1.3 Incorporation doctrine

The incorporation doctrine revolutionized civil liberties in the United States. It applied the Bill of Rights to state actions, ensuring uniform protection of individual rights across the country. This shift dramatically expanded federal oversight of civil liberties, altering the balance between state and federal power.

The doctrine developed gradually through Supreme Court decisions, starting with Gitlow v. New York in 1925. These cases selectively incorporated specific rights, reshaping the relationship between citizens and government at all levels. The process continues to evolve, with recent cases addressing previously unincorporated rights.

Origins of incorporation

• Incorporation doctrine fundamentally reshaped the relationship between federal and state governments in protecting individual rights
• Emerged as a response to the need for uniform application of constitutional protections across all states
• Significantly expanded the scope of civil liberties by applying the Bill of Rights to state actions

Pre-incorporation era

Top images from around the web for Pre-incorporation era

• 

  Educational Resources - Baltimore’s Civil Rights Heritage View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  B21 Bill of Rights 5-6 | howard_morland | Flickr View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Baltimore’s Civil Rights Heritage View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Educational Resources - Baltimore’s Civil Rights Heritage View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  B21 Bill of Rights 5-6 | howard_morland | Flickr View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

Top images from around the web for Pre-incorporation era

• 

  Educational Resources - Baltimore’s Civil Rights Heritage View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  B21 Bill of Rights 5-6 | howard_morland | Flickr View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Baltimore’s Civil Rights Heritage View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Educational Resources - Baltimore’s Civil Rights Heritage View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  B21 Bill of Rights 5-6 | howard_morland | Flickr View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

• States operated with considerable autonomy in matters of individual rights
• Bill of Rights initially applied only to federal government actions
• Barron v. Baltimore (1833) explicitly ruled that the Bill of Rights did not apply to states
• State constitutions served as primary source of civil liberties protections within each state
• Resulted in inconsistent rights protections across different states

Fourteenth Amendment significance

• Ratified in 1868 as part of Reconstruction Amendments following the Civil War
• Contains the Due Process Clause and Equal Protection Clause
• Provided constitutional basis for applying federal rights protections to states
• Sparked debates over interpretation and scope of application
• Led to gradual incorporation of Bill of Rights provisions through Supreme Court decisions

Selective vs total incorporation

• Selective incorporation applies Bill of Rights provisions to states on a case-by-case basis
  • Allows for nuanced consideration of each right's applicability to states
  • Adopted by the Supreme Court as the prevailing approach
• Total incorporation advocates for wholesale application of entire Bill of Rights to states
  • Supported by Justice Hugo Black in his dissent in Adamson v. California (1947)
  • Would have resulted in immediate and comprehensive expansion of federal protections
• Debate between approaches centered on balance between federal oversight and state autonomy

Key Supreme Court cases

• Supreme Court decisions played a crucial role in developing and refining the incorporation doctrine
• These landmark cases established precedents for applying specific constitutional rights to state actions
• Shaped the interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause in relation to civil liberties

Gitlow v New York

• Decided in 1925, marked the beginning of selective incorporation
• Involved prosecution under New York's Criminal Anarchy Law for publishing socialist literature
• Court assumed that freedom of speech and press were protected by Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause
• Established precedent for incorporating First Amendment protections against state actions
• Despite ruling against Gitlow, opened door for future incorporation of other rights

Palko v Connecticut

• 1937 case that introduced the "fundamental fairness" doctrine
• Addressed whether Fifth Amendment double jeopardy protection applied to states
• Justice Cardozo articulated test for incorporation based on principles of ordered liberty
• Court ruled that double jeopardy protection was not fundamental to fair trial system
• Decision later overturned, but "fundamental fairness" test influenced future incorporation cases

Duncan v Louisiana

• 1968 case that incorporated Sixth Amendment right to jury trial in criminal cases
• Duncan was convicted of simple battery without a jury trial under Louisiana law
• Court ruled that jury trial right was fundamental to American system of justice
• Established more expansive approach to incorporation than Palko's fundamental fairness test
• Marked shift towards broader application of Bill of Rights protections to states

Incorporation of Bill of Rights

• Process of incorporating Bill of Rights provisions occurred gradually over several decades
• Each incorporated right expanded federal constitutional protections to state-level actions
• Significantly altered balance of power between federal and state governments in civil liberties arena

First Amendment rights

• Freedom of speech incorporated in Gitlow v. New York (1925)
• Freedom of press incorporated in Near v. Minnesota (1931)
• Freedom of assembly incorporated in De Jonge v. Oregon (1937)
• Free exercise of religion incorporated in Cantwell v. Connecticut (1940)
• Establishment Clause incorporated in Everson v. Board of Education (1947)
• These incorporations dramatically expanded protection for expressive and religious freedoms across all states

Fourth Amendment protections

• Protection against unreasonable searches and seizures incorporated in Wolf v. Colorado (1949)
• Exclusionary rule applied to states in Mapp v. Ohio (1961)
• Warrant requirement for searches incorporated in Aguilar v. Texas (1964)
• These incorporations significantly impacted state-level law enforcement practices and criminal procedures

Fifth Amendment guarantees

• Protection against self-incrimination incorporated in Malloy v. Hogan (1964)
• Double jeopardy clause incorporated in Benton v. Maryland (1969)
• Just compensation clause for eminent domain incorporated in Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Co. v. Chicago (1897)
• These incorporations strengthened individual rights in state criminal proceedings and property disputes

Sixth Amendment provisions

• Right to public trial incorporated in In re Oliver (1948)
• Right to counsel incorporated in Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
• Right to impartial jury incorporated in Parker v. Gladden (1966)
• Right to confront witnesses incorporated in Pointer v. Texas (1965)
• These incorporations ensured fair trial rights in state courts, particularly for criminal defendants

Eighth Amendment restrictions

• Protection against cruel and unusual punishment incorporated in Robinson v. California (1962)
• Prohibition on excessive bail incorporated in Schilb v. Kuebel (1971)
• These incorporations established uniform standards for punishment and pre-trial detention across all states

Unincorporated rights

• Some provisions of the Bill of Rights remain unincorporated, applying only to federal government actions
• Debate continues over whether these rights should be incorporated in the future
• Unincorporated status highlights ongoing tensions between federal protections and state autonomy

Third Amendment

• Prohibits quartering of soldiers in private homes without consent
• Remains unincorporated due to lack of relevant modern cases
• Engblom v. Carey (1982) suggested potential for future incorporation
• Limited practical application in contemporary society contributes to its unincorporated status

Seventh Amendment

• Guarantees right to jury trial in civil cases where value exceeds $20
• Remains unincorporated due to concerns over impact on state civil court systems
• Minneapolis & St. Louis R. Co. v. Bombolis (1916) explicitly rejected incorporation
• Variation in state civil trial procedures contributes to resistance against incorporation

Grand Jury Clause

• Requires grand jury indictment for capital and infamous crimes in federal cases
• Hurtado v. California (1884) ruled that states are not required to use grand juries
• Remains unincorporated due to differences in state criminal charging procedures
• Many states use alternative preliminary hearing processes instead of grand juries

Incorporation doctrine impact

• Incorporation doctrine has profoundly shaped the landscape of civil liberties in the United States
• Led to more uniform protection of individual rights across all states
• Altered the balance of power between federal and state governments in matters of civil liberties

State vs federal protections

• Incorporation elevated federal constitutional protections above conflicting state laws
• States retain ability to provide greater protections than federal minimum standards
• Created a floor of civil liberties protections applicable in all states
• Reduced disparities in rights protections between different states
• Shifted primary arena for civil liberties disputes to federal courts

Expansion of civil liberties

• Incorporation dramatically broadened scope of protected individual rights
• Extended Bill of Rights protections to actions by state and local governments
• Empowered federal courts to strike down state laws violating incorporated rights
• Led to significant reforms in areas such as criminal procedure and freedom of expression
• Provided legal basis for civil rights movements to challenge discriminatory state practices

Uniformity in constitutional rights

• Created consistent baseline of civil liberties protections across all states
• Reduced regional variations in application of fundamental rights
• Facilitated development of national standards for protection of individual liberties
• Improved predictability and consistency in legal outcomes across jurisdictions
• Enhanced ability of individuals to assert constitutional rights against state actions

Criticisms and debates

• Incorporation doctrine has been subject to ongoing legal and political controversies
• Debates reflect broader tensions in constitutional interpretation and federalism
• Critics and supporters continue to argue over proper scope and application of incorporation

Judicial activism concerns

• Critics argue incorporation represents overreach by federal judiciary
• Claim doctrine lacks explicit constitutional basis and violates principles of federalism
• Supporters contend incorporation necessary to protect fundamental rights nationwide
• Debate centers on appropriate role of Supreme Court in interpreting Fourteenth Amendment
• Raises questions about balance between judicial review and democratic processes

States' rights arguments

• Opponents of incorporation claim doctrine infringes on state sovereignty
• Argue states should have latitude to develop own approaches to civil liberties
• Proponents assert need for uniform national standards to protect individual rights
• Debate reflects ongoing tensions between federal power and state autonomy
• Touches on broader discussions about nature of American federalism

Original intent vs living constitution

• Originalists argue incorporation not intended by framers of Fourteenth Amendment
• Living constitutionalists contend doctrine reflects evolving understanding of due process
• Debate highlights different approaches to constitutional interpretation
• Raises questions about how to apply 18th and 19th century concepts to modern society
• Reflects broader disagreements over proper method of constitutional analysis

Modern application

• Incorporation doctrine continues to evolve and shape contemporary civil liberties jurisprudence
• Recent cases have addressed incorporation of previously unincorporated rights
• Ongoing debates about scope and future of incorporation in light of new rights and technologies

Recent incorporation cases

• McDonald v. Chicago (2010) incorporated Second Amendment right to bear arms
• Timbs v. Indiana (2019) incorporated Eighth Amendment's excessive fines clause
• These cases demonstrate continued relevance of incorporation doctrine in modern era
• Reflect ongoing process of applying Bill of Rights protections to state actions
• Highlight potential for further incorporation of remaining unincorporated rights

Future of incorporation doctrine

• Potential incorporation of remaining unincorporated rights (Third and Seventh Amendments)
• Debates over application of incorporation to new technologies and emerging rights
• Questions about incorporation's role in addressing modern civil liberties challenges
• Ongoing discussions about proper balance between federal protections and state autonomy
• Consideration of incorporation's interaction with evolving interpretations of due process

Implications for new rights

• Debates over whether newly recognized rights should be incorporated against states
• Questions about how incorporation applies to rights not explicitly mentioned in Constitution
• Consideration of incorporation's role in protecting privacy rights in digital age
• Discussions about potential incorporation of international human rights standards
• Exploration of incorporation's relevance to emerging issues like artificial intelligence and biotechnology