flag"; even during World War II, we made some instructions to weave small flags and send them to soldiers far from home I did (Allegheny 59)

The thirteenth amendment is one of the most influential reforms in our history. The adoption of this amendment meant ending slavery and ending the overall way of life. Southern countries separated from trade unions were forced to release their slaves and passed amendments as part of their permission to return to trade unions. Then the southern part was forced to find a new way of self-sufficiency and cash crops. As a result of this amendment passed, African Americans finally acquired freedom. Racism and Apartheid still play an important role in their lives, but they are no longer forced to work as slaves. By reading this article you will understand that thirteenth amendment formed our lives and the degree of this country today. Before explaining the details of this fix in detail, it may be helpful to understand how it started. Abraham Lincoln himself proposed this amendment to the 38 th Congress. Lincoln strongly opposed slavery and freely expressed his view. After he was elected President, South Carolina decided to leave the United States. Several splits have now begun. The total is 13. These states include: South Carolina State, Mississippi State, Florida State, Alabama State, Georgia State, Louisiana State, Texas State, Virginia State, Arkansas State, North Carolina State, Tennessee State, Missouri State, and Kentucky State Has formed an alliance of the United States or CSA. The main reason for these sectors is that the southern countries believe that the administration of new governments threatens the right to maintain the country, especially slavery. This divisional movement resulted in a civil war, after the CSA was defeated, formed a thirteenth amendment. However, while the war is ongoing, Congress is working on developing the 13 th modification first submitted to several state parliaments at the 38 th Congress on 31 January 1865. When CSA is defeated The thirteenth revision of the US Constitution did not end slavery. In fact, this is the first reference to the term "slavery" in the Constitution, and in this amendment it is not abolished this word at all once taught, but until today given constitutional protection I am keeping American slavery in various forms. That's why the biggest prison strike in US history is about to reach the third week. Men and women in these prisons are effective slaves. According to Alice Speri, their freedom or nearly free labor force "is an industry of $ 2 billion annually that employs about 900,000 prisoners, but in some states it will pay a few cents per hour. According to the general knowledge of American citizens in general, President Abraham Lincoln abolished the thirteenth amendment in 1864. But for African-American scholars, activists and legal professionals, the wording, meaning, and influence of this amendment is a continuous source of information. I guess. Because the thirteenth revision abolished slavery, it is illegal to take away people from their homeland and to the United States, which includes exemption clauses. This provision stipulates that it is illegal to engage in captivity, trading and possession of slaves, but is still an acceptable and legal form of punishment for those convicted. People without color think that this is a wonderful benefit for the color community. However, it is not so, yet not

The United States is based on people's sovereignty and personal freedom. What Americans do when their freedom to give them is restricted at birth or deprived. They fight. The government has tried to deprive us of our civil liberty. The big failure of the government was an attempt to ban the alcohol. As we all know, alcohol is very dangerous and should be limited. But as the government tried to completely cancel it, the government had gone too far, as the founder of the rebels fell, the American people just found a way to understand the law. After introducing the discussion of clothing law, this article will study the protection of the first revision speech and expression applied to school clothing law. Specific types of dressing and grooming regulations are analyzed below. The progress of lawsuits on clothing regulations concerning hair length, obscenity, gang clothing is based on various ways the court deals with these issues, and how these decisions affect the legality of current public school uniforms Indicates whether it will be affected. . In short, this article concretely explains the constitutionality of the uniform clothing provisions and concludes that they are actually constitutional. School clothing regulations will vary depending on the school district to which the student belongs. At the moment, it is controversial at schools across the country whether school has requirements to be installed. Supporters of clothing regulations insist that students deepen their self-confidence and help reduce school confusion. Opponents of clothing regulations believe that they discriminate against women and infringe the student's rights to freedom of speech Many schools have established certain clothing rules for students going to school. Sometimes these clothing rules spread throughout the region. In my school, I want clothes like modern women and healthy men in the 1920s. - On the morning of each grade work day I woke up to prepare the school. I have breakfast, get on a public car, and I hope that my day will work out. When I got off the bus and entered school, I was unhappy because I was taken off from the girls and the back of the boy fell from my trousers. My hopes disappeared, replaced by aversion Many people today think that clothing rules are answers to most questions at school, but that is wrong. School is passionate about dress code everywhere. Like New Jersey, about 96% of schools have dress codes. It is necessary to stop this. I personally know the people who passed these schools, they hate it! First of all, as I did, most schools do not have air conditioners. Most dress codes contain boy's trousers that sweat, especially on warm, sunny days. In addition, for girls, almost all dress codes include skirts. How about the cold winter? Okay, they just go to school with cold feet. Another thing about the skirt, I know that several girls will feel uncomfortable wearing them. To notice at school you need to feel comfortable wearing the clothes you are wearing (this is the main cause of school confusion).

Sixth amendment: If Britain giving justice to everyone before the revolutionary war deems settlers a crime, he is likely to be unjustly tried and imprisoned. When the founder's father wrote the Bill of Rights, they believed that all Americans deserve the rights that the UK did not give them. The sixth amendment gives many citizens legal rights to US citizens to prevent them from being mistakenly convicted. The sixth amendment is the most important revision of the US Constitution. As with the fifth revision, the sixth revision consists of a series of clauses or single phrases, each defining a specific set of rights. In addition to the fifth Amendment provision (see chapter 5), the sixth amendment also provides specific rights to government criminal suspects. Therefore, the sixth amendment is often referred to as amendment to provide a fair trial. The accused also has the right to be heard by the jury. The jury is a group of citizens who listen to the evidence and determine whether the accused is guilty or not guilty. People's trials must be initiated quickly and must be open to the public. Also, the jury can not judge the case before the trial begins. "The general permission of a jury trial for a serious crime is a fundamental right, it is essential to prevent justice fraud and ensure fair trial for all defendants," the sixth amendment states that 10 As with any other exemption, as with all exemptions, it is impossible to restrict all criminal trials and standard Barton v. US cases, 281 US 276 (1930) In case of abandonment of the jury trial it is also necessary to receive prosecutors approval and sanctions on trials Prosecutors or courts have underwent a jury trial with a constitutional guarantee and are therefore not obliged to waive claims I refuse to accept the defendant 380 United States 24 (1965) "It is essential that the general permission of a jury trial against a serious crime is a basic right, it is essential to prevent judicial fraud and ensure a fair trial for all the defendants", so " Article 14 Restricts States through Proper Procedure 14th Amendment Article 14 However, because it is impossible to say that a specific trial without all criminal or jury trials is unfair, You can waive your rights and get a trial in front of a judge 62.

The US Constitution proposed an exclusive amendment to promote the rights of its citizens. One of them is the fourth revision. The fourth amendment highlights the right to protect people's security in terms of personnel, housing, and effects on unjust search and seizure. You must not violate and you must not issue a warrant. In particular, please explain the place to be searched and the people and things to seal (Worral, 2012). Mapp v. Ohio, 367 US 643 (1961) is a groundbreaking case in criminal proceedings, the US Supreme Court ruled that breach of evidence obtained by the fourth amendment can prevent "unfair search and seizure" . Like the previous law, it is used in criminal proceedings in state courts, and federal criminal law in federal courts. The Supreme Court will accomplish this using principles called selective mergers; in Mapp this means incorporating the provisions of the fourth amendment that apply only to the federal government applicable to the state, as explained by the court Including. The 14 th revision of this Act is an act of the procedure condition. On 19th June 1961 (6-3), the United States Supreme Court Mapp v. Ohio decided that evidence obtained in violation of Article 4 amendment of the US Constitution prohibits "unreasonable search and seizure" and does not approve the state court. By doing so, the Federal exclusion rules prohibit the use of unconstitutional evidence in federal courts, and the theory that the state is guaranteed by the principle of corporate formation, ie protection measures of the Federal Bill of Rights. Adoption of the provision of the due process provision of the 14 th revision (prohibits the state from denying life, freedom or property without proper legal process). Mapp's ruling also said Wolf v. Partially overrulting the Supreme Court's ruling in Colorado (1949), which treats privacy as being "embedded" rather than federal exclusion rules.

According to Article 2 of the amendment to the Constitution of the United States, "The security of free countries requires well-managed militia, the rights of people holding and carrying weapons should not be infringed" Ability to protect yourself I restrict it. According to Wikipedia, gun control is aimed at providing guidance on all problems related to guns as well as other laws. This includes assembly, transportation, distribution, sales and end use of firearms. I recently made a panel discussion on the second amendment and gun control at the Florida Freedom Summit in Orlando, Florida. Since I am writing a lot of articles on these topics for Freedom Movement, the 10th correction center, LewRockwell.com, Freedom Foundation, it would be a good idea to reread these articles to prepare for the problem think. The organizer or audience will ask me. As I read these articles, I suggested 10 themes on the second amendment and gun control, summarizing my view on these issues. Second amendment - Advocates supporting guns call firearms "offensive weapons" and what they call "large" ammunition magazines are weapons protected by the second amendment. As they are one of the most useful weapons for defense purposes, they are "commonly used" for defense purposes, as determined by the Supreme Court ruling of the Supreme Court of Colombia v. Supreme Court (2008) It is a standard that was made. This applies regardless of the extension of the definition of 'aggressive weapons' supported by advocates of gun control. Given the political sticking of the constitutional amendment, especially the fundamental revision seen from the eyes of their followers, gun control deals cautiously and gradually as a second amendment. Stevens' critics are right: the second amendment will not be abolished, and his column is now harming marching campaigns for our lives It may be distracting for brave men, women, and young people to discuss the second amendment to participate in the gun control debate. But it does not have to be so. There are many false alarms that encourage political discussions over gun control, but the law itself and its application are relatively easy to follow. The following explains the second amendment and how it supports state gun reform requirements. There are explanations about the worldwide task of implementing constitutional rights.

He thinks that suspects who do not have prior knowledge of their rights will feel pressured to answer all the questions raised by the questioner. They convicted Miranda in his written testimony. Miranda did not know that he did not have to answer all the questions, so his confession was not voluntary (alavardohistory). Therefore, he was not pleased, he was obliged to "testify" himself. As a result, the police action violated the fifth amendment. Miranda did not have a lawyer during the trial. After the 1966 Miranda v. Arizona Supreme Court ruling, the concept of "Miranda's Rights" was reflected in American law. The right to modify violated during his armed robbery, kidnapping, arrest and trial. And Mr. Miranda was raped by a mentally disabled young woman (Miranda was convicted later on and reconsidered based on his alienated former companion who was pursued by the original arrestor through Miranda's parents and sent him to jail Miranda's lawyer later admitted that he tried "him" Miranda v. Arizona (1966) deals with police that require police to understand their constitutional rights before being interrogated by the police. The specific protective measures involved were the right not to convict the fifth amendment himself and the right to the attorney of the sixth revision. The "fair basic principle" criteria derived from the Equal Protection Clause of the 14 th revision suggests that he or he will deal with the police so that he can make informed decisions rather than breaking his best carelessness I am curious to demand that she be informed about her choice. June 13: Miranda v. Arizona State: The US Supreme Court ruled that Article 5 of the amendment of the US Constitution provides protection from self-abuse and silently recommends to suspects being interrogated during detention I asked. Get rights and their rights lawyers. June 30: At a roving press conference in Tokyo, the Beatles openedly disagreed with their manager, Brian Epstein, allegedly opposed to the Vietnam War, claiming they were still non-political. During the subsequent American tour of the August band, George Harrison said: "The war is wrong and this is obviously wrong, and this is everything that needs to be spoken." In the revolutionary Miranda vs. Arizona ruling, the US Supreme Court expanded the scope of the fifth amendment to cover all situations, including a reduction in individual freedom outside the courtroom. 384 U. S. 436 (1966). Therefore, whenever a law enforcement body detains a suspect, the law enforcement agency must inform the suspects of all rights. These rights, known as Miranda's rights, include the right to defend silence, the right to attend a lawyer during the trial, and the right to obtain a lawyer appointed by the government if the suspect can not afford a person .

President Barack Obama in the United States said that we have an "obligation" to try something that can make use of our children, but many people think that this is stupid. Gun control is considered a government policy or regulation that regulates or limits the sale and use of guns. In the US Constitution, the second amendment states that well-controlled militia should not be infringed on the safety of free countries and the rights of people holding and carrying weapons. In today's America, gun control is a big problem, especially in the field of politics. Take gun control as an example. The second amendment approved the gun in the United States. With this amendment, people can manage "managed militia". This means that if the government loses sufficient control power, people can buy the government forcibly. Some people who are usually on the left side desire to completely ban guns or to strictly control them to stop terrorism - but this prevents people from getting figures to fight I will. If the government gets depressed, people will be ineffective. It may be distracting for brave men, women, and young people to discuss the second amendment to participate in the gun control debate. But it does not have to be so. There are many false alarms that encourage political discussions over gun control, but the law itself and its application are relatively easy to follow. The following explains the second amendment and how it supports state gun reform requirements. There are explanations about the worldwide task of implementing constitutional rights. Politics of gun control In recent years political discussions on gun control and second revision are becoming more and more unstable. Gun lobby groups such as the National Rifle Association are more organized and aggressive and their problem agenda is evolving with the emergence of new and more powerful weapons and militias. Meanwhile, a serious injury of James Brady has made gun control supporters an obvious martyr of close contact with Republican conservatives. In short, gun control and gun control gun control are actions the government should reduce crime. Congress passed a number of laws on this subject, but it did not go well. Gun control was a controversial issue for many years, but American citizens have a constitutional right to own a gun. In the way of government management of firearms, they enacted the Brady Act. Handgun Control Incorporated is a major organization for lobbying and legislation.

The thirteenth revised constitution is an identity of a country different from other countries and protects the rights of its citizens. The US Constitution, which includes laws and roles, was created in 1787. It has 27 approved modifications, the first of which is named the Bill of Rights. Each of these 27 fixes was issued for some reason or as a result of certain circumstances. A professional writer specializing in the history of the United States and the world, the constitution and the environment, Mark Grossman said: "The constitutional amendment is not a dry history - it is a comprehensive work that includes a way to change it. The thirteenth amendment provides a constitutional basis for the Disabled Persons Act of the United States of America. Plaintiff insisted that the power of the 13th reform of Congress reached "various forms of discrimination by race or other means". "The court dismissed the claim of the thirteenth revision of the plaintiff because the American law for persons with disabilities was not actually passed in accordance with the amendment to Article 13 and the second reason is the meaning of the thirteenth revision case The thirteenth amendment, amendment (1865), official abolition of the US slavery constitution Despite its significance in American history, the thirteenth amendment is not one of the more frequently cited parts of today's constitution. Since slavery is part of our past, the current relevance of this amendment will be controversial. Does it affect the fairness of modern labor practices? Do you approve Congress to pass a broad civil rights law? Regardless of the outcome of these discussions, however, the thirteenth amendment should be allowed, this is a historical and solemn commitment that slavery never exists again in the United States. Since the conclusion of the American Civil War, African Americans are working hard to achieve equality. In 1865, the thirteenth amendment of the US Constitution ended slavery in the United States. With the 14th amendment of 1867, African Americans were protected equally, and in 1870 they were given voting rights to African Americans by the 15th amendment. Despite these legal protections, African Americans continue to face US economic, social and political discrimination. Approximately 4 million slaves were released when the alliance won the civil war and approved the Constitutional Amendment No. 13 (1865). The 14th revision (1868) acknowledged the citizenship of African-Americans and the 15th revision (1870) guaranteed their voting rights. However, as these new provisions of the Constitution tend to be overlooked especially in the south, the period of reconstruction (1865 - 77) was one of the disappointment and frustration of African Americans.

The first amendment first amendment states: "Congress has enacted any law, respects religious beliefs, prohibits the use of free religion, is dissatisfied (North America Residents of colonial residents have no legal right to express an opinion against the administration of the British government against them). Several judicial decisions exclude problems related to the task of teaching "creation of science" when teaching evolutionary education and evolution theory. Article 1 of the Constitutional Amendment requires that public institutions such as schools continue to be religiously neutral. Public schools can not promote it because "creative science" claims certain sectarian religious views. The law was heard in the United States District Court when Arkansas passed a law requiring that "creation of science" and "equal time" develop. Opponents of the bill include Unified Methodist Church, British Catholic, Bishop of African Methodist, Presbyterian and Religious Leader of Southern Baptist Church, and several educational institutions. After a full-blown trial, the judge judged that "creative science" is not eligible for scientific theory (McLean v. Arkansas Board of Education, 529 F. Supp. 1255). Legal decisions on creationism and evolution were dependent on the first revision of the US Constitution. "Congress should not establish laws relating to the establishment or prohibition of religious freedom" to some extent. The provisions of enactment and free exercise require religious neutrality to public authorities. Therefore, it must be a corrupt context, but it is perfectly legal for a teacher to teach religion. People can explain religious or religious views, but it is not constitutional to say "Buddha is correct". Similarly, people can talk about religious controversy, but it is not appropriate to stand on one side (eg, "Pitifers are right because witches are evil, it is right to burn a witch "). What to do Every student in a public school in the US has a constitutional right to hear the whole story as the story evolves. It is known as the first revision of the Bill of Rights. American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), according to the authority of civil rights, each student has the right to take fair education (ACLU ...). Supreme court decision Edwards v. In Aguillard, 482 US 578 (1987), the court ruled by omitting evolution and creation from the science curriculum to compromise "to provide comprehensive science education". At the moment the law is very clear and the Supreme Court has stepped in - the first amendment prohibits modifying the state curriculum solely to preserve religious beliefs. This is the establishment of religion, it is unconstitutional. (Edwards) So it is not just illegal to evolve from the classroom.

The first 10 amendments of the Bill of Rights or the Constitution were proposed to Congress by James Madison in 1789 in response to anti-Federal movement. This can further support the right to freedom. In particular, the fourth amendment was drafted to approve abuse aid orders, which are "search warrants" issued by the UK government to search vessels that are considered to contain smuggled items in the colonies of the United States It was. The fourth modification can be divided into three parts: which activities are considered "search" or "detention", what are the possible reasons for "search" and "detention", and finally How to deal with the violation. The fourth revision was written for applying to physical search rather than electronic search. With the advent of new technology, the court tried to apply the fourth revision to the electronic data, but as a result, the influence of the revision was diluted. Below are some of the relevant rulings applicable to intercepting communications related to non-government intelligence agencies. Olmsted v. United States (1928) is an early ruling that the Supreme Court did not acknowledge that eavesdropping by the government is "search" or "detention" because wire transfers were eavesdropped outside the suspect's home and there was no real violation . . It's a place. Therefore, the court stated that the fourth amendment does not apply and that the Fed does not need to agree to acquire arrest warrants or wiretapped suspects' home. After that, the ruling was overturned in the next incident. On January 23, 2012, the US Supreme Court issued a long-term ruling on the impact of the use of the police's Global Positioning System (GPS) tracking device on the Fourth Amendment. The court ruled a somewhat complicated decision (US vs. Jones), setting up such equipment publicly on the bus comprised a survey under the fourth revision bill. The Colombian Special Zone police and the Federal Bureau of Investigation are suspecting that Antoine Jones is involved in drug trafficking. By the beginning of 2005, the investigation into Jones has progressed to the evidence that the police may have reason to install GPS equipment on Jeep registered by Jones' wife. Within 10 days of issue of the license, the power of attorney will approve device installation at any time. Due to the uncertain opinion of the court, the police waited 11 days before installing GPS equipment.

In this article I will discuss the rights of the sixth revision, elements of invalid lawyers, whether the judge treats someone as a valid lawyer, the defendant judged that his lawyer is invalid, the judge was effective I also decide the right of the sixth revision first and I will explain the invalid attorney element. In the case of a country and region where the crime is committed that the accused is to have a right to a fair jury, the sixth amendment was previously determined by law, and on the nature and causes of accusations I was informed. The sixth amendment states: "In all criminal proceedings, the defendant should have the right to make a prompt and public trial by a fair jury of the country and region in which the crime was committed ..." We guarantee. At the same time, the first amendment ensures that "Congress does not enact legislation ... freedom of speech or deprivation of press freedom ..." In the late eighteenth century, when information was moving slowly in the country, the constitutionalists may have never imagined possible conflict between the two guarantees. However, with the development of mass communication technology, news are diffused through cable service and then spread through radio waves. The problem lies in the contradiction between the right of the sixth revision of the defendant and "a fair and open trial of a fair jury", the first amendment guarantees that press freedom will inform the public about the judicial process . Is there too much propaganda before trial and trial? Did the judges approve of changing places with plenty of local publicity? In the case of Shepard: The atmosphere of the carnival of the trial made impossibility of justice. The judge denied that the change in position was wrong. The media independently decided that Shepard was guilty, judging that it had made many prejudices about the case, the jury could freely read and could not be ignored. Communication between the jury and his / her family should also be prohibited while reviewing the verdict, but that is not the case. In short, the lightning of the media has prevented Shepard from accepting fair trials through "fair juries".

Anti-federal marriage The term revised marriage means a lot to many different people. For some people, marriage is a religious ceremony, it should be a religious alliance, and there is no interaction with the government. For others, marriage is a legal contract that will benefit both parties of marriage. According to Wikipedia, most people say that marriage is "(1) mutual agreement and contractual relationships legally recognized, a state where the husband or wife reunites with the opposite sex (2), and the same relationship with the traditional relationship , Same sex ". "Not only the type of contract marriage, but I Mr Obama and his GLBTQ supporter failed to marry a homosexual. Mr. Obama voted against the "federal marriage revision", opposed the "protection of marriage law" and supported the civic union with full partner rights (emergency, equality medical insurance, employment benefits and property rights) I disagreed with gay marriage. In an interview with the Chicago Daily Tribune, Mr. Obama states: "I am a Christian, so I am not religious or ruling my religious beliefs about this issue. According to beliefs, marriage states that it is sanctity between men and women. Anti-federal marriage The term revised marriage means a lot to many different people. For some people, marriage is a religious ceremony, it should be a religious alliance, and there is no interaction with the government. For others, marriage is a legal contract that will benefit both parties of marriage. According to Wikipedia, most people say that marriage is "(1) mutual agreement and contractual relationships legally recognized, a state where the husband or wife reunites with the opposite sex (2), and the same relationship with the traditional relationship , Same sex ". People "" Not only the type of contract marriage. Constitutional amendment - federal marriage amendment - declares that marriage in the United States should consist only of a combination of men and women. It is interpreted that the prohibition of the Constitution and the constitution of the country requires the presence or absence of a spouse and its legal reasons to be given to unions and unions. Constitutional amendment - revision of marriage protection - declares that marriage in the United States should consist only of a combination of men and women. The Constitution or any prohibition on the constitutional constitution is interpreted as requiring any union or association to grant the status of a spouse or legal event thereof

The first interpretation of the first amendment states that the first amendment of the Constitution of the United States states: "Congress should not allow any law to be established, prohibit the free exercise of religion," [1 ] Our former father believed that this statement is sufficiently clear for everyone to understand but the US government needs to enact laws to more clearly define constitutional rights I often thought that there was. The interpretation of the first fix has been seen throughout our history, and it has been incorporated in a conservative or changing manner. The first revision basically explains Congression's limited power and our basic freedom. However, if the state government were able to contain these freedoms, it rarely attracted people's attention during the ratification of the bill, so the problem was never questioned. - According to First Amendment Center of Vanderbilt University and Newseum of Washington DC there are 12 kinds of statements not protected by First Amendment right. "An obscenity, insult, jealousy, jealousy, child pornography, false verification, compulsion, temptation to imminent lawless behavior, real threats, temptation to crime, and theft of copyrighted works" (paragraph 2) Reading the first amendment carefully reveals that it defends some fundamental freedoms - religion, speech, news, petitions and assembly. Interpretation of modifications is by no means an easy task, as the cases decided by the court attempt to define the limits of these freedoms. These definitions have been developed through American history, and this process continues today. Article 1 of the amendment guarantees religious freedom in two provisions - to establish a "free exercise" clause that allows the government to "officially" establish the "chapter" of the church and freely worship people It is forbidden. The term "separation of church and state" does not appear in the first amendment and does not appear in other places in the Constitution. Most people do not recognize that this sentence was actually created by Thomas Jefferson. In addition to Jefferson, before the Iverson and the climax of the 1960 's, the court interprets the Proper Procedure provision of the 14 th revision as almost all provisions of the Bill of Rights are applied to the state. The only initial amendment to the amendment of the Bill of Rights is that it states that "Congress should not enact legislation." "Whether this restriction indicates that the 14th modification did not include the provision of the first amendment In any case, as a result of Iverson, almost all Federal lawsuits including church and country separation walls are determined by state law I will.

As today's world is unpredictable, many American citizens make a second revision and choose to have guns to protect themselves, their families, and their wealth. Approximately 4 million guns in the US support owner each year (Doherty 46-47). Some studies have shown that the reduction of violent crime by 41% in the past 20 years may be due to a decrease in the gun holding law that allowed legitimate citizens to defend themselves (Doherty 46-47). You and I understand that the second amendment protects the inherent rights of all individuals who own a gun and oppose legislative and law enforcement rights. The second amendment was prepared to prevent authoritarian governments and freedom of protection. "Do not violate" is the conclusion that the need for armed militia to maintain "free national security" is an explanation. There is no doubt that this law means individual rights I am a policeman for decades, keeping in touch with law enforcement agencies every day and advising. I fully support the second amendment and the right for Americans to legally protect guns. The solution I proposed here is very simple, enabling law enforcement agencies to concentrate on criminals and take rob dangerous weapons from dangerous people. Richard "Bo" Dietl is a police force in New York City and a detective for 16 years. He co-chaired George H. W President of the National Criminal Commission. President Bush and George Pataki, New York State Security Council Advisory Committee Chairman and Governor Elliott Spitzer. Since 1985, he has served as CEO of research and security company Beau Dietl & Associates. Also, after the second amendment was passed, it was found that the founder's fathers themselves passed the restrictions and executed, so the second amendment was written to protect national militia control rights It is. These regulations include age restrictions, registration requirements, and safekeeping laws. For over 200 years, the Supreme Court has reaffirmed and enforced the rights of the state to enforce the management of firearms and, legally, the United States does not have the right to own firearms. All of these have been changed in 2008 and Republican strategists will raise the dominance of the gun industry by insisting that the second amendment will protect individual gun ownership regardless of whether the militia is well regulated or not We have formulated a plan

The sixth revision was approved on December 15, 1791. It guarantees the right of federal court criminal proceedings and determines that these rights are fundamental and important. The sixth amendment granted the defendant the right to accelerate and initiate the trial to a fair jury. The accused is informed about the nature and cause of the allegation and has the right to face the witness and his favorable witness. In this paper, we comprehensively analyze the above rights and introduce the history of the sixth revision. The sixth modification was written by Mentor George Mason of George Washington. It was written one month before the declaration ... See more However, the Supreme Court never regulates the specific deadline that must be applied. In addition, the prosecution can not delay the trial for its own benefit, but can delay the trial to confirm the existence of the witness. If it turns out that the defendant's right to a prompt trial is infringed, the prosecution will be canceled and convicted. Due to the abolition of criminal proceedings on the matter of a quick trial, the alleged crime was prosecuted. The reason for this right is that witnesses may be lost over time due to death, memory bleeding, and other factors. But there are other reasons. People in prisons have to gain substantial support and sometimes even families have to get help. Rapid trial assurance is one of the fundamental freedoms embodied in the Bill of Rights. There are some restrictions on this right: it only takes effect at the beginning of criminal proceedings and applies only to the accused during prosecution. So far, only two cases are infringed by the speed of the trial, Smith vs. Fui (1969) and Dickey vs. Florida (1970). In such a case, the country tends to criminalize the allegations of those who are restricted to other jurisdictions. The listed listing authorized and guaranteed by the sixth amendment is the right of the lawyer and the defendant under the criminal trial has the right to receive legal assistance at the federal court. Attorney's right on Sixth Amendment applies only to criminal cases and does not apply to non-felony cases. In the sixth revision, the rights of American lawyers were introduced, but the Supreme Court will further explain and expand this right. In 1931, in Scottsboro, Alabama, after insisting that two young white women were raped by a young black man, nine black youth "Scottsboro Boys" was tried. On the day of the trial, "Scottsboro Boy" was not appointed by a judge as a lawyer but by two unqualified people. It is a Tennessee real estate agent and an old lawyer who has not practiced for many years. The interpretation of the sentence of the sixth revision is consistent with the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court's legal rights. The Supreme Court stated that the judgment is an important stage in criminal proceedings, during which the lawyer's right of the sixth amendment will apply. Mempa v. Rhay, 389 US 128,88 S. Ct. 254, 19 L. Ed. See 2d 336 (1967). The Sixth Amendment expands the rights and conflicts of attorneys in "All Criminal Procedures" and indicates that in the case of certain rights another right applies. Petty, 982 F.2 d 1365, 1370 - 71 (No. 9) Cir. John H. Langbein, "The origin of the criminal justice trial" 291 (2003) (hereinafter referred to as "Langbein, origin") ("Review of the witness of the cross prosecution's side is a felony The main duty of a judge to accept a referee counsel attorney. ") The sixth indicates that the conflict provision should be applied, Mempa v. Modified the text according to Rhay

The sixth amendment fully focuses on the rights of suspects of government crime. The sixth amendment provides seven special protections for criminal suspects. These seven rights include the right to prompt trial, the right to trial, the right to be judged by a fair jury, the right to be informed of the nature and circumstances of the alleged crime, and the right to confront with the witness It is included. He has the right to testify to the accused, to find a witness defending the accused, and to have a lawyer. The reason behind all these protections can be traced back to the era of the founder; according to British law these rights are not so ... more But he chose to implement him the right to undergo the quick trial he wanted. Just because that is counterproductive, it does not give him the right to continue using the loophole abuse system in the Constitution. Next, there is a constitutional trial court provision. This provision guarantees that you must take a public trial if you are charged with a crime. Holding clinical trials in a public place can confuse corrupt officials and prevent unjustly hurting people. Throughout the history of Europe and the UK, many people have been tortured, executed or unjustly imprisoned for not doing in a secret trial. That is why the founders are determined to prevent people from being tried secretly. There are several other purposes in trial. They tend to hear public lawsuits and they may know something about crime, so they will have witnesses in front. Everyone who knows that they are lying can tell the truth by listening to public lawsuits, so they also tend to force people to tell the truth. Public trials also increase public confidence in justice and legislation, as the public can see exactly what is happening. If you like these systems and programs, they will be confident of the results. If you do not like what they saw, choose a new official to change the minutes. Public trials can also satisfy the public's mere desire to see criminals. The sixth revision aims to increase public confidence in the judicial system by guaranteeing the right to trial and enabling the public to participate in litigation against individuals. The sixth amendment generally prohibits the closure of justice, like the infamous star room of England in the 16th century where the accused was secretly tried. In the case of In re Oliver (1948), the Supreme Court stated that the right of court trial is "to protect every attempt to use the court as a means of persecution", that is to say, I certified that there was. Abuse of its jurisdiction As part of the Bill of Rights, the Sixth Amendment, Amendment (1791) of the US Constitution has effectively established the procedures of the Criminal Court. In accordance with the principle of delaying denial of justice in justice, this amendment balances social rights and personal rights in the first article by requiring a "quick" trial. It also meets democratic expectations for transparency and impartiality of the criminal law by requiring a trial consisting of a fair jury. For the text of the sixth revision, please refer to the following. The Right of the Sixth Amendment - If you can not pay attorney to defend you, the sixth amendment gives you a lawyer the right to represent you in criminal cases. For example, if you are economically impossible to pay attorneys to defend you in lawsuits, you can ask the court to appoint a public defender free of charge. Right of revision - The eighth amendment gives you the right to be free from any cruel or inhuman punishment for any kind of criminal activity, no matter how bad. For example, convicted serial killers can not be tortured because they killed more than one person. Everyone must be respected by humanity and dignity

In the first amendment, the provision that "Congress shall not enact legislation that respects religious beliefs" is based on the "establishment provision" included in the revision. This provision prohibits the government from establishing national religion and forces its citizens to believe it. Without this provision, the government can force participation in this chosen religion and punish those who do not obey the chosen faith. This article is controversial about how to read Gaustad's case which is mentioned in the free declaration of the whole land. I oppose the strict double-layer analysis conducted by the court based on the first amendment and the individual's burden by the court. According to the Principle of the First Amendment, the problem solved after the decision of Hanson and Street became clear First of all, the refusal to provide financial support to unions in the public sector is the first revision It is within range. Proof that any association dues or membership fees will require the responsibility of non-partners to contribute to the most important government interests The Supreme Court, Craig v. In Boren (1976), the analysis based on the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th revision was judged not to be affected by the adoption of the 21st revision. The court did not reveal whether the 21st amendment could be an exception to other constitutional protections other than commercial terms, but "the relevance of the 21st revision to other constitutional provisions is It is doubtful. "Similarly, the 21st revision section 2 has been claimed not to affect the establishment of the highest clauses and provisions. Larkin v. Grendel's Den, Inc. , 459 US 116, 122, n. 5 (1982). However, Craig v. Paulen's court does not distinguish between the two characteristics of state law accepted by the amendment. Otherwise there is the possibility of violating the Constitution. According to US law, the provision of the first revision of the US Constitution constitutes the constitutional right to freedom of religion as well as free exercise of revision. In the relevant Constitution text, "Congress shall not enact legislation on establishment or prohibition of religious freedom". "Establishment clause" is based on a number of persecutors, including the Clarendon Constitution, the 1689 Bill of Rights, the Colonial Constitution of Pennsylvania and New Jersey. The first draft of John Dickinson was created while he drafted the federal provision. In 1789, James Madison of a parliament at that time made another draft.

Slavery and involuntary slavery must not exist anywhere in the United States or under its jurisdiction unless the party is punished as a crime to be officially convicted. "If the evidence is correct and there is no logical mistake, the thirteenth revision to limit the appointment of lawyers was approved in 1819 and it was deleted from the US Constitution during civil unrest. The revision is legal I have never been abolished, so today is still law, the influence is big. "Dodge's statement has been well rebutted. The thirteenth fix for the thirteenth fix is ​​one of the most influential fixes in our history. The adoption of this amendment meant ending slavery and ending the overall way of life. Southern countries separated from the union were forced to release their slaves and passed amendments as part of their permission to return to the union. Then the southern part was forced to find a new way of self-sufficiency and cash crops. As a result of this amendment passed, African Americans finally acquired freedom. Racism and Apartheid still play an important role in their lives, but they are no longer forced to work as slaves. By reading this article you would like to learn how thirteenth amendments formed our lives and the country today. Before explaining the details of this fix in detail, it may be helpful to understand how it started. Abraham Lincoln himself proposed this amendment to the 38 th Congress. On Friday, January 31, the 13th amendment handed the 149th anniversary of the victory of the House to the desk of Abraham Lincoln, which was finally approved by the state. This amendment not only abolished the climax of the 2012 film "Lincoln" of Steven Spielberg but also abolished the climax of the American Civil War, but in the eternal law, the declaration of the liberation of Abraham Lincoln is used only as wartime measures It was done. What began two years ago Lincoln himself explains in his second inauguration address on March 4, 1865, so the thirteenth revision (which he did not mention that name) is often slavery I believe that we will offer original sin. Sinful redemption since the establishment of the country Slavery was terminated irreversibly with the adoption of the thirteenth revision bill, but African Americans still experienced a long and difficult journey to achieve equality. After the end of the civil war, Congress passed the so-called revision bill. These include a 14th revision introducing US born slaves and prohibiting denial of any country's life, freedom or property, and 15th revision giving all men the right to vote. Freedom, citizenship and voting are great achievements for African Americans. Unfortunately, however, their newly acquired civil rights were quickly suppressed. Black Code limits the freedom of African Americans and the law passed by the southern countries that forces them to work at low wages or contracts, the rise of KKK, and finally, the passage of the Jim Crow law again I conquer African Americans. Second class citizen

The 19th amendment of the US Constitution guaranteeing women's voting rights passes through Congress and is sent to the state for approval. Women's suffrage campaign began in the mid-nineteenth century when women engaged in political activities by abolishing slavery and moderates. In July 1848, 240 female feminists including Elizabeth Kei Stanton and Lucretia Mott met on Seneca Falls in New York and claimed that women had voting rights. Women's voting rights are still largely opposed by most Americans, and the division of the inter-Korean conflict and subsequent civil war hindered further discussion. In the era of reconstruction, the fifteenth revision proposal was passed and voting rights were given to African Americans, but the Republican-led parliament can expand its progressive radicalism to the gender domain I could not do it. In 1869, the National Women's Voting Association led by Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Kadistanton was formed to promote the amendment of the US Constitution. Another organization led by Lucy Stone, the American Women Voting Association, was organized in the same year and worked through the Legislature. In 1890, these two associations were integrated into the All American Human Rights Association. That year, Wyoming province became the first state to give women the right to vote. By the beginning of the 20th century, the role of women in American society has changed dramatically; women have more work, have better education, have fewer children, and some states vote for women Permitted. In 1913 the National Women's Party organized the voting rights of these women who had the right to vote and elected Congressional representatives to support female elections and by 1916 both Democrats and Republicans supported women's elections did. In 1919, the 19 th revision states that "the rights of US citizens shall not be rejected or deleted for gender by the United States or other countries", both houses passed and were sent to ratifying countries. On August 18, 1920, Tennessee State became the 36th state to approve the proposed amendment and granted two-thirds of the state's ratification rights as the national law. Eight days later, the 19 th revision bill was enforced The right to vote for women is a struggle to vote for women. In 1919, Congress passed the 19 th revision to protect women's voting rights. By August 1920, three quarters (3/4) of the state approved the 19 th revision (signed or voted). With this amendment, the number of qualified voters in the United States has doubled. Broadcast became very popular in the 1920s. By 1929, over 10 million American families had radio. A new way of life was born. After dinner everyday, the family gathered around the radio to adjust the program. We are broadcasting comedy and foreign films, classical music, jazz music, news reports, sports programs and others. It makes families more intimate In 1919, the 19 th revision bill was finally passed by Congress. Susan B. Anthony wrote that it will be elected to the House of Representatives in 1878, but he says that voting rights should not be deleted simply due to sexual activity. It was sent to the state for approval. On August 18, 1920, Tennessee province became the 36th and eventually necessary country to approve the amendment. It was signed by law on August 26, 1920. That's right. Now in 1920, Congress passed the 19 th revision after a 40 year delay. They have been sitting for 40 years. It came out at last, must be approved by three quarters of the state, and in the southern province it was rejected. The 19 th revision proposal was almost rejected in all the southern provinces, but there were two most notable reasons. One is the right of the state and we will hear these rights again in the second half of the 20th century when the same country opposes the right of integration and voting. The other two idea is that this gives black women and white women the right to vote. At this point in 1920, the sout

Background of the Second Amendment Since the acceptance more than 200 years ago, the interpretation of the second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States has become a controversial point. This dispute arises from the fact that most of the reasons for preparing for revision are meaningless today. One party thinks that modification is invalid and the other party removes it from the historical background, so it represents what they want. In order to understand the meaning of the second amendment, it is necessary to interpret the actual sentences and to adopt the historical background and the meaning of today. What is the meaning of "the rights of people holding and carrying weapons" in the context of the second amendment? Is it within the constitution? In the context of history? What do you think about constitutional representatives regarding resident forces? militia? Certainly, what is the constitution and the politics of the Bill of Rights? Is the meaning of the second amendment obvious? If the "original meaning" of the Constitution is clear and clear, why have we paid the Supreme Court more than 200 years? Why do some people represent "majority opinions" while others express different opinions? Why are there constitutional scholars? One of the most controversial fixes to the "US Constitution" is a second amendment. The second amendment was an accurate meaning of controversy for decades. The US Constitution stated that the second amendment is "a well-controlled militia necessary for the security of the Free State, the right of people holding and carrying weapons should not be infringed." Part 1 "well-managed militia" Congress approved the second amendment with 17 other amendments of the constitution in 1791 as part of the Bill of Rights. The Second Amendment states that "Freely controlled security is necessary for well-controlled militias, the rights of people holding and carrying weapons should not be infringed." If an individual decides to guarantee the right to own weapons, that weapon can be enforced under federal law or the District of Columbia Act. In June 2010, the US Supreme Court concluded that the right to possess weapons is the fundamental right of the 14th amendment to the state and local governments. What do these recent incidents mean for local gun control? In some respects they make more questions than they answer.

Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America is presented in 17/9/1789 and approved in 17/15/17 "excessive bail imposed, and excessive bail that must not impose a cruel and unusual application of punishment Do not demand money. " Cruel and unusual punishment limits the rigor of the punishment that the state and federal government may impose on criminals convicted. Excessive fine clauses limit the amount the state and federal government can punish people for certain crimes. There are eight kinds of capital punishment in the challenge of the general constitutional amendment Article 8: (1) In the death penalty or always unconstitution itself, death penalty 221 (2) is based on their inherent characteristics, unconstitutional is. Characteristics of offense respondents and defendants; 222 (3) is a unique and forward-looking 0.223 issue, according to the procedure applied to the death penalty and condemnation it is to present all three types of problems. Although it is powerful, arguments against the revision of Article 8 against the positive abolition did not win. In fact, according to the eighth amendment or its national inference, only two cases revoke the sole death sentence in the future. Lamb from the wolf (Part 1): The eighth amendment to the death penalty, Kevin Barry The United States is a typical example of Article 8 of the Constitution How the Arizona's capital punishment system inevitably violates and does not apply the capital punishment to any requirement. The Supreme Court will soon consider considering accepting the Arizona v. Arizona law and the judgment on the national death sentence. Because it has arbitrary control, the Furman v. Georgia state 45 years ago, the court ruled unconstitution capital punishment. Judge Potter Stewart (Potter Stewart) is a cruel and abnormal wrote the famous, there is a death penalty, as cruel and abnormal as struck by thunder. As a result, Arizona State and other states , Rewritten their death penal law to alleviate punishment for the most serious criminals. In 1973 the Arizona State Council passed a law requiring prosecutors to prove at least one of the six deteriorating factors before the death penalty. Parliament and the Legislative Assembly can also impose a death penalty on the death penalty. This is also known as the death penalty. The Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty does not violate the prohibition under Article 8 of the cruel and abnormal punishment, but Article 8 of amendment allows juries to use certain programs and that the death penalty Does not form the side of the death penalty how must be carried out. Article 8 of the Constitutional amendment applies to the state and the federal government as the due process clause of amendment 14

Many of the issues of freedom of freedom of expression and freedom of expression for adolescents and initials are attracting media attention but related to the adult population and what they think are their rights. Many people do not realize that young people today also deal with freedom of speech and freedom of expression in their lives. Freedom of expression and freedom of expression dealt with by young people are equally important and are treated in the same way as other freedom of expression freedom issues. In the three articles of AP communication, we discuss the freedom of speech and freedom of expression between young and high school students. With the popularity of curfew law, young supporters are becoming more aggressive towards them. They raised larger court challenges against the constitutionality of the law because they violated the freedom of expression and assembly, and the right of first amendment to the freedom of movement and freedom of justice. They are also actively working to educate the community on how these laws can reduce teenage crime and adversely affect young people. The reason for the increasing popularity of night excursion orders is just as simple reasoning. Taking a child off the street is a direct and inexpensive way to reduce juvenile delinquency. The general public seems to support this belief * Gitlow versus New York's lawsuit - the first amendment will apply to the provisional proceeding provision of the 14 th revision. "All people born or naturalized in the United States are US citizens, known as legitimate legal proceedings, fundamental justice - the 14th amendment was after the release of slaves - but the Africans in 1931 At that time, gitlow v. New York State Legislature could not do with the first amendment stating that the government arrested for instigating violence overturned the magazine - the first revision of the right Stated that it did not infringe the freedom of speech, nyc stated that it will not apply - found a crime triggered violence, but was first modified in New York State and all other states

Since mid-nineteenth century, women's voting rights supporters of generations have taught, written, marched civil disobedience, marched, and marched to achieve the fundamental change of the Constitution many Americans think. Activities were carried out and practiced. Extreme feminists used tactics such as parades, quiet gatherings, hunger strikes. The record of the National Archives and Records Management Bureau reveals most of this fight. In commemoration of the 150th anniversary of the Seneca Falls Conference in 1848, the National Archives has asked for historical documents and scripts entitled "Impossible Failure" as a precious educational tool, a long struggle did. Smith opposed the women's voting rights, especially the 19th amendment of the Constitution. He corrected the black ginseng administration and warned in the Senate: "This is exactly the same as the other half of the black race, south men voted for Susan Anthony's correction, Fira At the Democratic National Convention in Delphia, after Smith left the conference hall, he saw the Black minister preparing to make a request, Smith remembered: "He began to pray, I started walking From the big plantation of his sky, John Calhoun whispered to my ear whisper - "You did it well, Ed" Women's voting rights: In 2005, the 19th Constitutional amendment was passed, giving women the right to vote, celebrating the 85th anniversary. After a lot of discussions, at the Seneca Falls Conference in 1848 convoked by Elizabeth Kadistan and Lucia Mott, a resolution to seek women's suffrage was approved. In the "Emotional Declaration", documents based on the "Declaration of Independence" clarify many of these early activists' demands. Women, residences and poverty were written by Dr. Jerry D. Marx, Associate Professor of Social Work at the University of New Hampshire. This paper discusses the role of women in the redefinition of poverty in the United States, using key materials from the mid-nineteenth century to the early twentieth century. It examines the beliefs of colonial religion that poverty is the result of personal immorality and traces changes in the public perception of the turn of the 20th century. In the first wave, often called feminism, the women's voting rights were promoted more strongly and eventually the 19 th amendment was adopted. The National Women's Voting Rights Association and the National Women's Corruption Association cooperated to provide a more unified fight against opponents. The women's alliance is a strong political front, but it has removed some of the concerns about women's voting rights as it has another agenda, including health reform, child labor law and prison reform. However, in 1920, more than 50 years passed, the 19th amendment was passed and Marie Ruoff Byrum became the first woman to vote under the new amendment.

From the "federal criminal law" of 1790 to the Miranda v. Arizona 364 US 436 (1966), the right of the sixth revised lawyer developed greatly. In this article we will explore the development of the sixth revision, including the contents of the sixth amendment and cases where it applies to individuals. An effective lawyer's concept is also defined by the court For a long time, the sixth amendment has been interpreted as meaning only the rights of attorneys who have the right to choose and pay themselves. Since then, it means that you have the right to provide designated attorneys to those who can not afford it. Powell v. Alabama, 287 US 45 (1932), or in the case of the famous Scottsboro, this change occurred. This lawsuit (several black young people who filed lawsuits for raping two Caucasian women) was overturned on the grounds that they had not received a fair trial because the right to a valid attorney was denied. Betts v. In the case of Brady, 316 US 455 (1942), the Supreme Court ruled that attorneys should be appointed only in exceptional circumstances. However, Gideon v. In Wainwright, 372 USA 335 (1963), the court reversed Betts and expanded the defendant's rights to all states in all criminal cases of all states. In Argeringer v. Hamlin, 407 US 25 (1972), the court has applied the lawyers to all the offenses for which there is a possibility of imprisonment. The right of a lawyer of the sixth revision has appeared The Sixth Amendment will be informed of the right of litigation and the right to the complainant and the right to promptly initiate a fair jury trial in all criminal cases and guarantee that the accused will be assisted by lawyers . As long as you think that someone needs it, the lawyers' rights are applied. Attorney's rights include the right to a valid lawyer. In the US v. Chronic litigation, 466 US 640 (1984) Judge Stevens explained that competent lawyers are essential to the accusation system. The court is reluctant to find an incompetent lawyer yet Unethical acts in opposition interrogation or termination controversy can not be appealed against prosecution because of the double risk clause of the 315 Fifth Amendment heard by the High Court. 319 Therefore, there are few case laws for discussing defamation of lawyers' lawyers 320. For reasons detailed in Part 3 of this article, the current ethics and standards are used to identify unbiased and no-fake techniques There is no doubt that it prohibits it. It is therefore almost impossible to modify existing ethics regulations and regulate the actions that are clearly defined by their provisions. Destroying the ethical limits of true witnesses: how modern ethical rules can not prevent real witnesses from being destroyed by unethical means Let's take a closer look at the keywords of the first amendment Congress is not enacting the law, let's start from there. Let's define what the law is. a (1): Community-restricted habit or practice: Regular code of conduct or code of conduct (see rule 1a), or all of these and formal approval by the regulatory authorities to deter or force the neutrality of the network and The role of the government is very simple. Controlling speech is not the government's responsibility nor even the opinion that some people oppose. The government should ensure that the speech does not decrease in any way unless the speech and / or speaker intends to suffer any illegal violence. I will continue, the government will not interfere with any meeting of peaceful people, and will allow people to express their dissatisfaction and try to accomplish things.

We must not violate the right to protect people's security concerning personnel, residences, documents and influences, and unfair search and foreclosure. Also, it is impossible to issue warrants due to pledge or positive support, especially explanations to be searched. Place, sealed person or thing Article 4 of the amendment of the US Constitution guarantees that "there is no infringement of people's security rights in terms of personnel, residence, documents and effects against unfair search and seizure." The amendment arises from founder concerns that the newly formed federal government expands its powers and attempts to weaken common law and state constitutional rights to protect Americans. Based on their experience, they know that the discretionary power of unlimited search and seizure for government officials will be a powerful tool for suppressing "people". In the last column "Part 1 of Encounter Law Enforcement", I explained the general protection provided by the fourth amendment of the US Constitution. Today, Part 2 will cover the details: When, where, and to whom the fourth modification provides protection from unfair searches and seizures. Searching is done when there is a physical intrusion to a person or something that a person is trying to protect a secret. Specifically, (1) if an individual shows subjective privacy expectations, (2) privacy expectations are reasonable and society wants it, the government will restrict searching for someone I will. House and its property. We will protect you from government violations without warrant The fourth amendment of the Constitutional Protection of the United States protects the privacy of individuals and even if all citizens are intercepted by street police and arrested or searched for homes or businesses, the fourth amendment will include search and detention It protects individuals inside and prevents illegally seized items from being used as evidence of criminal cases. The scope of protection available for a particular case depends on the nature of the detention or arrest, the characteristics of the search place and the search.

After a long and painful independence war, the United States became a country of its own, a country with options and state rights, a country with sound and strong opinions, and freedom for God's human race. The birth of this glorious new country has brought about a new revolutionary era all over the world. Countries remembered America's victory, overthrowing the monarchy, and established a government governed by people's sovereignty. Perhaps the existence of the United States brought about a global struggle for autonomy. The Second Amendment or Secondary Amendment to the US Constitution is part of the amendment and the Bill of Rights document that the citizens have the right to keep and carry weapons. On December 15, 1791, the second amendment was incorporated into the Constitution of the United States along with other revisions of the Bill of Rights. James Madison introduced the second amendment and the Bill of Rights to the US Constitution. Militia: In the early days of American history, all males between the ages of 16 and 60 must be members of their local militia in their towns and communities. In the meantime, most people used and owned guns. By law, it is obligatory to pay a small fee to a few people who do not use or own a gun, rather than participate in the military service of the community. This is the historical reality of adoption of the second amendment as part of the first 10 amendments of the Bill of Rights. The exact wording of the second amendment states: "Freedom of state security requires a well-controlled militia, people are entitled to hold and carry weapons, and should not be violated." ing. The era of internal tension also proved the rationality of the second amendment. The black slave rebellion and the confrontation with Indians are still going on, and many people are afraid of their lives. This situation prove the private ownership of guns: citizens must protect themselves and their property. At that time, protecting it without armed citizens was not secure for the new country, and ordinary citizens could not protect themselves. Given the historical environment, ownership of weapons is a necessity of the times. I have three guns, but I admit that the second amendment means that the citizens have the right to have a basic gun for protection under the law, It is not the main purpose of the second revision. It is mainly to protect individual countries and countries. The founder's father does not even believe that America's emerging economies can afford to buy resident forces. It is the most practical solution to convoke locally armed people in front of the military. Therefore, the second amendment actually requires "well-supervised militia". The ninth amendment will record directly those who exaggerated the second amendment and other specific amendments.

Congress shall not enact legislation on banning religious beliefs and free exercise, loss of freedom of speech and freedom of press, or the rights of people to peaceful gatherings and the right to seek relief from the government. "Congress should not enact laws relating to religious beliefs or ban on free exercise, or deprive freedom of speech and press" - According to the first revision of the US Constitution, the basis of our country One of the fundamental principles to become free speech: For this reason, as time and age grew and this young and growing country passed away, this amendment became useful only for insurance. In 1925, the Supreme Court, freedom of speech, freedom of speech, freedom of speech, in particular in Congress, freedom of speech was one of the freedoms detailed in the First Amendment. The state guarantees that freedom of constitutional speech is protected from government interference and can only maintain freedom of speech if its content is not illegal. The first amendment to the initial amendment of the US Constitution is part of our citizens' rights bibliography. The first amendment is probably the most important part of the US Constitution. Because it protects the freedom of citizens' faith, speech, writing and writing, peaceful gatherings, and freedom of dissatisfaction with the government. In addition, the amendment requires separation between the church and the state. First amendment to the US Constitution The first revision of the US Constitution will protect the freedom of speech, religion, and press. It also protects the right to peaceful protests and petitions the government. This amendment was passed in 1791 with the other nine fixes. These amendments constitute a written document protecting the civil liberties under the Bill of Rights - US law. Over the years, the meaning of the first amendment has been ongoing interpretation and controversy. The groundbreaking case of the Supreme Court involves protesting the right for the United States to be involved in the external war, burning the flag and publishing confidential documents

Regarding the first revision On December 15, 1971, the first X revision to the Constitution took effect. The first modification of X to the Constitution is called the Bill of Rights. The first fix was written by James Madison. Because the American people demanded their freedom. The first amendment was implemented to protect American freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of assembly, and freedom of petition. The content of the first revision is as follows. "Congress shall not enact legislation prohibiting the establishment of religion, banning the free exercise of religion, or depriving freedom of speech and freedom of press. Thomas Emerson's classic "Freedom of Expression System" summarizes the four core values ​​of free expression reflected in the first amendment. With the political philosopher Alexander Meiklejohn, he believes that the first value is participation in autonomy, freedom of speech is possible and will not happen without it. From the famous article "On Liberty" by John Stuart Mills, and many other books there is a second value of free and unconstrained mind. The market is the best way to pursue the truth. As John Milton said in his famous "Areopagitica", the truth does not always exceed falsehood, but when an idea is challenged by a competitive idea, there is usually better opportunity to approach It is not a doctrine or a doctrine, but the truth accepts these ideas. Every year, the First Amendment Center at the Freedom Forum Institute conducts a First Amendment Study to investigate American views on freedom of religion, speech, news, gatherings and petitions and to comment on contemporary First Amendment issues . This study, conducted jointly with the applied research firm Fors Marsh Group, has been issued annually since 1997 and reflects the change in Americans' attitudes towards their core freedom. According to this year's survey, Americans think that false news is more unpleasant than disliked speech in social media, but most people oppose them. According to the survey, 83% of respondents said that social media companies should delete false information. Since social media sites are owned by private companies, they are generally beyond the scope of the first fix. But scholar David Pozen, who is visiting Columbia University law school and Knight's first revised laboratory, said that internal company policies such as Facebook and Twitter "give big impact" to shaping public discourse Some of the content I talked to Teen Vogue is done online. Sites In fact, public discourse is bound by private regulations - these regulations are often contrary to our understanding of freedom of speech.

Second amendment "For the security of free countries, we need well-managed militia, people have the right to keep and carry weapons and not to infringe it." Principles and ideals Persistent example. Through this statement, the founders of this country clearly and permanently guarantee that Americans have the right to hold and carry weapons. The second amendment to the origin of this country, and unparalleled key to the rights it guarantees, is important for our growth and success. The second revision and the second amendment of the rights of the Second Army will give US citizens the right to have weapons. "The second amendment treaties states," For the security of free countries, well-controlled militia is necessary.People have the right to keep and carry weapons.The stricter gun regulation ... Second amendment "For the safety of free countries, well-managed militia is necessary, people possess and carry weapons. Rights should not be infringed. "This eternal word, the second amended National Constitution of the United Nations is a permanent example of the principle and ideals established by Japan. On February 14, the latest school shooting incident in the United States again called for the abolition of the second amendment which is a provision of the Constitution which protects the right to "keep and carry weapons". Critics argue that the second amendment provision has helped the United States become a world leader in mass bombardment. After the genocide in high school in Parkland, Florida, as the student said, during the 227 years since the Constitutional amendment was added, the speed of gun development has been dizzy. However, "The gun has changed," she said - Park Land shooter killed 17 people, implying the difference between semi-automatic weapon rifle and AR-15 - "Our law does not change " And it was excluded from the Constitution. The Bill of Rights was approved on December 15, 1791. (Constitution of the United States) There were major criticisms, especially in recent years, due to the revision of the Constitution. The subject of gun control is controversial and related issues are submitted to the Supreme Court. The second amended country states: "A well-controlled militia is necessary for the security of free countries, the citizens have the right to hold and carry weapons and not violate it.

Importance of the first amendment "Congress shall not enact laws relating to the formation of religion, prohibit exercise freely, or deprive freedom of speech." This amendment is the most important of the constitution Part. Without freedom of speech, our American people can not speak openly and freely about problems affecting our daily lives. Otherwise, unless Katie Stanton and Susan B. Anthony exercise their initial amendment, freedom of speech, peaceful gatherings, and press coverage of the media and women's voting rights, women vote You may not have the right. Years later. This is a particularly timely topic, as this week is the annual event celebrating the importance of freedom of reading and first amendment, the ban on American Library Association (ALA) this week, Scroggins has books There is no unfavorable right, but it would be better for him to first read the problematic book first (see Anderson 's reply and correction, here is the Springfield news leader). He wrote: One of the books is called to talk. They will also see a movie. This is a book about a very dysfunctional family. Teachers are losers, adults are losers, and cheerleaders score higher than soccer teams. They made love on Saturday night and then became the goddess of the church on Sunday morning. The cheering team also abort the ball. She said this should be felt in high school because the main character of the book is part of a boy 's woman touching her. Then the boy raped to the next page. Through his speech, Charlton directly referred to the constitution. He said at the outset: "I said that the second amendment is an important first amendment, which is the first freedom of the United States of America and the protection of all other people's rights.A freedom of speech, Freedom, religion, assembly, public opinion correction On the one hand it is the first of its kind, it provides absolute ability to live without fear.

Besides drinking or drinking This is a common problem since the first person coincidentally discovered alcohol (and then each other). According to statistics, most domestic violence, car accidents and rape involve alcohol (s). People sometimes ask if people think that consumption is "right". This is the case of the 18 th revision of 1919. Invoices passed by people concerned about the above issues prohibit the automatic sale, transportation and consumption of alcohol. Even saying that the 18 th revision was completely invalid is harm. It is also harmful to say that the 18 th revision caused people's lawlessness like Al Capone. The 18 th revision reduced the amount of alcohol consumed in the United States and did not cause organized crime. In the era of alcohol ban, alcohol consumption (calculated in gallons of ethanol) fell to an average of less than 1 gallon per person per year, decreased from 2.5 gallons in 1915. Organized crime exists before the prohibition order and exists after that It banned American alcoholic beverages by performing 18th fix. The 18 th revision prohibits alcohol, but does not define any "addicting wine". A proposal was made to add a bill to clarify the provision of the 18 th revision. The three main objectives of the bill are as follows. Prohibition of drinking 2. Production of highly efficient alcohol sold for purposes other than beverages, and 3. Promotion of the use of small amounts of alcohol for scientific production, dyes and manufacturing (for purposes other than consumption) Congress knows what to do. Therefore, the 18 th revision was approved, and the birth of the ban started. The 18 th revision prohibits resale of manufacturing, transportation, and drunkards. (Exception of the use of wine in religious ceremonies.) 1000 people working at breweries, breweries and salons in charge of layoffs make the alcohol ban worse and seem to further lower the economy . People who prefer alcohol bans believe that alcohol is a curse to the United States and we are contributing to a low-profile society. The counterclaim said that because of the possibility of economic recession, sales of other goods are growing and they believe that they compensate for the difference in alcohol income. Indeed, alcohol banning closed many restaurants and reduced the theater's ticket sales, as in many places rely on the amount of alcohol to survive to survive. On January 16, 1920, the 18 th revision officially played its part. "Production, transportation, import, export and sale of alcoholic beverages have been prohibited or illegal due to the 18 th revision, which is also called the age of prohibition" (Scott, Robert). Age and "Jazz era", new dance for women as well as new music, new and exciting era has emerged. In addition, after the pressure of World War II, standards have generally relaxed. ("Ban").

The interpretation of the first fix has been seen throughout our history, and it has been incorporated in a conservative or changing manner. The first revision basically explains Congression's limited power and our basic freedom. However, if the provincial government were able to contain these freedoms, the problem was never questioned as it rarely attracted people's attention during the ratification of the bill. Besides casting doubt on the first case, these incidents have other fixes as well. The first amendment may be the most important part of the Bill of Rights. It defends the five most fundamental freedoms. It is freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of assembly, freedom to ask the government for the right mistake. These are assurances that anti-Federalists mostly miss the New Constitution. One of the hottest arguments of our time is prayer and school matters. Does the student have the right to pray in class? Or does prayer interfere with other students' right to pray for "no"? To solve this problem, a number of lawsuits have been filed in the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court believes that a clear secular goal, prayer, or even the moment of silence required does not violate the principle of the first amendment. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the US Constitution and many state constitutions and the first revision of state and federal law. Freedom of speech is not absolute, the US Supreme Court acknowledges several statements that are excluded from freedom and the government can take reasonable hours, places or restrictions on speech I admitted. In most cases it is acceptable to criticize the government and to argue that people may find unpleasant opinions contrary to offensive or public policy. There are exceptions to these general protections, such as the testing of obscene articles by Miller, child pornography, temptation to imminent action, regulation of commercial speech such as advertisements.

For the safety of free nation, we need well-managed militia. Under the repression of a professional army, founder of the United States has no way to build their own troops. Instead, they decided to make citizens the best troops. General George Washington established the rules for the "managed militia" above. And it is composed of all physically sound people in the country. The second amendment is the only difference in the amendment to the Bill of Rights, which is basically not implemented. The Supreme Court of the United States has never released any bill due to the second revision. This is due to the right of the judges to protect their rights as weapons of individual rights or as "supervised militia". Militia explained that the second amendment is no longer valid and it aims to protect militia systems that no longer exist. Interpretation of individual rights considers that the right for individuals to own weapons is the same basic right as the right to freedom of expression. The median of the explanation suggests that the second amendment will protect individuals' right to possess weapons but is limited to some extent by militia words. The only Supreme Court ruling in the US history, focused on the true meaning of the second amendment was the US versus Miller (1939), and finally the court heard the fix in a serious way. On Miller, the court confirmed an intermediate interpretation that the second amendment protects the right to have individual weapons, but only if the weapons are part of a citizen militia. Or maybe not, but the explanation is different as Miller is not a very well-written sentence Parker v. Columbia Special District (March 2007), D.C. The Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the ban of pistol on grounds that it violated protection by the second amendment of the right of individuals to carry weapons in Washington, DC. This lawsuit has been appealed by the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia v. Heller and may soon contain the meaning of the second amendment. Almost all standards are improvements of Miller This article discusses in more detail whether the second amendment guarantees the right to carry weapons. For scholars of the second amendment, sentences and history are all. Both individuals and group rights theorists carefully considered the original meaning of the second amendment, carefully analyzed its origins, drafted it, ratified it and implemented it in the early republics. Indeed, primitiveism dominates with second revised scholarship. Probably the focus on originality is tactical. Perhaps this is strategic. In particular, collective rights theorists may discover that the initial argument is not "deceptive" as other options. The second revised scholarship highlights the details of the Constitution: Why is this different from other rights? Maybe this is indirect. After all, there is no clear precedent, what is left is the original meaning? Regardless, regardless of the initial meaning of the second amendment, the courts are obliged to obey Miller. mirror............................................... .. .............................. 50 II. American history V. Miller ................................. 52 Several fields of the constitution are mentally creative more than the second modified scholarship. Over the past few decades, thousands of pages have been written to reveal the original meaning of words in modifications. In the process, the meaning of text that includes phrases such as "people" and "carrying weapons" is causing intense debate. Regardless of how primitiveism is viewed as a theory, it is no doubt that the evaluation of its possibilities depends on how accurately it reflects history. One of the problems that plagues the search for original intent is that there is no coherent approach to dividing this intention. The theoretical defense of primitiveism did not solve the complex empirical and explanatory problems that were necessary to correctly describe

The specific rights listed in the Constitution shall not be construed as denying or insulting other rights reserved by people. An excerpt from the speech of Black Ham's speech quoted the Procedure for Proper Procedure of 19th Revision and 14th Amendment. "Revised IX" "The specific rights listed in the Constitution shall not be construed as denying or insulting other rights retained by people" "Proper Procedure Clause of the revised XIV": with US citizens All countries in that country can not establish or enforce the laws to be abolished Privileges or disclaimers of US citizens; no country can deprive life, freedom or property without proper legal process. Also, any person within its jurisdiction should not be denied equal protection of the law. Modified IX: One objection to the Bill of Rights is that by identifying a particular right as being protected, other freedom is clearly not subject to federal intervention. The ninth amendment addresses this issue by stating that even if these rights are not included in the Bill of Rights, the government can not deprive people of their rights. For example, in the case of Gitlow v. New York in 1925, the Supreme Court found that the right to freedom of expression of the First Amendment is one of the freedoms protected under the Proper Procedure clause of the 14th Amendment did. According to the ruling of the Supreme Court, the state can not deprive people the right to freedom of expression, just as the federal government can not deny constitutional freedom of speech.

Through American history, which dates back to the late 18th century and the revolutionary war, the United States was different from other countries in its many qualities. Documents such as the Declaration of Independence of the Americas and the Bill of Rights document clarify some of the qualities that Americans value. Rights may be found in the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights, often referred to as the forefront of discussions on gun control. The second amendment of the Bill of Rights is to "stipulate that well-controlled militia is necessary for the security of free countries, the citizens have the right to store and carry weapons and not infringe" ing. Although the use of the second amendment as part of the discussion on gun control is effective, those claiming gun control are usually (erroneously) related to firearms and militias, or completely I believe it denies legality. I think that there is a simple argument against gun control, which is simpler, more logical, and unobtrusive. Since these two words are the core of discussion, we need to point out the difference. Murder is illegal (or unreasonable) killing. I know that anyone who reads this site knows the difference, but if we discuss this topic with counter gun, it is useful to confirm that they agree on the difference. The use of the second amendment as an argument against gun control applies only to people who recognize its effectiveness, so this discussion will not be effective against anti-gun, no matter how many attempts are made. In my opinion this argument is simpler and does not depend on interpretation of people or approval of second amendment. Note: I think that it is a personal use - saying that it is not ownership of bombs and WMDs as a means of self-defense but to use it is another argument and will not necessarily be covered by this discussion. Such weapons can not distinguish between innocent bystanders and attackers, which can lead to illegal killings. Gun control is an effort to restrict or limit gun ownership and use. Discussion of gun control may be one of the most important problems in our society. In 2008, the US Supreme Court ruled that the second amendment will restrict the government's ability to ban the pistol. Several politicians are enthusiastic about gun control and vote only for this issue; therefore, the people we chose have a direct impact on our lives. - In the United States, the number of deaths from firearms is the largest each year. "381 in Germany, 255 in France, 165 in Canada, 68 in the UK, 65 in Australia, 39 in Japan, 11, 127 in the United States" (Moore Michael, 51: 15-51: 48). It is important to have a gun control law that restricts the possession of dangerous guns such as machine guns by people because of the largest number of deaths in the United States. The gun control law should support both sides of the discussion.

Article 4 of the amendment states that "citizens' rights for assurance of personnel, residence, documents and efficacy against unjust search and foreclosure must not be violated and no warrant is issued, especially when searched Please describe where you are, the people and things being detained. "(Cornell University). On January 17, 2014, the US Supreme Court announced that it will hear two cases involving the Fourth Amendment. According to the Fourth Amendment, the scope of search and seizure (including arrest) should be limited to the specific information provided to the issuing court. This is usually sworn by law enforcement officials. Fourth revision Case law has three important problems. Which governmental activities constitute "search" and "seizure"? What are the possible causes of these behaviors? How do you solve the problem of violating the right of the fourth amendment? The early court's ruling limited the scope of amendment to the actual infringement of private property by law enforcement officials. However, Katz v. According to United States (1967), the Supreme Court has decided that protection measures such as warrants will extend to the privacy of individuals and physical places. Law enforcement officials need to be convinced of most searches and seizures. There are three main problems in the fourth revised case law. Government activities are "search" and "seizure", a possible cause of search and seizure, and a way to solve the infringement of the rights of the fourth revision. Earlier court rulings limited the scope of amendments to property revisions or individual intrusions, but Katz v. In the case of United States (1967), the Supreme Court stated that its protection scope extended to infringe personal privacy and physical location. Most searches and attacks require arrest warrants, but the court sets out a series of exceptions on consent investigation, automobile investigation, obvious evidence, emergency situations, border surveys and other circumstances.

Initial amendment: Although not announced in 1787, our ancestors have approved the constitution of the United States. In the first revision of the Bill of Rights, Congress enacted legislation to ban the establishment of religious beliefs and religion, freedom of speech, news, the right to peaceful gatherings of people, and to rectify frustration from the government It is said that it should not be. Freedom of the press stands out in the founder's mind - the first modification protects the features of free expression in every story developed in the United States. However, freedom of press has little meaning without the impression of the audience, as it is only literate capable talent that can make the right to press freedom meaningful. Here's why Thomas Jefferson said that press freedom is not enough to guarantee sound democracy. When he wrote to the famous Virginia state member Charles Juny in 1816, "" Freedom of the press, anyone can read, everything is safe. " In September 1990, Thomas Jefferson Freedom Voice Protection Center announced that the first amendment is "at risk in the country" based on a comprehensive survey on free expression. All the literary classics, such as Mark Twain 's adventure of Huckleberry Finn and Maya Angelo' s bird singing in the cage are known, are all targeted. Typically, complaints come from individual parents or members of the Board of Education. But at other times, censorship pressure comes from a public interest group like a moral majority. The first revision of freedom of expression of value guarantees that all Americans have the right to freedom of speech and freedom of association. In other words, the government has no right to prohibit citizens from telling their favorite things or writing down their favorite things, citizens can form clubs and organizations, participate in demonstrations and gatherings I will. Like all these voices, the right to freedom of expression is not absolute. - What is going on in the world today? The situation has improved since we finally participated in the war. The soldiers are coming home and everything is progressing smoothly. Things are really getting better. Looking at the current situation, there will be a lot of tension these days. This tension will escalate and face the worst direction. Currently there is a great tension between Russia and Ukraine. Tension between the Islamic state and Iraq

"I do not want them to have more power than men, but I want to help themselves." - Mary Worthcraft Kraft. The hottest topic of the 19th century was the rights of women and everyone expressed their opinion on it. Of course, there are lots of expectations like Lucretia Mott and Elizabeth Cady Stanton, but surprising people like William Lloyd Garrison and Frederick Douglas say women's rights. The focus will be the women's rights or the activist's responsibility and role in the feminist movement. The relevance to the theme is a very important role for activists in achieving the final goal of women's rights movement. Founded in 1869, the National Women's Vicarious Association of Korea is one of the major US voting rights organizations in the 19th century. This is the integration of the National Women's Voting Rights Association (NWSA) and the National Women's Voting Rights Association (AWSA). (NAWSA) became the parent of all women elected to a small, organized organization. It is one of the largest and most important election organizations and is the main promoter of women's voting rights. Women in gold plating In 1869, women's suffrage movement in the United States was divided into two major competing groups, the National Women's Corruption Association (NWSA) and the National Women's Rights Association (AWSA). By the mid-1980s, it became clear that leaders of division-related exercise are aging. Neither side has succeeded in persuading many states and federal governments to adopt women's suffrage. In 1878, Congress proposed "amendment of Anthony" to women through constitutional amendment. In 1887, the Senate voted for the first time and completely defeated it. The Senate is going to vote again for a further 25 years' revision. Over the past several hundred years, voting rights are increasing through voting rights like the 15th (irrespective of race, universal male's voting rights of the people) and 19th (women's voting rights) I will. In 1971, the referendum age declined from 21 years old to 18 years old, and after a decades of debate, young people can fight in war and die but can not vote. Senator Edward Kennedy (D - MA) stated that if the voting age would be reduced to 18, "Since the time to lower the voting age came in the United States, American young people became mainstream.We for us, we adequately and sustainably attend our youth to our democratic government agencies If it succeeds in making it, this is the only and most important principle that we can pursue as a country. "

Historical civilization and the empire rise and collapse in a single word. Some people are as young as summer nights, others continue for centuries. The greatest people in history have repeatedly said words, and their blood has been shed to accomplish that. William Wallace was constantly seeking freedom until the midst of Arab Spring even before that. Certainly, since it has only one word, its effect is great. People who asked for independence in the United States in 1777 clearly recognized the importance of the words and strongly insisted at the beginning of the Declaration of Independence as follows: "Congress should not enact legislation prohibiting religious beliefs and free exercise, or freedom of freedom of speech and news" - the first revision of the US Constitution. For freedom, as times and age grew, and as this young and growing country passed away, this fix has become more useful only for insurance ... they can not do that. Under British rule, one of the freedoms of the first amendment is freedom of speech, as Congress, in particular, has not enacted the "law of depriving the freedom of speech" law. The state guarantees that freedom of constitutional speech is protected from government interference and can only maintain freedom of speech only if its content is not illegal. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the US Constitution and many state constitutions and the first revision of state and federal law. Freedom of speech is not absolute, the US Supreme Court acknowledges several statements that are excluded from freedom and the government can take reasonable hours, places or restrictions on speech I admitted. In most cases it is acceptable to criticize the government and to argue that people may find unpleasant opinions contrary to offensive or public policy. There are exceptions to these general protections, such as the testing of obscene articles by Miller, child pornography, temptation to imminent action, regulation of commercial speech such as advertisements.

There are few problems to fuel Americans, not an increase in crime and violence. This problem can easily lead to the availability of firearms. ("Gun regulation") to the outbreak of violence in our society "firearms guarantee whether they lead a horrible danger to crime and violence by the sacred tradition and discussion of Article 2 amendment of the US Constitution Rights, or not. "Some people believe that the abolition of the second amendment of the Constitution can solve the problem. Those people believe that abolishing the second amendment will solve the problem. Many people believe in gun control that violates the rights of people, as homicide guns are not only necessary to control the involvement rate and violence, distribution and sale as well as the owner of guns and guns is essential However, in the second amendment, "right to bear weapons",. Criminals use guns. Many people believe that gun control violates the rights of "people carrying weapons" under Article 2 of the Constitution. In the second amendment of the Constitution, the American nation guarantees that the US Rifle Association better known as the American Rifle Association, such as the opponents of gun control, "the right to bear arms" restricted permission is the handgun How to punish law-abiding citizens, not to prevent crime, using. There is also a view that it poses a threat due to difficulties in purchasing and registering firearms for American citizens for the safety of the nation's families. The constitutional interpretation of Article 2 of the 2008 Constitution amendment has undergone a major change and the Supreme Court has so far refused the gun control law in violation of the right to bear arms, Protection of Article 2 dominated the possession of a gun at home Personal self-defense to do. The first phase of abolition of racial discrimination in southern schools is less than 1% of black children at South White school, who suffered such a big resistance in brown after ten years. The organized civil rights group started large-scale direct action against apartheid in the south. The campaign is reluctant to create huge pressure to use the media to take stronger steps to defend the federal civil rights to attract national interest and support

The fourth amendment is of little value to criminal defendants, since evidence that law enforcement agencies seized in violation of warrant or rationality requirements for more than 100 years after ratification is allowed during prosecution prosecution . The Supreme Court, Weeks v. United States, 232 US 383 (1914), we have dramatically changed the precedent of the fourth amendment. Several weeks involved in the defendant's appeal, which was convicted in the evidence that the federal agent was forfeited without a warrant or other constitutional reason. The Supreme Court overturned the conviction of the defendant and formulated the so-called "exclusion rule." Mapp v. In Ohio, 367 US 643 (1961), the Supreme Court has established state exclusion rules. If the evidence proves that the evidence is illegal to contain police fraud, the exclusion rule allows the court to exclude guilty evidence at trial. By this rule, the defendant can challenge the acceptability of the evidence by presenting a preliminary hearing to obtain evidence. If the court allows the evidence to be presented at trial and the jury votes to pass the conviction, the accused will dispute the ruling of the court's ruling and deny that the appeal was detained by appeal it can. However, if the defendant succeeded in appealing, the Supreme Court ruled that the double risk principle does not prohibit the defendant from reviewing the court because the court's mistake does not include guilty or innocent matter (Lockhart v . Nelson, 488 US 33 [1988]). Nonetheless, if the evidence removed by the exclusion rule is important for prosecution, it will be more difficult to gain confidence in the second trial. The partner who excluded the rule is the "toxic tree nut" theory. According to this principle, the court can not only exclude the proof of foreclosure of the constitution itself from the trial, but also exclude other evidence arising from illegal investigation. For example, suppose the defendant was arrested for kidnapping and later convicted. Later, if the court declares that arrest is unconstitutional, that confession will be regarded as corruption and ruling in prosecution against people charged with kidnapper prosecution. If you are facing a criminal proceeding, the exclusion rules may ultimately determine the outcome of your suit. However, the court does not automatically exclude evidence illegally acquired by law enforcement agencies. Instead, your legal defense team will evaluate the evidence and cast an appropriate objection. That is why it is essential to have a strong criminal defense attorney from the beginning of the lawsuit. No one can answer questions about "exclusive rules" until you know what is stated in the fourth amendment. The fourth amendment clause and exclusion rule are closely related. A fourth amendment was included in the Constitution to limit the enthusiastic personnel's behavior (Pick, 2006). Then people must understand what "possible reasons" means. You can use this information to explain the exclusion rule definition and its history. In addition, list some of the pros and cons of exclusion rules and ask questions when the problem is abandoned. In the first part of this article, focusing on the fundamental purpose of the exclusion rules published by the courts, and finally the investigation of derivations from that purpose, from the origin in the federal court to the state merger, the fourth revision Follow the origin of exclusion rules. Exclude many exceptions to the rule. In Part 2 we discuss various aspects of the Patriot Act in conflict with the clearly established Fourth Amendment Law, explain the operational relationship between the deterrence model towards the exclusion of evidence and the passage of the bill, based on Then. In the third part of this article, we believe that mistakes in the field of exclusion of evidence 50 years ago have problems as usual, and now we believe that we must be responsible for the fourth revise

Heller decided to reaffirm the purpose of the second amendment: This article made an analytical review of the background, background and important decisions of the Supreme Court decision in the District of Columbia v. Heller, It aims to investigate the influence and the influence. How is the decision and how it relates to the legal interpretation of the second amendment? BLUF Question: The US Supreme Court agreed to review the claim of breach of the second amendment relating to the District of Columbia. Colombia Special District versus Heller's 2008 incident involved Washington, DC police officer Dick Heller, who demanded a gun ban on the capital. The revolutionary Supreme Court ruled that Article 2 of the amendment will protect the rights of individuals possessing firearms for traditional legitimate purposes such as self-defense at home. This is the first sentence of the Supreme Court to possess self defense weapons and to protect the rights of individuals carrying them. A groundbreaking case in McDonald's versus Chicago in 2010 resulted from the claims of three men that forcing of pistol in Illinois infringed their second correction right. The US Supreme Court ruled that the right to keep and carry weapons is applied to the state and federal government as it is actually covered by the Proper Procedure provision of the 14 th revision. After Heller 's decision, concern over whether the second amendment applies to the state is increasing. In the case of McDonald's versus Chicago in 2010, the Supreme Court ruled that the provision of the second amendment was also applied to the result of the 14th revision. William Blackstone (born in 1723), a British legal scholar of the 18th century, whose work affects the drafters of the Constitution of the United States, can not rob the artificial law of the "natural law" (he said). Following Blackstone, American law journal St. George Tucker (born 1752) wrote as follows. "The right of self-defense is the law of nature, in most governments the ruler's research is to limit this right to the narrowest range within range". On June 26, 2008, in the Colombian Special Zone vs. Heller Vs. (PDF), the US Supreme Court gave the first ruling in 1939 and explained Article 2 of the amendment to the US Constitution. The court decided that the second amendment of the Constitution of the United States gives individuals the right to own guns for traditional legitimate purposes such as self-defense. I also decided that the two provisions of the District of Columbia, the prohibition of the use of the pistol, and another requirement that triggered the launch of a legitimate gun at home were in violation of this right.

I highly appreciate the November 17 news article "Some common points in controversial gun controversy" and fully support bipartisan attempts at gun control. However, as long as those who violate gun control believe that the second amendment is on their side, we will never find a consensus. This lie is often strengthened by the media. Responsible reports on the second amendment and firearm issues should recognize that the discussion is based on the original intention rather than promoting such unilateral interpretation. Mr. Nathan Kozuskanich pointed out that in an excellent paper by Journal of Constitutional Law, "There is no doubt that the assessment of its possibility depends on accurate reflection of history, regardless of how to regard primitivism as a theory." . Through a thorough investigation of the newspapers, pamphlets, and public records at the time, the term "carrying weapons" is reserved for military operations and individuals have the right to possess guns for hunting or personal defense It never was used. For example, Rhode Island tells a man between the ages of 16 and 50 that "we are obligated to bring weapons to the corresponding training band, which states that they should be their own in law." . Mr. Kozskanic's paper was published before the Court of Justice of Colombia vs. Heller Supreme Court, among which the "primitiveist" judge Antonin Scalia, in order to limit the management of firearms in this area He won five to four. That's right. It is not only because someone says they are original. The constitutionalists of our country are never meant to restrict the rights of states that manage firearms. The best comments and conversations published by Washington Post every Friday. Join the conversation Those who wish to question the original intention of the second amendment and who wish to exercise an excessive burden on the rights of citizens possessing weapons say they can find weapons that criminals can always be hurt and killed Forget about that. The second amendment has been part of our constitutional structure over the centuries and still protects innocent people, not criminals. There is no doubt that criminals prefer victims who are helpless and not armed. Our legal system should not adversely affect the ability of law-abiding citizens to defend themselves. I have three guns, but I admit that the second amendment means that the citizens have the right to have a basic gun for protection under the law, It is not the main purpose of the second revision. It is mainly to protect individual countries and countries. The founder's father does not even believe that America's emerging economies can afford to buy resident forces. There are locally armed people demanding the most realistic solution in case of a military emergency. Therefore, the second amendment actually requires "well-supervised militia". The ninth amendment will record directly those who exaggerated the second amendment and other specific amendments. This phenomenon is very interesting, but it is not the subject of this article. My aim is narrower. I will discuss the history of the second amendment and try to determine its original intent. I do not suggest that the original intention is dominance. At this point, George Washington said, "When an individual enters society, we must renounce the freedom of sharing to protect the rest, the importance of the sacrifice is that ACLU has agreed to the long-term interpretation of the Supreme Court The right to possess weapons applies only to the protection of properly managed militia and has weapons that are not protected by the Constitution in addition to legitimate police and military purposes, There is no constitutional obstacle to monitoring.

When approving the US Constitution, it mainly includes the structure of the government and individuals have little freedom. However, the state also requires the Bill of Rights to address individual rights issues. As a result, the Constitution was adapted and changed by adding modifications. Even today, the Bill of Rights is changing according to the wish of the people and the ruling of the Supreme Court, but the fundamental principles established by China have not changed. Federal Communications Commission and freedom of speech The First Amendment of the Telecommunications Law and Article 326 prohibit the committee from considering freedom of expression in broadcast materials and jamming broadcasting. Protection of freedom of speech by the Constitution includes programs that are unpleasant for many audiences or listeners. Therefore, the FCC can not block broadcasts from a specific point of view. In this regard, the committee stated that "freely expressing opinion is most beneficial to the public interest." However, the right to reproduce the material is not absolute. There are some restrictions on materials that Licensee can reproduce. These limitations are described below. Lobbying is an expression of freedom of speech. For example, Article 1 of the amendment to the Constitution of the United States states as follows. The lobbying activity expresses these rights naturally and expresses the opinions and desires of organizational organizations such as companies, supporting groups, labor unions etc. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the US Constitution and many state constitutions and the first revision of state and federal law. Freedom of speech is not absolute, the US Supreme Court acknowledges several statements that are excluded from freedom and the government can take reasonable hours, places or restrictions on speech I admitted. In most cases it is acceptable to criticize the government and to argue that people may find unpleasant opinions contrary to offensive or public policy. There are exceptions to these general protections, such as the testing of obscene articles by Miller, child pornography, temptation to imminent action, regulation of commercial speech such as advertisements.

According to the first amendment, how old should a person claim to have rights? For most people, the first thing is 18 years old. However, after the review, it is easy to prove that the 16-year-old child of the second year grader has the ability to express his / her opinion and should be allowed to express his / her opinion. What is the difference between this student and another student who dropped out of school and found work at the age of 16, or another student who decided to wear a shirt written "PRO-CHOICE"? What is the right of high school students' first modification? Here, we find this conflicting decision again, and make us very suspicious about the power of the first modification. In the 1960s, the Supreme Court stated that school officials in Iowa State can not prohibit students from wearing black arms to protest the Vietnam War. It said: "We do not limit the initial amendment rights to the supervision and regulation of the four corners of a telephone box or booklet, or school classroom." Public school officials also enjoy the right of the first revision. The staff 's initial amendment right parameters were first established by the US Supreme Court in Pickering v. Board of Education (in Illinois state). In this case, the court has identified three important issues to consider when deciding whether the statements of the staff are protected by the first amendment. To some extent, employees are dealing with public concern about the general public. By speaking without breaking the close relationship with other staff, parents or students, the speech is usually protected by the first amendment The problem raised in this case is whether the school board prevented the removal of the vulgarity of previously approved textbook materials from the high school stage where the first amendment was chosen for the choice of opposition . And it is sexually explicit. The US Court of Appeal has concluded that the Board of Education can take such actions without deleting the constitutional restrictions and without "being reasonably relevant" to "legitimate educational concerns" It was. The written "Regulations on the reasons of the Board" states that, as the grounds for the deletion of this textbook, explicit and excessively vulgar words among the two options of Part 1 "Humanities: Cultural Roots and Continuity" I quote it. The two choices are Joe's Miller's story and Aristophanes's Lysistrata.

My privacy is very important as a private citizen, especially in this new digital era; agencies will use this information where possible. However, we are protected by first and fourth modifications that give us the right to speak, drink or smoke in our house without infringement of the government. However, if these rights are violated, we can choose to challenge these lawsuits and if we are not satisfied with the results, we can refer them to the court. But to do this we have to restrict our language and acts to prevent these institutions from trying to infringe our freedom of rights. On September 25, 1789, the first amendment protected people's beliefs and privacy without government invasion. The fourth revision is to protect people and property from unfair search and seizures. On February 1, 1886 Boyd vs. the US Supreme Court granted the protection of privacy rights based on the fourth and fifth amendments of the US Constitution. In the 1890's, the legal concept of public relations - whether celebrities have their own privacy. In front of the newspaper, television, the Internet, the public did not touch infinite stories about celebrities. But the information we bombed today was about who dated, where they are eating, and what they are wearing from magazines like People, Entertainment Weekly, Stars. In addition, most ordinary people respect the right to private life. However, some people are absorbed in getting information from celebrities. "Constitution" strongly suggests privacy, but the term "privacy" is not stated in the "Constitution". With the first 10 fixes, privacy is obvious. The first amendment will protect the rights of individuals who worship religion. The first amendment also protects freedom of speech and freedom of press. There are many incidents concerning the first amendment. Saratoga Springs, freedom of religion at N. Y. Kindergarten girl Kayla Broadus held the hands of the two classmates and chanted prayers. "

2. Any state, territory, or property that is shipped or imported to the United States is prohibited from being shipped or used in violation of the law. 3. This provision shall be invalid and invalid, unless its amendment has been approved by several national conventions within seven years from the date Congress submitted to the state, pursuant to the provisions of the Constitution. The 18th amendment was abolished on December 5, 1933, and the 21st amendment of the US Constitution was approved. In spite of the efforts of the Chairman of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Heber J. Grant, a member of the 21 constitutional councils, unanimously voted and made Utah to No. 36 State. The abolition of the 18 th revision was placed in the necessary vote. Article 21 of amendment prohibits "transportation or import" to "violation of the law" and "any province, territory or possession of the United States", rather than preventing the restriction or prohibition of alcohol by the state, And allow localities to manage alcohol. There are still plenty of dried counties and towns that restrict or prohibit the sale of alcohol to the United States. In 1920, the 18th revision bill of the US constitution was passed, and the age of abstinence was born. This amendment prohibits the manufacture, sale or transport of alcoholic beverages. However, many people ignore the ban. The amendment in 1933 was abolished and it was the only constitutional amendment to be abolished. After World War I in the 1920s, the last unit of the US military came back from Europe. They returned to their families, friends, and work. Most soldiers never leave the house before the war and their experience has changed their perception of their surrounding lives. After seeing Europe, they want to offer better things for themselves and their families. As more and more Americans oppose the 18th amendment, the political campaign has grown because of its abolition. However, grassroots politics has made decommissioning more complicated. The US Constitution provided two ways to approve the Constitutional amendment, but that was not the case until one method was used; it was approved by the provincial legislature three quarters of the state. But the wisdom of the time was either the legislators of many countries fearing this mild lobbying activity or simply being afraid. Therefore, when Congress formally proposed the abolition of the ban on February 20, 1933 (two thirds required voted in each house, US senators 63 to 21, the US House of Representatives 289 to 121 I voted). It chose the second method of ratification established by Article 5, namely adoption of the national convention.

On August 18, 1920, Congress approved the 19 th revision and gave domestic women a vote. This historic moment is the result of the work of activists and organizations, mainly claiming universal voting rights. These efforts started as early as possible, but the result of the revision was the compilation of women's suffrage movement in the 20th century. The movement faced a strong political and social opposition and was delayed at times of concern to countries like the First World War. This set of main sources of photos, advertisements, maps and other documents - reveals the fight against the 19th revision Carrie Chapman Cat (January 9, 1859 - March 9, 1947) is the leader of the women's suffrage in the American women, and she gave the voting rights to American women in 1920 The American Constitution 19 campaigned the revision. He is the founder of the National Women Corruption Association's President Quo Mintang, the Female Voter Alliance and the International Women Association. "In 1919, she passed a voting constitutional amendment, gave a voting right, not to pressure Congress to convince a state legislature that approves it in 1920, a non-voting woman I led an army of women. "One of the women. In the first half of the 20th century, it is on the list of famous women in America " From the late nineteenth century to the early twentieth century, women expressed their views and wanted voting rights. Women's suffrage campaign opened the way for the 19th amendment of the US Constitution, which allows women to do the right thing. The female voting rights campaign launched an equitable women's rights movement that continues to provide equal opportunities for women throughout the country. - Progressive era was from the 1890s until the 1920s. This historical movement is driven by middle classes (doctors, lawyers, teachers, etc.), mainly people living in cities. The country is growing and moving forward, but many Americans are late. I hope poverty increases, big companies corrupt, and ethnic minorities are treated equally Decades later, the nineteenth amendment was finally incorporated into the constitution and gave women the right to vote in the country. The feminist movement promoted enough state voting authorization to force Congress to approve federal parliament amendments to declare women's rights by rival women's rights group in 1890 Was the top priority. While the fundamental faction continues to solve the inevitable problem, NAWSA 's new approach concentrates the efforts of the group to solicit new members and win women' s votes.

The dual risk of the fifth revision and double hazard is prosecution against people against a violation that he was indicted. The double hazard clause of the fifth amendment of the US Constitution is aimed at protecting individuals from trials and convictions, not suspicion of crime. The idea is not to give so many individuals to the country, so that no individual suffers, does not suffer cost and torture because of what was tried for the alleged crime. Double danger is forbidden in the fifth revision. In other words, we can not take a trial twice against the same crime. The fifth amendment also stipulates that people can not be forced to testify (self discrimination) and guarantee 'proper procedure'. The remaining fixes (2, 3, 7) do not include personal rights in criminal proceedings, but include other specific issues. The second amendment has the most noteworthy controversy among these remaining revisions. After paying attention to the necessity of "supervised militia" (group of civil soldiers convoked during an emergency or war), the amendment states that people's rights "... reserve and carry weapons without infringement" Declared. " The fifth revision created a series of rights related to criminal and civil litigation. In criminal cases, the fifth amendment guarantees the rights of large juries, prohibits "double danger" and prevents self-insult. It also requires that "legitimate legal proceedings" be part of a lawsuit denying citizen's "life, freedom or wealth", and if you use private property for public purposes, We require compensation to you. The double hazard clause of the fifth amendment of the US Constitution prohibits someone from being prosecuted twice against the same crime. The relevant part of the fifth amendment, like all amendments to the US Constitution, states: "You should not be threatening two people's life or physical injuries against the same crime." The danger clause was originally applied only to the federal government. However, through the establishment of the company, the Supreme Court proposed certain amendments and provisions to the state. In Benton vs. Maryland, 395 US 784 (1969), the Supreme Court incorporated a double hazard clause into the state.

In this article we will examine how different cases of freedom of expression and freedom of expression in freedom of expression of the first revision in three different Supreme Court cases are considered. In the case of Snyder vs. Phelps, Snyder prosecuted Westborough Baptist Church Phelps, deliberately caused mental suffering, invaded the secret by infringing. Protest was held outside the son's funeral (Chen et al., 2010). Another aspect of freedom of expression involves cases that allow schools to limit the promotion of illegal drug use. Freedom of expression zones (also known as First Modification Zone, Expression Freedom Network and Protest Zone) engages in political activities for public places to exercise the right to freedom of expression for American citizens Areas. Article 1 of the amendment of the US Constitution stipulates that "Congress should not demand the government to deprive citizens of peaceful gathering rights and rectify complaints." The judgment stipulates that the government can adjust the time, place and method of expression, not content. As you know, TPM restrictions are effective only in the following situations. The first amendment requires that national interests prove that it is very important that freedom of speech establishes a very important principle of freedom of speech and that it is very important to restrict freedom of speech . The freedom to exercise religious guarantees (until anomalies occur in 1990) can not force or prohibit religious beliefs and that religious acts can only be limited to "forced national interests" It meant that. Interestingly, this same approach is relatively easy to shift from more general constitutional principles to more specific principles. For example, in 1935, the court effectively abolished the contractual terms of housing construction and loans vs. Braidsdell, which supported a law very close to the paradigm case that the contract clause is intended to ban. However, it resumed this provision in the US Trust v. N.J. in 1977 - but adopted a unique modern form From Constitutional Interpretation to Judicial Behavioralism: Transformation of American Judicial Review Freedom of speech - the right to express opinions without government constraints - is an ideal of democracy going back to ancient Greece. In the United States, the first amendment clause guarantees the freedom of speech, but like all modern democracies, America limits this freedom. In a series of groundbreaking cases, the US Supreme Court has long helped to determine what kind of speech is protected and unprotected by US law. Socialist activist Charles Schenkd was arrested under the "Spy Act" after he distributed leaflets urging young people to avoid the draft. The Supreme Court upheld his conviction by setting a "clear and realistic danger" criteria and explaining that the government was allowed to restrict freedom of speech. In this case, they think the draft draft is dangerous for national security.

In three quarters of the resolution adopted by the Senate, Congress proposed 33 amendments, four of which were officially awaiting the decision of state politicians. Beginning with the 18th revision, except for the 19th amendment and the child labor amendment that were unresolved in 1924, each proposed amendment has a definite deadline for approval. In the first 13th revision, which was the title of the nobility amendment proposed in 1810, any American citizenship is revoked from any foreign power, or from other aspects of aristocratic or honorary titles became. what? The two previous amendments proposed by Congress will be the thirteenth fix, but not yet approved. The title of aristocratic revision was submitted to the state in 1810 and approved by 12 states; it will withdraw US citizenship of anyone who accepts the foreign nobleman or foreign payment title without Congressional approval . In December 1860, when Abraham Lincoln won the presidential election and the South was threatened to leave the league, another attempt to write the thirteenth revision bill began. The so-called Corwin fix - named after Ohio Republican Thomas Corwin. He served as the chairman to propose the amendment of the parliament who served as chairman of the 33rd committee. . At the request of President James Buchanan, 33 committees were set up to discuss amendments to deal with the split crisis, and the committee included representatives from each state. In May 1810, Congress approved the amendment of the US Constitution to deprive all citizens from the foreign aristocratic title of US citizenship and to submit it to the Legislature for approval. However, proposed amendments, often referred to as "title of nobility amendment", are not approved by the required number of states and are not technically proposed in the state. In 1812, the core group of the Democratic Republican Parliament participated in a few people, and in May 1812 Madison was again nominated without objection. A rebellious group of New York democratic republics nominated a nephew of Vice President George Clinton who recently died in the 1812 election against New York Vice President DeWitt Clinton and Madison If approved, the revision of the noble Protocol (proposed in 1810) will rob all citizens from the title of a foreign nobleman of US citizenship. When submitted to the state, it requires approval of 13 countries to become part of the Constitution; from the 11th century to the beginning of 1812 they have already done so. However, as Louisiana joined the league the same year (April 30, 1812), the approval standards rose to 14. Therefore, when the State of New Hampshire approved the amendment in December 1812, amendments were made again in the two approved states. Since then, other states have not approved this amendment. To become a part of the "Constitution" today, we need an additional 26 copies.

If you do not change this badly written fix, the school will suffer from problems related to marijuana. Legalization of marijuana to allow adults to buy cannabis for recreation is directly related to increased drug use in middle and high school in Colorado state. Many schools and police officers believe that the reason for this increase is that marijuana is no longer illegal. "Drug-related disciplinary action rumored by reliable sources changing the social norm surrounding marijuana is increasing rapidly," says Janelle Krueger. "(Loftholm). In commemoration of the 5 th anniversary of the 64 th revision in November 2017, the Colorado Springs Gazette published an editorial emphasizing its claimed policy of "embarrassing warning stories": an increase in homelessness, a fatal traffic conflict Has doubled, drug abuse in weeds' drunk drivers and Colorado schools has increased. The statistical elements of this sentence are a bit more complicated but accurate. According to data released by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development, the number of homeless people in Colorado State actually decreased by 34.8% between January 2012 (before the law amendment) and January 2017. This is the ninth largest decrease in the number of national homeless people. That period It is not the Sinaloa cartel when Colorado passed the 64th revision in 2012 and became the main cartel of Mexico. Weeds are their main profit center, but they suddenly can not compete with high quality American products, and the latter shipping and security costs are greatly reduced. Sinaloa Cartel decided to weaken the pharmaceutical company. Colombian chefs have made it possible to create "Cinnamon" heroin as powerful as East Asian products. They sell products at about 46% purity, and now they have increased the product to 90% Colorado State Resolution 64 was approved in 2012 to legalize state cannabis. As a result of this amendment, individuals aged 21 and older can take marijuana and can drink a limited amount of cannabis. This amendment also regulates the regulation of marijuana producers and distributors by state and municipalities. Similar measures were canceled in 2006. Oregon Measures 91, approved in 2014, legalizes casual marijuana for people aged 21 and over, allowing adults older than this age to have up to 8 oz of dry cannabis and up to 4 plants. In addition, this action requires the Oregon Wine Management Committee to regulate the sale of pharmaceuticals. This initiative is sponsored by the new methodology organization in Oregon state. Chief petitioner Anthony Johnson hopes to submit a bill for voting to legislators, but they did not do so before the end of the 2014 meeting on March 10, 2014

In search of illegal gambling gambled on public phones, the fourth revision Katz V. Privacy was arrested under the US petitioner Katz. FBI installed an electronic recorder outside the public telephone box. The state court insisted that the recording device is outside the telephone and FBI has never entered the booth, so it is legal. The Supreme Court is a good thing for Katz. They pointed out that the fourth amendment allowed the prevention of illegal searches by protecting individuals as well as personal property. In order to protect us from unfair search and seizure, privacy violation of the fourth revision really started under the guidance of President George W. Bush. The Patriot Act rendered an overwhelming superiority after the 9/11 affair, allowing the FBI to acquire telecommunications, finance, and credit records without court order. In addition, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act 2008 Revised Act stipulates that US companies will not be prosecuted by clients if they comply with publicly required government monitoring requirements. Privacy expectations are important legal tests to determine the scope of the fourth amendment to the privacy protection of the US Constitution. It is related to privacy, but it is not the same It is a wider concept seen in many legal institutions (see Privacy Act). Examples of places where there is reasonable privacy expectations include private residences or hotels offered by business or public sector to ensure privacy, such as public toilets, private parts of prisons, or telephone boxes There are rooms and public spaces. The US Constitution does not explicitly protect privacy, but it is generally thought that these rights are generated by specific provisions, particularly the 1 st, 4 th and 5 th revisions. Article 4 of amendment prohibits unjust search and seizure, but in Sections 1 and 5, it is not what the government can do, but because it takes into consideration the freedom of independence of individuals, privacy protection It is included. Privacy was originally interpreted as including only protection against tangible intrusions, resulting in measurable damage. However, after the influential article "Privacy" was published in 1890 by Justice Branddis and Samuel Warren in the Harvard University Law Review, the Federal Court began to explore what constitutes constitutional rights today. Different organizational principles of elements. privacy

Restrictions on initial amendments The United States seems to be protected by a very important historical document, the Constitution. It was written and signed many years ago, but American people and their leaders are still confident in the constitution. One of the main statements of the Constitution is the First Amendment, Freedom of Speech. It is difficult to judge what is uncomfortable, but it is difficult to judge what is uncomfortable, but rape, violence, paranoia, four-letter songs are totally unnecessary for a sensitive mind to admit It is clear that there is. Our generation is not the first person to overcome the limit of freedom of speech. As an emerging country, the United States is trying to determine the boundary of the right of first amendment. The 1798 "Sabotage Law" criminalizes scandal and malicious acts by the government and its officials - this is the entertainment that we are deemed natural today. For example, a man was a rude joker to the president. Fortunately, this bill has expired when President Thomas Jefferson took office in 1801. And he believed that the "institutional rebellion" violated the 1 st and 10 th corrections. During the John Adams regime, the conflict with France brought about the passage of foreigners and instigating bills, and the violation of the First Amendment Law restricts people's criticism of government liberties, foreign countries living in the United States We encouraged people's fears. James Madison and Thomas Jefferson responded to the resolutions of Virginia and Kentucky which will be the basis for the ineffective movement of the 1820s and 1830s, and unfortunately the separation of the 1850s and 1860s. Spirit of spirit. What is the limit on freedom of speech? According to the first amendment of the US Constitution, the right to freedom of expression is broad and protects everyone. This amendment prohibits the federal government from depriving this right and the modern US Supreme Court interpreted the First Amendment as limiting the ability to regulate state and local government expressions. At the same time, the court explained that according to the expression of freedom of speech the government could manage and limit the freedom of speech in various ways. Contrary to the general idea, freedom of speech is limited within the scope of the Constitution. The amendment Article 1 does not protect the temptation of violence, fraud, child pornography, or any act of obscene. It imposes restrictions and restrictions on defamation and intellectual property. In other words, the freedom of speech does not mean that people should not be bothered by what you say or agree. Freedom of speech is not an excuse by racial discrimination, homosexuality, or sex difference. The Constitution can protect you the right to say something, but of course you will not be protected for that reason.

The US Constitution has amendment procedures included in the Bill of Rights document. With this amendment, Americans can amend and approve the US Constitution on September 17, 1789. Due to amendments to the Bill of Rights, the United States has been prosperous for many years and has become one of the most powerful countries in the world. The US Constitution was enacted after revision of Article 5. With this revision, the Constitution can adapt to changes in American society. Article 5 of the "Constitution of the United States" explains the process that the framework of the government of the Constitution may change. Changes to the Constitution include proposals for amendments or amendments and subsequent approval. The proposed amendment can be proposed by a parliament voted in the House of Representatives and the Senate by two thirds or by a state legislature requested by two thirds of the Legislature. In order to be part of the Constitution, the amendment must be decided by Congress - three quarters of the Legislature or three quarters of the state are ratifying the treaty. Regardless of the population of the country or the length of the alliance, voting in each state (acceptance or rejection of amendment) has the same weight. Article 5 outlines the revision process of the Constitution. The eight provincial constitutions that came into effect in 1787 included a correction mechanism. The authority to modify is valid in three state parliaments, the other five are empowered in the special election contest. The Federal provision provides that amendments should be proposed by Congress and approved by a unanimous vote of all 13 Legislatures. It proved to be a major deficiency of the term as it created an obstacle that can not overcome the constitutional reform. According to Federalist No. 43, the amendment developed during the Philadelphia Constitution establishment aims to establish a balance between flexibility and rigidity.

So you are sleeping, you hear big noises, it sounds like your door is broken and the door is open. You called 911 and they said that the police will arrive there within 15 minutes. You noticed that they have a gun. What are you doing? As a firearm activist, I roll over, grab my Benelli shotgun, and enforce your position policy. Unfortunately, I always offer it if I have to use power. I think it is like my life and intruders, and I think it is more important. For me it is mine. If you do not have a gun, you may die when the police arrive at your house. You did this and in the purity of your second amendment, you decided: Yes. Yes, this government policy is fascism, racist motivation, very harmful, and hence repressive. Based on this: Yes, Americans have reasons to fight with government officials with weapons with a deadly force. If you imagine using your weapon to maintain the truly authoritarian Federal Government, what is it like? To be honest, I fought the FBI and used the AR - 15 to achieve a sustained moral victory for democracy, as the imagination to come up with a realistic scenario was missing. First of all, it is important to note that I am not opposed to the right to cancel the second amendment or the second amendment (Of course, our "Americans" can choose to do so The Constitution is designed to be able to change "our nationals" to respond to social changes, but I am just discussing limiting the "kind" of gun ownership is. Well then, gentlemen and ladies ... Next time I will tell you "Heller and DC decided in 2008" and "I am able to limit the second amendment provision" In the second amendment, the country was established Make sure that all tools are included, including those that do not exist. - Michael DelVecchio is passionate about protecting the rights of all American citizens, gun rights right bloggers, gun rights activists, gun owners, car enthusiasts, dog enthusiasts, writers and occasional I like eating. Follow twitter.com/Gun_It_Mike and catch up with posts and articles on media.com. For nearly a quarter of a century, the Supreme Court first agreed to discuss the discussion on gun control and the second amendment provision. This incident occurred in a controversial scholarly debate on the history and importance of the Second Amendment. In this month's article, the Constitutional Historian, Sol Cornell explains the change in the nature of the second revised scholarship over the past few years and explains the second amendment in its historical context in more detail. At the beginning of the year, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia revoked the local gun control law of the District of Columbia due to the second amendment. The D. C. Court is the only second appellate court to ensure that the second amendment protects the rights of individuals (not collectively) and is the first amendment to protect weapons. This case is now being brought up in the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court has not adopted the second amendment for approximately 70 years.

Since the founder of our country understands the importance of freedom of speech, there is a first revision of the Bill of Rights. Article 1 of the Amendment states that "Congress shall not enact any law ... freedom of speech or deprivation of press freedom ..." (Constitution of the United States Constitution two hundred year committee 17). One way for Americans to use this freedom of expression and freedom of expression is to create an art form called music. Expression of music expresses our society through our emotions and experiences. First of all, I would like to talk about the idea of ​​music review. When most people think of music reviews, the first fix comes to mind. Americans misunderstand this assumption. The first amendment states that "Congress is dissatisfied with the government by enacting laws that represent religious beliefs, banning free exercise, depriving freedom of speech and press, depriving peaceful gathering rights, We must not demand correction of the situation. " You can think that music is censored according to our constitution is prohibited. But when music is censored, our government will not do this, but it will be done by special interest groups. In court hearings, hearings are rarely held as civil rights hearings that judge whether an artist or artist has the right to make his work and promote mass sales. People oppose music reviews. It is a clear breach of self-expression and initial amendment of freedom of speech. When the censorship system becomes law, it prevents artists from expressing themselves or communicating the message they want to tell the audience. They also pointed out that if the review is to protect children from derogatory words, they will not be prepared for what happens outside the home. From their point of view, they believe that censorship is an obstacle to doing so. They should also be encouraged to express themselves, whether it is music or poetry, if there is some form of censorship, it is presented as needing to be reviewed So you will not be able to learn to express themselves.

"Congress should not enact legislation that prohibits religious beliefs, prohibits freedom of execution, frees freedom of speech, freedom of press, deprives the right of peaceful gatherings, and requests the government to rectify complaints "(Constitution of the United States of America). The greatest concern of anti-federalism in 1789 was the lack of adequate protection of citizens' freedom in the constitution. To provide for such protection, the first amendment and the other nine fixes known as the Bill of Rights are submitted to the state for approval on September 25, 1789 and passed on 15th December 1791 it was done. Thomas Emerson's classic "Freedom of Expression System" summarizes the four core values ​​of free expression reflected in the first amendment. With the political philosopher Alexander Meiklejohn, he believes that the first value is participation in autonomy, freedom of speech is possible and will not happen without it. From the famous article "On Liberty" by John Stuart Mills, and many other books there is a second value of free and unconstrained mind. The market is the best way to pursue the truth. As John Milton said in his famous "Areopagitica", the truth does not always exceed falsehood, but when an idea is challenged by a competitive idea, there is usually better opportunity to approach It is not a doctrine or a doctrine, but the truth accepts these ideas. Every year, the First Amendment Center at the Freedom Forum Institute conducts a First Amendment Study to investigate American views on freedom of religion, speech, news, gatherings and petitions and to comment on contemporary First Amendment issues . This study, conducted jointly with the applied research firm Fors Marsh Group, has been issued annually since 1997 and reflects the change in Americans' attitudes towards their core freedom. According to this year's survey, Americans think that false news is more unpleasant than disliked speech in social media, but most people oppose them. According to the survey, 83% of respondents said that social media companies should delete false information.

Gun control was always a hot topic. Gun regulated parties believe that ownership of the gun is a constitutional right supported by the second amendment. Counter gun believes that you should own and possess a gun. They also believe that gun law limits only citizens who comply with the law. Gun control is that the gun is the basis of our crime. They also believe that the laws of guns help protect street guns and block crime. The second amendment states that "the well-controlled militia are necessary for the security of free countries, and the rights of people holding and carrying weapons can not be infringed" (Caplan p 32). Gun control is necessary, and is good. It is entirely wrong that you violate reasonable gun control and against the actual constitution as you believe that the second amendment prohibits reasonable gun control. You are a delusion as the government is forfeiting your gun and fearing to resist it. You resist as much as you think that the government is going to be a totalitarian dictatorship, and you are the last line of resistance to prevent American experiments from surviving. Take gun control as an example. The second amendment approved the gun in the United States. With this amendment, people can manage "managed militia". This means that if the government loses sufficient control power, people can buy the government forcibly. Some people who are usually on the left side desire to completely ban guns or to strictly control them to stop terrorism - but this prevents people from getting figures to fight I will. If the government gets depressed, people will be ineffective. Given the political sticking of the constitutional amendment, especially the fundamental revision seen from the eyes of their followers, gun control deals cautiously and gradually as a second amendment. Stevens' critics are right: the second amendment will not be abolished, and his column is now harming marching campaigns for our lives Each country is intensifying discussions about gun control. Supporters of anti-gun control said that the second amendment guarantees that everyone has the right to obtain weapons, but the second amendment considers the collective right to hold weapons. Correct militia. This article will analyze the validity of several different articles that provide discussion to support and oppose gun control. Articles by Charles W. Collier "Cannon control in the US: France murder under the age of 50. It is estimated that there are about 270 million guns in the US The history of the United States and its past gun policy The history of gun control to investigate can give US views on gun ownership.

In 1789, the first amendment was added to the Constitution to ensure the enjoyment of individual rights in freedom of religion, speech and press in the United States. Article 1 of the amendment states that "Congress shall enact any law, respect the religious beliefs, prohibit free speech, deprive freedom of speech or press freedom, deprive the right of a peaceful assembly , And will not petition the government to rectify discontent ". Various government officials and supporters of individual constitutional rights firmly defend the student's first amendment right to public school property. But as our court repeatedly stated, nothing in the first amendment would change our public school into a religious district or require all religious expressions to remain in school gates It was. The government can not force the school to conscientize the conscience of the students or to convey the perception of public religion, but public schools can not discriminate private religious expressions in school. Schools are prohibited from starting or sponsoring religious activities including prayers, but it is forbidden to allow religious groups to gather at campus after school. To Can students pray at public schools? Can the teacher say "Merry Christmas"? What is permitted - What is prohibited No public schools are administered by the government. Therefore, they must comply with the first revision. This means that they can teach the influence of religion in history, literature, philosophy - they can not take religious beliefs and practices as part of the curriculum. Since private schools and parish schools are not governed by the government, the first amendment will not apply. No Prayer, scripture, devotion of the speaker violates the first amendment to promote religion. Even if prayer is "nonsectarian" (this is not a specific religion). The moment of silence may be unconstitutional - depending on whether the real reason for their detention is to encourage prayer Understand the first modification and the meaning of that rule. First Amendment Center is part of Newseum and provides teachers with a wealth of resources to try to clarify religious boundaries in public school classrooms. Teachers can not clearly lead prayers, but what about the students? If adults do not drive this idea, they can guide prayers. Please carefully select the material and complement the material. The Harvard University diversity program and religious literacy program are safe for teachers looking for high quality materials about world religion. The same applies to the California 3R project, developed with the help of the first amended scholar Charles C. Haynes. However, there are few K - 12 textbooks that can deeply explore the diversity within the religion. How good is the explanation about the religion written in the textbook? Is it the most orthodox, emphasizing the most conservative format and promotional stereotypes?

After tragic massive shooting in Greensboro - North Carolina, a national controversy has exacerbated gun control WFMY News 2 hopes to listen to triad gun control law, second amendment, and the United States. Reporter Ben Powell spent a lot of time collecting community reactions on Wednesday at Le Bauer Park in Greensboro. "This is your right to own a gun," Chris Kurtz said. "We do not think that we need to change the law because more stringent law will not change people's thoughts and people's problems." Mr. Bruce Robinson said he had influenced his view on this issue as he experienced gun violence at the personal level. Robinson said: "I have already been shot and lost the six families that attacked intensely, which is why I am passionate about it." "The world is increasingly dangerous and everything is going crazy," Howard said. "This is terrible, because you feel that you can not get out of the house unless you are undergoing some protection or simply are not afraid." "I think you should be allowed to buy a gun, I will do it," he said. "There really is no need to buy a gun at a shop, you can take a gun anywhere - that's all, how can we control what we can go shopping on the street yet?" Heather Perez split it into the second amendment, but believe that gun violence is a matter that needs to be resolved. "We can walk around with a gun and say" Oh, I want to shoot this person or I want to shoot that person, "Perez said. "If you think that a toy needs a gun to protect it, that's you, you can do it." For the safety of free nation, we need well-managed militia. Mr. Joel Oakley, a lawyer at Greensboro, said that the language has not changed since 1776, but the interpretation of the law has changed over the years. "We have something like a heavy weapon that does not have guns, we restrict the type of gun in some states, all of which will result in the explanation of the court," Oakley said . "They may be right then and may not be correct in 2000." Oakley said the state government could coordinate gun control laws to explain the increase in violence Mr. Oakley said that a majority vote is necessary and that two thirds of Congress and two thirds of the Senate are required to submit amendments. The same applies to the second amendment. Even if the second amendment agrees to prohibit the government from "infringing" the right of "holding and transporting weapons", the government can not rationally manage the manufacture, sale, ownership and ownership of the gun It does not mean that. In fact, this is what Judge Scalia said in his opinion on Heller Court. His new book, Second Fix: Biography, Michael Waldmann, Chairman of the Brennan Justice Center, New York University, examined this difference in detail. What does the second amendment mean today and what does it mean over time? From the Constitutional Law to the Modern Court, he follows the history of controversial provisions and the legal reasoning behind it. This historical method is remarkable. Heller's decision, written by the judge of Anthony Scalia, was rooted in the idea that primitiveism, the "constitution" should be interpreted according to the original intention of the founder. Waldman emphasized that we must understand the manufacturer's idea but we believe it impossible to give them the last sentence - it is also unrealistic. "I can not return to the time machine and tap James Madison and ask him what to do," he said. "It is important how this country evolves, what the country needs now is important. What does "having weapons" mean? The second amendment to the Constitutional Amendment states that "There is a need for well-managed militia for the security of free countries, the rights of people holding and carrying weapons should not be infringed" including Johnson Many critics reviewed the first half of this revision in the past. For some people it is clear that the first article is consistent with Article 2: the right to c

When our ancestors formed our new country in 1776, whatever principle they were based on, whatever religion wrote the first amendment to have equality right in the United States. However, the comment makes it difficult for the first modification to continue. People usually have a way of thinking that they can follow their own beliefs and make stereotypes to others. "These stereotypes are enemies of learning" (Wagner 6). Learning is the foundation of life. However, through stereotypes, less common religions such as Amish become less noticeable. Amish was born in Switzerland but now it is in the center of culture centered on the United States and Canada. Amish is known as Old Order Amish or Pennsylvania Dutch. Religion is strict in communities closely tied to education which is far from the world. Doctrine followed by Amish and simple doctrine. Because of this simplicity Amish can now possess electricity, possess a car, or can participate in war. Modern people think that living in the Netherlands society in Pennsylvania, Amish is a necessity of today's world Lancaster Amish is a Dutchman from Pennsylvania but Pennsylvania Dutch are not all Amish people. Dutch in Pennsylvania is the indigenous people in central Pennsylvania, especially Lancaster and its surrounding counties. Unlike Amish, they are not all religions. Instead, their common bonds are mostly German biographies (Pennsylvania Dutch is actually a German, Pennsylvania, German). They also have a family line in Welsh, English, Scots, Switzerland and French. The roots of Amish are in the Mennonite community. Both were part of the early European baptism movement that occurred during the reform. Anabaptists believe that only adults who admit their beliefs should be baptized and separated from a larger society. Many early anapaptists were executed as heathens as Catholics and Protestants, and many flew to the mountains of Switzerland and South Germany. At Yoder, Amish parents objected to Wisconsin 's regulation in 1969 which required an admission rate of 6 - 6 years. Specifically, parents believe that the law infringes religious freedom of their first amendment. The court upheld the challenges of Amish parents and pointed out that the state had no good reason to force such a burden. In addition, the court reiterated the importance of parental freedom to instruct child rearing. The court specifically stated that:

In Indiana, the amendment called HJR - 3 has changed the Indiana Constitution to define same - sex marriage, which can affect hundreds of people. The Indiana State Constitution can choose whether to submit or reject this amendment. The Indiana House Judiciary Committee postponed the vote to HJR - 3 on January 13, 2014 after hearing testimonies of 3 hours or more from both sides. The Indiana State Council must not go through HJR - 3. When HJR - 3 passes, it is damaging to our Indiana, our economy and our community if it is written in the constitution. The revision proposes 47 sponsors as a joint resolution of the House of Representatives 1006 (HJR 1006) in the Legislature, and the main sponsor is the House Speaker, Mark Mickelson (R - 13). On February 22, 2018, the Legislature supported HJR 1006, voted 56, and three lawmakers agreed. Voting was a faction, 56 of 60 Republicans voted, 9 out of 10 Democrats and 2 Republicans cast a vote. On March 6, 2018, the State Senator passed a revised version with a 28 - 6 vote and was a faction. This fix is ​​not substantial. The House of Representatives approved March 7, 2018 revision, the same 56 - 11 vote and the same party failed (multiple Republicans changed the vote). This proves the correction of voting This measure (HJR 19) requires the formulation of the National Constitutional Council, and all countries will discuss the campaign for fiscal reform. Supporters of the resolution hope that the Convention will amend the US Constitution and restrict corporate donations in American politics. The amendment must be approved by at least 38 countries to change the constitution Two-thirds (currently 34) Legislatures requiring amendments to the US Constitution, also referred to as Article 5 of the US Constitution or the Amendment Treaty, is one of the two procedures approved by Article 5 of the US Constitution. . Congress can also propose amendments through the House of Representatives and two-thirds of the Senate votes. In order to be part of the Constitution, the amendment must be decided by Congress - three quarters (currently 38) Legislative Assembly or three quarter states ratify the Convention. Congress approved the 33 amendments of the US Constitution and sent them to the state for approval. Of these, 27 amendments have been approved and are now part of the Constitution.

First amendment and the fight against God On 11th September 2001, when the four terrorists jumped to the World Trade Center, Pentagon, Pennsylvania oil field, our country experienced a terrible tragedy. More than 3,000 people were killed and thousands of people were affected. In order to promote patriotism and unite the nation, the citizens raised the American flag, opened a memorial ceremony, and began to join the church. County High School also strives to connect students with teachers. David Hudson, a junior American primary school, as a history and social studies of free expression, including Ventre, First Amendment experts and law professors served as First Amendment Ombudsman of the First Amendment Center of the Newseum Institute. How must the teacher avoid his course? "As long as they teach that they are closely related to that topic, they should have much freedom, especially in government or social studies classes, in the way they do it," Hudson said. Protection and privacy between government regulations and citizens' freedom as defined in the first amendment. The controversial problem of the first amendment law is controversial. The boundary of this rule was promoted as the first amendment protects citizens from government interference in freedom of expression. One of the most common but controversial issues in the First Amendment is copyright and infringement. Although the theme may not look big Criminal punishment for alleging false complaints raises a potential first amendment. 327 The Florida clause punishes the appeal by clarifying the essence of the complaint and claims that it infringed freedom of expression of the appeal. It was revised. To submit it to the hearing committee before the official management commitment. MD code ANN. , Art. 27, §§ 728 (b) (4) (2003). 321 N. ANN. § 29-14-4 (c)) (2) (Michie 2003). See also MD. ANN. Code Art 27, §§ 728 (b) (5) (iii) (1) (2003) (excluding confidential information). 322 For example, the final report on the state police of the Attorney General of New Jersey reported two retaliations. In some cases, soldiers represented friends in the city's case and testified in the courtroom. The investigator 's request to record an interview and a copy of the record received by the suspect constitutes basic rights. The words of Chaplin Ski vs New Hampshire battle are not protected by the first revision. The police are known as extortion and arrest (blowing words = unprotected insults say "to your face" and tend to cause a physical reaction instantly), and these words are common human beings Imminent violence triggering - destruction of peace 3. RAV vs. Sao Paulo (unconstitutional regulation on hate speech based on content) - The court ruled that the city law of hatred speech according to its content is unconstitutional. Arrest on a lawn of a family in Africa - The state is released because it is content based - it may be charged with illegal infringement - it can not be based on content - we will claim cross-cross banning

The first amendment of a public school student has jurisdiction over how the judge has decided in connection with the initial litigation and how it relates to all rights of public school students. This includes everything from burning the national flag to not paying respect to the flag and practicing religion at school. The focus of this article lies in the fact that schools are more capable than the government to limit speech. Research question Whether the ability to restrict freedom of speech by government or school district is high. Activities at school Public school students enjoy the right to freedom of expression with the first amendment, but their rights may not be as broad as those of adults. For example, in the case of the Supreme Court in 1988, even if school administrators deleted articles from student newspapers dealing with controversial topics, it is judged that the rights of students to freedom of expression are not infringed did. Obsceneable speech. Article 1 of amendment does not protect speech or speech which is considered "obscene". That's why child pornography is illegal. However, the exact boundary between obscenity and freedom of expression is often difficult to determine. For example, a filmmaker behind a controversial "2 Girls, 1 Cup" viral video was sentenced to four years imprisonment for producing a movie regarded as obscene. The first amendment of a public school student has jurisdiction over how the judge has decided in connection with the initial litigation and how it relates to all rights of public school students. This includes everything from burning the national flag to not paying respect to the flag and practicing religion at school. The focus of this article lies in the fact that schools are more capable than the government to limit speech. - In today's market, companies are pursuing competitive advantage, incentives to maintain excellent talent and to influence performance are important. Regardless of the economic environment, our goal is to create an attractive and exciting workplace where employees want to retain, develop and contribute to knowledge, experience and expertise. Participation affects motivation. This is reflected in the level of employee commitment, the level of their effort, and their working hours. One of the main problems in fulfilling uniforms at public schools is that they violate the rights of students to freedom of expression of the first revision. "The contradiction between the student's right to freedom of expression and the public school authority's responsibility to provide a safe learning environment is a core issue" (Siegel 3). However, if authorities are looking for ways to provide students with a safe learning environment by controlling what students are wearing, they can choose uniforms. Many schools have clothing regulations that regulate what students are wearing, but they do not manage the clothes they wear. In this way you can not wear dirty, vulgar or insulting clothes, but the student still has enough breathing space to express the style of your dress. Therefore, I think that it is better to limit wearing than to manage things like uniforms that are completely worn.

The Kevin Mitnick incident started very late in the 1900s and is a very interesting case. According to CNN, "Kevin David Mitnick - the world's most popular computer hacker, the source of inspiration for two Hollywood films and cyberspace heroes - is scheduled for April 20 in Los Angeles. One of the computers held a trial of historically relevant cases "(Christensen, 1999). An important issue in Mitnick's case is that Mitnick has a case. Computer crime can become an obsession. This is the case of a federal prosecutor, Kevin Mitnick, who was told to be the world 's most wanted computer hacker before his arrest. In the early 1980's, as a teenager, Mitnick proved his courage as a hacker by acquiring the North American defense terminal This incident affected the 1983 movie "War Game". Like the MOD gang, Mitnick accesses the computer network via the communication system. He violated federal law, got personal credit information and obtained about 20,000 credit data and past records. Other intrusions by Mitnick led to losses of approximately $ 4 million on Digital Equipment Corporation's computer operations. The company also claims that Mitnick stole more than $ 1 million in software. This incident involves Kevin Mitnick, a person known as the biggest threat to the cyber security community. Mitnick has been criticized for breaking into the computer systems of individuals and various companies around the world. He has also been accused of changing information on his belongings from time to time and constantly bringing significant loss to the owner of the computer. He was also accused of accusing new security measures in many places to stop him leaving. In addition, Mitnick was accused of violating his probation and observation condition that was previously convicted of other computer crimes. This case study reveals various ethical theories related to Kevin Mink's life and all its crimes. The survey also suggested facts on the US government, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and other people involved in the Mitnick case. They used different moral theories about the punishment and mitigation he had suffered for his crimes. The main ethical theory applied in this case is divided into three parts, each with its own internal meaning and understanding. - Morality is defined as moral research. Morality and ethics in various situations mean a variety of complicated meanings. You can call the immorality and immorality all contrary to public policy, contrary to public welfare, and perhaps disturbing public peace. Morality means to study "doing the right thing". Morality is a rule system that guides human behavior and is a principle for evaluating these rules.

Map versus Ohio: The fourth amendment's dispute Dolly Map and her daughter live in Cleveland, Ohio. Cleveland police asked to enter the door after receiving information that the individual had hidden the information he wanted to relate to a recent bomb attack at Mapp's house. Mapp called her attorneys and later refused to let the police enter when they failed to compose an investigation warrant. After several hours of surveillance and the arrival of more people, the police asked to enter the house again. Mapp v. Ohio is a groundbreaking Supreme Court case in 1961 and evidence of a breach of the US Constitutional Amendment No. 4 to protect the American people from "unfair search and seizure" can not be used in the state courts. The decision extends the existing policy from the federal court to the state court Mapp v. Ohio, 367 US 643 (1961) is a groundbreaking case in criminal proceedings, the US Supreme Court ruled that breach of evidence obtained by the fourth amendment can prevent "unfair search and seizure" . Like the previous law, it is used in criminal proceedings in state courts, and federal criminal law in federal courts. The Supreme Court will accomplish this using principles called selective mergers; in Mapp this means incorporating the provisions of the fourth amendment that apply only to the federal government applicable to the state, as explained by the court Including. The 14 th revision of this Act is an act of the procedure condition. On 19th June 1961 (6-3), the United States Supreme Court Mapp v. Ohio decided that evidence obtained in violation of Article 4 amendment of the US Constitution prohibits "unreasonable search and seizure" and does not approve the state court. By doing so, the Federal exclusion rules prohibit the use of unconstitutional evidence in federal courts, and the theory that the state is guaranteed by the principle of corporate formation, ie protection measures of the Federal Bill of Rights. Adoption of the provision of the due process provision of the 14 th revision (prohibits the state from denying life, freedom or property without proper legal process). Mapp's ruling also said Wolf v. Partially overrulting the Supreme Court's ruling in Colorado (1949), which treats privacy as being "embedded" rather than federal exclusion rules.

Prior to the 16 th revision, federal income tax was technically illegal as stated in Article 1, paragraph 9 of the Constitution. Direct taxes. I was robbed. "Therefore, the Federal Government must rely on land sales, consumption taxes and tariffs to increase revenues. However, in times of crisis these measures are simply not enough. During the Civil War, when the Union urgently needed funds, Congress passed the income law (1861), including the provision for the country's first income tax. In 1913, the Constitutional Amendment No. 16 used income tax as a permanent fixation of the US tax system. This amendment gives legislative authority to the income of Congress and enacts tax law that imposes tax on individuals and companies. In fiscal year 1918, annual internal revenues exceeded $ 1 billion for the first time and reached 5.4 billion dollars in 1920. With the advent of World War II, employment has increased and taxes have increased to $ 7.3 billion. Tax withholding tax was introduced in 1943, taxpayers increased to 60 million by 1945, taxes increased to $ 43 billion. In 1913, according to the amendment No. 16 of the Constitution, the income tax system became permanent. The amendment gives Congress the ability to legally assess individual and company income taxes. It took less time for the government to collect a lot of taxes. The annual income in 1918 surpassed $ 1 billion, tax revenues exceeded $ 5 billion by 1920. As early as 1986, the income tax system has undergone tremendous changes. President Ronald Reagan signed the Tax Reform Law, which lowered individual tax but raised business tax. Perhaps the most important aspect of this law is to lower the maximum income tax rate? 50% to 28% In 1981, the United States fell into a recession, the unemployment rate rose, the economy was damaged President Reagan proposed the "Economic Recovery Tax Law". This is an action aimed at "revision of the domestic tax law in 1954" by reducing income tax and incentives for business. Tax cuts on companies are expected to stimulate economic growth and eventually stimulate the economy. Over the years, the Kentlos tax reduction has been controversial, and most of them provide a very necessary shock to get out of the depression from what is considered to be radical if unprecedented It is fierce. Critics argue that the bill worsened the budget deficit and advocates assert that this will actually help expand the economy

Fix First Adjustment Right, privacy and the issue of paparazzi and first revision rights that threaten privacy and paparazzi's privacy are often discussed in a traditional way, but of course many aspects of the problem are solved in a very simple way can do. Celebrities who feel they have privacy in public places often catch fish in this problem. Strangely, most of the celebrities who have chosen to oppose people who believe they are violating their privacy are starting activities through a large press conference. However, the US law widely protects paparazzi. According to the first amendment, paparazzi always agreed with "news organizations", claiming that their "information gathering" is protected by the Constitution. 15 They believe that "press freedom" protects their positive news interview skills. But creating an initial fix in this way is similar to passing a blank check to a child in a toy store - which inevitably leads to disguised exploitation. In today's technological magic era, paparazzi has the ability to violate the privacy rights of individuals in ways that constitutionalists have not understood. Therefore, it is necessary to distinguish between the first revision and the right of privacy. Fix First Adjustment Right, privacy and the issue of paparazzi and first amendment rights that threaten privacy and paparazzi's privacy are often discussed in a traditional way, but of course many aspects of the problem can be solved in a very simple way I will. Celebrities who feel they have privacy in public places often catch fish in this problem. Strangely, most of the celebrities who have chosen to oppose people who believe they are violating their privacy are starting activities through a large press conference. Obviously there is a problem between unlimited paparazzi and celebrity's privacy and there is a problem between unlimited paparazzi and the physical safety of celebrities. The conflict between 253 paparazzi and celebrities continues to this day. 254 The violent nature of these interactions is obvious when observing the paternity of paparazzi's willingness to gain "money shots". Authors have proposed several ways to enhance the privacy of celebrities. Paparazzi tactics eliminate the daily existence of American celebrities from the definition of "news value" 257 unless they satisfy the public role they made them famous. In addition, laws prohibit the photographing of celebrities in daily life and impose sanctions on indirect employers. Tabloid Media - Paparazzi effectively prevents dangerous paparazzi behavior in the future

Whether it is protected by the first amendment. In the political protests you can prosecute individuals for publicly burning the American flag. Gregory Johnson did this in a political protest outside Dallas City Hall. Then he heard and judged items respected under Texas law (Section 42.09 of the Penal Code). "If a person intentionally or deliberately slanders the country or flag, it is guilty." This Texas state law is a violation of the First Amendment that Congress has stated that the law is not enacted ... It is currently not illegal to ban the flag in the United States. The US Supreme Court ruled in 1969 that the incineration of the flag was protected by the first amendment. However, people who burned flags may be convicted of despising as having fired without permission. Interestingly, burning the flag until 1969 was illegal. The first ruling of the US Supreme Court on the flag was passed in 1907 by Hortar vs. Nebraska. Most early flag bindings prohibit burning national flags or other ways not respecting national flags. Later, in 1968, Congress passed the slander of federal flag to respond to the American flag burning in the central park as a protest against the Vietnam War. The law prohibits "contempt" against the national flag. The constitutional amendment banning incineration of the American flag will directly attack the first revision. Fortunately, Congress repeatedly failed to pass such amendments, and the support for the proposed amendment to the flag has declined. Many members argue that the American flag is the least important patriotic idol, but worship of the flag is meaningless patriotism. Advocates of this correction symbolically broke the flag by trying to ban criticism from the government. Over the years there have been many attempts to prohibit the burning of flags, but the Supreme Court continues to certify that the first amendment protects the act as a symbolic statement. Some of these attempts include the 2006 Constitutional Failure Failure known as Flag Modification. In addition, Donald Trump 's presidential election expresses concerns about burning flags in the posting of social media in November 2016, spending time on protesters burning flags or losing citizenship in prison I even sought that. The President can try to ban administrative orders to burn the flags technically but this effort based on our government's inspection and balance to examine the possibility of this constitutional violation soon You may be defeated.

Your initial amendment right is very close to the violation of the US Congress. I mentioned the national flag bill, but if this is passed, it will unrecoverably impair our rights to freedom of expression and will impair the principle represented by the American flag. Fortunately, West Virginians have ally to Senator Robert C. Bird. Senator Bird, who approved the bill ahead of time, will protect our rights by preventing passage through the bill. I applaud his position and I hope to integrate his position. The main controversy over this issue is whether the amendment banning the creation of banners violates our initial amendment right. In 1989, the Supreme Court ruled that this flag is protected by the first amendment. In 1995, the Senate and the House of Representatives (Kaminer) proposed a constitutional amendment giving Congress the power to ban the flag. The amendment was passed by the House of Representatives, but only three votes could not pass through the Senate. In February 1997, similar amendments were proposed in the Senate and the House of Representatives. Over the past two decades, Congress passed seven attempts to overthrow constitutional amendments, pass the Constitutional amendment allowing the government to ban the flag, and to overthrow the Supreme Court's decision to burn the American flag It passed. Although this amendment was originally submitted in 1990, it was not possible to win the majority of two thirds required by the House. After the Republican Party took over Congress in 1994, the amendment was passed by the House of Representatives but was not passed in the Senate. The constitutional amendment banning incineration of the American flag will directly attack the first revision. Fortunately, Congress repeatedly failed to pass such amendments, and the support for the proposed amendment to the flag has declined. Many members argue that the American flag is the least important patriotic idol, but worship of the flag is meaningless patriotism. Advocates of this correction symbolically broke the flag by trying to ban criticism from the government.

Second amendment and the right to arms There have been discussions over the years, how the second revision should be interpreted. The question being discussed is whether our government has the power to control firearms. The answer to who has what rights is in how to interpret the second amendment. In this case, we must also consider the position of the constitutionalist at the time of writing this amendment. There are two main aspects to this discussion. One is a collective aspect that one believes is used only for collective purposes. It is not in America. There is a clever second fix. Right to carry weapons. "For the security of a free country, we need well-managed militia, people have the right to keep weapons and carry them, we can not violate." Is not it not only dexterity? Instead, it is very powerful. Always strong, I know, never give up. We are now in the area inside our history. NHS is conceived in the ashes of war and is a way to restore the country. For British, health is a fundamental right and there are occasional differences in how to act, but this principle is still consistent. Using American model, according to one's own free will, citizen's rights is to ensure personal health management of service points, we can already see the beginning of the formation of differences. NHS seems to be the privilege of goods everywhere in the pond. An entity that provides services but has not paid The Second Reform Absolutist often quotes to prove that the founder strictly adheres to the rights of weapons that they believe to be force majeure. The founder believed that the second amendment clause was a public right "as militia gathered in the town square", but the modern understanding of gun ownership was private . This is not only the founder's intention abused but also the result of infringing the indivisible right of "pursuit of life, freedom, and happiness".

Article 4 of the Constitutional amendment stipulates that individuals have the right to "protect the appearance and seizure in their persons, homes, documents and influences." In the plan, these are also covered even if the fourth fix is ​​made. To reconfirm the court's choice on this matter, I am in Oliver versus the USA (1984) and California vs. Virginia. To decide their choice. Article 4 of the Constitutional Amendment states that "People's rights in personnel, residences, documents and efficacy, unfair search and foreclosure are not violated and no warrant is issued, but the possible reasons are supported by vow or affirmation It is stated ". It is the place to be searched, and the description of the person or thing to be deprived. "StingRay clearly violated these standards. The drafters of the Constitution recognize that limiting the privacy violations of the government is essential to the free society. This is the reason for existence of the fourth revision. StingRay has created a dangerous precedent to tell the government that it may infringe our rights. For this reason, freedom quietly comes out of the window. The fourth revision of the fourth amendment of the US Constitution prohibits the government from conducting illegal searches and seizures at public schools. However, since courts generally do not conduct surveys, we believe that what we disclose so that we will deliberately open to the general public will not cause protection of the fourth amendment. People who record in public places do not want privacy, so they will not record and search your own images. The court also continued an undoubted investigation - for example random studies of students taking part in extracurricular activities - personal expectation for privacy is low and the government can show legitimate interest in the search A general search constitutes an unacceptable intrusion, searching for "no possible cause" or "fishing adventure". Therefore, in the United States, it violates the fourth revision. In other places, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights guarantees that there is no "arbitrary obstruction ... privacy". Many items are not illegal, but may cause sputum of love letters, pornography, oral contraceptives, medicines and so on. Teachers can use this power to make embarrassing students feel embarrassed or to negatively affect the attitude and treatment of their students.

In 1791 December 15, "Congress enacted any law, to respect the religious beliefs, to prohibit the free exercise, or taking away the freedom of speech should not be" guaranteed and, of the United States Constitution first The amendment was approved. The establishment of the conditions is minimal in absolute, such as when the country was established, the federal government in many other countries is intended to prohibit that declared the national religion, to provide funds ( University of Missouri, Kansas City, 2011). Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the US Constitution and many state constitutions and the first revision of state and federal law. Freedom of speech is not absolute, the US Supreme Court acknowledges several statements that are excluded from freedom and the government can take reasonable hours, places or restrictions on speech I admitted. In most cases it is acceptable to criticize the government and to argue that people may find unpleasant opinions contrary to offensive or public policy. There are exceptions to these general protections, such as the testing of obscene articles by Miller, child pornography, temptation to imminent action, regulation of commercial speech such as advertisements. The review of the United States includes suppressing speech or public communication and causing freedom of speech. It is protected by the first revision of the US Constitution. This explanation of fundamental freedom has been different since its dedication. For example, during the massive anti-communist feelings of the 1950s, restrictions were imposed, such as the hearing of the House Non-American Activity Committee. Mirror vs. California (1973), the US Supreme Court found that the freedom of expression of the first amendment is not applicable to obscene, so it can be reviewed. According to US law, the provision of the first amendment of the Constitution of the United States constitutes the constitutional right to freedom of religion, with the free exercise of its amendment. In the relevant Constitution text, "Congress shall not enact legislation on establishment or prohibition of religious freedom". "Establishment clause" is based on a number of persecutors, including the Clarendon Constitution, the 1689 Bill of Rights, the Colonial Constitution of Pennsylvania and New Jersey. The first draft of John Dickinson was created while he drafted the federal provision. In 1789, lawmakers James Madison at the time, after the discussion and debate in the first session of the Assembly, has created another draft that will be part of the 1st Amendment of the Bill of Rights.

In recent years, gun ownership and second amendment has been criticized after major tragedies such as New City, Aurora and Tucson's shooting. Although gun control is not a recent idea, it tends to attract people's attention and believe that more free people of gun control should be totally banned whether the guns are strictly regulated. The right of the gun, I think that I should completely reduce or abolish the provisions on firearms. Gun ownership and second amendment For centuries the Supreme Court ruled that the second amendment protects the rights of state militias carrying weapons and not to individuals. Indeed, law scholars believe that this problem is "residential law". For this reason, the Gun lobby group had not contested the constitutional right to carry and carry weapons in the Supreme Court of the Congress. - The Constitution is a pioneer of the government and the government is only a derivative of the Constitution. The Constitution is not a government act, it constitutes a government, and a government without a constitution is an unprivileged power. However, because the US Constitution has ownership of guns, gun control is still a difficult problem in the United States. Throughout history, several laws and lawsuits of the Supreme Court constitute the second amendment. The timetable outlines the most important events that affect national federal firearm policy. NFA is taxed on the manufacture, sale and transportation of firearms listed in the law, including short barrel guns and rifle, machine guns, firearm silencers and mufflers. The NFA has been revised several times due to constitutional defects. The high tax of 200 dollars in this era is to reduce the movement of these weapons.

Like the rest of the Bill of Rights, the second amendment states that the declaration of the Declaration of Independence that the basic goal of the government is to protect the rights of individuals - the existence of the government before the government's establishment for their existence And independence - are acknowledged. This is a promise to make the government illegal if it is destroyed. Obviously, the second amendment is the approval of defending the rights to life - usually the rights to the tools necessary for defense. As Robert Heinlein wrote in 1959, the militia provision is expressed as follows. "... Survival can be more intense than your personal survival, eg your family, your child's survival When they are, your country, if you are suffering from the scale. " As we believe, the second amendment protects the rights of individuals, but that these rights are never bound by limited, narrowly tuned specific exceptions or limitations, not being bound by such exceptions or restrictions It does not mean. It is reasonable and inconsistent with the right. Americans usually have their own weapons they understand in the history of the country. The same applies to the second amendment. Even if the second amendment agrees to prohibit the government from "infringing" the right of "holding and transporting weapons", the government can not rationally manage the manufacture, sale, ownership and ownership of the gun It does not mean that. In fact, this is what Judge Scalia said in his opinion on Heller Court. His new book, Second Fix: Biography, Michael Waldmann, Chairman of the Brennan Justice Center, New York University, examined this difference in detail. What does the second amendment mean today and what does it mean over time? From the Constitutional Law to the Modern Court, he follows the history of controversial provisions and the legal reasoning behind it. This historical method is remarkable. Heller's decision, written by the judge of Anthony Scalia, was rooted in the idea that primitiveism, the "constitution" should be interpreted according to the original intention of the founder. Waldman emphasized that we must understand the manufacturer's idea but we believe it impossible to give them the last sentence - it is also unrealistic. "I can not return to the time machine and tap James Madison and ask him what to do," he said. "It is important how this country evolves, what the country needs now is important. What does "having weapons" mean? The second Amendment to the Constitutional Amendment states that "a sufficiently controlled militia is necessary for the security of free countries, the rights of people holding and carrying weapons should not be infringed" . Many critics including Johnson reviewed the first half of this revision in the past. For some people it is clear that the first article is consistent with Article 2: the right to carry weapons is related to military service.

The composting process is done only under favorable conditions. The five conditions that promote the composting process are: Introduction of worms and microorganisms: To start the process, worms and microorganisms need to be introduced into the waste. Nutrients: In this process there must also be an appropriate amount of nutrients. The waste that is used to produce the compost should consist of "brown" and "green" organic materials. "Brown" organic materials are carbon-rich carbon-based materials such as dead leaves, feces and the like. Let's make healthy soil with healthy compost and coverings. The soil is alive and the life of the soil is important. Beneficial soil organisms improve soil structure and nutrient circulation. They save water for plants and protect them from pests and diseases. To learn more about how to make healthy soils, go to the Soil Improvement and Fertilizer section. There are many proven and real ways to increase soil health. First of all, you have to worry about bringing good organic matter into the soil of the garden. Covered soil can be used until ground improvement. Another way is to place animals on the slope of the garden or to view them during the season. If you do not have an animal you can accumulate nutrients for your plant at any time with a living cover like your lawn. However, I would like to talk more about leaf feeding as a means of improving soil biology. Leaf feeding is a method of spraying liquid fertilizer directly on the leaves of plants. They absorb over 90% of nutrients and carry some of them to the roots. If you decay these winter in the winter leaving these roots on the ground, they will provide food for the soil ecosystem. If you are trying to make soil, you may have added some kind of natural fertilizer to the mixture. Modifications are based on materials used to improve soil fertility, long-term chemical or physical state or soil stability (Park, 2007, EPA, 2007) and contaminated soil remediation (Kumpiene et al., 2008) is. Modifications are classified according to the purpose and nature of the materials used. Therefore, there are organic correction, mineral correction, pH correction. Table 1 below shows various types of fixes. There are lots of contaminated places abandoned around us that need to be reused in a useful way. Corrective correction of contaminants is an important tool for repairing abandoned land. Mobilizable and bioavailable contaminants pose serious health risks to animals and humans that may be exposed to contaminated areas and other receptors. Immobilization reduces the mobility and bioavailability of contaminants and helps to protect humans, other living things, and the environment from exposure to potentially toxic elements.

If this is no longer an option, imagine that more people are searching for a way to get a gun illegally and only increase the crime rate. Criminals will realize that people become helpless and prosper in many cities. "This prohibition will only increase the criminal capacity to hurt innocent people." "Sales of guns have increased rapidly over the past two decades, but gun murders have decreased 39% during the past 20 years, and other" crime of guns " Decreased by 69%. This was the first of 18 little known guns, proving that guns made us safer, written by Michael Snyder. I recently made a panel discussion on the second amendment and gun control at the Florida Freedom Summit in Orlando, Florida. Since I am writing a lot of articles on these topics for Freedom Movement, the 10th correction center, LewRockwell.com, Freedom Foundation, it would be a good idea to reread these articles to prepare for the problem think. The organizer or audience will ask me. As I read these articles, I suggested 10 themes on the second amendment and gun control, summarizing my view on these issues. Second amendment - Advocates supporting guns call firearms "offensive weapons" and what they call "large" ammunition magazines are weapons protected by the second amendment. As they are one of the most useful weapons for defense purposes, they are "commonly used" for defense purposes, as determined by the Supreme Court ruling of the Supreme Court of Colombia v. Supreme Court (2008) It is a standard that was made. This applies regardless of the extension of the definition of 'aggressive weapons' supported by advocates of gun control. Given the political sticking of the constitutional amendment, especially the fundamental revision seen from the eyes of their followers, gun control deals cautiously and gradually as a second amendment. Stevens' critics are right: the second amendment will not be abolished, and his column is now harming marching campaigns for our lives It may be distracting for brave men, women, and young people to discuss the second amendment to participate in the gun control debate. But it does not have to be so. There are many false alarms that encourage political discussions over gun control, but the law itself and its application are relatively easy to follow. The following explains the second amendment and how it supports state gun reform requirements. There are explanations about the worldwide task of implementing constitutional rights.

In the 19 th revision, the US Constitution prohibits US citizens from being deprived of voting rights based on gender. The 19 th revision is an important turning point for many women in the United States. It gives women the freedom they had not previously had. Before this amendment was adopted, many women did not explain themselves, but it was impossible with the adjudication of the next male character. It was until the 19 th revision of 1920 was passed. The amendment gives women power, giving them social justice and many political rights. Article 19 of the amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America (1920) stipulates the equal voting rights of men and women. The amendment stipulates that the right of referendum "should not be rejected or deleted by the United States or another country for sex." The 14th revision (1868) implies this equality, but most states continue to limit or prohibit women's voting rights. Since the women's rights movement that started as early as the 1930s was interwoven with the fight against slavery abolition, the 19 th revision proposal proposed by Congress in 1878 was proposed. This amendment is a problem that is controversial for over 40 years. Women's rights movement has become radical, has been published and demonstrated by Congress for correction. Which is then approved by the state. "Positive rights amendment" was written by Alice Paul in 1923, only a few years after the woman got the right to vote for the 19 th fix. She is the founder and feminist of the National Women's Party. Since its establishment in 1972, ERA has been published in almost all sessions, but since it is not implemented in three states, it can be incorporated into the constitution. What will happen if "correction of positive rights" becomes law? What are its strengths and weaknesses? When the ERA becomes part of the Constitution, all Federal and Family Court laws discriminating on the basis of gender are completely abolished. Gender prejudice will be illegal and gender based prejudice will be gone. It does not prevent people from having a specific opinion, but it will minimize gender discrimination. It is also easy to take legal action against those who violate the law.

This allows local law enforcement officials to follow appropriate procedures, such as obtaining a warrant. The court can explain the fourth revision and all other amendments. It all depends on whether the counsel has the ability to persuade the judge or its claimed jury. If this particular case is a milestone, it may be referenced in the future. One of the key words of the fourth revision is "rational". If one member of the family gives a formal consent to searching for a computer with more than one login or password, the officer is obvious and the evidence found may be accepted by the court. As shown in this section, the court allows you to agree to the investigation by not allowing it to be completely removed from the scope of the fourth amendment but by granting the exception required by the warrant. Therefore, the retrieval of the result should be reasonable. In addition, except for applicable consent, the court can quickly find voluntary consent as long as the consenting party can opt to refuse. If it involves reasonable privacy expectations. This first requires the individual to show subjective expectations of privacy, then the privacy expectation is a test that has two aspects "ready for social recognition". When applying the Katz criteria, the court judged that when people publicly provide personal information, the government does not imply reasonable expectations of privacy by viewing that information. In addition to the requirements of the arrest warrant, the court pays attention to rationality through the mandatory / joy dichotomized from the fifth amendment principle, including the voluntary nature of confession. The traditional concept of the rationality of the fourth revision - the necessity to balance the interests of the government and individuals - was lost in the noise. This article attempts to attribute the rationality of the fourth amendment to the principle of consent in two ways. First, in this paper, we evaluate the rationality of consensus search at the macro level and examine the government's interests on consensus search and the effect on individual privacy. This analysis shows that within the scope of reasonable macro review the court exaggerates the scope of seeking government interests and agreeing to underestimate their individual privacy. How should we change the taboo recommendations of the consensus principle and better reflect the "rationality" of the fourth revision? In examining whether the investigation is an exception to the consultation investigation required by the arrest warrant, the court must consider not only the voluntary nature of his / her consent, but also the adequacy of the government's consent to the request there is. By adopting the "micro" rationality requirement and focusing on the traditional fourth modifier rather than the mandatory concept of the fifth revision, the principle of consensus retrieval is the rationality of the fourth modification at the "macro" level Match. This approach also revolutionizes how law enforcement agrees to search.

The 19 th revision bill states that the US Constitution prohibits US citizens from being deprived of voting rights based on gender. The 19 th revision is an important turning point for many women in the United States. It gives women the freedom they did not have before. Before this revision proposal was passed, many women did not explain themselves and could not judge with male characters. It was until the 19 th revision of 1920 was passed. The amendment gives women power, giving them social justice and many political rights. Before 1920, women did not have the right to vote. They are called "second-class citizens". Women are at home to help and organize the necessities of their families. I have something ... See more content In 1869, Staton, Mott, Anthony founded "NWSA". This is also known as the National Women's Corruption Association. The team does not allow male characters to participate in the national elections and pass the Constitutional amendment. Soon another feminist Lucy Stone founded his own organization. Stone is a pioneer of "NAWSA" also known as the National Women's Vicarious Association. The focus of the group is the right to vote for state elections. The only difference with the organization is that it allows men to participate, which causes many problems. Twenty years later in 1890, Lucy Stone became very sick and passed away, and nobody operated the organization (NWSA), the NWSA group was connected. It is now known as the National Association of Women's Sexual Rights (NAWSA), but this time men are not allowed to participate. During the period following the Seneca Falls Convention, women acquired many other rights. Women are currently allowed to work at home. They work as sewers at the factory and others as nurses and teachers. This is not the kind of freedom they originally wanted, but they accepted it as it helped to get close to the goal. Until now, anti - institutionists appeared shortly afterwards. These "opponents" pointed out that voting would be a burden to women. There are chapters in over 25 states After years of women 's voting rights, when they adopted the nineteenth revision in the 1920' s, they finally gained voting rights. Other laws were passed to help women gain rights, such as equal rights modification adopted in 1923. This ensures equality of gender equality in all circumstances. In the meantime, women are increasingly involved in political reform and pay every effort to achieve this goal. Today, women have the right to vote and have the same power as men. The 1900 law began to pass and provided women with better working conditions. These laws also provide information on working hours and wages. In the 1900s, women's working conditions and labor rights have been greatly improved, and today there are as many opportunities as men. "Positive rights amendment" was written by Alice Paul in 1923, only a few years after the woman got the right to vote on the 19 th fix. She is the founder and feminist of the National Women's Party. Since its inception in 1972, ERA has been published at almost all meetings, but since it has not been achieved in the three states, it can be incorporated into the Constitution. What will happen if "correction of positive rights" becomes law? What are its advantages and disadvantages? When the ERA becomes part of the constitution, all federal and family court laws discriminating on the basis of gender are completely abolished. Gender prejudice will be illegal and gender based prejudice will be gone. It does not prevent people from having a specific opinion, but it will minimize gender discrimination. It is also easy to take legal action against those who violate the law. Fifty years before a woman in the United States gained the right to vote for the 19 th revision, the Wyoming State legislature began to move towards female equality. They give female teachers the same rewards as male teachers and the ability of women to possess land separately from their h

In an equal protection school under law, especially in our daily life, we will learn to defend freedom and equality of all people in the United States. We do not allow race, class, faith to determine the status of people in the community. This seems to be a social standard, but since the beginning of the written history these concepts of equality have been discussed, and prejudice still exists in the US today. In order to solve these and similar problems, the founders of the country developed a constitution that includes laws that govern individual freedom. The 14th revision, which provides equal protection under the law, is interpreted as meaning that people in similar circumstances must be treated equal. "We can not enact or enforce laws that harm US citizens' privileges and we can not deprive anyone within the jurisdiction of equal protection of the law." It was passed in 1868 and Reed v. Reid This case was first applied as a women's group by the Supreme Court. Sally Reed had custody in Richard in the early days, but then Cecil kept Richard in youth contrary to the hope of Sally Reed. Both Sally Reed and Cecil Reid sued Richard property managers with a value of less than $ 1,000. The will test proceedings court appointed Cecil as administrator under Article 15 to 314 of the Idaho Act and said that "men must give priority over women," the court ruled that parents' abilities It does not consider it. As you know, in the 14th amendment, "It is clear that every country can not deprive legal protection". In other words, all law passed by 50 states applies to everyone. Positive behavior gives racial preferences in hiring areas, registration and other competitive areas to some Americans. If an American gains preference, that person will not be treated equal to others. This is very easy. In 2006, 58% of Michigan voters won racial preferences at state universities and universities. After all, it was appealed to the Supreme Court, which ruled that the people of Michigan had a constitutional right to say no to refusal. So, should an equal protection clause open a special place for special Americans? The problem is to hurt other people by giving one person preference based on skin color or race. Michigan University accepts so many students only. This is a little easy

Rhode Island state public schools often invite local clergy to high school graduation ceremonies and high school graduation ceremonies. These priests gained guidelines for non-sectarian and non-denominational prayers for calls and blessings. The father of Nathan Bishop middle school students complained that they invited Rabbi to lead prayers when they graduated from high school in violation of the "establishment clause". "This includes civilian staff who provide prayers at the formal school graduation ceremony in line with religious provisions of the first revision." The court held that the school's 5: 4 voting did not allow the school to promote religious activities by inviting guests directly or at the graduation ceremony. The court found that the "establishment clause" prohibited the government from forcing people to participate in religious activities. It is mandatory and illegal to choose to graduate including non-conscious religious elements, or to enforce students to avoid breach if they do not graduate. The court judged that the students receiving the test were slightly compelled and seemed as if they were participating in favor or prayer. "The government can accept the principle of free exercise of religion and can not replace the basic restrictions imposed by the enactment of the provision, at least the constitution forces the government to force someone to support or participate in religion We guarantee that we should not do religion or religious belief, or way of doing it. "(Anthony Kennedy, judge) "So, I did not argue about the court's general assertion," setting clauses "to ensure that the government does not force anyone to support or participate in religion or its exercise" Fortunately For us who read Blackstone instead of Freud's disciples, these brands are easy to distinguish. "(Justice Antonin Scalia) Reading the first amendment carefully reveals that it protects some basic freedom - religious freedom, speech, news, petition and assembly. Interpretation of modifications is by no means an easy task, as the case decided by the court attempts to define the limits of these freedoms. These definitions have developed through American history, and this process continues today. Article 1 of the amendment guarantees religious freedom in both provisions - to establish a "free exercise" clause that allows the government to freely worship the official church "foundation" clause and worship freely I forbid it. Please note that the phrase "separation of church and state" does not appear in the first amendment and will not appear elsewhere in the Constitution. Most people do not recognize that this sentence was actually created by Thomas Jefferson. Freedom of the press is part of the five main freedoms represented by Article 1 of the amendment to the US Constitution. The Constitution was ratified in 1791 and we were able to fully develop the freedom of the press. Since then, many cases have evolved with this freedom, freedom has played a role in the revision and technology of modern development. Freedom of the press has history from before being approved, helps solve many lawsuits, and is used throughout the modern era. A typical case is Schenk v. America, which is the judgment of the trial in 1919. In this case, the US Supreme Court first decided the meaning of freedom of speech in Article 1 amendment of the US Constitution. The court also ruled that the first Amendment clause and its commitments have certain restrictions on this freedom. Freedom of speech is not free. Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. (Jr.) wrote a decision of a unified court that set guidelines for evaluating the limitations on freedom of expression. In considering this case, the court must decide whether Schenck's language is protected by the first amendment, even if it has the right to challenge the draft. According to the first amendment, the court concluded that the statement of Schenck & amp; iexcl; & amp; macr; s is intended to obj