Civil Liberties AP Government

1. Civil Liberties and Public
Policy
Chapter 4

2. Chapter 4: Civil Liberties and
Public Policy
 The Bill of Rights
 Freedom of Religion
 Freedom of Expression
 Freedom of Assembly
 Right to Bear Arms
 Defendants’ Rights
 The Right to Privacy
 Understanding Civil Liberties
 Summary

3. Chapter Outline and
Learning Objectives
 The Bill of Rights
LO 4.1: Trace the process by which the Bill
of Rights has been applied to the states.
 Freedom of Religion
LO 4.2: Distinguish the two types of
religious rights protected by the First
Amendment and determine the boundaries
of those rights.

4. Chapter Outline and
Learning Objectives
 Freedom of Expression
LO 4.3: Differentiate the rights of free
expression protected by the First
Amendment and determine the boundaries
of those rights.
 Freedom of Assembly
LO 4.4: Describe the rights to assemble and
associate protected by the First
Amendment and their limitations.

5. Chapter Outline and
Learning Objectives
 Right to Bear Arms
LO 4.5: Describe the right to bear arms
protected by the Second Amendment and
its limitations.
 Defendants’ Rights
LO 4.6: Characterize defendants’ rights and
identify issues that arise in their
implementation.

6. Chapter Outline and
Learning Objectives
 The Right to Privacy
LO 4.7: Outline the evolution of a right to
privacy and its application to the issue of
abortion.
 Understanding Civil Liberties
LO 4.8: Assess how civil liberties affect
democratic government and how they both
limit and expand the scope of government.

7. The Bill of Rights
LO 4.1: Trace the process by which the Bill
of Rights has been applied to the states.
 The Bill of Rights—Then and Now
 The Bill of Rights and the States
To Learning Objectives
Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Longman

8. The Bill of Rights
 The Bill of Rights—Then and Now
Civil Liberties – The legal constitutional
protections against the government.
The Bill of Rights – The first 10
amendments, which protect basic liberties
such as religion and speech.
LO 4.1
To Learning Objectives

9. The Bill of Rights–
Then and Now
 Civil Liberties: the legal Constitutional
protections against the government
“What government can’t do”
 The Bill of Rights: first 10
amendments, which protect basic
liberties, such as religion and speech

10. Distinguishing Civil Liberties
from Civil Rights
 Civil Liberties and Civil Rights are
often used interchangeably
 Important differences
Civil Liberties – Freedoms guaranteed
in the Bill of Rights and 14th
Amend
due process clause
Restrict what government can do to
you

11. Distinguishing Civil Liberties
from Civil Rights
Civil Rights
• Protect you from discrimination by both
the government and by individuals
Civil Liberties are more about freedom
and Civil Rights are about equality
Should “The Bill of Rights” be called
“The Bill of Liberties”?

12. p. 101

13. The Bill of Rights—Then and
Now
 The Bill of Rights and the States
 Written to restrict the national government
• “Congress shall make no law…”
• Barron v. Baltimore (1833) – only pertain to
national government not states
 Most have been “incorporated” through the
14th
Amendment, and now restrict state and
local governments
• First Amendment protection of speech first
incorporated to states in Gitlow v. New York
(1925)
• INCORPORATION DOCTRINE

14. 14th
Amendment
 Section. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the
United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,
are citizens of the United States and of the State
wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce
any law which shall abridge the privileges or
immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall
any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or
property, without due process of law; nor deny to
any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.
 Due Process – is the principle that a person has a right
to receive notice, and be heard in an orderly and fair
proceeding in order to protect his or her rights
 Equal Protection – states must treat everyone equally
under the law; allows for the judiciary to enforce this
principle

15. p. 101

16. Freedom of Religion

17. Freedom of Religion
 The Establishment Clause
“Congress shall make no law
respecting the establishment of
religion…”
Separation of Church and State
• “Wall of Separation” Jefferson
 How Tall?
 How Wide?

18. Freedom of Religion
 Lemon Test - Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971)
Secular legislative purpose
Neither advance nor inhibit religion
No excessive government
“entanglement”
 Endorsement Test – O’Connor
Gov’t involvement is generally
understood not to endorse religion

19. Freedom of Religion –
Establishment Clause
 Courts had to draw a fine line between
what is permissible and what is not.
Permissible
• Textbooks
• Lunches
• Computers
• Standardized Tests
Non-permissible
• Teacher salary
• Transportation for field trips

20. LO 4.2
To Learning Objectives
Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Longman

21. The Establishment Clause:
 Everson v. Board of Education(1947)
New Jerseys reimbursement to
parents of parochial and private
school students for the costs of busing
their children was upheld.
Incorporation of the Establishment
Clause

22. The Establishment Clause:
 School Prayer – Engel vs. Vitale (1962); Murray
v. Curlett (1963)
 Bible Reading - School District of Abington
Township, Pennsylvania vs. Schempp (1963)
 Intelligent Design vs. Darwin; Epperson v.
Arkansas (1968) law that prohibited teaching of
evolution was unconstitutional & Edwards v.
Aguillard (1987) Louisiana could not require that
public schools who taught evolution to creation
science.

23. The Establishment Clause:
 Marsh v. Chambers (1983) – State
had a right to hire a chaplain to open
legislative sessions with a prayer.
 Lynch v. Donnelly(1984) – the Court
upheld a nativity display among other
symbols in a public park

24. The Establishment Clause:
 Wallace v. Jaffree (1985) – Alabama
law setting aside a moment of
“voluntary prayer” was struck down.
 Board of Education of Westside
Community Schools v. Mergens
(1989) – 1990 Equal Access Act

25. The Establishment Clause:
 Lee v. Weisman (1992)Clergy led
prayer at public school graduations
unconstitutional
 Santa Fe Independent SD v. Doe
(2000) student led prayer at school
football games unconstitutional

26. The Establishment Clause:
 Mitchell v. Helms (2000) – the federal
government could provide computer equipment
to all schools – public , private and parochial.
The aid was religiously neutral
 Zelman vs. Simmons-Harris (2002) - a
government program providing tuition vouchers
to attend a private school was upheld
 Elk Grove Unified SD v. Newdow (2004) – a
father challenged the constitutionality of
“under god “ in a school led prayer…

27. The Establishment Clause:
 Van Orden v. Perry (2005) – a 6ft. monument displaying
the 10 Commandments donated by a private group and
placed near other monuments next to the Texas State
Capitol. ???? 5 v 4
 McCreary County v. ACLU (2005) Two large framed
copies of the 10 Commandments were in the Kentucky
courthouse. ???? 5 v 4

28. Freedom of Religion
 The Free Exercise Clause
“Congress shall make no law
respecting the establishment of
religion nor prohibiting the free
exercise thereof…”
Prohibits government from interfering
with the practice of religion

29. Freedom of Religion
 The Free Exercise Clause
 People should be given the right to practice
as they choose
 The matter is more complicated
 There are some practices that may be
detrimental to the community as a whole
 People have an unchallengeable right to
believe what they want, but the courts have
been more cautious about the right to
practice their belief

30. Freedom of Religion
 Reynolds v. United States (1879)
Polygamy not protected
 Minersville v. Gobitas (1940)
Flag Salute law upheld
 West Virginia v. Barnett (1943)
Reverses previous flag salute decision
 Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972)
 Amish exempt from compulsory attendance
requirement - “free exercise of religion”

31. Freedom of Religion
 Goldman v. Weinberger (1986)
 Air-force Jewish chaplain – yarmulke not
protected
 Employment division v. Smith (1990)
 Illegally smoking peyote (hallucinogen)
 Christian Legal Society v. Martinez
(2010)
 Would not allow members based on
sexual orientation
 Decided they could not discriminate
because it’s a public university

32. Freedom of Religion
 Religious Freedom Restoration Act
(1993)
 Gave the right to perform religious rituals
unless the gov’t could show a compelling
interest to deny the ritual.
 SC declared this act unconstitutional b/c it
was an intrusion of Congress into the states’
prerogatives for regulating health and
welfare of its citizens. (10th
Amend Issue)
 2006 Court allowed a small religious sect to
use hallucinogenic tea in rituals.

33. Freedom of Religion
 Free Exercise
How might the following laws relating
to government employees,
government contractors, recipients of
government dollars, or minors in the
care of the state conflict with religious
observation?
 Does each law violate the First Amendments
Free Exercise Clause?

34. Freedom of Expression
 “Congress shall make no law
respecting the establishment of
religion nor prohibiting the free
exercise thereof; or abridging the
freedom of speech, or of the press …
 The Fundamental Freedom in the US
Democracy depends of the free
expression of ideas

35. Freedom of Expression
 Freedom of speech and press are
fundamental to the American
Democracy
 The 1st
and 14th
Amendments serve
two important purposes
 To guarantee to each person a right of free
expression
 To ensure all persons a full wide ranging
discussion of public affairs

36. Freedom of Expression
These Freedoms are not
Absolute!
What types of speech is
protected?

37. Differing Views
 S. C. Justice Hugo Black - “I read no
law abridging to mean no law
abridging”
 S. C. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes –
“ The most stringent protection of free
speech would not protect a man in
falsely shouting ‘fire’ in a theater and
causing panic”

38. Freedom of Expression
 The courts have had to draw the line separating
permissible and impermissible speech
 Balance freedom of expression against
competing values like public order, national
security and a right to a fair trial
 The courts have also had to decide what types
of activities do and do not constitute speech

39. Freedom of Expression
 The First Amendment is not an
absolute bar against legislation by
Congress concerning speech. The First
Amendment protects most speech,
but some speech either falls outside
the protection of the First
Amendment or has only limited
protection.

40. The Tension Between
Freedom and Order
 Tug of war between the goal of
protecting individual freedoms
(Freedom of Expression) and the
governments central goal of insuring
order
 Alien and Sedition Acts, 1798
 Civil War – suspension of habeas
corpus
 Aftermath of September 11th

41. Freedom of Speech
 Why is the freedom of Speech essential
to an open society and to democratic
rule?
 Ensure individuals can discuss important
ideas and problems facing the
government
 The ability to speak freely and critically
about government and politics is central
to the democratic process
 Contributes to the “marketplace of ideas”

42. Free Speech laws
 Clear and Present Danger Test
Schenk v. US , 1917
WWI – socialist war protester who
handed out pamphlets urging men to
resist the draft
Gov’t may silence speech where there
is a clear and present danger

43. Free Speech laws
 Bad Tendency Test
 Gitlow v New York, 1925 – called for
revolutionary mass action to create a
socialist government
 Speech that has a tendency to incite a
crime or disturb public peace can be
silenced
 Lasted only a short while

44. Free Speech laws
 Clear and Probable Danger Test
Smith Act – forbade advocating the
violent overthrow of the American
government
Cold War era. Dennis v United
States, 1951
Government could suppress speech
to avoid grave danger, even if
probability was remote

45. The Standard Today
 Brandenburg v Ohio, 1969 KKK
arrested for making an anti-Semitic
speech and showed guns and rifles
 The KKK was convicted and that
conviction was overturned by the SC
 Imminent Lawless Action Test – to
suppress speech the government must
prove that speech would likely cause
harm and that harm would be immediate

46. The Protection of Symbolic
Speech
 Signs, gestures and articles of clothing
that convey meaning are
constitutionally protected speech.

47. Symbolic Speech Cases
 US v O’Brien, 1968 – Can Gov't
punish Vietnam War protestor for
burning their draft cards?
 SC – The Gov’t had a “compelling
interest” in preventing their destruction
 Balance the interest of the Gov’t to
raise and army and the indiv right to
free speech

48. Symbolic Speech Cases
 Tinker v Des Moines, 1969 Protest the
Vietnam war - Black armbands worn
by high school students
 SC – Symbolic speech in this case
warranted protection
 What was the difference between the
two cases?

49. Symbolic Speech Cases
 Texas v Johnson, 1989 – flag burning
 Is it protected form of symbolic
speech?
 YES protected by a 5 to 4 majority of
SC Justices
 Could this protection change?

50. Not all Speech is Created
Equal
 Limited or Prohibited Speech
 Not all speech is free in the US
 Political speech is highly protected
 Other forms of speech can be limited
or prohibited

51. Commercial Speech
 Definition: communication in the form of
advertising
 Generally the most restricted and regulated
form of speech (Federal Trade Commission)

52. The Protection of Commercial
Speech.
 Advertisements have limited First
Amendment protection.
 Restrictions must directly meet a
substantial government interest and go
no further than necessary to meet the
objective.
 Advertisers can be liable for factual
inaccuracies in ways that do not apply to
noncommercial speech.

53. Unprotected Speech:
Slander/Libel
One type of speech that falls outside
the protection of the First Amendment
include slander—statements that are
false and are intended to defame the
character of another.
Libel if Written
New York Times v. Sullivan 1964.
Public officials are required to prove
that the defendant acted with actual
malice

54. Unprotected Speech:
Obscenity
Indecent or offensive speech or
expression
• Roth vs. United States, 1957 – Obscenity not protected
speech
 Definitional Problems. No clear definition on what constitutes obscenity
• Justice Potter Stewart: “I know it when I see it.”
• The current definition stems from Miller v
California, 1973.
• Material is obscene if 1) the average person finds
it violates community standards, 2) the work as a
whole appeals to a prurient interest in sex, 3) the
work shows patently offensive sexual conduct,
and 4) the work lacks serious literary, artistic,
political, or scientific merit.

55. Films, Radio, and TV.
 Although the press was limited to printed
material when the First Amendment was
proposed, the press is no longer limited to just
the print media.
 Freedom of the press now includes other
channels: films, radio, and television. Broadcast
radio and TV are not afforded the same
protection as the print media.

56. Regulation of the Public
Airwaves
 Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) – regulates the radio and TV
broadcasting – license and
regulations
 Restriction of obscene words
 Fines for indecency
 Sexual programming to be blocked or
scrambled

57. Speech and Public School
 “Students do not shed their
constitutional rights when the enter
the school room door”
 School administrators have a far
greater ability to restrict the speech of
their students than the government
has to restrict the general public”

58. Speech and Public School
 There needs to be a balance between
the legitimate educational objectives
against First Amendment values and
freedom of speech.
 Tinker v. Des Moines, 1969

59. Speech and Public School
 Bethel School Dist v. Fraiser, 1986
 HS senior Matt Fraser gave a speech in
nominating a friend for a student gov office.
during which, he used lewd/vulgar references.
• "I know a man who is firm - he's firm in his pants, he's firm in his shirt, his character
is firm - but most [of] all, his belief in you the students of Bethel, is firm. Jeff
Kuhlman is a man who takes his point and pounds it in. If necessary, he'll take an
issue and nail it to the wall. He doesn't attack things in spurts - he drives hard,
pushing and pushing until finally - he succeeds. Jeff is a man who will go to the very
end - even the climax, for each and every one of you. So please vote for Jeff
Kuhlman, as he'll never come between us and the best our school can be. He is
firm enough to give it everything."
 SC – Found for SD – “Schools can teach
boundaries of socially appropriate behavior”

60. Speech and Public School
 Hazelwood School Dist v.
Kuhlmeier,1988
Student newspaper was censored by
principal. Two stories about
pregnancy and divorce.
SC - School newspaper was not a
public forum and could be censored

61. Speech and Public School
 Frederick v Morse, 2007
 At a school-supervised event, Joseph Frederick held up a banner
with the message "Bong Hits 4 Jesus
 Principal Deborah Morse took away the banner and suspended
Frederick for ten days
 Does the First Amendment allow public schools to prohibit students
from displaying messages promoting the use of illegal drugs at
school-supervised events?
 The Court reversed the Ninth Circuit by a 5-4 vote, ruling that
school officials can prohibit students from displaying messages that
promote illegal drug use

62. Freedom of the Press
 Freedom of the press is similar to
freedom of speech.
Defamation in Writing. Key concept:
libel, a written defamation of
character.
 Public figures must meet higher
standards than ordinary people to win
a libel suit.

63. Freedom of Expression
 Prior Restraint
Definition: a government preventing
material from being published;
censorship; unconstitutional
• Near v. Minnesota (1931) SC ruled
against Prior Restraint
May be permissible during wartime
One may be punished after something
is published.

64. Prior Restraint cont.
 Only on rare occasions has the government been
allowed to stop the press from printing anything. If
the publication violates a law, the law can be invoked
only after publication.
• Students in School – Hazelwood S.D . v. Kuhlmeier, 1988,
Morse v. Frederick, 2007
• National Security
• Pentagon Papers – New York Times v. United States, 1971

65. Second Amendment – Right
to Bear Arms
 2nd
Amendment – “a well regulated Militia,
being necessary to the security of a free State,
the right of the people to keep and bare Arms,
shall not be infringed.”
 Militia vs. private ownership?
 Control gun violence vs. right to own a gun?
 Waiting periods, age limits, one gun a month,
registration?
 District of Columbia v. Heller, 2008 – a case that
dealt with central meaning of the 2nd
Amendment and gun
control laws

66. The Rights of the Accused
versus the Rights of Society
 “The Great Balancing Act”
 The Courts and police must constantly
engage in a balancing act of
competing rights

67. Rights of the Accused
 Limits on the Conduct of police
Officers and prosecutors
 Defendant's Pretrial Rights
 Trial Rights
 Amendments 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

68. Due Process of Law
 Guaranteed by 5th
and 14th
Amendments
 Gov’t - “cannot take away life, liberty
or property without due process”
 Government must follow rules fairly
 Procedural and substantive

69. Procedural Due Process
 Gov’t must act fairly or “follow the
rules”
 The how, or methods of government
action
 Rochin v. California, 1952

70. Substantive Due Process
 Laws must be fair
 The what, or policies of government
action
 Pierce v. Society of Sisters

71. Police Power
 States have the right to protect individuals
and protect health, safety and welfare of
its citizens
 The use of police power often conflicts
with civil rights protections
 States must balance the rights of
individuals against the well being of all

72. Police Power
 Legislators and judges have often found
the publics health, safety, morals and or
welfare to be of overriding impotence
Limit the sale of alcohol and tobacco
Regulate weapons, require seatbelts
Limit gambling and prohibit prostitution
Enact compulsory education laws
They can not use their police power in an
unreasonable or unfair way!

73. Defendants’ Rights
 Much of the Bill of Rights (Amendments 4,
5, 6, 7, and 8) apply to defendants’ rights.
 Interpreting Defendants’ Rights
 Criminal Justice personnel are limited by the
Bill of Rights and failure to follow
constitutional protections may invalidate a
conviction.
 Courts continually rule on what is
constitutional and what is not.

74. Defendants’ Rights

75. Rights of the Accused
Fourth Amendment
•No unreasonable or unwarranted search or
seizure.
•No arrest except on probable cause.
Fifth Amendment
•No coerced confessions
•No compulsory self-incrimination.
•No double jeopardy.
•Due Process clause
•Eminent Domain

76. Sixth Amendment
•Legal counsel.
•Informed of charges.
•Speedy and public jury trial.
•Impartial jury by one’s peers.
Eighth Amendment
•Reasonable bail.
•No cruel or unusual punishment.
Rights of the Accused
(cont.)

77. Defendants’ Rights
 Searches and Seizures
 Probable Cause: when the police have reason to believe that
a person should be arrested
 Unreasonable searches and seizures: evidence is obtained
in a haphazard or random manner, prohibited by the Fourth
Amendment
 Exclusionary Rule: the rule that evidence, no matter how
incriminating, cannot be introduced into trial if it was not
constitutionally obtained
• Mapp v. Ohio (1961) – looking for gambling
material/fugitive; found obscene material; court upheld
her 4th
Amendment rights
• Exceptions: eventual discovery; good-faith(thought they
had a valid warrant); clerical errors; knock-and-announce;
dangerous situation; plain view; discarded material
TLO
vs. NJ

78. Searches and Seizures
 Some SC decisions offer more
protections against searches
Car – may search to protect for
weapons to protect themselves
(police) not to find criminal activity
Checkpoints to detect ordinary
criminal wrongdoing not allowed
Thermal imaging devices to search for
marijuana farming not allowed

79. Searches and Seizures
 The standard of “reasonable
suspicion” not “probable cause”
applied in school searches.
New Jersey v. T.L.O. (1985)
Vernonia School District v. Acton
(1995)
Board of Education of Independent
School District #92 of Pottawatomie
County v. Earls (2002)

80. Defendants’ Rights
 Self-Incrimination
 Definition: when an individual accused of a
crime is compelled to be a witness against
himself or herself in court
 Police must inform suspects of these and
other Fifth Amendment protections upon
arrest.
• Miranda v. Arizona (1966) – court overturned
conviction of a man b/c he was not aware of his
rights
 Protection from coerced confessions and
entrapments

81. Defendants’ Rights
 The Right to Counsel
 The state must provide lawyers in most criminal
cases (Sixth Amendment).
• Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) – anyone accused of a
crime, no matter how poor, facing imprisonment has the
right to a lawyer
 Trials
 Plea bargaining: a bargain between the prosecution
and defense for a defendant to plead guilty to a lesser
crime; 90 percent of cases end here and do not go to
trial
 Juries generally consist of 12 people, but unanimity is
not always needed to convict.
 The Sixth Amendment also guarantees a “speedy and
public” trial.

82. Defendants’ Rights
 Cruel and Unusual Punishment
The Eighth Amendment forbids cruel
and unusual punishment.
• Furman v. Georgia (1971)
The death penalty is not cruel and
unusual. It is “an extreme sanction,
suitable to the most extreme crimes.”
• Gregg v. Georgia (1976)
The death penalty’s use and
application varies by state.

83. The Death Penalty
Cruel and Unusual Punishment?
The Death Penalty Today. Now 37 states
allow the death penalty.
Time Limits for Death Row Appeals.
Problems with the Death Penalty
Recently, DNA testing has led to the freeing
of about a hundred death row inmates who
were wrongly convicted, throwing doubt on
the death penalty.

84. The Death Penalty
 Recent restraints on the application of
the death penalty
Mentally ill, 1986
Mentally retarded, 2002
Under 18, 2005
Raping
• Adult women, Coker v Georgia (1977)
• children, Kennedy v Louisiana (2008)

85. Privacy Rights
Is There a Right to Privacy?
There is no explicit Constitutional
right to privacy, rather the right to
privacy is an interpretation by the
Supreme Court.

86. The Right to Privacy
 Justice Brandeis – “the right to a private
personal live free from the intrusion of
government”
 Not explicitly stated in the Constitution, but
implied by the Fourth Amendment
 From the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, and Ninth
Amendments - “penumbras or Shadows”– Justice William
Douglass
• Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) – overturned
conviction of a doctor and family planning
specialist for disseminating birth control devices

87. Privacy Rights and Abortion
– Jane Doe (Norma McCorvey) sought an
abortion – TX Sate law only allowed if to save
life of mother.
– Roe v. Wade. In Roe v. Wade (1973) the court
held that governments could not totally
prohibit abortions because this violates a
woman’s right to privacy. Government
action was limited depending on the stage
of the pregnancy.

88. Privacy Rights and Abortion
 Controversial for 40 years!!!!
1973 Report
40 year anniv

89. After Roe -
 Webster v Reproductive Health
Services, 1989 (Missouri) – forbade
the use of state funds or state
employees to perform abortions
 Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 1992
(Pennsylvania)
the SC loosened standards for
evaluating restrictions on abortions
allowing considerably more regulation

90. Abortion Legislation Guidelines
 * Parental Consent. States may require a minor seeking an abortion to obtain the consent of a parent or
guardian as long as there is an adequate judicial bypass procedure.
 * Informed Consent. A state may require a physician to provide a woman with such information such as
alternatives to abortion, sources of financial aid, development of the child, and the gestational age of the
child. Prior to 1992, informed consent provisions were unconstitutional.
 * Spousal Consent. A state may not require a married woman to obtain her husband's consent before
undergoing an abortion.
 * Waiting Period. A twenty-four hour waiting period does not constitute an undue burden on a woman's
decision to abort and, therefore, is constitutional. Prior to 1992, waiting period requirements were
unconstitutional.
 * Parental Notice. A state may require that one parent be notified of a minor's abortion, but not two.
PA Law: Except for medical emergency, physician must give information to mother at least 24
hours before abortion; if mother under 18 years and not emancipated, both mother's and one
parent/guardian's informed consent required-court may authorize M.D. to perform abortion

91. Privacy Rights in an
Information Age
 Personal info of average Americans is
stored by both public and private
spaces
 Does the Internet compromise
privacy?
 HIPPA

92. Understanding Civil Liberties
 Civil Liberties and Democracy
 Rights ensured in the Bill of Rights are
essential to democracy.
 Courts typically protect civil liberties from
excesses of majority rule.
 Civil Liberties and the Scope of
Government
 In deciding between freedom and order, the
United States generally chooses liberty.
 Civil liberties limit the scope of government,
even though government efforts are needs to
protect rights.

93. Summary
 Civil liberties are expressed in the Bill
of Rights.
 These are the individual’s protections
—for religion, expression, assembly,
and the accused—against the
government.
 Legislatures and courts constantly
define what the Bill of Rights protects
in practice.