r51due

下面为大家整理一篇优秀的assignment代写范文- Constitutional amendment，供大家参考学习，这篇论文讨论了美国宪法修正案。作为世界上第一部成文宪法，美国宪法的制定与修正并非楷模，但无疑是西方乃至近代人类法治史上的壮举，是美式政治妥协的结果。《权利法案》是美国宪法修正案前十条的统称，它保护公民权利不受侵害，但反对《权利法案》的人指出，一旦将受保护的公民权写明，执政者可能会钻法律的空子，践踏那些没有列出的重要权利。

As the world's first written constitution, the U.S. constitution has been in use for more than 200 years since it was enacted in 1787. The constitution of the United States the change of The Times and reality need, according to the different periods of history background and the applicable conditions, constantly build consensus, successively passed the 27 amendments including the bill of rights, to respond effectively to the development of the history of the United States faces in the process of political, economic, cultural, military, society and so on various aspects of risks and challenges, to ensure that the constitution can stable operation, and can keep pace with The Times. The past amendments to the constitution of the United States have shown that there is no unchangeable spirit of The Times and governing strategy in the world. Only by adjusting and supplementing the constitution with The Times in keeping with the needs of The Times, can we maintain the stable operation of the constitutional framework and calmly respond to various new situations and problems.

In his September 1789 letter to James Madison, the "father of the American constitution," Thomas Jefferson spoke of why future generations should not be bound by the debts of their forebears. And by counting generations, it concludes that government debt must be paid off within 19 years. By extension, the founding father of the United States, who wrote the declaration of independence, believed that the constitution and other laws should not remain in force forever, but should be renewed every 19 years so that a new generation could govern itself without hindrance.

But the delegates to the constitutional convention in Philadelphia in 1787 saw things very differently. Their intention was to create a permanent constitution and a stable political system for the new America. But the delegates also knew that it would be impossible to resolve all problems and differences once and for all at the constituent assembly. So the delegates instituted procedures for passing constitutional amendments. First, amendments could be proposed only when "two-thirds of each house of congress deemed it necessary" or when at least two-thirds of the nation's states requested a national constitutional convention. Amendments need the approval of three-quarters of the national legislature or the state constitutional assembly to take effect. Under this procedure, only major matters with broad support can become part of the constitution. More than 200 years after the birth of the U.S. constitution, 27 amendments finally came into effect, and these amendments and the voluminous case law derived from them reflect the trend of American constitutionalism and American history.

The bill of rights is a catch-all term for the first ten amendments to the U.S. constitution that protect citizens' rights from infringement. At the constitutional convention of 1787, several delegates proposed that the constitution should refer to the bill of rights of England in 1689 and the constitutions of the states and add the bill of rights to protect citizens' rights. But most of the delegates didn't agree. They said the most important thing was to clarify the relationship between the federal government and the states. Alexander Hamilton, the constitution's most important promoter and America's first Treasury secretary, went so far as to say that the constitution itself was "a bill of rights". In addition, opponents of the addition of the bill of rights pointed out that once protected civil rights were written down, the executive could take advantage of legal loopholes and trample on important rights that were not listed.

Although Hamilton and other pro-constitution federalists prevailed at the constitutional convention, the battle over the bill of rights was far from over. Article 7 of the constitution stipulates that the constitution can take effect only after the ratification of the constitutional conventions of the nine states. In order to ensure the smooth implementation of the constitution, the federalists had to compromise with the opponents of the constitution and promised to join the bill of rights when the first congress was convened after the constitution came into force.

When the first congress came in 1789, some of those who had opposed the bill of rights changed their positions, and Madison's change was crucial. As the most critical author of the constitution, Madison came to realize the necessity of the bill of rights. At his urging, the house and senate passed 12 constitutional amendments to protect civil rights. By 1791, 10 of them had been ratified by enough states to become the first ten amendments to the U.S. constitution, collectively known as the bill of rights.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the freedom of religion; Deprivation of freedom of speech or of the press; To deprive the people of the right to peacefully assemble and petition the government

The first amendment protected the rights of citizens by limiting the legislative powers of congress. This reflected the fear that the federal congress would expand its powers and oppress the rights of the people in the states. So like the other nine amendments, it only targets the federal government, not the states. Although many state constitutions have civil rights protections, state governments were not bound by the bill of rights in the federal constitution-until after the passage of the fourteenth amendment.

The first amendment begins with a prohibition on the establishment of an established religion. Most of the first settlers in North America believed in Christianity, which was against the national religion. Moreover, America's founding fathers were heavily influenced by the enlightenment, who believed that religion was between every believer and god and that neither church nor state had the right to exercise any power over them. They fear that America will be bloodied by religion, so they want to ensure the separation of church and state, and ensure that the state does not serve any one sect.

There is no denying that "freedom of religion" can guarantee the freedom of believers. But not all practices of faith are protected by the first amendment. In 1878, the Supreme Court struck down a claim by mormons that the government had violated the freedom of worship clause by arresting them for bigamy on the grounds that its teaching allowed polygamy. The reason is simple: if religious freedom means that the government cannot ban polygamy, can it do nothing if a religion demands human sacrifice? Individual beliefs are not above the laws of the state, and only the freedom of belief within the law is protected.

The United States has come a long way in protecting speech. Socialists in world war I and communists in the early years of the cold war both had convictions for speech, and the precedents involving them were the starting point for the Supreme Court's decision on free speech cases. While the U.S. government rarely brings someone to justice for their political statements, that doesn't mean nothing will go unpunished. Shouting "fire! While not constitutionally protected, speech that immediately incites unlawful behavior (fighting) is not constitutionally protected.

The constitutional protection of the freedom of the press is primarily to prevent the government from imposing prior restrictions on publications, except where there is a danger that the publication may cause "serious and irreparable" harm. The law does not expressly provide for "grave and irreparable" dangers; But the Supreme Court ruled in 1971 that the publication of the highly classified "pentagon papers" by the New York times and the Washington post posed no such danger. The pentagon papers, a history of American military and political intervention in Vietnam, spoke of President Johnson's "systematic lying, not only to the public but to congress" when he persuaded americans to intervene in Vietnam in the 1960s. The government asked the court to issue an injunction blocking the document's publication, but the Supreme Court ruled that publishing the pentagon papers did not pose a "grave and irreparable" risk. Unlike the rest of the first amendment, the protection of freedom of assembly and petition has not produced a lot of precedent. Because the constitution does not expressly protect the freedom of association, when the Supreme Court ruled that the first amendment protects the freedom of association, the justices determined that the first amendment's protection of freedom of assembly contains protection of the freedom of association.

A regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is inviolable

This was by far the most controversial amendment in the United States at the time. As for the other amendments, much of the disagreement focused on the details; As for the second amendment, there is no agreement on the logical relationship between the two half sentences. The right of the people to bear arms is guaranteed; the right of the people to bear arms is guaranteed. Another view holds that the two halves of the sentence are logically independent, that the first elevates the militia to the level of the constitution, and that the second guarantees the fundamental civil rights to bear arms.

There was no such semantic divide at the founding of the United States. The continental army, made up of militia, defeated the well-equipped and well-trained British army, so some Americans still believe that the possession of weapons by responsible citizens is a guarantee of personal freedom. Although the idea of relying on the militia to defend the country was lost after the war of 1812, guns did not cause much trouble at the time, so few people delved into the logic of the two statements.

The real dispute began in recent decades. With the development of the United States from an agricultural country to a highly urbanized country, under the background of high population density distribution and the high lethality of weapons, urban shooting occurred one after another, and gun control became the focus of policy discussion. When the Washington, d.c., gun control act was declared unconstitutional in 2008, the Supreme Court adopted the second interpretation, which held that the second sentence was the operative one. The court ruled that even if a citizen did not serve in a militia, the government could not violate his right to bear arms. At the same time, the Supreme Court made it clear that this does not mean that anyone can carry any weapon in any place, and that existing restrictions on gun types, on guns around schools and government buildings, and on guns for felons and the mentally ill remain in place.

The right of the people to freedom from unreasonable search and seizure of their person, residence, documents and property shall not be infringed upon. No warrant of search and seizure shall be issued except by a declaration of oath or alternation, on reasonable grounds, specifying the place of search and the person or thing arrested

The fourth amendment protects citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures by the police. At the same time, the court is required to issue a warrant or arrest warrant only if a law enforcement officer has a "reasonable basis." A search warrant must specify the object and place to be searched and must not exceed this scope. Even if other clues are found outside the scope of the search, the government cannot use them as evidence against a defendant.

There are exceptions. For example, the precedent interpreting this article provides that when a crime is committed, the police present may arrest the perpetrator without a warrant. In fact, most of the Supreme Court's precedents on the fourth amendment are about what counts as an arrest when personal freedom is restricted, what counts as a search when evidence of a crime is collected, or what exceptions allow a police officer to make a lawful arrest or search without a warrant when an arrest warrant or warrant is required. These cases are too numerous to be detailed, but one thing is certain that their purpose is to balance the requirement of procedural justice with the government's ability to ensure social security.

No person shall be tried on death penalty or other felony, except in cases in the army or the navy, or in the militia where there is war or public danger, unless on the report or indictment of a grand jury. No person shall be endangered twice by life or body for the same crime; shall not be compelled to incriminate himself in any criminal case; No one may be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law. Private property may not be used for public use without fair compensation.

In order to get the United States out of the great depression, Roosevelt became the President of the United States in 1933 and introduced a series of new policies, making the federal government play a more active role in the national economy. Opponents filed a series of lawsuits against the New Deal laws, arguing that they constituted an unlawful interference of the federal government in the decisions of the states and the liberties of the people. Initially, the Supreme Court upheld the economic legislation of congress as regulating interstate commerce within the commerce clause of article 1, paragraph 8. In the 1960s, congress even used the provision's enabling legislation to prohibit racial discrimination in the restaurant and hotel industries, on the grounds that such discrimination was not conducive to commercial circulation.

As opposition to active government intervention in the economy gained ground in the 1970s, a series of laws based on the commerce clause were found to be unconstitutional, in part because they violated the tenth amendment, which had been ignored by the Supreme Court. In one case in the 1990s, for example, congress legislated to require states to conduct background checks on gun buyers. The court held that the federal law ordering the states to implement their policies violated the principle of federalism, reduced the states to lower levels of government directly under the federal government, completely disrupted the institutional arrangement of the separation of powers between the federal government and the states in the constitution, and naturally violated the 10th amendment. The Supreme Court's decision revived the dormant 10th amendment, adding a new twist to a case about the separation of powers between the federal and state governments.

As the world's first written constitution, the formulation and amendment of the us constitution is not a model, but it is undoubtedly a feat in the western and even modern human history of the rule of law.

Through amendments and precedents, the United States has been enriching the practice of maintaining the continuity and flexibility of the constitution. No matter it is a retrospective correction or a forward-looking reform, the contents of the amendments are different, but the following characteristics should be affirmed. Second, there is broad consensus between the government and the opposition on certain issues -- and if there is no consensus, it will be difficult to pass the fifth amendment's dual voting mechanism. These are only designed to meet the needs of certain groups, and therefore cannot be sustained for long.

Through these bills, however, there is no ready answer to the question of the magnitude of the problem requiring a constitutional amendment. Because of this, when it was difficult for the north and the south to reach consensus on state rights and slavery, they could only resort to force in the end, and the winning party solved the problem through the 13th to 15th amendments. This led to the most serious constitutional crisis in the history of the United States, indicating that power politics had already existed in the United States. Moreover, all amendments have a consensus-building process, driven by issues or driven by change, but constitutional amendments can only be adopted if there is genuine broad agreement.

In fact, many of the 27 amendments to the us constitution are "unrealistic". When the delegates to the Philadelphia constitutional convention wrote the constitution in 1787, they did not think that slaves would become free men with civil rights. Indirect elections to the senate, designed to prevent mob rule, were replaced by popular direct elections. The right to vote for blacks or women, or direct elections for senators, have all been labeled as "unrealistic" at different times and under different circumstances, but they have all come true. However, the history of continuous constitutional revision in the United States tells us that there is no unchangeable spirit of The Times and governance strategy in the world. Only by adapting to the needs of The Times and constantly adjusting and supplementing the constitution can we maintain the stable operation of the constitutional framework and calmly respond to various new situations and problems.

51due留学教育原创版权郑重声明：原创assignment代写范文源自编辑创作，未经官方许可，网站谢绝转载。对于侵权行为，未经同意的情况下，51Due有权追究法律责任。主要业务有assignment代写、essay代写、paper代写服务。

51due为留学生提供最好的assignment代写服务，亲们可以进入主页了解和获取更多assignment代写范文 提供北美作业代写服务，详情可以咨询我们的客服QQ：800020041。