Unalienable rights are those rights inherently held by all persons. They are not bestowed by the government and therefore cannot be taken away without due process. The Declaration of Independence lists life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness as unalienable rights. The Bill of Rights safeguards these unalienable rights and personal freedom. For example, the 1st Amendment’s inclusion of freedom of speech and religion assist in protecting all three unalienable rights.

**Miranda v. Arizona** is the famous 1966 Supreme Court case concerning the provision of the 5th Amendment: **guarantee against self-incrimination**.

Ernesto Miranda, a mentally challenged man, was convicted of kidnapping and murder based on the confession he gave to the police (among other things). The problem with this verdict was that it was discovered that the police did not inform Miranda about his rights during the arrest and interrogation.

The Supreme Court overturned this verdict, and the legacy of this case is **Miranda rule**. This rule implies that the police forces **must inform the suspect of his rights before the interrogation begins.**

The rights that are read to the suspect according to Miranda’s rule are: informing the suspect that he has the right to remain silent, that everything he says can be used against him later in court, that he has the right to a lawyer during interrogation, even if he cannot afford it (it will be assigned to him).

Although this rule has been applied for many years, there are still some controversies about it. Those who support this rule believe that the police should strictly apply the provisions of the Constitution in their work and that they should provide judgments with numerous pieces of evidence if it is not possible to obtain recognition. Opponents of this rule consider it inadmissible for the guilty to be acquitted due to a procedural error of the police in case of failure to read the rights of the suspect.

Roe v. Wade was a Supreme Court case in 1973 that struck down a Texas law which prohibited a woman from having an abortion unless her life was in danger. The Court decided that the right to privacy implied in the 14th Amendment included a woman’s right to access abortion care. Roe v. Wade remains controversial because of strong opinions regarding the morality of abortion. Many abortion opponents have launched legal attacks on Roe v. Wade and the case remains contentious.

Due Process is the right to fair treatment under the law. The 5th Amendment includes language which states no man will, “… be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” The 14th Amendment directly addresses due process in Section 1.

It states, “No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

Due process protects individual rights by assuring fair treatment for all individuals under the law. Due process provides surety that the government can not act capriciously. Due process requires that all people must be treated fairly under the law, but also that the laws themselves are fair.

The **6th Amendment** focuses on providing certain individual rights to the defendants during a trial. 

In the case **Gideon v. Wainwright**, Gideon could not afford expenses for his trial process. The court concluded a guarantee for the defendants’ rights to legal counsel at the governmental expense if the defendants cannot afford one. This implied to all levels of courts in the U.S. 

During the **Pointer v. Texas** case, the defendant did not have a right which was active in the other states. The court ruled that everyone has the right of confrontation in the federal trials due and per the 6th Amendment. It was demanded that all states uphold this right. 

In the **Washington v. Texas** case, a defendant was refused to have a witness testifying in his favor. It was concluded that all defendants have the right to call a witness. The rule was extended to all of the U.S. courts.

There are many issues to choose from regarding the rights and freedoms of citizens per the Bill of Rights. The best bet would be to mainly focus on the rights that seem the most interesting for you to go thoroughly. Make sure to generalize and simplify, provide valid arguments for and against the matter. Arguments for and against could be an excellent source for generating neat questions.

**Bill of Rights** is a legal document of the U.S. that guarantees protection to the citizens and their liberties by the government. Through the ten Amendments, citizen’s rights are clearly defined and apply to everyone; they are based on equality.

The **main principles of the Amendments** are as following:

*1st Amendment*: freedom of press, assembly, speech, and religion.
*2nd Amendment*: people can legally bear arms for their own protection.
*3rd Amendment*: restriction of housing soldiers in homes.
*4th Amendment*: unreasonable search and seizure is forbidden.
*5th Amendment*: protection against self-testimonies, and seizure of personal property that is under eminent domain.
*6th Amendment*: the rights to service of lawyer and trial by jury.
*7th Amendment*: cases that have certain dollar amount are guaranteed a trial by jury.
*8th Amendment*: excessive bail, fines, and cruel punishment are all prohibited.
*9th Amendment*: the right in the Bill of Rights do no put other rights in no effect.
*10th Amendment*: The power that is not given to the federal government is for the states or individuals.

The **1st Amendment** primarily protects citizen rights that regard freedom of religion, liberty of expression, speech, petition, and assembly.

**The freedom of speech** allows individuals to legally verbalize and communicate their point of view without any governmental intervention, censorship, or sanction.

However, **freedom of speech is not absolute** since boundaries and limitations concern vulgar expression, confidential secrets, libel, or any other expression that might unjustly damage an individual’s reputation.

Habeas Corpus is a legal principle which translates from latin as “you have the body.” A writ of habeas corpus compels an officer of the law to bring an arrested person before the court to provide evidence as to why they should continue to be held. Article I Section 9 of the Constitution states, “”The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.” During the Civil War President Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus as a response to the violence.

In the case Ex Parte Merryman the court ruled Presidents Lincoln’s actions to be unconstitutional because the power to suspend habeas corpus belonged to Congress. Congress went on pass the Habeas Corpus Act of 1863 which empowered the President to suspend habeas corpus in times of conflict. The court then ruled in Ex Parte Mulligan that neither the President nor Congress could suspend habeas corpus in areas that were not directly experiencing conflict or violence.

Habeas Corpus is important because it protects individual freedom from the overreach of government. It prevents the government from detaining people without demonstrable cause.

Freedoms and rights guaranteed by each amendment in the Bill of Rights:

*1st Amendment* – Freedom of speech, press, religion, assembly, and the right to petition.

*2nd Amendment* – Right to bear arms.

*3rd Amendment* – Protection against housing soldiers in homes.

*4th Amendment* – Protection against warrants without the probable cause, and protection against unreasonable search.

*5th Amendment* – Protection of the citizens against double jeopardy, property seizure, self-incrimination, and trial without indictment.

*6th Amendment* – Everyone has a right to: legal counsel, speedy trial, be informed of charges, call witnesses, and be confronted by witnesses.

*7th Amendment* – Right to trial by jurisdiction.

*8th Amendment* – Protection against cruel and unusual punishment, excessive fines and bail.

*9th Amendment* – Rights guaranteed in the Constitution can not infringe on other rights.

*10th Amendment* – Powers that are not granted to the federal government belong to the people or the states.

The Constitution guarantees religious freedom to its citizens as it is stated in the *First Amendment*: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” With this statement the government provides two protections. One is the right to religious belief, and the second is that the government will not favor a religion over other religions and religion over non-religion.

The **Establishment Clause** prohibits the federal government from establishing a religion or interfere in matters of religion.

The **Free Exercise Clause** states that the legislative body can make no law supporting religion or prohibiting it.

Both clauses support freedom of religion as a personal choice. The government will favor none or make laws for or against church matters.

The **Founding Fathers** created freedom of religion so everyone’s belief is protected and not only selected or recognized religious groups.

There are many provisions in the U.S Constitution for the protection of individual rights. The Bill of Rights protects many individual freedoms including speech (1st), religion (1st), protection from unlawful search and seizure (4th), protection from self incrimination (5th), and many others. Article I Section 9 outlines both the protection of habeas corpus and the only time it may be suspended. The 9th Amendment makes a point of saying that the Bill of Rights in not an exhaustive list. There may be other rights held by all individuals that are not stated therein. The 14th Amendment also protects individual rights by extending the protections found in the Constitution to the states governments.

To successfully write down and create visuals of observation for the extension of the Bill of Rights, make sure to understand the philosophy behind the principles and Amendments that the Constitution upholds; it will give you a better insight so you can elaborate successfully. Perhaps you can start by explaining matters on a federal level and its structure (larger scale, and then gradually move onto the fundamental rights of individuals; smaller scale and how the system exactly protects individual rights. 

In the system of **federalism**, the government creates national and state governments that are both sovereign powers. Some power is shared, and some powers are exclusive to the national and state government. Therefore, the federal government divides itself (in that it has certain powers over a state) into numerous independent state governmental systems. So in simple words, federalism includes the states whose rights are protected by the power given to the national government in the system of power-sharing. 

The **14th Amendment** states that: “ No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” 

Since the **States are under the federal government**, the federal government extends its power to note that all states should follow the same rules and principles from the 14th Amendment with no State exceptions. 

If you look closely into the details from the 14th Amendment, you will notice that there is a highly offered level of protection from governmental abuse and upholding of the fundamental rights. Thus, the **14th Amendment indeed is based on protecting fundamental rights**, such as Due Process. 

The case** Lemon v. Kurtzman** (1971) influenced the Supreme Court to establish three standards that will evaluate whether the government’s actions are interfering with religion because, as we know per the 1st Amendment, the **government is not allowed to select and make a decision based on religion preference**. Furthermore, the government favors none nor makes laws for or against the religion – it is neutral.

The government’s tool to preserve religious freedom is the **Lemon test**. Here are three standards from the test that must be satisfied:
*1)* Does a subject have a secular purpose of non-religious nature.
*2)* The subject does not advance or inhibit religion.
*3)* The subject does not promote involvement with religion on the government’s behalf.

Using the Lemon test, the government determines whether political activities or the law violates the **Establishment Clause** under the 1st Amendment.

**Thomas Jefferson** drafted a document (Virginia Statute) for creating religious freedom in 1786. His fundamental belief for freedom of religion was that the government nor anyone has the right to force a person to believe or chose a religion. Furthermore, Jefferson upheld religious freedom by stating there is no real religious liberty if there is no separation between the church and the state.

The **fundamental philosophies from the Founding Fathers** revolve around the right to life, liberty, and pursuit of personal happiness – without interference with someone else’s freedom. Most of the political philosophies are inspired by enlightenment thinkers.

**Thomas Jefferson** was a lawyer, one of the main authors of the Declaration of Independence, a democratic spokesman, third president of the States, a supporter of rightfully arranged federalism, and he made other contributions such as the separation of church and state.

Jefferson voiced his opinion that no person or entity should be able to enforce a religion – without this, there is no freedom of religion. **Freedom of religion** is believed to be crucial in creating a state where everyone has natural rights, including the freedom of religion. Jefferson drafted a document (Virginia Statute) for the cause of liberty to faith in 1786.

The **1st Amendment** guarantees the citizens’ freedom of expression, religion, press, and assembly. Thus, the government enforces the law that upholds a personal choice. The government is not allowed to interfere in the matters of religion or church, nor is it allowed to select and make decisions based on religious preference. All of the principles and philosophies combined, including freedom of religion, provide a high level of personal freedoms for the citizens of the States.

One can break down the above statement into two parts. The first, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” prohibits the government from creating any sort of national church or state sponsored religion. The second, “or prohibiting the free exercise
thereof ” refers to the prohibition on government restricting the religious practices or beliefs of its citizens. Thomas Jefferson’s phrase from the letter to the Danbury Baptist Association “separation of church and state” is how he viewed the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses. He also writes in his letter, “Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions,” Jefferson believed the government had no place in dictating the religious beliefs of its citizens. Due to these clauses, the government cannot impose a religious practice on anyone, nor prohibit them from exercising their own beliefs. These two limitations set up a wall between the government and the religious beliefs of an individual.

For the government to function correctly and provide its citizens with safety and opportunities, it needs fuel. One of the fuel for that is the contributions people make.

The **obligation of citizenship** makes the system function so the system can give back to the people and provide them with conditions for their lifestyle of choice. Everyone has different interests and should follow their desires, so they contribute to the system in their own way. However, if the actions for their interests cause harm to others, intervene with the interest of others, or disturb the public good, they are not fulfilling their citizen role. For example, a citizen must obey the law, and if someone acts out of self-interest but is not obeying the law, it is indeed disturbing the public good.

Political, economic, and social stability comes from the efforts of citizens. Everyone can feel safe to a certain degree because they know the government enforces the law. Moreover, it is vital that everyone has freedom of choice and follow their own interest as long as it is not suppressing the liberty of others. Without all of this, the system could not function. Therefore **citizen’s efforts for obligations and their interests are what makes a state function correctly**.

**Many factors influence policymaking**, such as interest groups, public opinion, changes in technologies, political activities, business lobbying, and conditions in the economy.

In the case **Roe v. Wade**, the court was defining a line between the morality for the act of abortion, and someone’s right to privacy. The Supreme Court ruled it is a personal right to privacy to let women decide for an abortion in the first six months of pregnancy. In the last trimester of pregnancy, the government protects the unborn child. Only if a mother’s life is at stake, the government allows abortion in the last trimester. The court set a line between an undue burden and the protection of an unborn child. Therefore, the Supreme Court protected individual rights by ensuring that every woman has a choice while drawing the moral line for her actions.

In the case **Washington v. Texas**, a defendant, was denied to have a witness testifying in his favor. The Supreme Court ruled that all defendants have the right to call a witness, thus protecting individuals from the possibility of judicial abuse.

Both of the cases protect civil rights by ensuring them to the citizens.

Individual rights are those held by each person that allow them to live free from government interference. Limited government protects individual rights by clearly defining the scope of governmental power. However, there are limits on freedoms. Individual rights do not extend to violating the rights of others. For example libel and slander, which are malicious and false speech, are not protected. Rights do come into conflict. Sometimes rights are limited for the common good. One cannot drive as fast as they may wish on public roads, smoke cigarettes wherever they may wish, or, as in the famous example, shout fire in a crowded theater. If the government had more authority individual rights could be infringed upon. For example, during WWII the government forcibly interned those of Japanese descent living on the west coast. This was supported by the 1944 Supreme Court case Korematsu v. United States. The government extended their authority in the name of national security and individual rights were sacrificed.

The **card shows** individual rights belonging to all suspects of a crime. Those rights have to be read to suspects for the police interrogation to be legal.

In the case **Miranda v. Arizona**, a suspect confessed a murder to the police. However, the officials have not informed Miranda of his Constitutional rights before the confession.

Miranda appealed to the court that the officials took his statement in an unconstitutional order. The Supreme Court ruled, with a 5-4 decision, that Miranda’s confession cannot be used during a trial because the officials did not respect his rights.

From then on, the **Miranda rule** demands governmental officials to inform the suspects of their individual rights per the 5th and 6th Amendments prior to the interrogation.

In theory, the **government needs enough power to sustain itself, be able to protect its citizens, and provide opportunities**. However, too much power is not good, so the government has to ensure it has **limited power that is under the people’s consent**. In that way, the government is governed by its citizens while offering them protection from abuse.

For the government to protect its citizens and provide them opportunities for their interest, it needs to ensure unalienable rights, freedom of expression and particular actions, a due process of law, and the right for the accused.

**Unalienable rights** belong to and are equal for everyone. They include a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The government has enough power to ensure protection by creating laws and enforcing the rules for the benefit of citizens.

**Due Process of law** notes that all citizens have the right to property, liberty, and life that couldn’t be denied by the government or anyone else.

Individual freedoms of action (expression, speech, petition, assembly, et cetera) allow and create individuals a space where they can be themself, promote and act based on their interest and opinion without the fear of government interfering.

**Civil liberties are what makes a democracy**, so the government has the power to encourage and act according to those liberties. They empower the citizens by providing a power equilibrium and a platform where citizens have personal space and are treated equally.