How has the Supreme Court influenced the process of incorporating the Bill of Rights?
Explain how Palko and Duncan changed the Supreme Court’s approach to selective incorporation.
Answers
Answer:
Palko involved restricting incorporation of the Bill of Rights on the state level. In contrast, Duncan resulted in an expansion of incorporation when the conviction was overturned due to the lack of a jury trial.
Explanation:
The Supreme Court has played a crucial role in the process of incorporating the Bill of Rights, which refers to the application of the protections guaranteed by the Bill of Rights to the states. Originally, the Bill of Rights only applied to the federal government, and it was up to the states to decide which rights to protect for their citizens. However, with the process of selective incorporation, the Supreme Court began to apply certain provisions of the Bill of Rights to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause.
The Court's first attempt at selective incorporation was in the case of Gitlow v. New York (1925), where the Court held that the First Amendment's protection of freedom of speech and the press applied to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. However, this was a limited ruling, and the Court did not apply all provisions of the Bill of Rights to the states at once.
The Supreme Court continued to refine its approach to selective incorporation in subsequent cases such as Palko v. Connecticut (1937) and Duncan v. Louisiana (1968). In Palko, the Court ruled that the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment was not "fundamental" to the American scheme of justice and therefore did not apply to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. This decision was a setback for advocates of incorporation, as it suggested that the Supreme Court would not incorporate all provisions of the Bill of Rights.
However, in Duncan, the Court changed its approach to selective incorporation and ruled that the Sixth Amendment's right to a trial by jury applied to the states. The Court held that the right to a jury trial was "fundamental" to the American scheme of justice and therefore was applicable to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. This decision signaled a shift in the Court's approach to selective incorporation, as it suggested that the Court would be more willing to apply other provisions of the Bill of Rights to the states.
Overall, the Supreme Court has played a vital role in the process of incorporating the Bill of Rights, and its decisions in cases such as Palko and Duncan have influenced the Court's approach to selective incorporation. These decisions have helped to expand the protections guaranteed by the Bill of Rights to the states and have ensured that citizens' rights are protected against state infringement.
#SPJ3