Antifederalists argued that in a state of nature people were entirely free. In society some rights were yielded for the common good. But, there were some rights so fundamental that to give them up would be contrary to the common good. These rights, which should always be retained by the people, needed to be explicitly stated in a bill of rights that would clearly define the limits of government. A bill of rights would serve as a fire bell for the people, enabling them to immediately know when their rights were threatened. Show Additionally, some Antifederalists argued that the protections of a bill of rights was especially important under the Constitution, which was an original compact with the people. State bills of rights offered no protection from oppressive acts of the federal government because the Constitution, treaties and laws made in pursuance of the Constitution were declared to be the supreme law of the land. Antifederalists argued that a bill of rights was necessary because, the supremacy clause in combination with the necessary and proper and general welfare clauses would allow implied powers that could endanger rights. Federalists rejected the proposition that a bill of rights was needed. They made a clear distinction between the state constitutions and the U.S. Constitution. Using the language of social compact, Federalists asserted that when the people formed their state constitutions, they delegated to the state all rights and powers which were not explicitly reserved to the people. The state governments had broad authority to regulate even personal and private matters. But in the U.S. Constitution, the people or the states retained all rights and powers that were not positively granted to the federal government. In short, everything not given was reserved. The U.S. government only had strictly delegated powers, limited to the general interests of the nation. Consequently, a bill of rights was not necessary and was perhaps a dangerous proposition. It was unnecessary because the new federal government could in no way endanger the freedoms of the press or religion since it was not granted any authority to regulate either. It was dangerous because any listing of rights could potentially be interpreted as exhaustive. Rights omitted could be considered as not retained. Finally, Federalists believed that bills of rights in history had been nothing more than paper protections, useless when they were most needed. In times of crisis they had been and would continue to be overridden. The people’s rights are best secured not by bills of rights, but by auxiliary precautions: the division and separation of powers, bicameralism, and a representative form of government in which officeholders were responsible to the people, derive their power from the people, and would themselves suffer from the loss of basic rights. The Ninth Amendment states, “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” This means that the rights citizens are not limited by those listed in the Constitution. The purpose of the Ninth Amendment was to dismiss the notion that the rights not explicitly named in the Constitution did not exist. The Ninth Amendment rights or Non-enumerated rights are additional fundamental rights protected from governmental infringement. These additional rights exists side-by-side with the fundamental rights specifically mentioned in the first eight amendments. The non-enumerated rights are considered to arise from natural law. Courts have also found that these non-enumerated rights can be derived from express constitutional provisions. For example, although the first amendment guarantees freedom of speech, it is silent about the nature of the speech protected. In this regard, the Supreme Court has held that a freedom of speech protects both verbal and non-verbal expressions and communicative conduct at the same time[i].
The Supreme Court has also used this power not to recognize certain rights asserted by people. In Wash. v. Glucksberg, 521 U.S. 702 (U.S. 1997), the Supreme Court ruled that the right to die is not a non-enumerated constitutional right. Critics pose the argument that this power of the Courts imposes the personal values of Judges on the law. But this role of Judiciary has helped recognize various rights of the people which are not expressly enumerated in the Constitution. The term ‘due process of law’ as used in the Fifth and Fourteenth amendment is nowhere defined in those amendments. However, the Supreme Court has interpreted this term to require procedural fairness in the litigation process. The procedural rights recognized under this term are non-enumerated because the due process clause does not describe the procedures that it covers. [i] Tex. v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (U.S. 1989) [ii] Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (U.S. 1973) [iii] Gibson v. Berryhill, 411 U.S. 564 (1973); Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (1923); Allgeyer v. Louisiana, 165 U.S. 578 (1897). [iv]Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia, 448 U.S. 555 (1980) [v] Bolling v. Sharpe, 347 U.S. 497 (1954). [vi] Sandstrom v. Montana, 442 U.S. 510 (1979); Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979); Estelle v. Williams, 425 U.S. 501 (1976); In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358 (1970). [vii]NAACP v. Alabama, 357 U.S. 449 (1958); De Jonge v. Oregon, 299 U.S. 353 (1937). [viii] Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965) [ix] Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 (1969); Crandall v. Nevada, 73 U.S. (6 Wall.) 35 (1868). [x] Zablocki v. Redhail, 434 U.S. 374 (1978); Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967) [xi] Carey v. Population Servs., 431 U.S. 678 (1977); Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973); Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U.S. 438 (1972); Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965). What are rights not listed?The Ninth Amendment rights or Non-enumerated rights are additional fundamental rights protected from governmental infringement. These additional rights exists side-by-side with the fundamental rights specifically mentioned in the first eight amendments.
What parts of the Bill of Rights are not incorporated?As a note, the Ninth Amendment and the Tenth Amendment have not been incorporated, and it is unlikely that they ever will be. The text of the Tenth Amendment directly interacts with state law, and the Supreme Court rarely relies upon the Ninth Amendment when deciding cases.
Which of the following is not granted in the Bill of Rights?The right to vote for all free males age 21 or over is not guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. The frame work of voting is elsewhere in the Constitution. Was this answer helpful?
What are some things not listed in the Constitution?There is no mention of labor unions, corporations, political parties, the air force, radio and television broadcasting, telecommunications, and so on, but the courts deliberate constitutional controversies on these subjects all the time.
|
