Abstract
This paper addresses the present state of the Patients' Bill of Rights, as well as its history and future possibilities. Also explored are the issues of political support, arguments for and against, and major pitfalls in getting this legislation passed into law. The paper attempts to further explain general intentions of the Patients' Bill of Rights. The most pertinent bills specific to the Patients' Bill of Rights are presented and analyzed.

Outline:
Introduction
Arguments For and Against Patients' Bill of Rights
History of the Patients' Bill of Rights
Why the Patients' Bill of Rights has Failed
Summary and Conclusion

From the Paper
"Before exploring the more complex issues involved, it is necessary to understand the general intentions of the Patients' Bill of Rights. Numerous bills involving patients' rights have been presented to the House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. Discussed in this paper are the most pertinent bills specific to the Patients' Bill of Rights: the 1998 Patients' Bill of Rights, H.R. 3605 and S. 1890; the Bipartisan Patient Protection Act of 2001, S. 1052, S. 872, and H.R. 526; and the 2005 Patients' Bill of Rights, H.R. 2259, H.R. 2650, and S. 1012. In general, federal legislation that safeguards patients' rights is supported by both major political parties and the President, and also has considerable public appeal (Chavez, 2001, 606; Chaddock, 2001, 1)."

Tags:Patients', Bill, of, Rights, medical, legislation

Abstract
This paper reviews and discusses the U.S. Bill of Rights. According to the paper, the Bill of Rights defines procedural rights added to the Constitution. The paper discusses how, under the Fourth Amendment, individual's are protected against unreasonable search and seizures without probable cause. The paper goes on to say that the Fifth Amendment ensures due process, and prohibits self-incrimination and double jeopardy, fair compensation for private property taken by the government and indictment by grand jury. The paper also reviews the Sixth, Seventh and Eighth Amendments.

Outline:
Introduction
Fourth Amendment
Fifth Amendment
Sixth Amendment
Seventh Amendment
Eighth Amendment
Modifying the Eighth Amendment
Conclusion

From the Paper
"Upon founding a new country, we would insist that this right be kept. It is necessary for there to be a system that embraces due process. A speedy and public trial will ensure that the accused doen not spend an unreasonable time in jail prior to trial. This could be considered torture, especially if the accused is innocent."
"The Sixth Amendment is a right that allows for all people to be considered equal under that law until proven otherwise. When determining whether to take a man or a woman's right to life and liberty, there has to be a strict standard that is followed to ensure that those rights are not taken away unnecessarily."

Tags:Bill of Rights, Fourth Amendment, Fifth Amendment, Sixth Amendment, seventh amendment, modifying eighth amendment

Abstract
This paper shows by using the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendments to the Constitution that the Bill of Rights was necessary to the foundation of law in the United States. Without these, a person accused of a crime, whether federal or state, could face unfair or even dangerous prosecution and could be denied his/her basic human rights as described in the U.S. Constitution.

From the Paper
"When the Constitution of the United States was ratified by a majority of the states in 1789, it lacked what has come to be called the Bill of Rights, a very important document made up of amendments to the Constitution itself. For example, in the original Constitution, there existed no protection against the establishment of a national religion and did not guarantee that American citizens could speak freely, belong to any group they wished or publish magazines and books without the fear of being censored or banned by the federal government. But most importantly, the Constitution did not promise nor provide any protections for a citizen accused of a crime, nor did it specify that such a person would receive a fair and swift trial and if convicted receive just and humane punishment."

Tags:constitution, bill, of, rights, amendment, foundation, of, law

Abstract
A paper on the topic of the Bill of Rights and the American nation. The paper analyzes why the founding fathers created the Bill of Rights and looks at their fears for the new country.

Tags:bill, rights

Abstract
This paper explains the history of the Bill of Rights from its founding fathers and the U.S. constitution. The paper also discusses how the Bill of Rights was created as an addendum to correct the mistakes of the Articles of Confederation, America's first failed government. In addition, the paper explains Thomas Jefferson's influence in the creation of the Bill of Rights. Furthermore, the paper discusses the issues addressed in each of the amendments included in the Bill of Rights and the purpose for its creation.

From the Paper
"In the United States, the Bill of Rights is a term that constitutes the first ten amendments of the United States Constitution. During the 18th century, the citizens of the United States of America had just recently been freed from the binding chains of a monarchy. The King of England had abused the responsibilities that allowed the nation to govern the former colonies. As a result, the immigrants of the New World had in mind a different system of government as was proved within the parameters of the United States Constitution. At this point, her new citizens were strongly fighting for the fundamental liberties of the people. The main purpose and contribution of the Bill of Rights was to explicitly limit the rights and powers of the new federal government."

Tags:constitution government colonies amendments laws, articles of confederation, thomas jefferson

Abstract
This paper first stresses that, in a democracy, the government struggles to maintain a balance between freedom and order as established by the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution. Next, the author analyzes the original purposes and the interpretations of each of the fourth, fifth, sixth, eighth and fourteenth amendments to the Bill of Rights. The paper concludes that nearly everyone agrees that the Constitution is an impressive and extremely important document; however, the debate continues about its proper meaning.

Table of Contents:
Introduction
First Amendment
Fourth Amendment
Fifth Amendment
Sixth Amendment
Fourteenth Amendment
Conclusion

From the Paper
"None of the rights in the First Amendment receive the level of protection indicated by the amendment's absolutist language that purports to bar the enactment of prohibitions by Congress. The Supreme Court's interpretations of the First Amendment's provisions permit government to restrict and prohibit religious exercises, speech, press freedom, and assemblies under various circumstances, which societal interests outweigh individuals' rights. The Constitution says nothing about weighing individuals' rights against society's interests."

Tags:justice, civil rights, self-incrimination enforcement, equal protection

Abstract
This paper discusses the topic of this book, which is precisely as the title suggests, an investigation into the origin of each of the ten amendments that collectively constitute the Bill of Rights as well as (to a less extent) an examination of why the Bill of Rights as a whole was a necessary addition to the Constitution to ensure that it would be ratified. It shows how Levy is concerned to some extent with explaining what is usually called "original intent", with providing us some insight on what was going on in the mind of the Framers of the Constitution when they chose these particular rights to be enumerated and not others.

From the Paper
"Describing the exact nature of Leonard Williams Levy's Origins of the Bill of Rights is not as simple as it seems, and this is in fact a measure of the strength of the book. We are so accustomed to dividing the world into clear categories " popular fiction on one side, serious scholarship on another, pulp fiction over there in the corner " that we are given pause when we come across a book that cannot be so easily categorized. Our first impulse may in fact be to decided that this means that there is something wrong with such a book, that the author has failed in his (in this case) attempt to produce a particular kind of text."

Tags:constitution, father, founding, ammendment, rights, framer

Abstract
This paper examines the Bill of Rights. It shows that this is not only an ambiguous document but its interpretation has not generated the kind of application it needs in today's world. Levy and Amar's argument and interpretation through historical evidence show this fact. Their two interpretations are presented, compared and analyzed.

From the Paper
"Two of the most renowned authors in American history, Amar and Levy attempt to rejuvenate Bill of Rights, by interpreting its usage for this century. While one takes a liberal view of the Bill, the other takes a very detailed interpretation of the connotation of the law prevalent at the time. Leonard W. Levy in his Origins of the Bill of Rights argues that the Bill of Rights is not only a militarized document but also it is also a document for the purpose of the ruling class. On the other hand Akhil Reed Amar in his The Bill of Rights argues that the rights of the individuals is incorporated in the Bill but it needs further interpretation for proper application. "

Tags:politics, constitution, rights, democracy, america, levy, amar

Abstract
This paper explains that many experts believe the Australian constitutional system, which is based on the colonial English administrative model, is too limited and confusing; therefore, the American Bill of Rights system, which would list the basic rights of an individual and would force the government to treat the individual within the limits set by this system, is now preferred. The author points out that opponents to the enactment of a Bill of Rights in Australia have vociferously asserted that the federal parliament has the power to enact laws, which amounts to provisions envisaged in a formal Bill of Rights; however, past instances have shown that the commitment of the lawmakers in Australia is not fully sympathetic to the cause of the underprivileged. The paper relates that a formal Bill of Rights would lighten the load on the judiciary and give it a framework by which important cases relating to human rights could be decided because the courts are not always in a position to protect basic rights, as they themselves operate under many restrictions.

From the Paper
"It is interesting to note that the founding fathers of the constitution of Australia openly rejected the proposal for a bill of rights. Since the Australian constitution was based on the British and the American system, it was only natural that a proposal for inducting a bill of rights was made. However, the proposal was rejected outright because the people who drafted the constitution of Australia felt that such a move would put the government into a great disadvantage. They felt that the provisions of the bill of rights would prevent them from invoking laws against the aboriginals and the Chinese who were discriminated against in this country. Hence, it is quite evident that the bill of rights was rejected as a legal option out of the fear of the loss of influence of the government. That the bill of rights was prevented from gaining entry into the executive branches of the constitution proves that the white dominated majority wanted to maintain their dominance over the natives as well as people of foreign origin. This is an unfortunate example of the total lack of commitment by a legal framework that should have ideally considered all citizens equally."

Tags:aboriginals, chinese, framework, parliament, judiciary

Abstract
The Bill of Rights was ratified into the United States Constitution in 1791. The Bill consists of 10 amendments and was created to define the liberties of the people of the United States that the government could not infringe upon. This paper provides a brief history of the Bill of Rights before delving into several of the amendments incorporated into the Bill, including the First, Sixth and Eighth Amendments.

From the Paper
"The Eighth Amendment prevents the government from imposing excessive bail or fines and says cruel or unusual punishments shall not be inflicted (Lowi & Ginsburg, 2000). In this case, we can see that it takes the power of the government to punish criminals but, at the same time, it adds restrictions to that power. All of these examples show that the Bill of Rights expresses civil liberties; liberties that are for the people, and states that the government cannot take action that would go against or infringe upon on these rights."

Tags:freedom, anti-federalist, Union, speech