Selective Incorporation Pros And Cons

The idea of Selective Incorporation first began after the Civil War. Some of the southern states sanctioned laws that denied recently liberated slaves the same privileges that whites held. Unlike the African Americans, the whites were able to own property and travel freely. Congress replied by introducing a constitutional amendment that was created to protect the rights of recently liberated slaves. The states that were once confederate, refused to ratify the new amendment. Because they refused to cooperate, Congress proceeded to pass the Reconstruction Act. “The Reconstruction Act placed the southern states under military rule until they ratified the amendment and adopted state constitutions that conformed with the U.S. Constitution,” We the
New York. The Supreme Court appealed a law in New York that made it illegal to promote the violent abolishment of the U.S. Government. Gitlow circulated a manifesto on how to take down the U.S. government. “For present purposes we may and do assume that freedom of speech and of the press, which are protected by the First Amendment from abridgment by Congress-are among the fundamental personal rights and “liberties” protected by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment from impairment by the states,” We the People, pg. 108. The Supreme Court decided that the States do not have outright rule over what their citizens say and write. The Court selectively incorporated the Freedom of Speech Amendment guarantee of free expression into the Fourteenth Amendment. This selective incorporation enabled citizens to sue in federal court if they thought their free expression rights were violated by a
Kansas), freedom of press (Near v. Minnesota), freedom of religion (Hamilton v. Regents, University of California), and freedom of assembly and petition (Defonge v. Oregon). Near v. Minnesota was the case that stood out the most from the others and became a landmark Supreme Court decision. Jay Near published a Minneapolis Newspaper that routinely made defamatory comments about African Americans, Jews, Catholics, and Labor Union leaders. The State of Minnesota ruled that Jay Nears paper consisted of “malicious, scandalous, or defamatory” publications and was, therefore, closed down. Near appealed the shutdown of his newspaper stating that the ruling “infringed on freedom of the press,” our First Amendment right. After years of appealing to the Supreme Court, they finally ruled in his favor. The Supreme Court declared that the Minnesota Law was the “essence of censorship,” and violated Nears First Amendment right to freedom of the press. During the 1920’s and 1930’s, the Supreme Court took serious action to protect citizens of the United States from State action against their free-expression rights. The Supreme Court stated that “free-expression rights were more deserving of federal protection because they are the “indispensable condition of nearly every other form of freedom,” We the People, pg.