#right to trial by an impartial jury

[todaysdocument]

It’s Bill of Rights Day! Articles 3 through 12 were ratified on 12/15/1791, and became the first ten amendments to the Constitution. Article 2 became the 27th Amendment in 1992! 

Record Group 11: General Records of the United States Government

Series: Enrolled Acts and Resolutions of Congress

Image description:

A zoomed-in portion of the document, reading:

No law, varying the compensa--

Congress shall make no law resp--

--asemble, and to petition the Gov--

A well regulated militia, bein--

Transcription:

Congress of the United States began and held at the City of New York, on Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty-nine. 

THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution. 

RESOLVED by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two-thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following Articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all, or any of which Articles, when ratified by three-fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution; viz. 

ARTICLES in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution. 

Article the first... After the first enumeration required by the first article of the Constitution, there shall be one Representative for every thirty thousand, until the number shall amount to one hundred, after which the proportion shall be so regulated by Congress, that there shall be not less than one hundred Representatives, nor less than one Representative for every forty thousand persons, until the number of Representatives shall amount to two hundred; after which the proportion shall be so regulated by Congress, that there shall not be less than two hundred Representatives, nor more than one Representative for every fifty thousand persons. 

Article the second... No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened. 

Article the third... 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. 

Article the fourth... 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. 

Article the fifth... 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. 

Article the sixth... 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 Warrants 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. 

Article the seventh... No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. 

Article the eighth... In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence. 

Article the ninth... In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law. 

Article the tenth... Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. 

Article the eleventh... The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. 

Article the twelfth... The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. 

ATTEST, Frederick Augustus Muhlenberg, Speaker of the House of Representatives John Adams, Vice-President of the United States, and President of the Senate John Beckley, Clerk of the House of Representatives. Sam. A Otis Secretary of the Senate

#archivesgov #December 15 #1791 #1700s #Early America #Bill of Rights #Bill of Rights Day #Constitution #Amendments #Freedom of speech #freedom of assembly #freedom of religion #right to petition the government for a redress of grievances #right to bear arms #search and seizure #right to a speedy and public trial #right to trial by an impartial jury #cruel and unusual punishment

[worldwatcher3072]

The Sixth Amendment: Safeguarding Fair Trials and Due Process

Welcome to the sixth installment of our "Constitution Matters" series, where we delve into the significance and impact of each amendment in the United States Constitution. In this edition, we shine a light on the Sixth Amendment, which plays a vital role in safeguarding fair trials and upholding the principles of due process. Let's explore how this amendment protects the rights of individuals within the criminal justice system and ensures justice is served.

Right to a Speedy and Public Trial: At the core of the Sixth Amendment is the right to a speedy and public trial. This crucial safeguard ensures that individuals facing criminal charges are not subject to undue delays or languish in legal limbo. It promotes efficiency in the judicial process while preserving transparency by allowing public scrutiny of court proceedings.

Impartial Jury of Peers: The Sixth Amendment guarantees the right to an impartial jury of one's peers. This means that individuals accused of a crime have the right to be judged by a group of impartial individuals from the community who will fairly evaluate the evidence presented and determine guilt or innocence. This principle helps prevent bias and ensures that decisions are reached based on an objective assessment of the facts.

Right to Confront Witnesses: Another critical aspect of the Sixth Amendment is the right to confront witnesses. Defendants have the opportunity to face and cross-examine witnesses who testify against them. This right ensures that the accused can challenge the credibility and accuracy of the evidence presented, fostering a robust and reliable adversarial process.

Right to Assistance of Counsel: The Sixth Amendment guarantees the right to assistance of counsel, which ensures that individuals accused of a crime have access to legal representation. This right recognizes the imbalance of power between the accused and the prosecution and aims to level the playing field. Competent legal counsel helps defendants navigate the complexities of the legal system, protects their rights, and ensures a fair trial.

Right to Compulsory Process: The Sixth Amendment also encompasses the right to compel witnesses to testify on behalf of the accused. This enables defendants to gather evidence in their favor and present a complete and thorough defense. The right to compulsory process empowers the accused to challenge the prosecution's case and provide a comprehensive account of the events in question.

The Sixth Amendment stands as a cornerstone of the American justice system, guaranteeing essential rights to individuals accused of crimes. By ensuring speedy and public trials, impartial juries, the right to confront witnesses, access to legal counsel, and the ability to compel witnesses, this amendment upholds the principles of fairness, due process, and the presumption of innocence. It serves as a vital safeguard against potential abuses of power and helps maintain the integrity of the criminal justice system.

Stay tuned for the next installment of our "Constitution Matters" series, where we continue to explore the remaining amendments that shape our democratic society.

#Constitution Matters #Sixth Amendment #Fair Trials #Due Process #Speedy Trial #Public Trial #Impartial Jury #Right to Confront Witnesses #Assistance of Counsel #Compulsory Process #Criminal Justice System #Presumption of Innocence #Legal Rights #Constitutional Rights

[bonefall]

Life After Life: StarClan 101

For @medicinalmercury who has asked how StarClan works, in general.

BB!StarClan has been significantly revamped from canon, to try and make it an impressive godlike force while giving it some clearer rules. This time around, they are an awe-inspiring entity whose judgement can be clouded by their emotions.

They are also able to pull off supernatural feats, such as smiting cats with lightning and designing souls for new kittens. They have a collective power that's been formed over many generations, rivaling that of one of the four seasonal Gods.

Most importantly, StarClan is not inherently benevolent. Their goal is the preservation of the Clans. Because of the fact they are ancestors and most of them also love their descendants, they try to act in what they consider to be the best interest of the Clans as a whole.

This means they are not always the good guys, but it does mean they're more likely to be helpful than Dark Forest cats, who act in their own individual interests.

For a comparison between the morality of StarClan and the Dark Forest, go here!

Sections:

Death: GO FETCH

The Trial: Judgement without Redemption

Silverpelt: The StarClan Council

Godlike Aspects: The Magic Buff

Death: GO FETCH.

Everybody dies eventually. When they do, someone has to go get you.

There are some StarClan warriors who are better at "Fetching" than others, a better sense of when someone will die, better at walking in the living world, something of the sort. But generally, a Fetcher is someone who loved the person in life who wants to bring them into StarClan.

If you have no guide to bring you to heaven, and still try to find it, you will end up in the Dark Forest.

It is possible for a fetch-ening to get interrupted, usually by a Dark Forest spirit. In the case of bloodlines that are haunted, like Appledusk's descendants, the fetchers sent are usually particularly beefy.

There's also Jayfeather specifically, whose powers are terrifying. He has the power to stave off death entirely by making a soul stay in its body, even un-fetching it by snatching it from Silverpelt. His ability is beyond StarClan.

The Trial: Judgement without Redemption

Upon arriving at StarClan, a cat must be judged. In the meanwhile, they will meet with their family at the land between StarClan and the Dark Forest. A neutral ground called the Meadow of Young Stars, a hazy, purple grassland that twinkles with tiny sparkles.

This is also the point where any unwanted injuries or scars are mended, a special "Sharing of Stars." They can regain a missing limb, a lost eye, patch up their cause of death, but it will be made of starlight.

Even a cat who ultimately goes to the Dark Forest can have their fatal wound fixed by a loved one at this time. Brokenstar's eyesight was restored by his father, Raggedstar, as an example.

(Kittens who died young can also choose the age they wish to appear as, but this is not tied to the Sharing of Stars and is simply tied to their self-perception.)

Most cats aren't there for long, as their lives are quickly reviewed and approved. For those who broke the code or inspired the ire of StarClan, a trial is held.

For a trial, a Prosecutor rises, Silverpelt (the council) juries, and all of StarClan is invited to witness.

Silverpelt is not impartial nor is it fair. The cats on it are just as prone to emotion and to the fervor of the crowd as any living cat. Cats have been unfairly damned because of StarClan's wrath; including EVERY cat who was involved in the deaths of Mapleshade’s kittens.

(Darkstar only wiggled out because she spent the rest of her lives atoning, committing herself to implementing the Queen’s Rights.)

JUDGEMENTS. ARE. PERMANENT. There is NO redemption, even for cats who modern Silverpelt would agree were judged too harshly. StarClan is a shifting entity and it is a taboo to admit their faded ancestors were incorrect.

Perhaps this will change in the future; but as of the end of Bonefall TBC, all rulings are final. If cats don't like the verdict, they are free to follow the damned into the Dark Forest.

Silverpelt: The StarClan Council.

"Who died and put you in charge?" "Myself, dipfish."

StarClan cats fade when they have peace and there is nothing left for them to do. It is a natural, and gentle thing. It's not known where a cat goes when they fade.

(If StarClan were to be disrupted, such as if all the living were to scatter and not create a collective heaven for their ancestors to exist in... these spirits would meet a truly horrible, earth-fallen fate.)

For cats who ARE remembered long after death, even mythologized by stories, they gain more power than their peers. Belief and reverence gives them bright stars, and their stories grant them special magical abilities.

Firestar is a patron of flames and breaking bad habits, Skystar is a god of war, Bumble commands language and is said to be the reason why love makes you tongue-tied.

The most powerful cats in StarClan make up Silverpelt, the bright band in the night sky, sometimes called the council. Because reverence from the living gives a spirit power, Silverpelt is mixed between the recently deceased and the ancient legends.

Silverpelt is StarClan's leadership, calling for votes and making the ultimate decisions. There is no process for "moving up" in the ranks; the brightest spirits simply have more authority.

As with everything... perhaps events in the future will disrupt this.

Godlike Aspects: The Magic Buff

As mentioned before, the most revered cats in StarClan are significantly more powerful than the cats around them. These spirits become patrons of a subject, based on what the living pray to them for.

On a wet day, a quick prayer will be called to Firestar in the hopes he will help light a cooking fire. A call will be made to Daisytail to protect kittens. Darkstar is invoked for forgiveness.

But belief is something that changes with the generations! Some patrons have surges and dips in popularity. A beloved friend who recently passed on will often be invoked over an ancient stranger. Power shifts with time.

All of StarClan shares in this collective power.

The world can turn without StarClan warriors, but they have immense power over nature. There are many things they can do;

Craft the souls of new kittens, 'designing' warriors

Manage plants and animals, growing plants and tossing more cubs into litters

Chase clouds and influence weather

Weave dreams and cause omens

Lay curses and blessings

And, of course, receive prophetic visions of the future, and choose when and how they will share them.

Most spirits are good at some things, and terrible at others. There are also cats who choose not to partake in any particular jobs, simply enjoying their well-earned rest.

There are also individual warriors who are naturally more powerful than others, either because of their willpower, connection to the living, or just because they were particularly spiritual in life.

And finally, the sum of StarClan's power is greater than its individual parts. This terrifying collective power is heavily emotion-based.

When StarClan is furious, they can collectively accomplish impressive actions, such as rolling in massive storms or smiting cats with lightning... with a drawback. StarClan has a hard time doing such large actions "on purpose."

#Spirituality Overhauls #StarClan #Warrior Cats #better bones au #BB!Starclan

[mariacallous]

A Trump-appointed prosecutor dropped an unfalsifiable partisan bomb on President Joe Biden Thursday, playing into a years-long right-wing media campaign — and U.S. political journalists decided to treat it as a valid and impartial charge.

Biden, who has a 40-year record of public service in the U.S. Senate, as vice president, and in the Oval Office, is a self-described “gaffe machine” with a well-documented stutter. He is also, at 81, the oldest president in U.S. history.

The right has dedicated substantial time and resources since Biden launched his 2020 presidential campaign to attributing his verbal miscues to his age. Republican political operatives surface out-of-context snippets of Biden’s misstatements and try to blow them up into national stories, and it is rarely-disputed canon in the right-wing media that the president is a mentally failing dementia patient. 

This argument blew up in their faces when Biden performed so well in a debate against then-President Donald Trump that the GOP resorted to accusing him of taking performance-enhancing drugs, and again in 2023, when his canny dealings with then-House Speaker Kevin McCarthy led McCarthy to describe him as “very smart” and Republicans to question how they’d been outmaneuvered by someone purportedly in mental decline. But undeterred by reality, the right has maintained the drumbeat over Biden’s mental status, driving up public concern over the president’s age.

Enter Robert Hur. Attorney General Merrick Garland presumably selected him as a special counsel to investigate Biden’s possible unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or other records because he thought he could quell potential complaints of political bias by putting in charge a former clerk to right-wing judges whom Trump appointed as a U.S. attorney with every incentive to do maximum political damage to the Democratic president. This is a regular pattern — Republican and Democratic administrations each appoint Republicans to investigate both Republicans and Democrats, though that never seems to halt the complaints from the right about the handling of those cases.

On Thursday, after a year-long investigation, Hur issued a 345-page report in which he concluded that “​​no criminal charges are warranted in this matter” and that “the evidence does not establish Mr. Biden's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.” But rather than stop there, he also levied an incendiary and gratuitous attack on Biden’s mental status, claiming that, “at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.” Hur cited specific mental lapses he’d observed during their five hours of interviews — conducted at a time when Biden was responding to the international crisis caused by the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel — including that his “memory appeared hazy” when discussing the intricacies of 15-year-old White House policy debates.

Hur’s argument that lawyers for the sitting president of the United States would argue in court that he shouldn’t be convicted of a crime because he is a senile old man is facially absurd. Indeed, Biden forcefully pushed back on the critique during a White House appearance Thursday night.

The special counsel’s actions drew sharp criticism from the legal community. Biden’s lawyers blasted claims about Biden’s memory in a draft report, saying, “We do not believe that the report's treatment of President Biden's memory is accurate or appropriate. The report uses highly prejudicial language to describe a commonplace occurrence among witnesses: a lack of recall of years-old events.” On MSNBC, former FBI counsel Andrew Weissmann called the claims “wholly inappropriate,” “gratuitous,” and “exactly what you’re not supposed to do, which is putting your thumb on the scale that could have political repercussions.” Neal Katyal, the former acting U.S. solicitor general, likewise said that based on his tours in the Justice Department, Hur’s statements were “totally gratuitous” and a “too-clever-move-by-half by the special counsel to try and take some swipes at a sitting president.” And Ty Cobb, a former Trump lawyer, said on CNN that he had served on an independent counsel probe that declined to prosecute someone due to “health issues, but we didn’t tell the world that,” suggesting that such statements by Hur were inappropriate.

But by including those inappropriate and gratuitous statements, Hur put an official seal on a partisan attack. 

The right jumped on Hur’s claims, with Republican politicians and right-wing commentators falsely claiming that the special counsel had found that Biden “is not competent to stand trial” and “has dementia.” Some called for the Cabinet to invoke the 25th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and remove him from office.

The mainstream political press, meanwhile, turned Hur’s insinuations about Biden’s mental health — and not his declination to prosecute — into the report’s big takeaway. Here’s a sampling of top headlines from major newspapers, political tipsheets, and digital outlets on Thursday and Friday.

New York Times: “Eight Words and a Verbal Slip Put Biden’s Age Back at the Center of 2024” Axios: “1 big thing: Report questions Biden’s memory” Semafor Flagship: “DoJ report questions Biden’s memory” Washington Post: “Special counsel report paints scathing picture of Biden’s memory” Wall Street Journal: “Biden’s Age Back in Spotlight After Special Counsel Report, Verbal Flubs” CNN: “Biden tries to lay to rest age concerns, but may have exacerbated them” ABC News: “Special counsel blows open debate over Biden age and memory” CBS News: “Biden disputes special counsel findings, insists his memory is fine” Politico: “Age isn’t just a number. It’s a profound and growing problem for Biden.

Stories about Biden’s mental state are clearly catnip for political journalists. They can demonstrate how “fair” they are by providing negative coverage of Biden to balance their treatment of his likely opponent Donald Trump, who is an unhinged authoritarian facing scores of federal and state criminal charges, including for attempting to subvert the 2020 presidential election. And they don’t need to bone up on policy nuances separating the candidates — “is the president addled” is an easy venue for hot takes.

The storyline is particularly toxic because no matter how many times it is repudiated by Biden’s public actions or the statements of people who have spoken to him privately, it cannot be falsified. The White House physician can release health summaries calling him “fit to successfully execute the duties of the Presidency.” Democrats who have recently spoken to the president, like Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY), and reporters who have recently interviewed him, like John Harwood, can attest to his mental acuity at the time of his special counsel interview. But Biden is still Biden, so he’s going to keep making gaffes, as he did Thursday night when he referred to Egyptian president Abdel Fattah el-Sisi as “the president of Mexico,” leading journalists to downplay his newsmaking statements about the Israel-Hamas war and fixate instead on what the statement says about his mental health. 

The choice for reporters is how they respond to such misstatements. On NPR, Mara Liasson said that the White House is pushing back by pointing out that Biden’s foes, like Fox’s Sean Hannity and Trump, have had similar mix-ups.

“But the difference is that one of these missteps, one of these guys who forgets things, Biden, has become a viral meme, and it's become a big problem for him,” she said. “Trump's misstatements, for some reason, have not risen to that level.”

It’s true that Trump’s own verbal missteps have not coalesced into an overarching narrative about his mental fitness for office. But the reason why is obvious: Political journalists decided to treat Biden’s missteps as a big problem, and Trump’s as a small one. They’re setting the agenda, following the lead of the Republican Party, the right-wing media, and now, Hur.

[beardedmrbean]

I must be behind was Donald Trump actually arrested?

I don't think arrested is the right work, there was a grand jury convened to do what grand juries do, determine if there's enough evidence to justify the cost of bringing charges.

Not guilt or innocence, just should this move forward and they said yes on 34 different charges, so trump flew up for his arraignment where he and his lawyers were there to hear the formal charges and enter his plea.

So in a land of technicalities no he wasn't really arrested, showed up at court on his own and left on his own after the charges were read, it's alleged financial crimes and on top of that it's not like a person that could just fade into the background if he felt like running so afaik didn't even need to fuss with his passport I don't think.

Now the question is, is it even conceivably possible for the man to get a fair and impartial trial.

No would be the answer to that.

Should be exciting, I think the DA would be very happy if he could get the donald to plea to something that would bar him from public office for life.

That's my theory about the whole thing at least as to why they're doing this now.

We'll see

#athelarkaid

[cherokeefrank]

Always check back to the actual original post, I'm always adding stuff.

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.

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.

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.

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 warrants 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.

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

Amendment VII

In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Amendment VIII

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

#Youtube

[the-importance-of-being-wilde]

I hope Mr. Trump gets the constitutional rights that he and many right wing people want to deny people they label criminals. I hope Mr. Trump will have effective assistance of counsel, that he'll have a fair trial in front of an impartial jury, and that he will be presumed to be innocent unless he is proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. I hope that Mr. Trump will be convicted, but not without due process of law and all that it entails. And I hope every single person in the United States who is accused of a crime, regardless of its severity, will also maintain these rights.

#donald trump #criminal law

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Barry Blitt

* * * *

Legal developments in Trump's criminal and civil cases

The Manhattan election interference case—a jury is selected

The prosecutors in Trump's election interference trial in Manhattan expanded their pending motion to hold Trump in contempt to include his reposting of a Fox News attack on jurors who were selected on Tuesday. A hearing on the contempt motion will take place next Tuesday.

The attacks by Fox News—and the re-posting by Donald Trump—appeared to do what Trump's lawyer could not lawfully achieve in the courtroom—remove a juror to whom they objected. By amplifying news media attacks on the juror, Trump caused the juror to rethink her ability to serve on the jury. She was dismissed on Thursday, less than forty-eight hours after she was seated on the jury.

Yesterday, I wrote that Judge Merchan should declare a mistrial each time Trump engages in conduct that intimidates the jury. One reader—Professor Laurence Tribe—was aghast at my suggestion and asked me to rethink my position. Professor Tribe wrote the following (used with his permission):

No! You’re proposing that Judge Merchan give him what he has repeatedly tried unsuccessfully to get: delay and more delay of a trial that only the misinformed regard as small potatoes. The testimony of the head of the National Enquirer alone will be devastating to the myth that Trump won the 2016 election fair and square.

Professor Tribe is right—as proven by Judge Merchan’s ability to continue jury selection at a brisk pace while setting a hearing on the contempt motion for next Tuesday. If Judge Merchan can protect jurors from irremediable harm while ensuring an impartial jury, he should push ahead to the merits. As Professor Tribe notes, the facts are damning and deserve to be heard by the public at the first opportunity. Delays are Trump's objective and should be avoided whenever possible.

But we are left with the conundrum of what to do with a defendant who intentionally disregards a gag order to intimidate jurors. A remedy must exist—otherwise we are faced with an outcome where Trump is above the law. Judge Merchan has been up to the task of controlling Trump. Let’s hope he will continue to do so.

[Robert B. Hubbell Newsletter]

#Judge Merchan #TFG #jury selection #jury tampering #Robert B. Hubbell #Robert B. Hubbell Newsletter #Barry Blitt

[ask-will-and-nico]

Poseidon was the judge this time, as he was seen as an impartial party. Whether or not that was actually a wise decision, Nico didn't have any place to say. Alecto was the first to explain what had happened, bringing up every piece of evidence there was, and there were many. After she'd said her piece, it was Athena's turn. "Well?" Will spat. Athena looked at her notes. "Well... My father has made his defense in advance. That he had a right to the prosecution's body, seeing as he was, and I quote, supposed to die." She grimaced at the notes, looking over at Zeus. "And... You're sure you wanna go with this?"

Zeus stood up, and Nico could feel the hair on the back of his neck stand up. The room grew tense, the air thick and electric. Nico had to resist the urge to flinch. He didn’t want Zeus to know how much he frightened Nico. How much power he held over Nico. Nico swallowed, trying to keep his body still. “Well, you’ve had your silly little show,” Zeus said. Nico did flinch then. He looked over at Will, who looked like he was seething. He wasn’t with Nico, he was off to the side with the other gods. Was there even a jury in this trial? Nico didn’t think so. Zeus crackled with lightening, and Nico felt his skin tingle. This wasn’t going to end well. “I tolerated this long enough. Hades, your son is insolent, and deserves punishment. If not by your own hand, than mine,” he said, leveling Nico with a look that made Nico want to run and hide.

#asks #mini fic 10

[tmarshconnors]

Reminder for Every American The 27 Amendments

In the rich history of the United States Constitution, the 27 amendments stand as crucial pillars that shape the nation's principles and protect the rights of its citizens.

As Americans, it is imperative you never forget these amendments, as they form the bedrock of our democracy. Let's delve into each amendment and understand why they are essential to uphold.

First Amendment - Freedom of Speech, Religion, and the Press: The First Amendment guarantees the fundamental rights of freedom of speech, religion, and the press. Americans should cherish this amendment as a cornerstone of democracy, allowing diverse voices to be heard and ideas to flourish.

Second Amendment - Right to Bear Arms: While the Second Amendment ensures the right to bear arms, responsible gun ownership is crucial. Americans must be mindful of the balance between individual rights and public safety.

Third Amendment - Quartering of Soldiers: The Third Amendment, often overlooked, prohibits the quartering of soldiers in private homes during peacetime. This protects citizens' privacy and underscores the principle of civilian control over the military.

Fourth Amendment - Search and Seizure: Guarding against unreasonable searches and seizures, the Fourth Amendment is a safeguard against unwarranted government intrusion. Americans must be vigilant in defending their right to privacy.

Fifth Amendment - Rights of the Accused: The Fifth Amendment protects the rights of the accused, ensuring due process, protection against self-incrimination, and the right to fair compensation for seized property. It stands as a shield against potential government abuse.

Sixth Amendment - Right to a Fair Trial: The right to a speedy and public trial, impartial jury, and legal representation is enshrined in the Sixth Amendment. Americans should demand a fair judicial system that upholds justice for all.

Seventh Amendment - Right to a Jury Trial in Civil Cases: In civil cases, the Seventh Amendment guarantees the right to a jury trial. This reinforces the democratic principle that citizens, not just judges, play a role in dispensing justice.

Eighth Amendment - Cruel and Unusual Punishment: The Eighth Amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, emphasizing the nation's commitment to humane treatment even of those convicted of crimes.

Ninth Amendment - Rights Retained by the People: The Ninth Amendment reminds Americans that their rights extend beyond those explicitly stated in the Constitution. It safeguards individual liberties not enumerated, stressing the breadth of personal freedoms.

Tenth Amendment - Powers Reserved to the States: Highlighting the principle of federalism, the Tenth Amendment reserves powers not delegated to the federal government to the states or the people. Americans should appreciate the balance between national and state authority.

Eleventh Amendment - Immunity of States from Certain Lawsuits: The Eleventh Amendment shields states from certain lawsuits, emphasizing the sovereignty of states in specific legal matters. This reinforces the delicate balance between federal and state authority.

Twelfth Amendment - Procedure for Electing the President and Vice President: The Twelfth Amendment outlines the electoral process for choosing the President and Vice President. Americans should understand the intricacies of this process, which ensures a smooth transition of power.

Thirteenth Amendment - Abolition of Slavery: Arguably one of the most pivotal amendments, the Thirteenth Amendment abolished slavery. Americans should never forget the historic significance of this amendment, celebrating the triumph over one of the darkest chapters in the nation's history.

Fourteenth Amendment - Equal Protection Under the Law: The Fourteenth Amendment is a cornerstone of civil rights, guaranteeing equal protection under the law. Americans must actively strive for a society that upholds this principle for all its citizens.

Fifteenth Amendment - Right to Vote Regardless of Race: The Fifteenth Amendment prohibits the denial of voting rights based on race. It is a reminder of the ongoing struggle for universal suffrage and the importance of protecting voting rights for all.

Sixteenth Amendment - Income Tax: The Sixteenth Amendment grants Congress the power to levy income taxes. Understanding the role of taxes in funding essential government functions is crucial for all Americans.

Seventeenth Amendment - Direct Election of Senators: Prior to the Seventeenth Amendment, state legislatures appointed U.S. Senators. This amendment changed the process to direct election by the people, reinforcing the democratic principle of citizens' direct involvement in governance.

Eighteenth Amendment - Prohibition of Alcohol: The Eighteenth Amendment, prohibiting the manufacture, sale, and transportation of alcohol, was later repealed by the Twenty-First Amendment. This episode in American history highlights the importance of carefully considering the implications of legislative decisions.

Nineteenth Amendment - Women's Right to Vote: The Nineteenth Amendment granted women the right to vote, marking a significant milestone in the quest for gender equality. Americans must honor the struggles of those who fought for this fundamental right.

Twentieth Amendment - Terms of the President and Congress: The Twentieth Amendment sets the dates for the inauguration of the President and Congress, ensuring a smooth transition of power and efficient governance.

Twenty-First Amendment - Repeal of Prohibition: The Twenty-First Amendment repealed the Eighteenth Amendment, ending the era of prohibition. It serves as a reminder of the importance of revisiting and rectifying laws that may prove impractical or counterproductive.

Twenty-Second Amendment - Limitation on Presidential Terms: The Twenty-Second Amendment imposes term limits on the presidency, preventing individuals from holding the office for more than two terms. This ensures a rotation of leadership and guards against potential abuses of power.

Twenty-Third Amendment - Right to Vote for Residents of Washington, D.C.: Granting residents of Washington, D.C., the right to vote in presidential elections, the Twenty-Third Amendment reinforces the democratic principle of representation for all citizens.

Twenty-Fourth Amendment - Prohibition of Poll Taxes: The Twenty-Fourth Amendment prohibits poll taxes in federal elections, ensuring that financial barriers do not impede citizens' right to vote. Americans should be vigilant against any attempts to restrict voting through discriminatory means.

Twenty-Fifth Amendment - Presidential Succession and Disability: The Twenty-Fifth Amendment outlines the procedures for presidential succession and the temporary transfer of power in case of a president's incapacity. Understanding this amendment is crucial for maintaining stability in government.

Twenty-Sixth Amendment - Right to Vote at Age 18: The Twenty-Sixth Amendment lowered the voting age to 18, recognizing the rights and responsibilities of young citizens. Americans should encourage civic engagement and participation among the youth.

Twenty-Seventh Amendment - Congressional Pay: The Twenty-Seventh Amendment addresses congressional pay, stating that any change in salary for members of Congress will only take effect after the next election. This amendment reflects the importance of transparency and accountability in government.

Americans, you must not only be aware of the 27 amendments but actively embrace and defend the principles they embody. These amendments represent the collective efforts to forge a more perfect union, securing individual freedoms, promoting equality, and establishing a government accountable to its citizens.

These amendments forward, ensuring that they remain an integral part of the nation's identity and guide your commitment to justice, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

#Constitution #Amendments #USHistory #CivilRights #Democracy #LegalRights #CivicEngagement #AmericanValues #IndividualFreedom #Equality #VotingRights #GovernmentAccountability #PoliticalEducation #Citizenship #ConstitutionalRights #HistoricalLegacy #PublicPolicy #RuleOfLaw #SocialJustice #DemocracyInAction

[icubud]

The Redheaded Libertarian @TRHLOFFICIAL

BACK BY POPULAR DEMAND: I present you The Bill of Rights written in a way anyone can understand it. These rights are inalienable and endowed unto you by your creator, simply by the virtue of being human. 1A. You have the right to speak freely, practice your religion freely, gather freely, report the news freely, protest freely, and express yourself freely without the fear of the government silencing you. You may freely tell the government what they are doing or not doing that pisses you off. Also, the government is forbidden from creating a state religion. 2A. you are guaranteed two fundamental obligations: 1. the right of a militia— or the body of people— to protect the free state, and 2. the right of the armed individual to defend himself. The government can’t take your guns and the Militias must always be prepared. 3A. The government cannot place soldiers in your home and force you to take care of them. 4A. The government cannot search you or take your things without a warrant issued by a judge and secured by evidence. 5A. You have Five rights or protections here: the right to a jury trial when you're charged with a crime, protection against double jeopardy (tried for the same crime twice), protection against self-incrimination (testifying against yourself), the right to a fair trial & the presumption of innocence, and the protection against the taking of property by the government without compensation. 6A. You have eight Entitlements here: You have the right to transparency and timeliness in a trial, an impartial jury where you are charged, and for that district to be alerted. You have the right to know your charges, face your accuser, gather your own witnesses, and have an attorney. 7A. You have the right to have a jury trial in federal courts with civil cases where the claim exceeds a certain dollar value. 8A. The government is prohibited from charging you unreasonable fines and torturing you. 9A. Just because the founders didn’t write it down, it doesn’t mean it’s not a natural right. All unlisted rights belong to the people. 10A. The powers of the federal government are delegated to what is written down in the articles of the US Constitution. If it is not written there, then that power belongs to the states or the people. The Bill of Rights was written to restrain the federal government, although many of these amendments apply to the states too, whether in their own state constitutions, per the 14th amendment, or the supremacy clause.

#truth #remember #usa #LIVING

[yourtoradorasextendedwarranty]

It always baffles me how daft and stupid people that vote democrat are. Me personally? I live in Texas and I vote Independent. Unless I'm faced with a choice of a literal psychopath or an asshole I don't really like all that much. Which in the last Governor race, it was one such case. Similarly, when it comes to voting for president I feel the same. I'd sooner vote Independent or write in something then vote either side unless it was like the last 2 races. Which was literal tyrant wanna be warhawks (Clinton & Biden) or Orange man.

What's more, the ability of people that vote democrat to turn a blind eye to actual facts. Take this tweet, which for the most part is pretty tame, and then the replies, which I will address.

Now, First and foremost, I will not make the claim that Trump paid back all his loans. However, I find it suspect all of a sudden, after his run at president where he became the most villainized man in history second only HITLER (because Auth Leftists are morons that can't condemn genocidal communist dictators) that "We are investigating every grain of sand in his life to destroy this person who supposedly wronged us". Ok.....so why now all of a sudden? Oh right because now we need him out of a presidential race. Got it.

Ok so now to the replies.

Most of these can be summed up with one reply. "Banks and Lenders assess property values, and will send someone or several someone's in order to make a value judgement of an asset or property before giving out a loan.

However to answer Kit, No he has not been found Guilty. He has been pressed by a judge (Unilaterally) that RAN on burying Trump. That was what she RAN ON. No investigations. No facts to go off of. Just "Elect me and I will destroy this man and everything he has". And again only after he got into office. Prior to that he was the golden child of NY.

We call that a conflict of interest and she should be disbarred for it.

To Proud-Democrat I repeat. HE DID NOT PERSONALLY ASSESS THE PROPERTY VALUE YOU MORON! The banks and lenders 100% did.

To Rae & American Woman Same thing as above. Literally exact same thing as above.

And this is why I hate Democrat voters. And before someone goes on some tirade about "Republican Voters". Bruh. Conservatives typically HATE Republicans. They just hate Democrats more. And honestly aside from people that still get all of their news wholesale from Fox and nothing but Fox, Most Conservatives would probably sooner vote Independent with a viable candidate. And other people might go, "WELL WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER LAWS TRUMP BROKE!". Idk. Let's look at them shall we?

Accused of trying to steal the election. Except everything he did in that process was legal. He asked if there was anything that he could do. Up to and including asking his VP which electors to pick. Funny fact it is legal for a state to have different sets of electors. It happened during the Nixon years. Of which helped him win. Those rules have never been changed even now. And what's more, there WAS fraud. How much? We don't know. And we likely won't know until 10-20 years from now when the people that claim there is none will go, "OH well it's good there was fraud so Orange man stayed out of office....causing us to go to war with Russia, China, Iran, etc, etc, etc."

Accused of assaulting a woman over 20 years ago. Possibly over 40 years ago. Now let me be clear. Could this have happened? Sure. Did it? We have no idea. And 20-40 years is too long ago to have a decisive verdict on it. (Which brings me to another point which is the legality of the charges. So aside from statute of limitations, american citizens are allowed a right to a trial, by a jury of their peers. However, those peers must be impartial. NY is ANYTHING but impartial. They could bring charges of assassination through ninja skills on a foreign leader and NY would STILL CHARGE HIM just to do it.)

Quid Pro Quo. So the only evidence they had that this supposedly even happened was more or less ONE GUY. This man state that TRUMP expressly stated that he did not want a quid pro quo. HOWEVER, that man also believed Trump DID IN FACT want one, despite saying exactly to the contrary. What's more, let me remind all of you, Joe Biden, did that EXACT THING as VP to protect his financial asset of a son at a Ukrainian Energy company he had no business working at the board of. (1:30 Is the start of the segment.)

So all in all. MOST of the things Trump was accused of doing were outright false, or falsely placed on him. And it's because he was a human molotov cocktail. He didn't want any new wars. He wanted to bring more soldiers back from the Middle East. The Economy was GREAT. We were bringing jobs back to the US, and we had Remain in Mexico. Which was GREAT legislation. And it said, "If you are coming to the US for "Asylum" and you pass through another county on the way here you have to stay in THAT country until you can legally get processed.

Whereas now, DEM VOTING residents of NY are being told they are going to pay Billions to house, feed, and process illegals. When their own state is crumbling under the weight of its own corruption.

Which brings me to this point. Both sides need to talk about when there side is doing wrong. And most of the people I know that vote Rep very much DO talk about when their guys do wrong. The issue is that people that vote Dem seldom actually do. It's always, "Your side did X" and then when anyone else says, "OK but you side did Y and that's worse", We all get greeted with, "I don't care because at least he's not right wing. He could kill kids for all I care. I don't actually care what he does so long as it furthers my sides ideals".

And therein lies the issue. Democrats and their primary voters DO NOT GIVE A F*CK about morals. Because they have none. It's a very much "At all cost" mentality. And often based on LIES. Because if there is one thing Dems are great at, it's manipulation of information. The "Silver Tongued Devil" as it were. That's pretty much them. The founders of the KKK. The opposition to Civil Rights. And the Party of Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton who said they were mentored by a clansman. The parties never flipped. They just became better liars.

(This post is in no shape or form endorsement of the Republicans. Because frankly speaking that party and it's primary voter faction has its own issues. But this post isn't about them)

#discourse #Youtube

[roamwithahungryheart]

AH was also never found guilty of abuse if you want to be technical about Depp not being found guilty of abuse. These were civil defamation cases not criminal trials about assault. Depp lost his defamation case in the UK- a ruling that a judge handed out. This American case was decided by people who never studied the law and who were influenced by the blatant smear campaign against one woman.

There's a widespread misunderstanding (mostly on AH fans' part) that the UK case proved 'guilt'. I'm starting to get sick of answering about the UK trial because the publication involved is one I'm filled with absolute unbridled hatred for. AH was a witness. Whatever 'evidence' she presented was simply used to back up a flimsy claim that a shithead journalist had a right to refer to Johnny as a 'wife-beater'. That case was never really about either of them. It was about Dan Wootton preserving his career.

The Virginia trial was, whether you like it or not, a fair trial. I hate to break it to you but it seems you have no clue about the function of a jury. A jury is supposed to be impartial. That's the whole point. So no, they probably didn't have a bunch of people sat on the jury who studied law. They had a bunch of people with critical thinking skills who backed up the ruling of the judge. It was a unanimous verdict. No prejudice, no outside influence, just the evidence presented informing their decision.

If you think the only smear campaign was against AH, then oh boy I'd like to know what you think was happening to Johnny over the last six years.

#Johnny Depp #Amber Heard #Depp vs Heard #Johnny Depp vs Amber Heard #Depp v Heard #Johnny Depp v Amber Heard #y'all mfs trying to ice skate uphill

[humanrightsupdates]

URGENT ACTION: EXECUTION WOULD BREACH INTERNATIONAL LAW (USA: UA 23.23)

Texas intends to execute Andre Thomas, a Black man, on 5 April 2023. He was sentenced to death in 2005 by an all-white jury after his lawyers failed to challenge dubious prosecutorial jury selection tactics, the impartiality of certain jurors, or their client’s competence to stand trial. Andre Thomas has a long history of serious mental disability, including schizophrenia, and was experiencing a prolonged and severe psychosis at the time of the crime. Soon after his arrest, he gouged out his right eye, and has since extracted the other. He is held in a prison psychiatric facility. His current lawyers are challenging his competence for execution.

TAKE ACTION:

Please take action as-soon-as possible. This Urgent Action expires on April 5, 2023.

Write a letter in your own words or using the sample below as a guide to the government official listed below. You can also email, fax, call or Tweet them.

Click here to let us know the actions you took on Urgent Action 23.23. It’s important to report because we share the total number with the officials we are trying to persuade and the people we are trying to help

#texas #death penalty #human rights

[worldwatcher3072]

Amendment VII:

The Right to Trial by Jury in Civil Cases

"In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States than according to the rules of common law."

Explanation:

The Seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees the right to a trial by jury in civil cases. It ensures that in certain legal disputes, where the value in question exceeds twenty dollars, the parties involved have the right to have their case decided by a jury of their peers.

The amendment emphasizes the importance of preserving this right, which dates back to English common law traditions. It seeks to protect individuals from having their property or financial interests decided solely by judges without the input of a jury.

Application to Daily Life:

Amendment VII plays a significant role in protecting the rights of individuals and corporations in civil disputes in modern-day America. Here's how it applies to our daily lives:

Legal Disputes: The Seventh Amendment becomes particularly relevant in civil cases, such as personal injury claims, contract disputes, property disputes, and tort cases. If the amount of money or value involved exceeds the threshold set by the amendment, both parties have the right to request a trial by jury.

Jury Selection: In cases where a jury trial is requested, a jury of ordinary citizens is selected to hear the evidence, review the facts, and reach a verdict. This ensures that decisions are not made solely by legal professionals but by a group of impartial peers.

Balancing Power: The Seventh Amendment helps maintain a balance of power in the legal system. It prevents potential bias or unfair decisions by giving individuals the opportunity to present their case to a jury, making the process more democratic.

Civil Justice System: This amendment plays a crucial role in the civil justice system, as it empowers citizens to participate actively in the legal process. It helps ensure that verdicts are not solely based on the interpretation of laws by judges but also consider the collective wisdom of a jury.

Settlements: In many cases, the right to a trial by jury can influence parties to settle out of court to avoid the uncertainty of a jury's decision. This, in turn, can lead to more efficient resolution of disputes in the legal system.

The Seventh Amendment of the U.S. Constitution preserves the right to trial by jury in civil cases, providing individuals and corporations with an essential safeguard against potential unfair rulings. By empowering ordinary citizens to participate in the legal process, the amendment contributes to a more just and democratic civil justice system that protects the rights and interests of all citizens in their daily lives.

#SeventhAmendment #TrialByJury #CivilJustice #IndividualRights #FairnessAndJustice #DemocracyMatters #LegalSystem #ChecksAndBalances #RuleOfLaw #PublicTrust #CivilLiberties #CommonLawTraditions #USConstitution #AmericanJurisprudence #GovernmentAccountability #JuryTrials #LegalRights #JurySelection #LegalEmpowerment #JudicialProcess

[robert-c]

Bill of Rights – With Some Interpretive Comments

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.

This specifically means religiously motivated laws under the guise “general morality”, “Natural Law”, “offense to believers” etc. In order to ensure all beliefs are protected there can be no banning of actions by others that some feel offended by because it conflicts with their beliefs.

Freedom of speech does not permit the call for armed uprising against the government nor should it allow “hate speech” which incites to violence or promotes the idea the some citizens have less rights. A live and let live attitude is the best way to preserve everyone’s freedom to believe what they wish without pushing their beliefs on others.

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.

“A well regulated Militia” a phrase almost always omitted by some is the key to this right. At the very minimum regulation should include a basic level of proficiency and safety. While this was intended to be how we recruited citizen armies, today’s only reason for keeping it is to allow a person (in the absence of the police or military) to defend themselves and their home. Nothing in this amendment could reasonably be construed to allow any citizen to possess any sort of weapon they choose, especially if they have violent or antisocial history.

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.

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 Warrants 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.

The standard for “probable cause” should not be something as vague as their presumed affiliations based on race, ethnicity, religion, gender etc, There is no reason to presume that the search can be destructive. It shouldn’t be a method of intimidation, destroying or completely scattering one’s belongings around the premises.

V.           No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

While it has been common for some people to claim that “taking the fifth” is tantamount to guilt (at least until they themselves are under suspicion of a crime) the clear purpose of this amendment was to prevent coerced confessions, i.e. torture. The Founders were well aware of the kinds of dangers the republic would face which would elicit excuses for an exception, but did not feel that such excuses would warrant the long term damage to the freedom and rights of citizens.

VI.          In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

The right to a speedy trial does not offer exceptions for a public unwilling to pay the taxes for additional courts or judges. Being as how these are among the most important functions for a free society the complaints about their taxes shouldn’t be a deciding force in providing a chance for the innocently accused to clear their name and be on about their business, as one would expect under the presumption of innocence until proven guilty.

VII.         In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

VIII.       Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

This should be considered in connection with the Sixth Amendment. There is a tendency for high bail to be set for poor defendants which essentially deprives them of their freedom, often their livelihood as well as their right to a speedy trial. The entire point of bail was to ensure the accused’s appearance at trial. If a speedy trial cannot be assured then some method other than incarcerating someone presumed to be innocent until convicted by a jury should be employed. Requiring bail only for violent offenders, prior felons, etc. may be a step in the right direction, but avoiding the imprisonment of people for long periods prior to trial simply because they cannot afford bail seems in complete opposition to this amendment.

IX.          The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

X.           The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

This is a very interesting amendment, largely in the way that it and the one preceding it have been deliberately misinterpreted by “State’s Rights” advocates almost from the beginning of the republic. It doesn’t and shouldn’t be a cover for each state to enact their own version of religious laws and observances, as it has in many cases. Those laws that claim some citizens cannot have the same rights as others simply because of their race, beliefs, sexuality etc. which are all based on religious notions, are a good example of what is wrong with the common right wing interpretation of these two amendments.

#constitution #bill of rights