Why is the Bill of Rights important?
The Bill of Rights is an essential part of the US Constitution. And this is because of its profound political implications. That’s what we’re going to see here, now.
Today, I want to speak to you about the importance of the Bill of Rights.
It’s impossible to understand the relevance of the Bill of Rights if we don’t put it into its historical context. Why did Founding Fathers include it in the Constitution? If we address this aspect of the first ten amendments, we’ll be ready to acknowledge its political implications, and then, how important it is.
So, first of all, I’m going to start discussing the historical events that led to the draft of the ten amendments. After that, I’ll link this discussion with the relevance of the Bill of Rights in political terms.
Here it’s necessary to make some preliminary clarifications. So, I want to answer a fundamental question. What is the Bill of Rights?
It’s the first ten amendments to the US constitution. It added specific guarantees of personal freedoms and rights besides clear limitations on the government’s power in judicial and other proceedings.
Now, let’s go into another question. Why did James Madison write the Bill of Rights? The answer is in the bitter debate over the ratification of the constitution between 1787 and 1788. That was related to the final draft of the second constitution insofar as it had established a new national government with expanded powers. For this reason, disagreements arose during the constitutional convention because some delegates considered the new text a threat to individual rights and liberties.
Indeed, 13 delegates left before the end of the Philadelphia convention, and three more didn’t sign the constitution. Even Benjamin Franklin and Nathaniel Gorham showed doubts when they signed it. Despite that, the real risk for the new constitution was its ratification in the States’ legislatures. There was a remarkable opposition from those who considered it a threat to the liberties that Americans had achieved in the independence war. It was the consequence of the rejection to include any Bill of Rights in the constitutional draft during the convention. That was the case of the Elbridge Gerry’s proposal.
Those who opposed the inclusion of the Bill of Rights in the constitution are known as Federalists. Among them, we find some figures such as James Madison or Alexander Hamilton. They set forth their arguments to defend their political stance. In the case of Madison, he considered the Bill of Rights, an illusion of protection against tyranny. James Wilson of Pennsylvania argued that the act of enumerating the rights of the people would have been dangerous. He thought it would entail that rights not explicitly mentioned didn’t exist. And Hamilton concluded it wasn’t necessary because it doesn’t make sense to set provisions against powers that weren’t given.
However, the rejection of any motion to include a Bill of Rights, in the same vein as the Magna Carta, the English Bill of Rights, or the Virginia Declaration of Rights, endangered the ratification of the constitution. Despite the final approval of the constitution, the ten amendments were finally written to address the objections raised by the Anti-Federalist faction.
The arguments of the Anti-Federalist faction revolve around the same idea. That was the expanded powers of the national government granted by the constitution. They were concerned about the threat to individual rights and liberties represented by a strong federal government, and also the president powers that resembled him a king. For all these reasons, they advocated for a Bill of Rights. In this respect, it’s interesting what Patrick Henry said by claiming that the legislature must be firmly informed of the extent of the rights retained by the people.
We can consider the ratification process of the constitution a turning point because the national debate showed the concerns of many people in the States’ legislatures, and stirred up controversy and political division. That produced great strain in the country, and even put under question the future of the Union.
During the ratification debates, James Madison, who initially opposed the inclusion of a Bill of Rights, gradually came to understand the importance of doing so. That explains why he proposed amendments through the Congress because there was the risk of a second constitutional convention that could undo the compromises of 1787, and open the entire constitution to reconsideration. This political scenario would have endangered the federal government by causing its dissolution.
Then, the main goal was to supply additional guards for liberty and prevent any political movement from revising the whole constitution and endanger the federal government. For Madison, the amendments would give the government its due popularity and stability. In addition to this, the amendments would be fundamental maxims of free government, and they also would counterbalance the impulses of interest and passion.
In brief, the Bill of Rights aimed to appease those who objected to the constitution and wanted guarantees for individual rights and freedoms.
Now, it’s time to address why the Bill of Rights is so important. That means analyzing its political implications in the shaping of the representative government in America.
Following the English political tradition, the establishment of constraints on government power was the means to avoid the emergence of a Leviathan. These limitations gathered in the Magna Carta, and more recently in the Bill of Rights of 1689, were essential to stop any attempt of imposing an absolute monarchy.
As a result, Americans looked for the way to confine government powers through some limitations aimed to grant individual autonomy. That was in accordance with the liberal tradition of John Locke, who advocated for a limited government intended to protect natural rights.
For this purpose, the Bill of Rights includes different provisions that prevent the government from infringing individual rights and liberties. In this way, the ten first amendments were aimed to forbid any law against natural rights. And at the same time, it’s an explicit declaration that all powers not explicitly granted to the US Congress by the constitution are reserved for the States or the people.
Let’s take a look at these amendments to see their political implications.
First Amendment
“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.”
The first amendment protects free speech and press, as well as the right of people to assemble and ask for a redress of grievances. In addition to this, the government can’t pass any bill aimed to establish an official religion. So, it’s a protection of freedom to practice any religion, express your opinion in public, and publish your ideas to spread them. The government can’t intervene in these fields. Otherwise, it would be curtailing individual freedom by imposing its views, opinions, and so on.
Second Amendment
“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.”
This amendment connects with the English tradition of the Bill of Rights of 1689. This right is considered essential because by granting people bearing guns, they keep the capability to defend themselves from government oppression. In history, all governments, especially despotic regimes, tried to disarm their peoples because, in that way, they couldn’t resist abuse. So, armed people are a free people who can resist tyranny.
Third Amendment
“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.”
Framers knew that armies are always problematic, and at the end of the eighteenth century, there wasn’t a standing army in the US. Then, in the case of mobilization, they needed accommodation because there were no garrisons. That was annoying for civilians, and it could be a means to strip people of their liberties.
Fourth Amendment
“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.”
This amendment is another limitation to prevent the government from becoming an autocracy in which authorities treat people as slaves and trample on their rights. Therefore, according to this amendment, the government must respect the integrity and properties of individuals. It’s a hindrance to the formation of Police State by preserving the rule of law.
Fifth Amendment
“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.”
This amendment guarantees the rights to due process, grand jury screening of criminal indictments, and compensation for the seizure of private property. It aims to ensure a fair trial for any defendant, and protect them from any abuse of authorities. That contrasts with absolute monarchies, in which authorities tried people without observing any of these rights. And the same thing happens today in totalitarian regimes that don’t hesitate to ride roughshod over people’s rights.
Sixth Amendment
“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.”
In order to grant a fair trial, with all guarantees, this amendment establishes some rights of the defendant. In this way, authorities aren’t allowed to run criminal prosecutions without the observance of some legal procedures.
Seventh Amendment
“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.”
This amendment guarantees jury trials in federal civil cases that deal with claims of more than twenty dollars. And it prohibits judges from overruling findings of fact by juries in federal civil lawsuits. It prevents arbitrary judges by establishing jury trials.
Eighth Amendment
“Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”
In this case, the amendment forbids some abuses of judicial authority. It’s a clause against cruelty, so the Congress isn’t allowed to pass any bill that involves excessive fines and unusual punishments.
Ninth Amendment
“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”
According to this amendment, there are additional fundamental rights outside the constitution. So, the rights enumerated in the constitution are not an explicit and exhaustive list of individual rights. Moreover, the people retain these rights not mentioned in the constitution, which is a reference to natural rights.
Tenth Amendment
“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.”
The last amendment expresses the principles of separation of powers and federalism by granting the States and people the retention of those powers that aren’t delegated to the federal government by the constitution. That’s a remarkable limitation of government powers. However, it’s important to mention that this amendment has a slight but critical difference compared to the article of the Confederation. That difference was controversial when the Bill of Rights was drafted, and it’s the omission of expressly delegated. So, this amendment dismisses that expression because it would have denied implied powers theory. You can find more information about implied powers here.
Therefore, this amendment limits the power of the government vaguely because it doesn’t specify what powers aren’t delegated.
Conclusion
In sum, the Bill of Rights is important because it limits the power of the government, and by doing so, it grants individual rights and liberties. All in all, it’s a protection to prevent the formation of an overwhelming power that enslaves people.
Question of the day
Question of the day! Do you think the Bill of Rights protects your rights and liberties adequately nowadays? Post your opinion in the comments section below, and I’ll check it out.
Bibliography used:
Morgan, Edmund S., The Birth of the Republic
Sabine, George, A History of Political Theory
Locke, John, Two Treatises of Government
Labunski, Richard E., James Madison and the struggle for the Bill of Rights
Maier, Pauline, Ratification: The People Debate the Constitution, 1787–1788
Storing, Herbert J. (ed.), The Complete Anti-Federalist
Stewart, David O., The Summer of 1787. The Men Who Invented the Constitution
Rakove, Jack N., Original Meanings. Politics and Ideas in the Making of the Constitution
Beeman, Richard, Plain Honest Men: The Making of the American Constitution
Schechter, Stephen L. (ed.), Roots of the Republic: American Founding Documents Interpreted
Brookhiser, Richard, James Madison
Disclosure: Some of these links are affiliate links where I’ll earn a small commission if you make a purchase at no additional cost to you. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.