The First Amendment Essay, Research PaperOur Populating Shield: The First Amendment?The writers of the Constitution of the United States created abrilliant list of autonomies which were, at the clip ascribed, to mostpeople belonging to the United States. The chief writer, James Madison,transported the old thoughts of f undamental autonomies from the greatlibertarians around the universe, such as John Lilburne, John Locke, WilliamWalwyn and John Milton.
Madison and other old libertarians of his clipwere transposed into 17 different rights which were to be secured toall those in the United States. These 17 civil autonomies werecompressed into 10 different groupings which were designated as the & # 8220 ; Billof Rights. & # 8221 ; In this papers lay the First Amendment which stated that thepeople of the Uni ted States had the & # 8220 ; freedom of address, or of the imperativeness ;or the right of the people pacifically to piece, and to petition theGovernment & # 8230 ; & # 8221 ; The First Amendment was drafted by federalist Madison chieflyas a political maneuver to get rid of anti-federalist opposition to theFundamental law. After its transition in December of 1791, the First Amendmentremained more idealistic than realistic.
The First Amendment remained aset of ideals which were non to be carried out during its first century,so progressed to more realistic footings during its latter half ofuse.?During the first century of the First Amendment, the FirstAmendment was paid a glimpse by all when it came to really transporting outthe freedoms guaranteed by this amendment. For illustration, in 1794,Pennsylvanian backcountry husbandmans protested a whiskey revenue enhancement.
The dissenterswere non violent such as those of the old Shay & # 8217 ; s Rebellion. GeorgeWashington sent in a reserves to oppress the rebellion denying them of theirFirst Amendment right to & # 8220 ; pacifically assemble. & # 8221 ; Later, in 1836, anti Shining Pathavery newspaper editor James G. Birney had been warned that his newspaper& # 8220 ; The Philanthropist & # 8221 ; was non desirable in the metropolis of Cincinatti. WhenBirney refused to collaborate, throng action took regulation and, & # 8220 ; scattered the typeinto the streets, tore down T he presses and wholly dismantled theoffice. & # 8221 ; This contradicted the First Amendment which stated that,& # 8220 ; freedom & # 8230 ; of the imperativeness, & # 8221 ; is a constitutional right.
The Supreme Courtcould make nil about these state of affairss when in Barron v. Baltimore, T heCourt ruled that, & # 8220 ; These amendments contain no look bespeaking anpurpose to use them to province authoritiess. This tribunal can non so usethem. & # 8221 ; Thus, the Supreme Court could non interfere when First Amendmentsare being violated within a province. These Acts of the Apostless were representative of thedeficiency of acknowledgment for our First Amendment rights during the first half ofthe Bill of Right & # 8217 ; s credence.?The 2nd half of the Bill of Rights was marked by a metempsychosis inwhich the Bill of Rights was no longer a set of ideals. The 2nd halfbegan when in 1925, the tribunal ruled in Gitlow v.
New York that the FirstAmendment supersedes province Torahs. This nullified the Court & # 8217 ; s opinion inBarron v. Baltimore, which took topographic point 92 old ages earlier. Besides, in 1931, theCourt overturned Minnesota & # 8217 ; s strong belief of Jay M.
Near, whose anti Semitic& # 8220 ; Saturday Press & # 8221 ; violated Minnesota jurisprudence which prohibited & # 8221 ; malicious,disgraceful and calumniatory & # 8221 ; comments towards politicians and other publicfunctionaries. The Court stamped Minnesota & # 8217 ; s jurisprudence in misdemeanor of the Firstamendment. In 1937, Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes overturned thestrong belief of Oregon Com munist Dirk De Jonge. De Jonge had been detainedfor go toing a meeting to protest the constabulary shot of strikingstevedores. The Court ruled that & # 8220 ; Peaceable assembly for lawfultreatment can non be made a crime. & # 8221 ; More late, in 1985, the S upremeCourt ruled that firing the American flag is protected by the FirstAmendment when the Court reversed the strong belief of Gregory Lee Johnson,who was arrested for misdemeanor of the Flag Protection Act of 1989.
TheCourt so ruled the Flag Protection Act of 1989 unconstitutional. Thesecases clearly portray the rebounding of libertarian beliefs.?The First Amendment of the Constitution started off as a set ofbeliefs meant to provide ground for one being loyal instead than supplythose unalienable rights discussed in the Declaration of Independence. Itso developed into a powerfu cubic decimeter papers which is the lone lifemanuscript which specificly lists out the peoples rights. One can non lookback without looking in front. The supreme tribunal presently is overpoweringlyconservative.
Without the balance of conservativism and liberalism, alack evolves. And this lack is human rights. The SupremeCourt ruled in 1990 that two American Indians were non protected by theFirst Amendment when they sacredly smoked mescal. This is merely a sampleof the conservativism which wi ll finally plague America.
The Court & # 8217 ; sdeterminations are close to ageless and determinations made now will impact America & # 8217 ; shereafter. And whether or non we should set America & # 8217 ; s hereafter in one group & # 8217 ; scustodies is out of the inquiry. The tribunal is presently dan gerouslyconservative.