Habeas Corpus:

This guarantee enables a person whose freedom has been restrained in some way to petition a Federal court for a writ of habeas corpus, to test whether such restraint was imposed in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States. This right under the Constitution applies to all cases in which a person is confined by Government authority. It can be suspended only when the President, pursuant to congressional authorization, declares that a national emergency requires it and probably only when the courts are physically unable to function because of war, invasion, or rebellion. Habeas corpus is an important safeguard to prevent unlawful imprisonment.

ARTICLE I, SECTION 9, CLAUSE 3

No Bill of Attainder * * * shall be passed [by the Federal Government].

ARTICLE I, SECTION 10, CLAUSE 1

No State shall *** pass any Bill of Attainder * * *

Bill of Attainder:

A bill of attainder historically is a special act of a legislature which declares that a person or group of persons has committed a crime and which imposes punishment without a trial by court. Under our system of separation of powers, only courts may try a person for a crime or impose punishment for violation of the law.

Section 9 restrains Congress from passing bills of attainder, and section 10 restrains the States.

ARTICLE I, SECTION 9, CLAUSE 3

No *** ex post facto law shall be passed [by the Federal Government].

ARTICLE I, SECTION 10, CLAUSE 1

No State shall * * * pass any

Ex Post Facto Laws:

ex post facto law.*

These two clauses prohibit the States and the Federal Government from enacting any criminal or penal law which makes unlawful any act which was not a crime when it was committed. They also prevent the imposition of a greater penalty for a crime than that in effect when the crime was committed. However, laws which retroactively determine how a person is to be tried for a crime may be changed so long as no important rights are lost. Laws are not ex post facto if they make the punishment less severe than it was when the crime was committed.

The Judicial System:

ARTICLE III

Article III of the Constitution outlines the structure and power of our Federal court system and establishes a Federal judiciary which helps maintain the rights of American citizens. Article III, section 2, also contains a guarantee that the trial of all Federal crimes, except cases of impeachment, shall be by jury. The Supreme Court has interpreted this guarantee as containing exceptions for "trials of petty offenses," cases rightfully tried before court-martial or other military

tribunal and some cases where the defendant has voluntarily relinquished his right to jury.

This section also requires that a Federal criminal trial be held in a Federal court sitting in the State where the crime was committed. Thus, a person is given protection against being tried without his consent in some part of the United States far distant from the place where his alleged violation of Federal laws occurred.

ARTICLE III, SECTION 3

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or, in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

Treason:

Treason is the only crime defined by the Constitution. The precise description of this offense reflects an awareness by our forefathers of the danger unpopular views might be branded as traitorous. Recent experience in other countries with prosecutions for conduct loosely labeled "treason" confirms the wisdom of the authors of the Constitution in expressly stating what constitutes this crime and how it shall be proved.

ARTICLE VI, CLAUSE 3

***[N]o religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

Religious Tests:

Together with the First Amendment, this guarantee expresses the principle that church and government are to remain separate, and that a person's religious beliefs are no indication of his patriotism, his ability, or his right to serve his country. Thus a citizen need not fear that his religious affiliation or convictions may legally bar him from holding office in our country.

THE BILL OF RIGHTS

AMENDMENT I

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.

Religion:

Two express guarantees are given to the individual citizen with respect to his religious freedom. First, neither Congress-nor a State legislature because of the Fourteenth Amendment-may "make any law respecting an establishment of religion." This means no law may be passed which establishes an official church which all Americans must accept and support or to whose tenets all must subscribe or which favors one church over another. Secondly, no law is constitu

tional if it "prohibits the free exercise" of religion. A citizen is guaranteed the freedom to worship in the way he chooses.

The Supreme Court has described the establishment clause as providing a "wall of separation between church and state." Governmental activity which leads to "excessive entanglement" with the church or its related institutions and practices has been ruled unconstitutional. Thus, the Court has held that a state may not require prayer in the public schools nor may it supplement or reimburse parochial schools for teachers' salaries and textbooks. To permit or authorize such activities would constitute governmental support of the religious organization affected. On the other hand, the Court has held that it is permissible for public schools to release students, at their own request, from an hour of classwork in order that they may attend their own churches for religious instruction; or for a State to provide free bus transportation to children attending church or parochial schools if transportation was also furnished to children in the public schools. Furthermore, the Court has upheld the tax-exempt status of church property used exclusively for worship purposes, and has sanctioned federal aid programs for new construction at churchrelated universities. It has also held that the establishment clause does not prevent a State from designating Sunday as a day of rest.

One's freedom to worship as he pleases has been interpreted by the Supreme Court so that the right to worship must not conflict with otherwise valid government enactments. For example, one may not have two wives and escape conviction for bigamy by attributing his conduct to his religious beliefs. Nor could a person commit an indecent act or engage in immoral conduct and then validly justify his actions on grounds of religious freedom. The Supreme Court has also declared that it is an unconstitutional invasion of religious freedom to exclude children from public schools who, because of their religious beliefs, refuse to salute the American flag. The Court has further ruled that requiring attendance of children of the Amish religious sect in public schools beyond the eighth grade was an impairment of the free exercise clause since it prevented education in the traditional Amish framework.

Speech:

As a general rule, a citizen may freely speak out on any subject he chooses. In addition, he may join organizations, wear buttons, buy books, and carry signs which represent his views. And he may take his case to court when he feels he has been wronged.

The Supreme Court has ruled, however, that the protections afforded by the First Amendment do not extend to all forms of expression. Highly inflammatory remarks spoken to a crowd which advocate violence and clearly threaten the peace and safety of the community, or present a "clear and present danger" to the continued existence of the government, have likewise been unprotected. Obscenity, too, has been judged unprotected by the First Amendment, although the Court has held that the mere possession of obscene materials in the home may not be punished.

Courts have also recognized that "symbolic speech," which involves more tangible forms of expression, falls within the protection of the First Amendment. Wearing buttons, or clothing with political slogans, or displaying a sign or a flag, are examples of symbolic speech. The wearing of black armbands by secondary school students in protest

against the Vietnam war has been ruled protected by the First Amendment, so long as such activity was not disruptive or injurious to the rights of other students. Display of a black flag in protest to organized government has also been protected. On the other hand, burning draft cards in protest against the Vietnam war has not been protected, since it could be shown to disrupt or undermine the operation of the Selective Service System. Courts have also been reluctant to overturn hair and dress codes of public schools where the schools could show that such codes were designed to prevent disruption or distraction of classes.

Finally, censorship by requirement of official approval or a license in advance for speaking has been condemned frequently by the courts. While a citizen is free to make speeches on the public streets, he may be prevented from doing so when he uses a loud and raucous amplifier in a hospital zone or when the location chosen for his address is such that it is likely to interfere with the movement of traffic.

Press:

Freedom of the press is a further guarantee of the right to express oneself, in this case by writing or publishing one's views of a particular subject. The Founding Fathers recognized the importance of a free interplay of ideas in a democratic society and sought to guarantee the right of all citizens to speak or publish their views, even if they were contrary to those of the government or the society as a whole. Accordingly, the First Amendment generally forbids censorship or other restraint upon speech or the printed word. Thus, a school board's dismissal of a teacher who had protested school board activities in a letter to the editor of the local newspaper was held to infringe upon his First Amendment rights.

As with speech, however, freedom to write or publish is not an absolute right of expression. The sale of obscene materials is not protected nor are printed materials which are libelous to other individuals. The Supreme Court has ruled, however, that public figures cannot sue for defamation unless the alleged libelous remarks were printed with knowledge of their falsity or a reckless disregard for the truth.

The Court has also ruled that the publication of a secret study into the origins of the United States involvement in the Vietnam war could not be prevented due to the First Amendment guarantee. The Court indicated, however, that freedom of the press may not extend to other similar matters which could be shown to have a more direct and substantial bearing on national security.

Finally, it is to be noted that broadcasting, to include radio, television, and motion pictures, receives the protections of the free press guarantee, and is subject to its limitations.

Assembly and Petition:

American citizens, whether they are meeting for political activity, religious services, or for other purposes, have the right to assemble peaceably. Public authorities cannot impose unreasonable restrictions on such assemblies; but they can impose limitations reasonably designed to prevent fire, hazard to health, or a traffic obstruction. The Supreme Court has emphasized that freedom of assembly is just as fundamental as freedom of speech and press. Thus, while no law may legitimately prohibit demonstrations, there may be laws or other governmental actions which legitimately restrict demonstrations to certain areas or prohibit the obstruction and occupation of public buildings.

Picketing has also been protected under the free speech guarantee, however, it may be reasonably regulated to prevent pickets from obstructing movement onto and from the property involved. Picketing on private property has been upheld but only where the property is open to the public and the picketing relates to the business being conducted on the property. Thus, the distribution of antiwar handbills on the premises of a privately-owned shopping center has been held to be unprotected.

The right of petition is designed to enable the citizen to communicate with his Government without obstruction. When a citizen exercises his first Amendment freedom to write or speak to his Senator or Congressman, he partakes of "the healthy essence of the democratic process."

AMENDMENT II

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 Right to Bear Arms:

The Second Amendment provides for the freedom of the citizen to protect himself against both disorder in the community and attack from foreign enemies. This right to bear arms has become much less important in recent decades as well-trained military and police forces have been developed to protect the citizen. No longer does he need to place reliance on having his own weapons available. Furthermore the Supreme Court has held that the State and Federal Governments may pass laws prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons, requiring the registration of firearms, and limiting the sale of firearms for other than military uses.

AMENDMENT III

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.

Quartering of Soldiers:

Prior to the Revolution, American colonists had frequently been required to provide lodging and food for British soldiers against their will. The Third Amendment prohibited the continuation of this practice.

AMENDMENT IV

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 warrant 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.

Search and Seizure:

In some countries, even today, police officers may invade a citizen's home, seize his property, or arrest him whenever they see fit. In the United States, on the other hand, the Fourth Amendment protects the individual and his property from unreasonable search and seizure by officers of the law. In most instances, a police officer is not allowed to search the home of a private citizen, seize any of his property, or arrest him without first obtaining a court order called a warrant. Before the warrant will be issued to the policeman, he must convince a magistrate