Pros And Cons Of Substantive Due Process Clause

Good Essays
The Equal Protection Clause is the constitutional promise that no individual or class of persons can be denied the same protection of the laws that is enjoyed by others individuals or classes. These protections include life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of hapiness. The Substantive Due Process Clause is similar in that it states that no person can be deprived of either life, liberty, or property devoid of due process. Substantive Due Process clause put limits on the content or subject matter of state and federal laws. The Substantive Due Process Clause keeps the government from violating certain fundamental constitutional rights of individuals or parties. The Supreme court relied on the Substantive Due Process clause to overturn the previous courts ruling and argued that the ruling violated the S. Due Process Clause, as opposed to the Equal Protections Clause. However, Justice Sandra Day O ' Connor argued in favor of the Equal Protections Clause to overturn the state laws against sodomy. The Court recognized that the privacy rights of consenting adults cannot be violated as this violates the Constitution.

You would first file a complaint with the court and deliver a copy to the defendant. The
…show more content…
This would make the legislature unconstitutional and the legislature could be modified or scrapped entirely to fit within the framework of the US Constitution. States cannot enact a statute that violates or infringes upon the first amendment rights of an entity; the entities in this case being GMI and HDTV. In this case the free speech being violated is these companies right to commercial speech which is protected under the first amendment. However, limits can be placed upon commercial free speech, but in this case the limit restricts commercial free speech too heavily and the purpose is unsupported for protecting

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    The Miller test uses community standards which imposes view of the majority onto views of the minority. This violates the spirit of a liberal reading of the First Amendment because it restricts content and therefore speech. Speech and individual liberty should be protected. Content should not be prohibited, especially when it is based on community standards because they are “unsupported by reasoning of any intelligible kind” and do not rise to the “dignity of moral reasoning that justifies the deprivation of liberty.” Richards also argues that pornography should not be prohibited because it has some redeeming values such as creating ideas that individuals may like, providing a release for individuals who may not have access to sexual partners, and it can also reduce the incidence of certain…

    • 798 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Freedom Of Free Speech

    • 1355 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Mills argued in On Liberty “...there ought to exist the fullest liberty of professing and discussing, as a matter of ethical conviction, any doctrine, however immoral it may be considered.” In a democratic society, freedom of speech plays an important role. Freedom of speech guarantees the citizens to participate in the democracy, and a democratic society isn’t stable if there is no free speech in the administration sector. Restrictions on free speech may cause harm to democratic life, and also contradicts the principles that founded democracy, that the government shouldn’t impose any more than necessary restrictions on individual rights. In Australia, the constitution does not explicitly protect freedom of speech, however, there is meant to be an implied freedom of speech in the constitution. Freedom of speech is thought to be essential in a democratic society.…

    • 1355 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    While this reasoning is valid, Huemer does not address the claim that the government should protect the autonomy of its citizens. Making the empirical assumption that drugs inhibit users’ ability to control themselves, prohibitionists might argue that the government is obligated to restrict the use of drugs—or at least addictive ones—in the interest of preserving…

    • 704 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The constitution itself protects marriage rights by protecting citizens from unfair judgements. The Constitution of the United States says, “Nor [shall any State] deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws” (amend. 14, sec. 1). This proves that the government is not allowed to ban same-sex marriage because denies homosexuals the right of protection of the law.…

    • 1142 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Lawrence V. Wade

    • 1313 Words
    • 6 Pages

    He also points out that we still have laws prohibiting bigamy, prostitution, obscenity, and child pornography, which restrict a persons right to make their own choices in their sex lives. He finds the courts claim to be totally hypocritical. In my opinion, sodomy is a fundamental right, and it is "deeply rooted in our Nation's history and traditions." It may have a history of being illegal, but it is not the government's right to restrict sodomy based purely on morals. Bestiality and adult incest, as I mentioned before, have other reasons to illegalize them.…

    • 1313 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Plessy V. Ferguson

    • 1576 Words
    • 7 Pages

    The reason why the Bill of Rights is are there to protect their liberties from the government, but they can limit you on certain liberties. Take the 1st Amendment, part of it is to protect people’s freedom of religion and religious practices. The government, however, can limit this by saying you still must follow the laws. An example of the government limiting religious practice is when a religious practice includes illegal drugs. The court case Employment Division of Oregon v. Smith, the court decided that they could not use drugs for religious purposes because of legitimate state interest.…

    • 1576 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Fundamental rights are granted through the Constitution of the United States, and are a part of our liberty and freedom. Also, The Ninth Amendment reads, “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. In other words the right to bear arms should not be taken away from anyone. Opponents of gun control consider the right to bear arms in some sense a fundamental right, and having those rights taken away is unconstitutional. Although the Fourth Amendment protects the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, it doesn’t protect against felons possessing a firearm.…

    • 3270 Words
    • 14 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Lifestyle Statute

    • 1035 Words
    • 4 Pages

    California Labor Code section 96(k) protects lawful conduct occurring during nonworking hours away from the employer’s premises. This law appears to be broad, however, it is restrictive. In Barbee v. Household Automotive, the Court held that 96(k) did not create a substantive right; instead, it was a procedure for the Labor Commissioner to uphold already recognized constitutional rights. This essentially means the California lifestyle statute only protects previously “recognized constitutional rights.” Thus, based on state common law, this statute is inadequate in protecting applicants from employers screening of their Facebook accounts since it will not protect an employee 's online behavior and conduct outside of…

    • 1035 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Iphones, Inc. Case Study

    • 1642 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Fein reports that the First Amendment cannot be used because the First Amendment is there to protect democratic self-government and expressive autonomy. Expressive autonomy is a synonym for self-government and self-government is defined as “political independence and self-control” (Self). Fein goes on to argue that requiring a software corporation to form a new version of its software for a criminal investigation is not different than a subpoena requiring a witness to testify in court for a criminal investigation. The infringement of speech isn’t affected if it is from the power of the courts. As for the Fifth Amendment Fein says that Apple cannot use this.…

    • 1642 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Meaning that power is divided between the national and state governments. Each have specific powers which the other cannot change or override. States not in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage claimed that the national government did not have the authority to overrule their laws. Nullification is “the historical idea that states can ignore federal laws, or pass laws that supersede them” (Graham) these states tried to nullify the Supreme Courts decision. Public officials in many states such as Ted Cruz support the idea that the Supreme Court’s ruling is not in fact the law of the land.…

    • 1472 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays