Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Tenth Amendment (Amendment X) to the United States Constitution, a part of the Bill of Rights, was ratified on December 15, 1791. [1] It expresses the principle of federalism , whereby the federal government and the individual states share power, by mutual agreement, with the federal government having the supremacy.
2.1 First Amendment. 2.2 Fourth Amendment. 2.3 Fifth Amendment. 2.4 Sixth Amendment. ... Download as PDF; Printable version; In other projects Wikidata item; Appearance.
The United States Bill of Rights comprises the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution.Proposed following the often bitter 1787–88 debate over the ratification of the Constitution and written to address the objections raised by Anti-Federalists, the Bill of Rights amendments add to the Constitution specific guarantees of personal freedoms and rights, clear limitations on the ...
The only amendment to be ratified through this method thus far is the Twenty-first Amendment in 1933. That amendment is also the only one that explicitly repeals an earlier one, the Eighteenth Amendment (ratified in 1919), establishing the prohibition of alcohol.
The United States Bill of Rights is the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution. [1] Proposed following the oftentimes bitter 1787–88 battle over ratification of the United States Constitution, and crafted to address the objections raised by Anti-Federalists, the Bill of Rights amendments add to the Constitution specific guarantees of personal freedoms and rights, clear ...
Branzburg v. Hayes, 408 U.S. 665 (1972) The First Amendment's protection of press freedom does not give the reporters' privilege in court. Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973) To be obscene, a work must fail the Miller test, which determines if it has any "serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value." Gertz v.
The history of the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Free Exercise Clause follows a broad arc, beginning with approximately 100 years of little attention, then taking on a relatively narrow view of the governmental restrictions required under the clause, growing into a much broader view in the 1960s, and later again receding.
The Supreme Court has largely interpreted the Petition Clause as coextensive with the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment, but in its 2010 decision in Borough of Duryea v. Guarnieri (2010) it acknowledged that there may be differences between the two: This case arises under the Petition Clause, not the Speech Clause.