January 19 2016 Introduction to the Course underlies all of these freedoms is freedom from governmental restraints What Do We Mean by Civil Liberties The basic human freedoms that we associate with the condition of being free what Civil liberties are personal guarantees and freedoms that the government cannot abridge Civil liberties also include procedural rights that we citizens have when the government wants to deny us or life liberty or property E g rights to a fair hearing or trial the right to an appeal before an impartial court the right to council basically the right to be treated fairly and equally by the government either by law or by judicial interpretation without due process These rights and freedoms are protected by various provisions Most constitutional law scholars do not consider economic rights to be civil liberties Why Study Civil Liberties The study of civil liberties law can tells us many things about our society such as How it has evolved and to what extent we are were a free society Helps us understand American politics Helps us understand some of the most controversial issues today gay rights abortion Tells us about the development of the Supreme Court as a political institution Tells us about the development of Constitutional Law Forces us to confront the hard questions of what are our own values af rmative action of which the issues arose were affected by the decision How Do We Study Civil Liberties Historical Approach Examine the development of civil liberties law in the historical context Political Approach Look at the politics that impacted the decision and the way that politics Behavioral Approach Interested in the voting behavior of the justices Doctrinal Approach Examine civil liberties doctrines created by the decisions Aims Objectives Learn how the Supreme Court works as a legal institution Introduce some landmark civil liberties decisions Gain insight into how constitutional law has evolved and how our concept of rights have Look at problem areas develop own hierarchy of values and informed positions Civil Liberties Through the Marshall Court The United States Constitution began operating in 1788 Before the Civil War cases involving civil liberties cases did not come before the Supreme evolved Court Federal guarantees against federal invasions of civil liberties were provided in the Bill of Each state had its own Constitution and Bill of Rights these were believed to be the best Rights The Alien and Sedition acts protection of individual rights rather than protection from the Federal Government gaining power Adams was also a Federalist The Alien and Sedition Acts 1798 Congress was dominated by members of the Federalist Party the president at the time John Thomas Jefferson was the leader of the primary opposing force and they were gradually The Federalists attempted to stop the Jeffersonians by enacting the Alien and Sedition Acts The Sedition Act was aimed at sti ing the Jeffersonian s criticism of the federal government The act made it a federal crime to criticize the president or Congress with the intent to bring Newspapers run by Jeffersonian supporters attempted to challenge these laws by citing the either into disrepute Marshall to the position of Chief Justice in 1801 his appointment acted until 1834 First Amendment Congress shall make no law that abridges freedom of speech constitutional challenges to the Acts The Supreme Court justices who were acting as trial judges did not entertain any The laws expired after two years after the elections of 1800 The most important development for the Supreme Court was the appointment of John Marshall and his values dominated the Supreme Court Marshall s Constitutional Agenda Establishment and enhancement of the Supreme Court s power Establish federal supremacy over the states Protection of the sanctity of private property Landmark cases furthered Marshall s values none concerned civil liberties Marshall s view of fundamental rights are at odds with what we consider fundamental rights in contemporary times and disputes over the interpretation of state law Slavery Cases Most slavery cases occurred in state courts they included contract cases disputes wills Federal courts in DC heard similar disputes some went to the Supreme Court They did not involve any Constitutional guarantees of civil liberties The Supreme Court of the United States did not decide on slavery in terms of civil liberties A more massive violation of human rights is hard to imagine Barron v Baltimore Implication for Civil Liberties The Court recognized that the Bill of Rights was meant by the This turned into a case of whether the Fifth Amendment was applicable to the states and not framers to apply only to the federal government and not the states because slavery was legal just the federal government Marshall was forced to confront the historical record and the intent of the framers The Rill of Rights begins with Congress shall make no law Marshall and the Court took this to mean that the Bill of Rights was only meant to apply to the federal government and not the states Something would need to be added to the Constitution to extend these right to the states Civil Liberties Through the Taney Court and the Civil War Dred Scott v Sandford Racist decision Chief Justice Taney Black people are not citizens of the U S They were considered to be inferior human beings when the Constitution was written The decision basically solidi ed the notion that slaves are property and that congress can not forbid slave owners from bringing their slaves into other territories Martial Law During the Civil War Lincoln declares Martial Law This declaration resulted in a suspension of Habeas Corpus Writ of Habeas Corpus Requirement that the jailer produce the prisoner and justify basis for detention This was the rst time that a president seized power for the military The declaration of Martial Law was very troublesome for the judiciary liberties Writ of Habeas Corpus is suspended considered one of the fundamental aspects of civil During the Civil War the Supreme Court ducked the issue of whether the president had a constitutional right to suspend the Writ of Habeas Corpus Once the war was over the court confronted the issue of Martial Law in Ex Parte Milligan The Milligan Doctrine states that no civilian can be subject to Martial Law as long as the Only in the actual theater of war can Martial Law occur Violation of right to be tried by article 3 court