Abstract
This paper looks at the reasons behind Congress's proposal for a Constitutional amendment that would require a balanced budget and the groups that supported the proposal. The paper also looks at the groups that opposed the proposal and their arguments against it. The paper concludes with a counter proposal that is intended to address the concerns of those both for and against the proposed amendment.

From the Paper
"Deficit spending in the eighties, coupled with two Gulf Wars and a slowing economy, have escalated the borrowing and spending of this country for nearly two decades straight. As the federal deficit grows, those within government can not help but heed the warning signs. With no end in sight, many inside the beltway have proposed initiatives for capping federal spending. The most notable of these, and perhaps most drastic, is the adoption of a Constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget. Proponents believe a balanced budget is necessary for the continued prosperity of the nation. They also believe budget oversights can be avoided when the President and lawmakers are held accountable for where they direct money."

Tags:recessions, economic, slowdowns, increased, government, spending, surpluses, future, budget, forecasts, oversights

Abstract
This paper looks at the how Senate Judiciary Committee passed the victims? rights Constitutional amendment, which would give crime victims the right to be notified, present and heard at critical stages throughout their case. It examines how advocates for the amendment believe it encompasses four basic ideas: that all victims should be treated with the same dignity and given the same information as the accused criminal; how victims are notified when rapists or abusers are let out of jail or prison; how no one can profit from crime, and any monies should go to the victims and their families; and finally, how nationwide victims will be allowed to make victim impact statements before final sentencing. It also discusses how the amendment has encountered much opposition from nonprofit groups and prosecutors and judges who believe that granting victims the right to a speedy trial may put pressure on prosecution to try the case before it is ready.

From the Paper
"The amendment also denies defendants due process rights, due process rights protect the innocent from arrest and imprisonment. They do not exist to protect the guilty criminals from punishment. One basic due process right is the right to be afforded an impartial trial. However, when you have victims pleading to the jury to return a guilty verdict, you can easily see that someone innocent could easily be denied the due process of the law (aclu.org). The result of this miscarriage of justice is innocent people being wrongfully convicted for crimes they did not commit (Wallace)."

Tags:prosecution, case, rapists

Abstract
This paper argues that the proposed amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the Federal Marriage Amendment, represents a repudiation of the rights and freedoms already granted to all citizens in the Constitution because its intended purpose is to deny gays and lesbians the right to a legal marriage. The paper contends that a better amendment regarding the institution of marriage would be the Amendment for Total Equality because it would guarantee to all citizens the legal rights and benefits of marriage and seeks to prevent and, ultimately, eliminate legal discrimination against homosexuals.

From the Paper
"The definition of civil marriage is currently defined by state law. According to the Federalist principles underlying the creation of the union, individual states have the right to define the legal parameters of marriage: "the state is free to set limits to the circumstances in which marriage may be permitted, and judicial interpretation thereof," ("Federal Marriage Amendment" 2004). The federal government cannot offer a blanket definition of marriage. However, a proposed amendment to the Constitution of the United States: H.J. Res 56, would place universal parameters on the definition of the social institution. Also called the Federal Marriage Amendment, the proposal reads: "Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution or the constitution of any State, nor state or federal law, shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups," ("Federal Marriage Amendment" Section One, cited by Longley 2004). Support for H.J. Res 56 is relatively strong. Its proponents seek primarily to prevent gays and lesbians from being able to legally marry."

Tags:same-sex, heterosexual, couples, restrict, status, freedoms, priveliges, house, senate

Abstract
This paper argues that the Federal Marriage Amendment should not be added to the United States Constitution. Some of the arguments include the ideas that the amendment rejects American traditions of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness allowed by our individual rights and that we would be obliterating the family rights that many same-sex couples and their families currently have.

From the Paper
"Another reason that the Federal Marriage Amendment should not be added is because we would be writing discrimination into the United States Constitution. The United States government has dealt with a lot of issues that seemed unheard of like racial integration and women's rights, but as the times changed, so did society. In fact, in the past there were laws prohibiting people of different races from marrying, but that law was overturned 35 years ago (American Civil Liberties Union, 2004). Our society is growing and changing and with that comes acceptance. The issues of the past are a part of everyday life now. Who's to say that gay marriage won't be a thing of the past in a few years?"

Tags:discrimination, homosexuality, lesbian

Abstract
The following paper briefly adumbrates ten constitutional amendments this writer believes can safeguard individual rights in America. The paper looks at the constitutions of other lands to arrive at a better idea of what revisions will serve America best. The paper concludes that American problems need uniquely American solutions.

From the Paper
"Proposing amendments to the United States Bill of Rights is a favorite activity of many Americans. With that in mind, the following paper will offer up ten amendments, in order of significance, aimed at bolstering individual rights. To perform this rather ardurous task, it is necessary - among other things - to speak with various individuals who are of voting age and of sound mind to gain their input into what amendments will most advance the cause of liberty and the pursuit of individual happiness. The paper will also review the constitutions of at least a handful of other nations with an eye towards determining which aspects of them, if any, may be worthy of incorporation into the revised Bill of Rights. Finally, this paper will conclude with a table that delineates each of the ten amendments and offers a brief explanation of the meaning and intent of each amendment."

Tags:law, constitution, america

Abstract
This paper reviews five sites. It gives the appearance, content, how to navigate the site. For example, at one site the paper presents information about the 19th Amendment including states that ratified and the date. Another site gives information about ratification. Another site is selected because it contains many links to other sites related to Constitutional Amendments.

From the Paper
"This site is pleasing to the eye and yet remains functional for research purposes. It contains historical information, by way of a dropdown menu through which one can obtain profile, membership, and leadership information about a particular Congress. Legislative and historical information from the 91st (1969-1971) through the 107th (2001-2003) Congresses is provided. For example, the 106th Congress, which was 2000-2001) reports a total membership of 435 Members, four Delegates, and one Resident Commissioner."

Tags:appearance, content, navigate, information, ratification, congress, house, representatives, links

Abstract
This paper explores another argument against the death penalty: that capital punishment could not be fairly administered throughout the country. From state to state, variables such as race, class, and even gender continue to influence sentencing in capital cases. The inherent unfairness of this system is further seen in how states have different standards regarding what constitutes a capital offense. Given these differences, this paper proposes that a Constitutional amendment banning capital punishment is necessary on the grounds that the current administration of the death penalty is prone to conflicting interpretations by states, conflicting interpretations among jurors, and to the influence of extra-legal factors, such as gender, class, and race.

From the Paper
"Currently, 38 states have legalized capital punishment statutes. In most states, the reinstatements of the death penalty were a response to public outcry over the perceived increase of violent crimes. There are now more than 3,000 people on death row. However, the death penalty continues to raise many disturbing questions. Study after study, however, has shown no correlation between the availability of a death penalty and crime. A study by the Death Penalty Information Center shows that United States, which retains the death penalty, has a murder rate that is more than three times that of many of its European allies that have banned capital punishment (DPIC homepage)."

Tags:race, gender, capital, punishment, crime, deterent

Abstract
This paper discusses how in 1947 Justice Frankfurter remarked that individuals were entitled to fundamental rights guaranteed in the Constitution. However Frankfurter concluded that he could not determine exactly what rights would be considered fundamental because there was no direction provided by the framers. The paper further discusses how 1965, Justice Stewart searched through the constitution for any indication that a right to privacy was evident. He found none. Stewart had intended to apply this right to a case that dealt with contraceptive laws that had been passed in Connecticut. However, failing in this mission, Stewart stated that the Bill of Rights offered guarantees to citizens and that within those guarantees there had to be a "zone of privacy" that was intended by the founders. Therefore, it would appear time to create an amendment allowing for the right to privacy for American citizens.

Tags:constitution, amendment, privacy

Abstract
The paper discusses the Fourth Constitutional Amendment that is the embodiment of the right against constitutionally improper search and seizure or deprivation of liberty through arbitrary arrest by state authorities. The paper looks at the Fifth Constitutional Amendment that prohibits the state from extracting criminal confessions from criminal suspects or from compelling them to testify against themselves at trial, the Sixth Amendment that offers the right to competent legal representation if defendants are unable to afford counsel on their own and the Eighth Constitutional Amendment that provides rights in relation to the death penalty. The paper points out that in many ways, the extensive constitutional protections afforded by the Bill of Rights interfere with efficient law enforcement efforts by the state, however, in the U.S., the magnitude of the importance of avoiding false convictions always outweighs the importance of securing criminal convictions.

Outline:
Background and History
Fourth Constitutional Amendment Protections in American Criminal Justice
Fifth Constitutional Amendment Protections in American Criminal Justice
Sixth Amendment Constitutional Amendment Protections in American Criminal Justice
Eighth Amendment Constitutional Amendment Protections in American Criminal Justice
Personal Opinion

From the Paper
"The American criminal justice system evolved gradually over the last two centuries, with a series of some of the most important changes incorporated within the last fifty years. A few decades earlier, American law enforcement policies and criminal procedure was (in retrospect) not consistent with many of the fundamental principles of the Constitution. In fact, the comprehensive application of due process protections at both state and federal level was not the law of the land until the U.S. Supreme Court began applying them to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment in broader and broader respects throughout much of the 20th century (Friedman, 2005).
"In contemporary American criminal justice policies and procedures, some of the most important rights and protections afforded to persons accused by the state of having committed crimes punishable by the state are the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Constitutional Amendments. Generally, the Fourth Amendment is the basis for modern search and seizure laws; the Fifth Amendment is the basis for the rights of the accused against coerced confessions (among other things); the Sixth Amendment is the basis for the right to competent legal representation, to confront one's accuser, and to compel witnesses by subpoena on his behalf; and the Eighth Amendment is the basis for protection from cruel and unusual forms of punishment (Dershowitz, 2002; Friedman, 2005; Schmalleger, 2008)."

Tags:search, seizure, liberty, arrest, counsel, confessions, death, penalty

Abstract
This paper provides a brief examination of the Constitutional interpretation of the search and seizure law. There is a focus mainly on the limitations of the search and seizure law, as this provides focus to this extremely varied legal topic.