Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM


Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.


Bill of Rights Scrapbook

A scrapbook on the first ten amendments.

Miles Goff

on 28 September 2012

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Bill of Rights Scrapbook

Bill of Rights Scrapbook Including the infamous first ten amendments. This amendment prevents creating any law hindering religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, preventing ones freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances. This amendments overall purpose is to guarantee the people of America their natural born rights as a citizen. The 1st Amendment An atheist mother, Vashti McCollum, sued the Board of Education on the basis of eliminating religion from public schooling due to her child being bullied for not participating in the prayers. Her and her family were atheists in practice, and therefore did not find themselves to include themselves in a religious activity. The Supreme Court (S.C.) was in favor of McCollum, claiming that schooling and religion should be left on separate terms. This show a boy and girl listing what freedoms and rights they have under the first amendment. In the second amendment, the citizens of America are given the right to bear arms. This right in English past was deemed as a natural right, meaning they are not based on laws or rules and therefore inalienable as well as universal. As written in the Bill of Rights, "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 2nd Amendment The plaintiff, McCollum and her son. In 2008, the trial of District of Columbia vs. Heller held that this amendment withheld the ability to protect citizens freedom to bear arms for lawful purposes, such as defending oneself within their home. This case was one of the first to face the issue of individuals (not participating in a militia) to bear arms. This is a cropped political cartoon exhibiting Benjamin Franklin and what happens when you prevent the 2nd amendment The Fourth Amendment to the Bill of Rights guards against unreasonable searches and seizing of property/the person, along with requiring any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause. It was implemented as a response to the abuse of the writ of assistance, which is a type of general search warrant by the British The 4th Amendment The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution protects against abuse of government authority in a legal procedure. This amendment also protects people from returning to court for the same case (but it may be the same TYPE of case) when found innocent. In court, when someone states "I plead the 5th", they are referring to this amendments ability to protect them from incriminating themselves or others. The 5th Amendment The Tenth Amendment states the Constitution's principle of federalism by providing that powers not granted to the federal government nor prohibited to the States by the Constitution are reserved to the States or the people. This means that the federal government can do anything that is not lawfully illegal / not allowed or anything that is not unconstitutional. The 10th Amendment An arsenal of firearms, some of which can be used for self-defense. Board of Education vs. Earls (2002) is a case involving a Oklahoma school district located in Tecumseh. In it, the plaintiffs argued that requiring a urinalysis test to be done in order to do participate in school funded extracurricular actives was unconstitutional according to their 4th amendment right. The S.C. sided with the Board of Education, saying that the students willingly wanted to undergo these extra activities, knowing the circumstances, and that a school search is more flexible then a lawful search, the school not needing probable cause to do the search. This cartoon indicated a cop using probable cause to ask the driver if "they have been drinking" Without smelling it, asking for a breathalyzer would have been illegal. This image shows a officer illegally searching under somebodies mattress. The third amendment to the United States Constitution's Bill of Rights claims that no person should be forced to quarter (or house) soldiers without their consent, regardless if the country is in a time a peace, or a time of war. This amendment come from the Quartering Acts, passed by Britain on U.S as a colony, forcing them to house their soldiers in the Americas. The 3rd Amendment This cartoon shows two people questioning the rights of the officer to be in their home without their permission In 2004, the case Hiibel vs. Sixth Judicial Court of Nevada went to the S.C. This case questioned the rights of officers to require an identification to people when asked. The S.C. ruled that inorder for a identification to be mandatory is if the officer thinks a crime is in progress or has happened and requests your identity. If rejected, however, the questioned will be arrested for obstructing justice and failing to comply with a law enforcement officer. This is the 5th amendment located within the Bill of Rights. Casey Anthony, found innocent on the case regarding her baby's death. She cannot go back to trail for this crime due to the 5th amendment. The 9th amendment protects all the rights that the citizens have that are not specifically guaranteed or already protected in the Bill of Rights. For example, there is no law saying we cannot job, and therefore we have the right to assume that we can legally jog anywhere (unless specified otherwise by the owner of the land or law). The 9th Amendment In Griswold vs. Connecticut, a couple was appealing a law that made it illegal to use some drugs, as in this case Birth Control. After being fined a charge for the usage of it, the couple sued saying it violated their privacy, and therefore violating their 9th amendment freedom. The justices saide with Griswold, saying according the Founding Father, the intention of this amendment was to protect certain unwritten liberties, such as this one. This amendment gives criminals the right to quick and speedy trial, a jury for said trial, and the right to face those persons who are testifying against the defendant. This amendment also protects the defendant from a biased jury pool, meaning they have the right to a fair judging by their "peers." The 6th Amendment The 7th amendment gives us the right to a jury trial for any civil case that is dealing with property that exceeds a twenty dollar amount (according to the value of money back in 1789). The price set for this amendment would be scaled accordingly to the value of present time wealth. The 7th Amendment This amendment protects people from any punishment that would be deemed cruel or unusual, from being given any form of excessive bail, and from having to pay any outrageous fines. For example, some states have outlawed the death penalty as a ruling because it is said to be unconstitutional and an "unusual/cruel" punishment. The 8th Amendment In the S.C. case Roper vs. Simmons, a young boy, 18 at the time, was convicted for murder and given the death penalty. At the time, it was commonly accepted for anybody under the age of 16 at the time of the crime to be void of the death penalty. After hearing the case and researching other states stances on the death penalty, the court decided that performing the death penalty on anybody under the age of 18 at the time of the crime was unconstitutional and therefore prohibited. The accused Simmons' mug shot. A needle and poison expressing lethal injection. Protesters in a 2006/7 case petitioning for their 9th amendment right to get an abortion if they want one. pro-abortion activists expressing their right to choose if they want to have an abortion. In the case of Giles v. California, Giles was testifying his conviction for allowing the statements of his murdered girlfriend to be used against him in court, for her murder. In a majority opinion, the Court held that this may be allowed if the defendant had caused the disappearance during the time of the investigation, and therefore not for what he is being tried for. A political cartoon expressing what would happen with a biased jury. http://www.revolutionary-war-and-beyond.com/fifth-amendment-court-cases-self-incrimination-clause.html http://lawbrain.com/wiki/Ninth_Amendment http://www.fourthamendmentsummaries.com/cases/post_2000_cases.html http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/cruelunusual.html http://www.firstamendmentschools.org/freedoms/case.aspx?id=481 http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-290.ZS.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giles_v._California Under the 7th amendment, it gives citizens the right to a trial by jury under certain situations. The case Bond vs. U.S., Bond was appealing for the right to use her 10th amendment right on a law used against her that was passed long ago. The court, in a unanimous decision, agreed with Bond and said, "Bond, like any other defendant, has a personal right not to be convicted under a constitutionally invalid law." Expresses the goals of the 10th amendment. A man and women expressing their beliefs on the 10th amendment. One of the rights expressed in the 6th amendment. Expressing the large sum of money that would be seen in a civil case. Protestors exhibiting their right to protest. http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1995/1995_95_26/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bond_v._United_States_(2011) In 1995, Markham sued Westview Instrument, Inc. claiming they stole his patent. The case was originally heard by just a judge, and Markham appealed to the S.C. They ruled that a judge would be a better choice to see the terms and violations of patents instead of jurors, as Markham wanted. Westview won with a unanimous decision.
Full transcript