Human Rights and United States Policy Essay

Introduction

Being a federalist who was against such malpractices James Madison and other Federalists like John Adams and Thomas Jefferson became the major supporters of the Bill of rights, which was vehemently opposed by the Anti-federalist. According to the Anti-federalist, the new system proposed by Madison and other federalists infringed on people's liberty and was a threat to both the new constitution and the individual rights. However, Madison did not give up on his mission but instead, lead a fight in the Congress to add the bill of rights to the constitution as he believed that the disintegration of the US government into three government arms of the legislature, executive and the judiciary, would primarily protect people's liberty as the disintegration would contain oppression of the minority by the majority. However, despite some of his amendments not being included in the Bill of Rights, the ten that were added greatly addressed the problems of governance that existed under the original US constitution.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

History of Bill of Rights

According to Wood, the first amendment that was adopted to the Bill of Rights and helped address the governance issues that originally existed under the original constitution was that that granted all US citizens the freedom of religion. The bill was meant to bar the federal government from imposing a common religion as well as from the interference of religious activities within some of the US states as it was the case with the original constitution that provided for the establishment of a common religion which led to the establishment of The Congregational Church by the Federal government. As a result of the existence of a common religion, the church could collect tithes from the public on behalf of the government as well as entitlement to tax receivership and elements of the original constitution that brought discomfort and governance issues among the people. Therefore, the adoption of this amendment within the Bill of Rights allowed people to practice a religion of their choice as well as kept religion away from political interference thus solving the issues of governance that existed between the American people and the government.

Additionally, the adoption of the Freedom of speech as stipulated in the Bill of Rights adopted by the US constitution also offered a lasting solution to the governance problems that existed under the original US constitution which did not grant absolute freedom to Americans to speak their minds. However, the Bill of Rights did not offer absolute freedom of speech as this would subject the constitution to possible abuse by the citizens. According to Wood, the adoption of the Bill of Rights meant that citizens would criticize the government, and hold public officials responsible for their actions. In the first governance, criticism of the government was illegal' and would attract either conviction or assassination and this further led to governance issues between the government and its citizens. However, upon the adoption of the Bill of rights the problem was complete as the government executed its mandate keenly as if it did the contrary the public was watching and would hold it accountable. Also, the guidance on how people could exercise this right brought about convenience in governance as people would not step on the wrong side of the law.

The third amendment was about quartering of troops which forbade the State government from stationing soldiers in private houses without the owner's permission or without proper authorization in times of war. Evidently, the government infringed the rights to privacy as well as compromised the individual security. As such, the amendment disregarded the article to enable improved governance of the American people as well as the avoidance of conflict among the soldiers and the individual citizens.

The fourth amendment according to Wood stated that in case of need for search of an individual or their houses, the public authority must acquire a warrant from the magistrates that gave the officers the authority to do so with owners consent. This amendment, therefore, necessitated improved privacy which never existed under the old constitution. Under the initial constitution, the state gave unlimited legal search warrants to its agents who could storm private properties to search or forcibly interrogate and criminalize citizens without their will. These searches and seizures were an egregious affront to the citizens which appropriated the amendment that significantly improved the government's operations when it came to the handling of its citizens.

The governance of the time was improved by the Fifth Amendment, which stated that No person shall be compelled in any criminal case to testify against himself. This meant to protect an individual from self-incrimination that was exercised by the Courts of Star Chamber and British High Commission that employed the inquisitorial method to prove the defendant's accusations as opposed to prosecutorial. This meant that the prosecutors relied on the confessions of the accused, which were attained during the trials or pre-trial through torture. This infringed the accused right to an attorney during trials in a court of law but with the adoption of the Bill of right, such court procedures were made fair.

In the same bill is the right to compensation in a case where one's private property was taken for public use. This was meant to restrict the Federal government's initial power of eminent domain. Initially, the government could dispossess someone of their property and use it for public purposes without compensation to the owner. As such the amendment restored the right to ownership and compensation of dispossessed property, which meant improved governance through compliance to the newly introduced bill of rights.

The jury trial in civil lawsuits was the seventh amendment in the bill of rights that helped solve the existing governance problems in the US. The Anti-federalist such as Madison advocated for the right of trial by jury so that they could protect the law of contract. They brought about this right to protect litigants from the bad law passed by the legislature, corrupt judges and tyrannical actions of the executive in the previous governance. The second clause, no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, then, according to the rules of the common law, prevent the federal judges from overturning any jury verdicts. Thus, the inclusion of the jury in the civil cases successfully improved governance through dignified trials.

In his proposed bill, Madison also stated that excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor unusual punishments inflicted. This was created in response to the federal government in the old constitution whereby excessive bails were asked for before the release of a suspect and in case someone was found guilty in the court of law, they were subjected to adverse punishments as in the case of Titus Oates. This was considered a cruel punishment and was abolished under the bill of rights. As such, the inception of the new bill improved treatment of those found guilty thus improving the governance of the nation.

The other way the governance issues were addressed by the introduction of the Bill of rights was by the enactment of the ninth amendment that was meant to protect people from the denial of any rights that existed before the amendments. Other rights such as the right to a marriage were not enumerated in the constitution but were still enjoyed by the people. In fear of the federal government ignoring a multitude of privileges, customs and old usages cherished by the American people, they created the bill. Madison wanted to prevent a perverse application of the old legal maxims and eliminate any possibility of the Congress, or the future President, thinking of taking them away from the people. As such the protection of these rights improved the people's confidence in their government and more so in exercising their rights.

Wood further presented the tenth amendment as one which was among the most eagerly awaited by various State conventions and State legislatures. This bill was designed to declare that the powers were reserved for the people or States respectively and not the Federal government. They did this because of the fear that the Federal government would gradually expand its powers and suppress the states powers, as that was their trend. Bestowing part of the power to the people significantly altered the governance to suit the peoples rights. As such, they had the power to express dissatisfaction to the state as opposed to the ultimate power given to the federal government.

Conclusion

Therefore, the bill of rights is seen to contain the fundamental rights that were infringed by the US governments in the wake of independence. However, people's voices through patriotic politicians such as Madison initiated the amendments to have human rights restored. It is observable in the current government that people of America are the most democratic, which indicates equitable governance. The addition of this bill of rights into the constitution was celebrated by the US nationals as a historical event. The bill, therefore, meant a turning point for the people's rights and the constitution and the amendments thus, were viable and their appropriation was fulfilled for it successfully addressed problems in governance and effected changes being enjoyed by the people today.

Bibliography

"Bill of rights and acts of incorporation: US exceptionalism and adaptation of the parliamentary model." Rights-Based Constitutional Review (n.d.), 27-28. doi:10.4337/9781784717612.00008.

Gibson, Alan. "James Madison, Republican Government, and the Formation of the Bill of Rights: Bound by Every Motive of Prudence." A Companion to James Madison and James Monroe, 2012, 109-126. doi:10.1002/9781118281369.ch7.

Konvitz, Milton R. "The Bill of Rights: A Bill of Fundamental Rights." Fundamental Rights(n.d.), 43-60. doi:10.4324/9780203791110-3.

Vincent, R. J. "Human Rights and United States Policy Toward Latin America and The International Bill of Rights: The Covenant on Civil and Political Rights." International Affairs 59, no. 2 (1983), 280-281. doi:10.2307/2619976.

Wood, Gordon S. "The American Enlightenment." America and Enlightenment Constitutionalism, 2006, 159-175. doi:10.1057/9780230601062_7.