Federal agencies in the United States

开国元勋把权利的账单送到了美国的宪法，他们旨在防止政府权力过于集中，可能会危及自由，由于中央政府严密控制的国家的合法权利。因此，为了合理分配权力和权利，第十修正案被提出。但是，必须明确的是，这第十修正案并没有给国家任何新的权力，而是表明，没有授予联邦政府的权力可以保留给各州，这意味着一旦联邦政府制定了关于权力的新规定，各州必须遵守。这是联邦保护联邦政府的最高权力，它不会被推翻。

When the founding fathers put the Bill of Rights into the Constitution of United States, they intended to prevent a too centralized government and power that could jeopardize the liberty and legitimate right of the States due to the tight control of the central government. So, in order to distribute the power and right properly, the tenth amendment was made. However, it must be clear that the tenth amendment did not give the States any new power, but rather suggests that the powers that are not granted to the federal government can be reserved to the States, which means that once the federal government made new regulations about power, the states have to comply. This is yet another aspect of federalism—protecting the supreme power of the federal government so that it will not be overridden by the States.

I do believe that Bill of Rights protect the people’s right that are intended by the founding fathers. For example, the second amendment about the freedom of holding arms ensures that people can defend themselves in case of becoming victims of crimes, which has saved many lives and possesses a potential warning to the criminals not to act recklessly to harm those who seem weak or unprotected. It makes people’s behavior more discretionary.

The incorporations are not against the spirit of federalism, for the incorporations are done unto the states in order to maintain order and rule of law of the country, or to maintain the federation as a whole to fight against cessation. For example, after the Civil War, the federal government incorporated several laws that are previously non-existent in southern states that formed the confederation, which was to ensure that the southern States wouldn’t go renegade again; another example is that during the Civil Rights Movement, the Supreme Court declared Alabama’s discrimination law towards African Americans unconstitutional, and even sent 101 Airborne soldiers to protect African American students to go to school in the Little Rock City, which is a powerful weapon to ensure the equal rights of all within the country, across the States.

The most important rights that the Supreme Court have incorporated are the rights listed in fourth amendment, which protects citizens’ personal and property security and from illegal searches; the rights listed in fifth amendment, which protects the citizens from illegal crimination and trial; and that of the sixth amendment, that the right of speedy trial, public trial and impartial jury trial.

The fourth amendment on protection of personal and property security is important due to its limitation placed on the state and law enforcers, which forbids them from abusing their law enforcement power on civilians, for example, illegal seizure. The Weeks v. United States in 1984, for example, implemented the fourth amendment so that evidence obtained from illegal search and seizure have become invalid under the amendment, ensuring that people’s right would not be violated. The fourth amendment protects people’s basic right and ensures a democratic and equal basis of politics of the United States. In Katz v. United States in 1967, the Supreme Court verdict that privacies should also be placed into the protection of personal and property security, which shows the democratic principle of jurisdiction.

The Fifth Amendment is important for it forbids the law enforcers and jurisdiction from making biased convictions upon innocent citizens or unfair judgement based on their personal preference, so that the justice of law can be preserved as much as possible. It also protects the citizens against any illegal movements, such as terrorizing and interrogation, made by the authorities before legally charge the person. The most famous case on this right is the “Miranda Warning” which came from the 1963 Miranda v. Arizona, that protects the suspects’ right of remain silent. And also, civilians need not to fear that their property will be damaged by the law enforcers in case of illegal deeds; if they were damaged, it will be compensated by the state. As shown in the 1897 Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Co. v. City of Chicago, the protection ensures the absolute right of legal property of the citizens, which is also vital for the citizens can rest assured that their property will not be stripped at will by the authority.

The Sixth Amendment protects the rights of the defendants in a trial. It is important because firstly, it assures the principle that all men are equal when facing the law, and even the defendants enjoy the right to be protected by the law in case of legitimate rights. In terms of impartial jury trial, the 1968 Duncan v. Louisiana has regulated so, in order to ensure an unbiased trial and justified conviction implemented. The second reason it is important is that the Fifth Amendment does not strip the right of those who cannot afford legal assistance; rather they will protect them by offering these assistances. We can also see from Powell v. Alabama in 1932 that the Fifth Amendment protects the right of assistance of counsel of the defendants. 

The Fifth Amendment and the Sixth Amendment’s right conflicts each other in terms of protecting the defendant—the Fifth Amendment states that the defendant cannot testify against himself or herself, and the Sixth Amendment regulates that the defendants must enjoy the right to be confronted with the witness against him or her, and that a cross-examination to be implemented on the witness. However, the conflict happens when the witness raises the right of the Fifth Amendment when being cross-examined by the defendants, thus making a paradox under the circumstance.

In my opinion the protection against self-incrimination listed in the Fifth Amendment is not as important as the right of cross-examination of the witness in the Sixth Amendment, for cross-examination and the attendance of witness is a necessary part which guarantees the impartiality of the court. If the witnesses are not cross-examined properly, they will jeopardize the justice of court convict and make it an unfair trial. It is the fundamental right for the defendant to defend himself or herself in order to get a justified convict under the law. The OJ Simpson case in 1995 also proved that Sixth Amendment right is much more fundamental.

The vagueness of the Constitution has hindered democratic progress for it has left those who wish to find holes on the system opportunities to make profit for themselves, and that those who abide by the laws will be harmed when this happens. A good example will be the Seventh Amendment that protects people from excessive fines, but the problem is that “excessive” was never clearly explained by any other Act or law, which makes it easy for law enforcers to profit from the hole of the law.

Liberty is the sole right of all individuals, without liberty the basic development opportunity of all will be deprived and they shall no longer stay safe and free from the enslavement of the authority and the government. Liberty gives all the chance to do whatever they want under the law. On the other hand, security is the guarantee of liberty, without safety, there will be nothing left to protect liberty, no matter individual liberty or liberty as a nation. Security gives liberty a solid defense from criminals and external interference, and is able to protect the enforcement of law to maintain liberty.

In my opinion the personal liberty is the thing that the government is obligated to protect. Without liberty U.S. will just become another aristocratic country in which the authorities act according to their own will instead the will of people. Personal liberty forms the solid foundation of the democracy that United States approves and protects. An effective government is bound to be capable of protecting personal liberty so that the government would not become the puppet of tyranny to suppress people. Protecting national security is also important, but it should not be based on the sacrifice of personal liberty.

The Patriotic Act is a violation of American citizens’ due process rights for it grants the U.S. government to tap into individual communication of U.S. citizens in the name of protecting national security and fighting terrorism. The PRISM project exposed by former CIA employee Edward Snowden was a covert mass surveillance project under the Patriot Act, which surveilles the private communication of U.S. citizens and violates their privacy, an essential part of personal liberty. Another example is the handover of user profile of Google to U.S. government in 2011, which is demanded to cooperate with the counter-terrorism operations of U.S. security department. Users of Google’s privacies are seriously jeopardized and their personal information has been totally exposed to the authorities under the Patriot Act.