Arguments Against The Sixth Amendment

The Sixth Amendment is part of the Bill of Rights which was ratified and went into effect on December 5, 1791. The Sixth Amendment states that the accused has the right to a speedy trial; the right to a public trial; the right to an impartial jury; the right to be informed of the charges; the right to cross-examine and confront witnesses; the right to use compulsory process for favorable witnesses to testify at trial through a subpoena; and the right to legal counsel (FindLaw). The right to a speedy trial helps defendant from being in jail for an undetermined amount of time before trial. The longer the trial is postponed, the more likely that those witnesses will disappear or their memories will fade away. Physical evidence could be lost or destroyed. If a trial is delayed over a year then it is considered a violation of the Sixth Amendment. The time of delay will come into question and proper reason must be provided (LAWS). The right to a public trial is guaranteed to ensure that defendants are protected from abuse of the justice system, and to keep the public informed about how the justice system works. That right is not always granted when it can be proven to affect the due process clause. A closed trial could be ordered if it is proven that a public trial might affect the outcome of a fair …show more content…
Alabama (1932), three African American teenagers were charged with the rape of two white girls. They were taken to trial were the jury found them guilty and sentenced them to death. The case was appealed all the ways to the Supreme Court where the court dismissed the charges of the teenagers based on the fact that they had not been able to get the assistance of a lawyer during trial. This case established that people have right to be represented by a lawyer, whether they could afford it or not, in capital cases. At that time it was only allowed in federal cases. The right to have a lawyer appointed in state cases was established later in