Explore BrainMass
Share

Framers Intent

This content was STOLEN from BrainMass.com - View the original, and get the already-completed solution here!

Describe the original intent of freedom of speech, freedom of religion, right to privacy, and criminals' rights.

Explain current views regarding provisions of freedom of speech, freedom of religion, right to privacy, and criminals' rights.

Considerations for the future of these provisions.

© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com October 25, 2018, 4:29 am ad1c9bdddf
https://brainmass.com/history/north-american-history/framers-intent-380699

Solution Preview

The original intent of the freedom of speech and freedom of religion and freedom of privacy, including criminals' rights was to steer away from the rule of King George in England and retain some of the rights and priviledges that the framers and the people of the time did not have in their home country. Thus, the framers wanted the people of the newfound nation ...

Solution Summary

Describe the original intent of freedom of speech, freedom of religion, right to privacy, and criminals' rights.

Explain current views regarding provisions of freedom of speech, freedom of religion, right to privacy, and criminals' rights.

Considerations for the future of these provisions.

$2.19
See Also This Related BrainMass Solution

Approaches to the Constitutional interpretation

Answer the following with 200 words or more based on the Four Approaches to the Constitutional Interpretation listed below:
1.) Clear Meaning, 2.) Adaptation 3.) Original Intent 4.) Structuralism

a. Which approach best characterizes Justice Stevens' opinion of the Court in U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton (1995)? Explain.
b. Which approach best characterizes Justice Thomas's dissent in the same case? Explain.

A central issue in constitutional politics involves whether the authority granted in Article II exhausts the powers of the President. To what extent does the President enjoy inherent powers and extraordinary powers in times of emergency? Scholars disagree on this important question. Discuss the theories of presidential power. Discuss the Supreme Court's acceptance or rejection of these theories by relying on cases that were discussed in this unit. Be specific. To which theory (or theories) has the Supreme Court subscribed, and why? To which theory (or theories) did the Framers probably subscribe, and why?

In his dissent in Baker v. Carr, Justice Frankfurter denounced the majority for "asserting destructively novel judicial power" in its decision. What did Frankfurter mean? What alternative remedy did Frankfurter offer in his dissent for those aggrieved voters who had brought this case? Explain.

Explain how Baker v. Carr and Shaw v. Reno, which are viewed as landmarks in establishing a cause of action under the Fourteenth Amendment, are analogous. With what objections from dissenters did Justices Brennan and O'Connor have to contend in their respective majority opinions?

View Full Posting Details