in united states v. cruikshank the supreme court ruled that the fourteenth amendment quizlet
United States v. Cruikshank Federal charges were brought against several members of the white insurgents under the Enforcement Act of 1870, which prohibited two or more people from conspiring to deprive anyone of their constitutional rights. Convictions were appealed to the Supreme Court. Among these charges including hindering the freedmen's First Amendment right to freely assemble and their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. This was the first case to come before the Supreme Court which involved a possible violation of the Second Amendment.[3] In its ruling, the Supreme Court overturned the convictions of the white men, holding that the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applies only to state action, not to actions by individual citizens. It said that the plaintiffs had to rely on state courts for protection, although at the time and for decades after these courts never convicted white men for murder of blacks.[4] The Justices stated "The right to bear arms is not granted by the Constitution; neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The Second Amendment means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress, and has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the National Government."[5]
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution The Citizenship Clause overruled the Supreme Court's Dred Scott decision that black people were not citizens and could not become citizens, nor enjoy the benefits of citizenship.[37][38] Some members of Congress voted for the Fourteenth Amendment in order to eliminate doubts about the constitutionality of the Civil Rights Act of 1866,[39] or to ensure that no subsequent Congress could later repeal or alter the main provisions of that Act.[40] The Civil Rights Act of 1866 had granted citizenship to all persons born in the United States if they were not subject to a foreign power, and this clause of the Fourteenth Amendment constitutionalized this rule.
Morse v. Frederick Melinda Cupps Dickler, in her article "The Morse Quartet: Student Speech And The First Amendment" in the Loyola Law Review,[3] provided a survey of commentary that followed in the immediate aftermath of the case: Some commentators have suggested that Morse both demonstrated a division among the Justices on student speech rights[50] and continued Fraser's and Kuhlmeier's erosion of students' First Amendment rights.[51] She regards this suggestion as "not surprising" given the outcome of the decision, the plain language of the holding, and the dissenting Justices' charge that the opinion did "serious violence to the First Amendment".[52] She adds that other commentators have asserted that while Morse did not dramatically change the law regarding student speech, it failed to answer any of the questions left by the Tinker trilogy.[53] She notes that these questions—what First Amendment protection is owed to student speech, and how courts should analyze its censorship—are currently significant as schools struggle with the issues of discriminatory student speech or hate speech,[nb 6] and student speech threatening violence.[nb 7] Further, "such questions are always paramount because schools are the training grounds for our nation's citizens and future leaders."[3]
Duncan v. Louisiana Do the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee the right to jury trial in state prosecutions where sentences as long as two years may be imposed.