Case law and the Bill of Rights
Case law refers to the collection of judicial decisions that form an integral part of the law within a particular jurisdiction, especially in common law legal systems. It plays a crucial role in interpreting and applying the Bill of Rights, which encompasses fundamental rights and protections guaranteed to individuals. In common law, judges declare legal principles through their rulings, establishing precedents that guide future cases. This process, known as stare decisis, ensures that similar cases are decided consistently over time, allowing the law to evolve in response to changing societal values.
Notably, pivotal cases like Gideon v. Wainwright and Miranda v. Arizona have shaped the interpretation of rights within the Bill of Rights, ensuring the right to counsel and the protection against self-incrimination, respectively. Additionally, cases such as District of Columbia v. Heller have clarified the scope of the Second Amendment regarding gun ownership. Through these judicial decisions, the courts not only interpret the Constitution but also refine its principles, adapting them to contemporary circumstances and enhancing the protection of individual liberties. This intricate relationship between case law and the Bill of Rights is vital for understanding how constitutional rights are applied and protected in practice.
On this Page
Subject Terms
Case law and the Bill of Rights
- Description: The entire body of reported cases forming all or part of the law in a particular jurisdiction.
- Significance: Case law is a defining characteristic of common law legal systems, which use cases to declare rules and principles of law
The common law, as developed in England and transplanted to colonial America, was unwritten and based on custom. It had no authoritative statement in a code or statute, such as may be found in civil law systems. Legal rules and principles were “found” or “declared” by judges as they decided cases. A judicial decision can be viewed in two parts the decision on who won and the relief granted and the reasoned explanation of the judge in reaching the decision. It is the reasoned explanation that gives rise to a case law system, even if the reasons must be skillfully extracted or inferred from the written decision.
Cases, including their explanations, are used to decide future cases. If the facts of a future case are similar to the facts of an old case, the rule or principle of the old case will be used to decide the new case. The old case is called a precedent, and the general procedure whereby courts use old cases to decide new ones is called stare decisis. Over time, stare decisis causes a refinement of old rules and principles, adapting them to changes in law and society. In addition, judges will change an old rule or principle if they believe it is wrong, outdated, or otherwise unacceptable. For example, the law of product liability changed in the early twentieth century as judges rejected established legal rules that did not allow consumers to recover damages when injured by defective products except under the most extreme circumstances. Modern common law rules allow recovery in most circumstances.
Case law is also used to interpret positive law, such as constitutions, statutes, and administrative regulations. This is particularly true if the language of the positive law is open-ended, vague, ambiguous, susceptible to different interpretations, or simply ill-defined. A court that applies the positive law in a particular case will announce a decision accompanied by a reasoned explanation. This explanation will be read by lawyers to discover a legal rule or principle, which will then be applied to future cases arising under the same or similar positive law. For example, cases arising under the free speech clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution have created a rich case law defining the boundaries of protected speech. The Constitution does not define what freedom of speech means, so it is up to the courts to give meaning to this concept as they decide individual cases.
Many important cases have informed and influenced the Bill of Rights. This included Gideon v. Wainwright (1963), which established the Sixth Amendment right to counsel in criminal trials. Miranda v. Arizona (1966) established the requirement to inform individuals of their rights when placed into custody. Columbia v. Heller (2008) further refined the Second Amendment to bear arms, finding a law regulating gun ownership in the District of Colombia unconstitutional.
Bibliography
"The Bill of Rights: What Does it Say?" U.S. National Archives and Records Administration, 27 Apr. 2023, www.archives.gov/founding-docs/bill-of-rights/what-does-it-say. Accessed 1 Oct. 2024.
"Clinics." Michigan Law, michigan.law.umich.edu/academics/experiential-learning/clinics. Accessed 10 Sept. 2024.
"Landmark Supreme Court Cases." Bill of Rights Institute, www.billofrightsinstitute.org/landmark-cases. Accessed 10 Sept. 2024.
"Legal Research: A Guide to Case Law." Library of Congress, guides.loc.gov/case-law. Accessed 10 Sept. 2024.
Mead, Joseph W. "Satre Decisis in the Inferior Courts of the United States." William S. Boyd School of Law, 2012, scholars.law.unlv.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1521&context=nlj. Accessed 10 Sept. 2024.
Roberson, Cliff, et al. Principles of Criminal Law. 7th ed., Pearson, 2020.