Amendment I (1791)

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free
exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people
peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The First Amendment lays out five basic freedoms: freedom of religion, freedom of speech,
freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, and the freedom to petition the government. These
rights were important to establish because they ensured that individuals could think, speak, and
act without fear of being punished for disagreeing with the government. 

In addition to being arguably one of the most important amendments, the First Amendment is
still very much at the center of America's political discourse today — from questioning whether
or not Twitter bots have First Amendment rights to whether or not the White House banning a
CNN reporter violates the Constitution.

Amendment II (1791)

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to
keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The Second Amendment supports the right to own firearms, though it's been hotly debated
whether the Constitution's framers only had in mind the militia's use of guns or if any citizen had
a constitutional right to a firearm (this confusion is largely due to the four commas in the
amendment that are grammatically confusing).

It has since become one of the most politicized amendments. In 2008, the Supreme Court ruled
5-4 that US citizens have a constitutional right to keep a loaded handgun at home for self-
defense.

Amendment III (1791)

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner,
nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

The Third Amendment prohibits the government from forcing citizens to give lodging to soldiers
in their homes without permission. Before the Revolutionary War, Americans were required to
give food and lodging to British soldiers as part of the 1765 Quartering Act.

According to the National Constitution Center, the Third Amendment is the least litigated in the
Bill of Rights and the Supreme Court has never decided a case based on it.
Amendment IV (1791)

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against
unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon
probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be
searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

The Fourth Amendment prevents the government or police from searching or seizing the homes,
belongings, or bodies of citizens without probable cause or a warrant.

One of the most significant impacts of the Fourth Amendment was in the case of Weeks v United
States (1914) when the Supreme Court decided that evidence taken in violation of the Fourth
Amendment could not be used in court, which is called the exclusionary rule.

Amendment V (1791)

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a
presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or
in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be
subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in
any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property,
without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just
compensation.

The Fifth Amendment gives people accused of crimes a variety of rights and protections,

including: the right to a grand jury indictment for felony offenses in federal court, the restriction
on double jeopardy (being put on trial for the same crime after being found not guilty),
protection against forced self-incrimination, the guarantee of due process of law and the
prevention of the government taking private property for public use without proper
compensation.

The most significant Supreme Court decision relating to the Fifth Amendment outside of
criminal trials, according to the National Constitution Center, was Miranda v Arizona (1966),
where the Supreme Court decided that police must give criminal suspects a set of warnings
before they can be questioned. This is called their Miranda rights. These rights are in direct
relation to the self-incrimination clause of the Fifth Amendment.

Amendment VI (1791)

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an
impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which
district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause
of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process
for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
The Sixth Amendment guarantees people accused of a crime receive fair and accurate criminal
proceedings, including: the right to a speedy, public trial by jury from the area where the crime
was committed, the right to confront and question witnesses against the accused, the right to
subpoena witnesses and have them testify at trial, and the right to a lawyer.

Although criminal institutions in America have changed since 1791 and something like a
"speedy trial" could actually mean years in today's court system, the Sixth Amendment sets a
standard for justice and criminal proceedings, particularly in specifying the rights of those
accused of crimes.

Amendment VII (1791)

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of
trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any
Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

The Seventh Amendment promises the right to a jury trial for civil cases that involve property
worth more than $20. Even though criminal cases that go to trial always have juries, civil cases
rarely do.

Amendment VIII (1791)

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

The Eighth Amendment prevents the federal government from imposing excessive bail and
inflicting cruel or unusual punishment on criminal defendants.

Some, including the American Civil Liberties Union, argue that the death penalty is a violation
of the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment.

Amendment IX (1791)

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

The Ninth Amendment essentially just clarifies that even though the US Constitution and the Bill
of Rights names certain rights, that doesn’t mean that people don’t have other rights not
specifically included in the US Constitution.

One of the supporters of the US Constitution, James Wilson, worried that by naming or

enumerating specific rights, any powers not mentioned would be assumed to belong to the
federal government, so the Ninth Amendment makes it clear that is not the case.
Amendment X (1791)

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the
States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

The 10th Amendment leaves any powers not specifically assigned to the federal government to
each state or to the people. This amendment protects against the possibility of the national
government assuming powers that have not already been assigned to it and is greatly important
to keep the federal government limited as the US Constitution framers intended.

Amendment XIII (1865)

SECTION 1

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

SECTION 2

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

The 13th Amendment — passed by Congress on January 31, 1865, and ratified on December 6,
1865 — abolished slavery and superseded a part of Article 4, Section 2 of the US Constitution,
which set out that fugitive slave be returned to their owners.

President Abraham Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation, which was issued on January 1, 1863,
only freed slaves from the Confederate states that had seceded. The 13th Amendment was able to
free all slaves and indentured servants throughout the country.

It did not, however, grant black Americans the right to vote.

Amendment XVI

Realizing the 13th Amendment didn't go far enough, the 14th Amendment was passed by
Congress on June 13, 1866, and ratified on July 9, 1868:

SECTION 1

All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are
citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce
any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor
shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor
deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
The 14th Amendment has five sections that include: defining citizenship rights, apportionment of
representatives, denying public office to those who have participated in insurrection, invalidating
Confederate debt, and giving Congress the power to enforce the amendment.

Section 1 is one of the most important parts of this amendment because it grants former slaves
citizenship in the United States and guarantees former slaves equal protection and due process.

In one of the most notable cases related to this amendment, the Supreme Court ruled in Brown v.
Board of Education (1954) that racial segregation in public schools violated the
14th Amendment. It was also used in landmark cases like Roe v. Wade (1973), about abortion,
and Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), about same-sex marriage.

Amendment XV

SECTION 1

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United
States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

SECTION 2

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

The 15th Amendment — which was passed by Congress on February 26, 1869, and ratified on
February 3, 1870 — guarantees the right to vote and guarantees that right cannot be denied based
on race.

Despite this amendment, discriminatory practices continued in voting booths, including literacy
tests and poll taxes, to prevent black Americans from voting until the Voting Rights Act of
1965. Voter suppression remains an issue to this day.

Amendment XIX

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

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

The 19th Amendment gave women the right to vote. Before the 19th Amendment existed — it
was passed by Congress on June 4, 1919, and ratified on August 18, 1920 — Susan B. Anthony
argued that the 14th Amendment privileges and immunities clause gave women the right to vote
since they had been citizens all along.

In Minor v Happersett (1875), the Supreme Court decided that being citizens alone did not give
women the right to vote, so the women's suffrage movement worked to get a US Constitutional
Amendment passed to give women the right to vote.
 SUSAN B ANTHONY ‘S WOMEN SUFFRAGE

At the election of President and Vice President of the United States, and members of Congress,
in November, 1872, Susan B. Anthony, and several other women, offered their votes to the
inspectors of election, claiming the right to vote, as among the privileges and immunities secured
to them as citizens by the fourteenth amendment to the Constitution of the United States. The
inspectors, Jones, Hall, and Marsh, by a majority, decided in favor of receiving the offered votes,
against the dissent of Hall, and they were received and deposited in the ballot box. For this act,
the women, fourteen in number, were arrested and held to bail, and indictments were found
against them severally, under the 19th Section of the Act of Congress of May 30th, 1870, (16 St.
at L. 144.) charging them with the offense of "knowingly voting without having a lawful right to
vote." The three inspectors were also arrested, but only two of them were held to bail, Hall
having been discharged by the Commissioner on whose warrant they were arrested. All three,
however were jointly indicted under the same statute-for having "knowingly and willfully
received the votes of persons not entitled to vote."

Of the women voters, the case of Miss Anthony alone was brought to trial, a nolle prosequi
having been entered upon the other indictments. Upon the trial of Miss Anthony before the U.S.
Circuit Court for the Northern District of New York, at Canandaigua, in June, 1873, it was
proved that before offering her vote she was advised by her counsel that she had a right to vote;
and that she entertained no doubt, at the time of voting, that she was entitled to vote. It was
claimed in her behalf:

I. That she was legally entitled to vote.

II. That if she was not so entitled, but voted in good faith in the belief that it was her right, she
was guilty of no crime.

III. That she did vote in such good faith, and with such belief.

The court held that the defendant had no right to vote-that good faith constituted no defence-that
there was nothing in the case for the jury to decide, and directed them to find a verdict of guilty;
refusing to submit, at the request of the defendant's counsel, any question to the jury, or to allow
the clerk to ask the jurors, severally, whether they assented to the verdict which the court had
directed to be entered. The verdict of guilty was entered by the clerk, as directed by the court,
without any express assent or dissent on the part of the jury. A fine of $100, and costs, was
imposed upon the defendant.

BROWN V. BOARD OF EDUCATION (1954, 1955)

The case that came to be known as Brown v. Board of Education was actually the name given to
five separate cases that were heard by the U.S. Supreme Court concerning the issue of
segregation in public schools. These cases were Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Briggs
v. Elliot, Davis v. Board of Education of Prince Edward County (VA.), Bolling v.
Sharpe,  and Gebhart v. Ethel. While the facts of each case are different, the main issue in each
was the constitutionality of state-sponsored segregation in public schools. Once again, Thurgood
Marshall and the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund handled these cases.

Although it acknowledged some of the plaintiffs'/plaintiffs claims, a three-judge panel at the U.S.
District Court that heard the cases ruled in favor of the school boards. The plaintiffs then
appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

When the cases came before the Supreme Court in 1952, the Court consolidated all five cases
under the name of Brown v. Board of Education. Marshall personally argued the case before the
Court. Although he raised a variety of legal issues on appeal, the most common one was that
separate school systems for blacks and whites were inherently unequal, and thus violate the
"equal protection clause" of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Furthermore,
relying on sociological tests, such as the one performed by social scientist Kenneth Clark, and
other data, he also argued that segregated school systems had a tendency to make black children
feel inferior to white children, and thus such a system should not be legally permissible.

Meeting to decide the case, the Justices of the Supreme Court realized that they were deeply
divided over the issues raised. While most wanted to reverse Plessy and declare segregation in
public schools to be unconstitutional, they had various reasons for doing so. Unable to come to a
solution by June 1953 (the end of the Court's 1952-1953 term), the Court decided to rehear the
case in December 1953. During the intervening months, however, Chief Justice Fred Vinson died
and was replaced by Gov. Earl Warren of California. After the case was reheard in 1953, Chief
Justice Warren was able to do something that his predecessor had not—i.e. bring all of the
Justices to agree to support a unanimous decision declaring segregation in public schools
unconstitutional. On May 14, 1954, he delivered the opinion of the Court, stating that "We
conclude that in the field of public education the doctrine of 'separate but equal' has no place.
Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal. . ."

Expecting opposition to its ruling, especially in the southern states, the Supreme Court did not
immediately try to give direction for the implementation of its ruling. Rather, it asked the
attorney generals of all states with laws permitting segregation in their public schools to submit
plans for how to proceed with desegregation. After still more hearings before the Court
concerning the matter of desegregation, on May 31, 1955, the Justices handed down a plan for
how it was to proceed; desegregation was to proceed with "all deliberate speed." Although it
would be many years before all segregated school systems were to be
desegregated, Brown and Brown II (as the Courts plan for how to desegregate schools came to
be called) were responsible for getting the process underway.