• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • So You Think You Know Your Rights?

    It seems people think that they have a right to everything these days: a right to the Internet, to free health care, to a good job, and to a free college education. The Supreme Court is famous for finding new rights in the “penumbras” and “emanations” of the Constitution.

    Today marks the 220th anniversary of the ratification of the Bill of Rights. What better opportunity to look at the rights the Constitution actually guarantees?

    A right is not merely something you want or claim. You may, for example, want a better job, but that does not mean you have a right to that job. The framers understood a right to mean something that justly belongs to you, that others have a duty not to interfere with, and that creates a claim against anyone who would deprive you of it. The Declaration of Independence explains that people possess certain rights by nature and that governments exist to secure these rights.

    What does this mean for the Constitution? By creating a document of limited, enumerated powers, the framers crafted a government that would allow individuals to enjoytheir rights. The Constitution outlines the structure of American government, by allocating powers to particular branches on specific subjects, but it rarely discusses rights. At various points, the Constitution prohibits ex post facto laws and bills of attainder at the state and national levels, requires criminal trials to have juries, and guarantees the writ of habeas corpus (except in cases of rebellion or invasion). Yet, the word “right” appears only once in the entire document: the Patents Clause, which empowers Congress “to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.”

    The first Congress amended the Constitution to include the first 10 amendments, collectively known as the Bill of Rights. James Madison drafted them not only to counter false interpretations of each branch’s enumerated powers but also to support a public understanding of individual liberty that would assist citizens in the task of defending their liberties.

    The First Amendment clarifies that the federal government may not interfere with particular substantive political rights involving religion, speech, press, assembly, and petition. Likewise, the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to keep and bear arms. The next six amendments deal with more procedural political rights, mostly restraints on criminal procedure that were present in most of the state constitutions. For instance, the Fourth Amendment outlines the procedures for obtaining a warrant, and the Fifth Amendment prohibits the sovereign from trying a person twice for the same offense. The Ninth and Tenth Amendments summarize the Constitution’s purpose—to secure individual liberty not by having a comprehensive list of rights but by allocating powers between state governments and the branches of the federal government.

    The Bill of Rights, properly understood, serves as a check on the federal government’s power. In Securing Liberty: The Purpose and Importance of the Bill of Rights, Joseph Postell argues that “implicit in the story surrounding our Bill of Rights is the proposition that the liberties of a nation can only be secured by citizens of firm conviction who understand our rights and liberties and will actively defend them.” This makes understanding the nature of rights all the more important. If we continue to define “rights” to be anything we could possibly want and insist that government is obligated pay for them, then we will place ourselves in the position of constantly appealing to government to give us more “rights.” In this subservient position, we cannot sufficiently guard our liberty from government encroachment.

    As you celebrate Bill of Rights Day today, take time to read the Constitution and the first 10 amendments. Challenge yourself to study your natural rights for the sake of knowing your liberties and defending them.

    Posted in First Principles [slideshow_deploy]

    7 Responses to So You Think You Know Your Rights?

    1. Bobbie says:

      that's because democrats are always looking for a job. the more government defines rights, the less rights of our own we'll have with an eventual drive toward government dependency for more rights. what better way for democrats to feel significant than to misinterpret, underestimate, disrespect to destroy the one document that keeps them at bay. The peoples' constitution…

      we know our rights and we know they aren't given by man, although the free will of a dishonorable man will put himself in position to take them away.

    2. Rusty Shackleford says:

      People may not have an absolute right to health care or to a free education but to say that the people of the world don't have a right to information that should rightly be theirs to begin with is pure poppycock. The internet is the greatest tool that freedom and democracy have ever had. If you fear the spread of information then you fear the people, and only a despot fears his own people.

      • Sam Sheetz says:

        Agreed Rusty! Bravo! Just look at how the internet helped topple the dictatorships in the Arab spring. But, if I don't pay my internet bill at the end of the month and my service is disconnected, is this a violation of my rights? Can I appeal to the government to restore my internet access?

        A right to a free and un-censored internet, where information can flow freely, sounds more like a "right" to me. If we start using the term lightly, "rights" can be a slippery slope.

    3. West Texan says:

      You're on target. Natural rights are freely inherited while substantive rights respect ownership. Access to consumer products and/or services, be it private or public, does not constitute a right. Additionally, these domestic matters are reserved to the respective states. Why does the federal government continue to involve itself in the states' sovereign affairs? The Beltway's social progressive ideologues best reverse course to avoid the looming iceberg off their bow.

    4. Obamapoop says:

      Good post thanks

    5. RGeorgeDunn says:

      If you read the Constitution and interpret it as intended when created, you will find near 90% of the Federal spending today is unconstituitonal. How you going to correct this when there is no will to do so. Words matter, but action prevails.

      Read Federal #78 and understand the Words in the Constituton "Good Behavior". http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa78.htm

      Constitutional conduct and FairTax please~

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×