In 1798 John Adams, the president at the time, passed two laws called the alien, and the sedition act. The alien act made it nearly triple the time before becoming an American citizen. As well any non-American citizen could be removed by the president at any time. Another thing the act did was make it so that if you are over the age of 14 and America goes to war with your home country you would be deported. Now onto the sedition act. The sedition act made it so that ay reporter or news source reporting on “fake” news would be imprisoned without trial. Also, the government was the ones to decide if it was fake or not. For some reason believe what John Adams did was necessary. I am not one of those people. These acts violated the constitution. …show more content…
The aliens act completely demolishes what the constitution stands for, freedom. “No person shall be deprived of liberty without due process of the law”. What this means is that you cannot imprison someone without some kind of trial, however, the alien act goes completely against this. Especially when you think about them deporting innocent children just because they were born in France. When people believe that this was constitutional they say what John Adams did was necessary. From Massachusetts’ response “We consider the alien sedition act constitutional” as well when regarding the alien act, “Aliens have temporary rights, which should be taken away whenever they become dangerous to the public safety or are found guilty of treason against the government.”. While I agree with this statement completely, this was not all it was used for. Along with this ability, there was also the part where anyone above the age of 14 who was still considered a citizen of a country that we were at war with would be deported. As well even with that quote, the way those things were implemented was not a good job. They would not need to prove any treason had happened or even if they were a
I’ll be discussing the similarities and differences between the Alien and Sedition Act and the Patriot Act, and how these two Acts impacted our nation during a time of war. Furthermore, both of these Acts helped protect our nation when there was a crisis at at hand. However, both of these Acts provide the government with power that was not constitutional. The Alien Sedition act was passed in-order to protect the young nation from french spies. The Patriot Act was passed in-order to protect the nation from further terrorist attacks.
In the year of 1787, delegates met in Philadelphia to write the Constitution. One major factor they were trying to guard against was tyranny, a type of government with an absolute ruler. This was a big fear because they didn’t want this democracy to turn into a dictatorship. So the delegates brainstormed and make the checks and balances for the three main branches of government. Checks and balances meant that each branch would check all the other branches and balance out their power equally.
Abrams was a case under the repressive Espionage and Sedition Acts passed during World War I, the most outrageously unconstitutional violations of our civil liberties since the 1798 Alien and Sedition Acts. The 1917-18 laws prohibited anything — including speech — that criticized the government, brought it into disrepute, and supposedly interfered with our war effort. The Supreme Court consistently upheld this legislation.
It is significant to note the list of rights that J. Miller says the clause protects, e.g., the right of free access to the seaports, the right to demand the care of the Federal government over his life, liberty and property when on the high seas or within the jurisdiction of a foreign government. Whether the Privileges and Immunities Clause should be read narrowly so as to protect the few rights J. Miller attributes to it is debatable. The Supreme Court will later incorporate several amendments of the United States Bill of Rights into the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution. The Fourteenth Amendment was not intended to safeguard Plaintiffs against the types of injuries for which they seek relief. The Fourteenth Amendment textually distinguishes between citizens of the United States and citizens of the States.
On July 14, 1798 the Alien and Sedition Acts were passed, marking the year that the United States dishonored the Constitution by violating the 1st Amendment of the United States of America. The 1st
In this first paragraph, I will argue that the procedures and regulations the United States Government has implemented against Muslims in response to the events of 9/11 violate constitutional law. To start off, Under the Fourteenth Amendment, also referred to as “the protection clause,” the definition according to CNN news in an article titled “The Bush-era Muslim registry failed. Yet the United States could be trying it again,” the article, states that the United States must treat every individual living within the United States territory in the same manners as any other in similar conditions and circumstances, including the equal protection of their rights. The fourteenth amendment also prohibits states from denying any person within its territory the equal protection of the laws. This includes the rights to freedom of speech, the rights to free travel, and religious freedom.
The question of why Americans supported or feared the Constitution of 1787 is imperative for it provides further insight into the founding of the United States. The young republic of America had several reasons to strongly support or fear the Constitution of 1787. To many, it would provide stability, but to others, it would take away their individual rights. Those who supported the Constitution (generally the Federalists) felt it was enough—no need for a Bill of Rights. Those who feared the Constitution (generally the Antifederalists) demanded a Bill of Rights to protect citizens.
In 1798 the “Alien and Sedations Act” would give the president the power to prevent potential threats from immigrating as well as allow detainment of populations. This was seen as a potential abuse of power and circumvention of the checks and balance systems by two states and particular: Kentucky and Virginia. While the Kentucky Resolution seems inconsistent with the framers intent, the Virginia Resolution raises seriously concerns which are consistent with my reading of the “Federalist Papers.” The Kentucky Resolution is an ambitious response, at best, to the “Alien and Sedation Acts.”
The opposition suggests that the USA Patriot Act grinds down several elements in the Bill of Rights. The First Amendment, the freedom of speech and assembly, is violated because it restricts our speech, albeit, indirectly but it is still restricted. People are losing the right to say what they feel and they have to be careful with their words when discussing politics or the government because they can be prosecuted for saying what they think. The Fourth Amendment, the freedom from unreasonable search and seizure, is violated because the Patriot Act does not require a probable cause or a warrant to search through someone's data and personal information and with the Patriot Act, the victim does not need to be informed this search is happening.
The author of, You decide: Current Debates in Criminal Justice asks, “Is the Patriot Act a Necessary Protection Against Terrorism or a Threat to Our Civil Liberties?” (Waller) Proponents of the Patriot Act have claim that the law is a necessary protection against terrorism. In contrast, opponents of the Patriot Act claim that it is a violation of Americans’ civil liberties. Both sides of the argument have debated valid points for and against the Patriot Act. The, U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act is an acronym that stands for, Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism.
As government began to gain more power and authority they began to start violating the citizens very own rights in order to gain more power. The Alien and Sedition act explained that no one can criticize the government which completely go against the 1st amendment of the bill of rights of free speech and press. This violation goes back to the John Peter Zenger’s trial during the colonial period, where the British violated the colonists rights. The citizens,intended audiences, is shocked by this because, after they have separated from the oppressing British, they are once again having their rights being violated. This led the citizens to believe that the federal government have too much power.
February 19, 1942. About two months after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066, which allowed for the legal internment of Americans with Japanese ancestry living on the west coast. FDR and the U.S. Army claimed it was out of military necessity and to defend California, Oregon, and Washington from another Japanese attack. There were no exceptions. Lawyers, doctors, business people, and even wounded Japanese American war veterans were sent to internment camps (Marrin 97-98).
“Threats to freedom of speech, writing and action, though often trivial in isolation, are cumulative in their effect and, unless checked, lead to a general disrespect for the rights of the citizen.” This quote is from George Orwell’s book, 1984, written in 1944 about domestic surveillance. This quote has become all too real in today’s technology-idolizing society in which our freedom of speech and the security of our digital thoughts and papers are constantly put at risk by the government, particularly the National Security Administration. The NSA conducts wiretaps and digital surveillance without the acknowledgement of the majority of citizens and without constitutional evidence to do so. Although the NSA must appear before Foreign Intelligence
This event aligns with the creation of The Espionage Act of 1917 and the Sedition Act made in 1918. The purpose of these laws was to forbid "spying and interfering with the draft but also "false statements" that might impede military success", as well as any ' 'statements intended to cast "contempt, scorn or disrepute" on the "form of government" or that advocated interference with the war effort" (Voices of Freedom 119). As a result, American citizens expressing their disapproval in any form regarding the war would be arrested and punished by these
Before America gained independence and established the Constitution, the freedom of speech and press and its scope started to be explored and discussed in England. The English writers Milton, Blackstone, and Cato wrote about the flaws in the previous restraints, dangers of libel, and the importance of the freedom of speech and press. Seeing this, the Founders of America incorporated their thoughts on previous restraints, libel, and freedom of speech and press into early documents such as the Aliens and Sedition Acts and several state constitutions. Milton in Areopagitica focuses on the previous restraints mainly on publishing documents and importance of the freedom of press. During the 17th century, publications had to be approved by a licenser,