The federal system is responsible for the division of powers of the government between the national government the state and the local governments. The federal system is established under the constitution which gives each level of government the local and national sovereignty in some areas wherein others power is shared. The bill of rights refers to the first ten amendments which are listed after the constitution and states the rights of people and individuals liberties such as freedom of expression and the right to own private property (Finkelman, 2013). The bill of rights is significant as it provides a list of the fundamental rights that protect citizens from the harsh rule of the government and overlooking of their rights.
The fourteen amendment addresses different issues regarding equality and the due process. The four main issues addressed by the 14 amendment include a reaffirmation of state and federal citizenship for all races (Wells, 2004). It stipulates that the state cannot abridge the rights of privileges and immunity of the people. It also clearly outlines that citizens cannot be abstained from life liberty or property without the due process. It also states the right of citizens to receive equal protection of the laws. The 14 amendment is significant in court as it serves as a basis to change the ruling so as to observe the action it stipulates (Finkelman, 2013). The structure of the federal system affects the application of the bill of rights since the bills provides rights granted to people that the federal government should not interfere with. However, in other cases, the federal government has often been seen referencing the rights in the 14th amendment to enforce certain clauses such as the equal protection clause to protect the minority or the due process clause which allows the process without interference from the state (Wells, 2004).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The Supreme Court’s Use of the Fourteenth Amendment to Expand Coverage Throughout the Federal System
Over the years the Supreme Court had not been keen in acknowledging and recognizing the civil rights provided in the bills of rights and those in the fourteenth amendment. It took a long period for the bill of right to become applicable in the states (Finkelman, 2013). This ignorance led to the state abridging the rights such as those of free expression contained in the first amendment and the personal procedural rights which relate to arrest and trial contained in Amendments IV-VIII. These rights were often abridged by the states officiated by the supreme court without raising a federal constitution question (Finkelman, 2013).
Throughout the years it was interpreted that he due process clause did not require the states to conform to the Bill of Rights in their criminal procedures, and as late as 1922 the Court denied that the amendment restricted the states in dealing with freedom of expression (Finkelman, 2013) . The Supreme Court had on numerous occasions acted in a way that was not confined by the constitution in regard to the civil rights. The federal court on the other hand through the national or state governments rarely interfered with civil rights except on extreme conditions such as during times of war for actions such as police regulation.
The question of Supreme Court interference with civil rights was left to the state. Example of such interference can be depicted in the case of arrest where the right against “unreasonable searches and seizures" (Amendment IV) did not avail, and neither was it observed to prevent federal officers from searching the premises of an arrested person without a warrant which even though they were required by the law to obtain a warrant to search and later to arrest to allow the rights to prevail as stated in the 14th amendment and the due process clause (Press & VerBurg, 1979).
Another example can be shown by them as an interpretation of the procedural laws in a generous and favorable where the state refused to admit and recognize the violation of the fourth amendment by using evidence obtained through wiretapping using radio transmitters and the court allowed its admission and use despite the violation (Finkelman, 2013). The clause also offers protection to a person facing deportation and denaturalization by being entitled to procedural rights under the due process clause. Their conflict led to the establishment that some procedural rights protected against national action by Amendments IV-VII were also protected against state action by the Fourteenth Amendment (Press & VerBurg, 1979).
The Supreme Court and the federal system acted to influence and hinder the bill of rights during the post-war period. This can be evidenced by the discrimination against the African Americans who were neglected and forgotten in terms of civil rights and privileges (Wells, 2004). Despite the rights outlined in the fourteenth amendment and the bill of rights, they faced racial segregation being denied the rights to vote or right to access basic education as other white citizens were entitled to. They were subjected to great injustices and as a result, the XIV and XV amendments were passed originally to secure African American rights and later the other former amendment were diverted to address other issues (Press & VerBurg, 1979).
The continued debate has led to the Supreme Court realization of the need to be cautious and conscious of the United States position in the world and the need to reflect justice and follow the set laws and rights as dictated by the amendments and the constitution. The Equal Protection Clause which forms a basic part of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "no state shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws"(Wells, 2004). This can be interpreted to mean that the amendment has no bearing on private discriminatory behavior and that Congress, as empowered by the XIV Amendment, prevented states from denying basic civil rights (Finkelman, 2013). The amendment also allows the Congress to enforce liberty and equality as bestowed within its power but it should only extend to states and to state officials acting under state law.
The Due-Process Clause
The due process clause is a constituent of the Fifth Amendment as a limit to the nation and the 14 amendment as a limit on the states. The due process clause has a procedural interpretation that the state does not prevents state action against an individual civil rights and the 14 amendment must be observed (Finkelman, 2013). The due process provides an establishment of a course for action to allow judicial proceedings to protect the legal rights of citizens. It, therefore, ensures that every citizen has the right to the due process and that activities pertaining to an individual carried out by the government are in a dignified manner. The due process can also be substantive which is indicated in the first and the 14 amendment of the due process clause that safeguards the rights of individuals under the federal law courts (Finkelman, 2013). Thus it ensures that citizens have a right to the due process and the right to trial by a jury.
Incorporation Doctrine
The incorporation doctrine is a legal theory that allows the Supreme Court to include the bill the Supreme Court to include the Bill of Rights to the states under the 14th Amendment Due Process and Equal Protection clauses. The incorporation doctrine is responsible for the first ten amendments application to state governments as well as the federal government. A significant case is the Near v. Minnesota (1931) which brought the state issue of freedom of speech (Press & VerBurg, 1979).
References
Finkelman Paul. (2013) Encyclopedia of American Civil Liberties. Routledge.
Press, C., & VerBurg, K. (1979). State and community governments in the Federal system. New York: Wiley.
Wells, D. R. (2004). The Federal Reserve System: A history. Jefferson, NC: McFarland.
