3.8

Standard 3B

Protections of the Bill of Rights have been selectively incorporated by way of the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause to prevent state infringement of basic liberties.

Learning Objective

Explain the extent to which states are limited by the due process clause from infringing upon individual rights.

ESSENTIAL KNOWLEDGE

The Court has on occasion ruled in favor of states’ power to restrict individual liberty, as, for example, when speech can be shown to increase the danger to public safety.

The Miranda rule involves the interpretation and application of accused persons’ due process rights as protected by the Fifth and Sixth Amendments, yet the Court has sanctioned a “public safety” exception that allows unwarned interrogation to stand as direct evidence in court.

Pretrial rights of the accused and the prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures are intended to ensure that citizen liberties are not eclipsed by the need for social order and security, including:

• The right to legal counsel, speedy and public trial, and an impartial jury

• Protection against warrantless searches of cell phone data under the Fourth Amendment

• Limitations placed on bulk collection of telecommunication metadata (Patriot and USA Freedom Acts)

The due process clause has been applied to guarantee the right to an attorney and protection from unreasonable searches and seizures, as represented by:

• Gideon v. Wainwright (1963), which guaranteed the right to an attorney for the poor or indigent

• The exclusionary rule, which stipulates evidence illegally seized by law enforcement officers in violation of the suspect’s Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures cannot be used against that suspect in criminal prosecution.