The first amendment prohibits congress from making any laws regarding the establishment of religion or stopping people from involving themselves in the practice of any religion they chose. It also provides for freedom of speech which means the liberty of the people to express sensible opinions without inhibition. Additionally, the press, which today includes various forms of media – print, television and internet – is given freedom, in the first amendment, to publish what it desires without fear of the government. The first amendment also authorizes the free assembly of people in a peaceful manner. This means that people could join or associate with any group they desire and such association or membership would not be restricted by the government.
…show more content…
The amendment is understood to have arisen to enable the state protect themselves for the Brits or the roaming native Indians are the time constitution was drafted.
The third amendment prohibits soldiers, whether in time of peace or war, from forcefully taking up residence in anyone’s abode. There must be full and un-coerced consent of the householder before a solider could lodge in a person’s house. This amendment was included in the constitution because of the Quartering Act passed earlier by the British government. During the American Revolutionary War, the Quartering Act allowed soldiers to temporary live in the houses of the American colonist since the Brits did not have bases across the colonies.
The fourth amendment primarily protect people from unreasonable search by law enforcement agents of the government. All reasonable searches are to be preceded by the issuance of a warrant to this purpose. That warrant is to be duly affirmed by a judge and should specify the place to be searched and the person or thing to be seized. However, there are various exigent circumstance where the need for a warrant may be waived as has been seen in various decided cases e.g. Arizona v. Gant (2009), where it was upheld that a police officer had the right to stop and search an individual on reasonable …show more content…
The exception to this proviso would be if the person who committed the offence was in the military and the crime was committed during service. In such a case, a grand jury would not be required to indict the person. The fifth amendment also stipulates that a person cannot not stand trial for the same crime twice. Similarly, if a person has served the punishment for a criminal offence for which he was convicted, the person cannot be put on trial again for the same crime. In addition, the fifth amendment provides that the government cannot make a person appear as a witness against him/herself neither can a person’s life or property be taken with the due process of the law. Finally, government was not permitted to take a person’s property for public use without adequate
The amendment is understood to have arisen to enable the state protect themselves for the Brits or the roaming native Indians are the time constitution was drafted.
The third amendment prohibits soldiers, whether in time of peace or war, from forcefully taking up residence in anyone’s abode. There must be full and un-coerced consent of the householder before a solider could lodge in a person’s house. This amendment was included in the constitution because of the Quartering Act passed earlier by the British government. During the American Revolutionary War, the Quartering Act allowed soldiers to temporary live in the houses of the American colonist since the Brits did not have bases across the colonies.
The fourth amendment primarily protect people from unreasonable search by law enforcement agents of the government. All reasonable searches are to be preceded by the issuance of a warrant to this purpose. That warrant is to be duly affirmed by a judge and should specify the place to be searched and the person or thing to be seized. However, there are various exigent circumstance where the need for a warrant may be waived as has been seen in various decided cases e.g. Arizona v. Gant (2009), where it was upheld that a police officer had the right to stop and search an individual on reasonable …show more content…
The exception to this proviso would be if the person who committed the offence was in the military and the crime was committed during service. In such a case, a grand jury would not be required to indict the person. The fifth amendment also stipulates that a person cannot not stand trial for the same crime twice. Similarly, if a person has served the punishment for a criminal offence for which he was convicted, the person cannot be put on trial again for the same crime. In addition, the fifth amendment provides that the government cannot make a person appear as a witness against him/herself neither can a person’s life or property be taken with the due process of the law. Finally, government was not permitted to take a person’s property for public use without adequate