Appendix 1
The Bill of Rights and Other Constitutional Amendments
Meeting in New York City on September 25, 1789, the first Congress submitted twelve proposed changes to the Constitution—called articles or amendments—for ratification by the states. (See p. 131 for more on the Bill of Rights.) These amendments dealt with certain individual and states’ rights not specifically named in the Constitution. Ten of these articles, which were originally proposed as Amendments Three through Twelve, were declared ratified in 1791 and are now known as Amendments One through Ten, or the Bill of Rights. The other two amendments from the original list of twelve proposed were not ratified by the necessary number of states at the time. The first related to the apportionment of representatives; the second, relating to the pay of Congress, was finally ratified in 1992 and became Amendment Twenty-seven.
Since 1791, another seventeen changes have been made to the Constitution, a process that begins when Congress proposes an amendment, which must clear both the House and the Senate by a two-thirds majority. Although state conventions can propose amendments, all the existing amendments have been proposed by the Congress. The proposed amendment is sent to the states for ratification. Three quarters of the states are needed to ratify, and that is usually done by state legislatures (although there has been one exception; see Amendment Twenty-one).
Amendment One
Prohibits the establishment of religion. Guarantees freedom of religion, of speech, of the press, the right to assemble, and the right to petition.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Amendment Two
Guarantees the limited right to keep and bear arms.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Among the most controversial and ambiguous of the amendments, the Second Amendment was intended to provide for the effectiveness of the militia, which would presumably protect the citizenry against Indians, foreign powers, or the power of the federal government, at a time when there was little or no standing army.
Under current court interpretations, it does not provide for unlimited gun ownership, but merely prevents the federal government from disarming the members of the National Guard. In decisions dating further back, the Supreme Court has consistently ruled that the Second Amendment does not bind the states, so that state and local governments are free to enact gun control laws if they desire. In the case of federal laws, since a 1939 case involving sawed-off shotguns, United States v. Miller, the courts have consistently held that the Second Amendment only confers a collective right to keep and bear arms, which must have a “reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia.” Congress has placed many restrictions on the manufacture, sale, transfer, and possession of weapons, and these statutes have all been upheld as constitutional.
Not everyone agrees with that interpretation, even though it has stood for more than sixty years. As constitutional scholar Leonard W. Levy writes, “The Second Amendment is as vague as it is ambiguous. Some think it upholds the collective right of state militias to bear arms, while others, probably more accurate in so far as original intent is concerned, argue that it protects the right of individuals to keep arms.”
Until 2002, no administration had challenged the so-called collective right established by Miller in 1939. But in 2002, Attorney General John Ashcroft announced that the Justice Department would seek to challenge the collective view in favor of the individual rights view, a stance vigorously supported by the National Rifle Association. In footnotes in two filings with the Supreme Court in May, the government said that the Second Amendment protected the rights of individuals “to possess and bear their own firearms, subject to reasonable restrictions designed to prevent possession by unfit persons or to restrict the possession of types of firearms that are particularly suited to criminal misuse.”
In June 2008, the Supreme Court, led by George W. Bush appointee Chief Justice John Roberts (appointed in 2005, following the death of Chief Justice William Rehnquist), went beyond the Bush administration’s arguments. In District of Columbia v. Heller, the Court struck down a thirty-two-year-old Washington, D.C., ban on handguns as incompatible with the Second Amendment. The majority opinion in the five-to-four ruling stated that an individual right to bear arms is supported by “the historical narrative” both before and after the Second Amendment was adopted, wrote Justice Antonin Scalia. The Constitution does not permit “the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home.”
Amendment Three
Sets conditions for quartering of soldiers.
No Soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner prescribed by law.
A reaction to the enforced quartering of British troops in colonial America before independence was achieved, this amendment has never been the basis for a Supreme Court decision since its adoption. It does mean, however, that the Army can’t just move into your house if it decides it needs a barracks for some troops. The only significant case that invoked the Third Amendment involved striking corrections officers who lived in housing owned by New York State. While the officers were on strike, the State of New York moved National Guard troops into their homes, but the courts found that the amendment did not apply.
Amendment Four
Protects from unreasonable search and seizure.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
At the heart of the debate over “criminals’ rights,” this amendment was intended to protect privacy and personal security as essential to liberty. This means that no one can be arrested without a warrant naming a specific individual with a specified crime. Arrests without warrants may be made in the case of a felony when the police arrest someone suspected of a crime. After such an arrest, a judge must determine if there is probable cause to hold that person. A police officer can also arrest someone who commits a minor infraction, or misdemeanor, in the presence of the arresting officer.
The amendment also permits only “reasonable” searches and covers evidence that is uncovered during a search that relates to a separate crime. All of these issues depend on the court hearing them. No warrant is necessary for police to look for something outside a building or private yard or property.
Amendment Five
Guarantees provisions for prosecution and due process of law. Double jeopardy restriction. Private property not to be taken without compensation.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself; nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
“Pleading the Fifth” has acquired the connotation of “He must be hiding something” for many people. If you have nothing to hide, they reason, you would tell the truth. But the idea behind protection from self-incrimination is part of a tradition of reasoning that begins with the presumption of innocence and was designed to check the power of the government. Written by men who knew the unlimited power of a monarch or church to compel evidence, the Bill of Rights placed the interest of the individual above that of the state. Under this amendment, the Constitution requires the state to establish guilt by independent evidence, protecting everyone from a potentially abusive government.
Amendment Six
Guarantees the right to a speedy trial, witnesses, counsel.
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining Witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
This amendment also protects the individual’s rights in criminal proceedings. Having seen people taken to jail under a monarchy, never to be seen again, the authors of the Bill of Rights wrote specific protections against that possibility. Speedy trials, public trials instead of secret inquisitions, jury trials in the district where the crime is committed, the right to confront accusers, and the guarantee of legal representation are all bedrock rights in the American system of justice.
Amendment Seven
Guarantees the right of trial by jury in federal civil cases.
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
This amendment gives a right to a trial by jury for monetary damages in federal court. The Constitution does not require a jury in civil cases in state courts.
Amendment Eight
Protects from excessive bail or fines; cruel and unusual punishment.
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Another of the amendments that protect the rights of the accused, it allows the accused to post bail, a guarantee that he will return for trial, in order to be free from detention to prepare his defense. A judge can determine that factors such as the gravity of the offense and previous record weigh against bail.
More controversial is the “cruel and unusual punishment” line, which has been used to argue against the death penalty. Under current Court rulings, the death penalty is not considered cruel and unusual, although the United States is one of the few industrialized nations that permits the death penalty.
Deterrent Argument: One widely accepted argument has been that the death penalty acts as a deterrent, preventing further murders. Statistically speaking, there is no evidence to support that idea. In fact, some statistics suggest that the opposite is true. Over the last twenty years, the homicide rates in states with the death penalty have been 50 to 100 percent higher than the rates in states without it, a 2000 New York Times study found. Twelve states do not have the death penalty, and the homicide rates in ten of them are below the national average. Of the seven states with the lowest homicide rates, five do not have the death penalty. The lowest homicide rate in the country belongs to Iowa, which abolished the death penalty in 1965. On the other end, of the twenty-seven states with the highest homicide rates, all but two have the death penalty.
The fact is that homicide rates are often determined by many other factors, including demographics, unemployment, and poverty. However, states without the death penalty often have noticeably different homicide rates than states that are similar in other ways. North Dakota, a no-death-penalty state, has a lower homicide rate than South Dakota or Wyoming. Massachusetts, which has not executed anyone since 1947, has a lower homicide rate than Connecticut. The homicide rate in West Virginia, which does not have the death penalty, is 30 percent lower than that of neighboring Virginia, which has one of the highest execution rates in the country.
Cost Argument: Those who favor the death penalty often cite the high cost of maintaining criminals in prison.
Opponents of the death penalty point out that the cost of the litigation involved in most executions that go through lengthy appeals processes is much higher than the cost of imprisonment.
Racial Injustice Argument: Critics of the death penalty cite the widespread disparity in capital crime convictions of minority defendants.
The Innocent with the Guilty Argument: DNA, false evidence, faulty evidence, police misbehavior, and prosecutorial misconduct have all been shown to be factors in overturning convictions in recent years.
Obviously once an execution is carried out, there is no do-over. Opponents of the death penalty argue that the execution of an innocent person by the state is not worth all the potentially positive values of capital punishment.
Punitive Argument: Those who favor the death penalty, in spite of all the arguments against it, often argue as a last resort that it is the only punishment that truly fits the crime. In addition, they point to the large numbers of murders committed by prison inmates against guards and fellow prisoners.
Opponents argue that life in prison, with no chance of parole, can be considered a far worse fate than a quick and painless death by lethal injection.
The execution of convicted terrorist bomber Timothy McVeigh in 2001 came at a time when the country was reexamining its attitudes about the death penalty. The governor of Illinois, a conservative Republican who previously supported capital punishment, and the governor of Maryland, a Democrat, both announced a moratorium on executions when a significant number of death row convictions were overturned in their states. In some of these cases, new DNA evidence proved a convicted person’s innocence; other convictions had been found to be based on tainted evidence or misconduct by police investigators, technicians, or prosecutors.
In 2002, the Supreme Court issued two rulings that also reflected changing attitudes toward the death penalty. In the first case, the Court ruled that the execution of the mentally retarded qualified as cruel and unusual punishment. In another case, the Court held that juries rather than judges must determine if the death penalty is to be used.
Amendment Nine
Establishes the rule of the construction of the Constitution.
The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
This amendment is at the heart of the Constitution, and it is based on the idea that all human beings have certain fundamental rights. Some of these rights are specifically mentioned (“enumerated”) in the Constitution, but others are not. Alexander Hamilton believed that the Bill of Rights was flawed because it listed certain rights that gave specific protections, but left the government free to act on any that had not been specifically set down. To protect those rights, including those that were expressed in the Declaration of Independence as “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” this amendment covers fundamental rights not set forth in the Constitution.
The Ninth Amendment is at the heart of the debate over the right of privacy. That concept, never specifically mentioned in the Constitution, was first established in 1965 by the Supreme Court in a case involving contraceptive devices, and added to in several later cases. But most people know it as the underpinning of what is still the most controversial and divisive ruling in recent history, Roe v. Wade (1973), which legalized abortion. The Court also recognized that a woman’s right to choose contraception or abortion is “central to personal dignity and autonomy.” (For more on this issue, see “Why Did ‘Jane Roe’ sue Wade?” p. 498.)
Amendment Ten
Lays out the rights of states under the Constitution.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
This amendment was a sort of additional “fail safe” designed to allay fears that a central national government might someday exceed its proper powers. It has been the cornerstone of the states’ rights philosophy, but does not diminish or add to the authority of the federal government.
Amendment Eleven
Establishes rules for suing states.
[Proposed by Congress in 1794; declared ratified in 1798, although it was later discovered that ratification had actually come in 1795.]
The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.
The amendment prohibits anyone from suing a state in federal court without the state’s consent. It amended Section 2 of Article II, which seemed to provide that a state could be sued in federal court by citizens of its own state or citizens of a different state. The amendment applies only to suits brought by individuals. It does not affect the right of the federal government to sue a state or one state to sue another. The immunity from suit in federal court also does not apply to subdivisions of the state, so a citizen may sue a city, county, school board, or other municipal entity.
Amendment Twelve
Sets the manner of choosing the president and vice president.
[Proposed in 1803; ratified in 1804.]
The Electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for president and vice president, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as president, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as president, and of all persons voted for as Vice President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the president of the Senate;—The president of the Senate shall, in presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;—The person having the greatest number of votes for president, shall be the president, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as president, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the president. But in choosing the president, the vote shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. [And if the House of representatives shall not chose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice President, shall act as president, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the president.] The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice President, shall be the Vice President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice President of the United States. [Bracketed portion was superseded by Section 3 of Amendment Twenty in 1933.]
In American presidential elections, a voter does not actually vote for the candidate, but casts his ballot for a group of presidential electors, known as a “slate,” selected by the various political parties in the state, who are pledged to that party’s candidate. (For more, see Appendix 2, “Is the Electoral College a Party School?”) The number of electors in each state is equal to the combined total of senators and representatives in the House from that state. In the winner-take-all system of American presidential elections, the state’s electors go to the winner of the popular vote in the state, no matter how close the vote. This is what makes it possible, as in the 2000 election of George Bush, for the president to be elected by a minority of the popular vote. This has happened twice before in American history. The first time, in 1876, Rutherford B. Hayes won over Samuel J. Tilden with a minority vote (see p. 661). And in 1888, William Harrison beat Grover Cleveland with a minority of the popular vote.
(Amendments Thirteen, Fourteen, and Fifteen are known as the Reconstruction Amendments. See p. 246, “What was Reconstruction?”)
Amendment Thirteen
Abolishes slavery.
[Proposed by Congress in January 1865; ratified in December 1865.]
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
This amendment outlawed slavery in America. In recent times, the amendment has been raised in other contexts, such as “peonage,” in which a debtor is held to work off a debt. However, the military draft is not considered involuntary servitude, nor is requiring welfare recipients to work. Some students who object to compulsory community service have raised this amendment as an argument, but all courts have so far rejected that claim.
Amendment Fourteen
Extends citizenship to former slaves.
[Proposed by Congress in June 1866; ratified in July 1868.]
Section 1
1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.
2. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;
3. nor shall any States deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
4. nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protections of the laws.
[Sections 2, 3, and 4 of this amendment, which dealt with issues relating to the Civil War, are now obsolete.]
Section 5
The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
First, and most important, this amendment declared that Negroes were citizens and created national citizenship independent of state citizenship. This was a repudiation of the famed Dred Scott decision of 1857 (see p. 210). All children born in the United States are citizens except those of enemy aliens in wartime and children of foreign diplomats. (Children born to American citizens abroad are also American citizens by birth, under a law passed in 1934.)
Clause 2, the “privileges and immunities” clause, means that rights that come with U.S. citizenship may not be abridged by the states.
Clause 3, the “due process” clause, means that the law must not be arbitrary and must be conducted with fairness. It has been the subject of more Supreme Court cases than any other.
Clause 4 is mostly concerned with discriminatory laws of a state against any group and was originally designed to eliminate discrimination because of race or color. This clause was the basis for much of the decision in Brown v. Board of Education (1954), which ruled that segregation deprives people of equal opportunities (see p. 424).
Section 5 provided the constitutional authority under which the Civil Rights Acts of the 1960s were passed. These laws outlawed racial discrimination in a wide variety of areas including employment, schools, public facilities, housing, and real estate.
Amendment Fifteen
Gives black males the vote.
[Proposed by Congress in February 1869; ratified in February 1870.]
Section 1
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any States on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
Section 2
The Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
Often called the most important right of all, the right to vote is the citizen’s voice in electing people who will ensure his other rights. This amendment outlawed the denial of the right to vote based on race or color. The right applied to all state, local, and party primary elections. (Of course, sex was another question that would not be solved until the Nineteenth Amendment was ratified in 1920.)
Amendment Sixteen
Authorizes income taxes.
[Proposed by Congress in July 1909; ratified in February 1913.]
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
It is safe to say that this is everybody’s least favorite amendment, but it made one of life’s two proverbial certainties—the other being death, of course—fully constitutional. The first income tax was imposed during the Civil War. In 1895, the Supreme Court ruled that income taxes were unconstitutional. This amendment was adopted to overcome that ruling and permits Congress to place direct taxes on income from all sources.
Amendment Seventeen
Provides for direct election of senators.
[Proposed by Congress in May 1912; ratified in April 1913.]
The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.
When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct. This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution.
Prior to ratification of this amendment, U.S. senators were chosen by state legislatures under Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution. The amendment also provides for appointments by the governor of a state in which a vacancy occurs because of death or resignation.
Amendment Eighteen
Prohibits liquor.
[Proposed by Congress in December 1917; ratified in January 1919.]
1. After one year from the ratification of this article the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.
2. The Congress and the several States shall have concurrent power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
3. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission to the States by the Congress.
The historic ban on liquor that began the period in American history known as Prohibition was overwhelmingly approved in the state legislatures. It was adopted by all the states except Connecticut and Rhode Island.
The Eighteenth Amendment and Prohibition were then repealed by ratification of Amendment Twenty-one in 1933.
Amendment Nineteen
Establishes nationwide vote for women.
[Proposed by Congress in June 1919; ratified in August 1920.]
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.
Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
Although ratified, this amendment was rejected by the following states: Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Virginia. While it guaranteed the vote to women, states could enact their own voting requirements. The amendment also did not require states to allow women to serve on juries or be eligible for public office. All states have since permitted women to serve on juries and serve in public office.
Amendment Twenty
Establishes terms of assuming office for president, vice president, and Congress.
[Proposed by Congress in March 1932; ratified in January 1933.]
1. The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.
2. The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting shall begin at noon on the 3d of January, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.
3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.
4. The Congress may by law provide for the case of the death of any of the persons from whom the House of Representatives may choose a President whenever the right of choice shall have devolved upon them, and for the case of the death of any of the persons from whom the Senate may choose a Vice President whenever the right of choice shall have devolved upon them.
5. Sections 1 and 2 shall take effect on the 15th day of October following the ratification of this article [October 1933].
6. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission.
Before this amendment was ratified, the newly elected president and Congress did not assume their offices until March following the November elections. This was a holdover from the eighteenth century when travel and communications were much slower and the pace of the government very different. However, it meant that the Congress that convened in December possibly included defeated officials to carry out the legislative and executive business of government in what was known as a “lame duck” session. Of course, the sitting president remains in power until the president-elect is inaugurated in January. While Congress is not in session, the “lame duck” president still functions, and controversial decisions and appointments are often made during this period.
Now, the old session of Congress adjourns before the elections and the new session begins in January with newly elected congressmen taking their seats at once.
Section 3 addressed a problem caused by the Twelfth Amendment. Under that amendment, the three top vote getters in a presidential race were sent to the House of Representatives in case there was no winner in the Electoral College. It was possible that none of the three could get a majority of the votes in the House, where each state is given a single vote. This section says that the vice president elect would serve until the House elected someone by a majority, or if there was no vice president elect, the House could declare who should act as president.
Amendment Twenty-one
Repeals Prohibition.
[Proposed by Congress in February 1933; ratified in December 1933. It was rejected by South Carolina.]
1. The eighteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.
2. The transportation or importation into any State, territory, or possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited.
3. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by conventions in the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress.
While overturning the federal prohibition on liquor, the amendment gave the states full power to pass their own laws regarding sale of liquor within their boundaries. A number of state, county, and municipal governments continued Prohibition. However, by 1966, no statewide Prohibition existed.
This is the only amendment that has ever been ratified by conventions instead of by the state legislatures.
Amendment Twenty-two
Sets presidential term limits.
[Proposed by Congress in March 1947; ratified in February 1951.]
No persons shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as president, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of President more than once. But this article shall not apply to any person holding the office of president when this Article was proposed by the Congress.
This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states within seven years from the date of its submission to the States by the Congress.
This amendment was proposed and ratified following the unprecedented and unequaled four terms of Franklin D. Roosevelt, who died during his fourth term in office. It limits a president to two terms, except in the case of a vice president who has succeeded to the presidency but serves two years or less of his predecessor’s term. Harry Truman, having served more than three years of FDR’s fourth term and been elected to a term of his own, could have run for a third term under the special provision of the amendment. Lyndon B. Johnson served only one year of President Kennedy’s first term. He was then reelected in 1964 and was eligible to run again in 1968, but declined to run. Had he run and won, he would have served a total of nine years.
Amendment Twenty-three
Gives voters in the District of Columbia the presidential vote.
[Proposed by Congress in June 1960; ratified in March 1961.]
1. The District constituting the seat of Government of the United States shall appoint in such manner as the Congress may direct:
A number of electors of president and vice president equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives in Congress to which the District would be entitled if it were a State, but in no event more than the least populous state; they shall be in addition to those appointed by the States, but they shall be considered, for the purpose of the election of the President and Vice President, to be electors appointed by a State; and they shall meet in the District and perform such duties as provided by the twelfth article of amendment.
2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
Prior to this amendment, voters in the District of Columbia could not vote for president. The amendment guarantees that the District will always have at least three electoral votes, since the smallest state has two senators and at least one representative. In 1970, Congress approved a single delegate to the House of Representatives. This member cannot vote on the floor but can vote in committee and participate. The District has no representation in the Senate. If the District of Columbia were counted as the fifty-first state, it would rank fiftieth in population, behind Vermont but ahead of Wyoming, according to the 2000 census.
Amendment Twenty-four
Outlaws poll taxes in federal elections.
[Proposed by Congress in August 1962; ratified in January 1964.]
1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, of electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.
2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
While some states had imposed some sort of poll tax—an income requirement in order to vote—following the Civil War Reconstruction era, many southern states had imposed taxes as a specific means to limit black voter participation. Passed during the period of civil rights legislation that included the Voting Rights Act of 1964, this amendment was aimed at eliminating one more hurdle to voting rights for all Americans.
Amendment Twenty-five
Sets rules in the event of presidential disability and succession.
[Proposed by Congress in July 1965; ratified in February 1967.]
1. In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become President.
2. Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.
3. Whenever the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, and until he transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary, such power and duties shall be discharged by the Vice President as Acting President.
4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the power and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.
Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.
This amendment provides clear rules for the succession in the presidency, in cases of death, removal, resignation, or disability. It covers temporary as well as permanent succession by the vice president. The amendment fills the gap in constitutional law if the president is ill and provides for a situation in which the president might be severely disabled. The first time this amendment was invoked came during President Reagan’s 1985 cancer surgery when Vice President Bush became the first “acting president.” In 2002, Vice President Cheney became acting president while President George W. Bush underwent a colonoscopy and was sedated. Some observers, including physicians, think that the amendment should have been invoked after the 1981 assassination attempt on President Reagan, while he was undergoing surgery.
Amendment Twenty-six
Gives voting rights to eighteen-year-olds.
[Proposed by Congress in March 1971; ratified in June 1971.]
1. The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.
2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
Proposed during the Vietnam War era, while many eighteen-year-olds were being drafted to fight but couldn’t vote and many others were vocally protesting the war, this amendment was ratified faster than any other in American history. At the time, most states’ drinking age was also eighteen, but since then almost every state has raised the minimum drinking age to twenty-one years. The only notable Court case involving this amendment was the successful suit brought by college students who wanted to register to vote in the towns where they attended school. The Court found that the students do have that right.
Amendment Twenty-seven
Limits congressional pay raises.
[Ratified in 1992.]
No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.
If the twenty-sixth was fastest, this was slowest. What a surprise! Congress took about 200 years to limit its ability to give itself a raise. To be fair, it was actually the states that dallied on this one.
This amendment, which delays any increase in congressional pay until a new Congress is elected, was written by James Madison as part of the original Bill of Rights and proposed by Congress in 1789. But it was not ratified until 1992, in the wake of outrage over congressional gridlock, the power of an incumbent Congress, budget deficits, and several pay raises that took effect immediately after their enactment. Those states that had originally ratified the amendment in the late 1700s did not have to ratify it again. While it theoretically denies a member of Congress from voting himself a raise, the overwhelming number of incumbents who successfully run for reelection means that they usually have to wait just a few months for the raise to come through.