Corona Constitution Class, November 18, 2014; 6:00 pm - 7:00 pm
Constitution Class Handout
Instructor: Douglas V. Gibbs
douglasvgibbs@reagan.com
AllStar Collision, Inc.
522 Railroad Street
Corona, CA
Sponsored by TLCC
Truth and Liberty Covenant Coalition
Corona · Norco · Eastvale
info@tlccoalition.org
www.tlccoalition.org
Amendment
VII
Right of
Trial by Jury in Civil Suits
“In suits at Common Law, where the value in
controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be
preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any
court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.”
The 7th Amendment guarantees
the right to a jury trial in most civil suits heard in federal court. Remember, the Constitution, and the Bill
of Rights, apply only to the federal government unless the document states
otherwise. The 7th Amendment serves to
preserve the historic line separating the province of the jury from that of the
judge in civil cases by separating cases that should have a jury in federal
court, from those that are smaller cases, and may not require a jury. During the time the amendment was ratified, a
case requiring a jury was one where “the value in controversy” exceeded twenty
dollars. The cutoff in the court system
today is $75,000. Any disputes that
involve amounts less than $75,000, in fact, will not even be handled in a
federal court.
State courts don’t have to
honor this provision in the 7th Amendment, and often don't. People bringing a suit do not have to have a
jury trial. Individuals can waive their
right to a jury trial if they so choose.
The 7th Amendment also
expressly forbids federal judges to re-examine any "fact tried by a
jury" except as allowed by the common law.
This means that no court, trial or appellate, may overturn a jury
verdict that is reasonably supported by the evidence.
Prior to the Declaration
of Rights in 1689, English judges served the King of England. These judges showed bias towards the King,
resulting in unfair rulings. Judges in
the American colonies were also biased towards the king, and when King George
III got rid of trials by juries in the Colonies, the colonists viewed the
decision as more kindling for the fire of independence that had been blazing in
the pubs, churches and meeting halls of the Colonies. The Bill of Rights applied what the Framers
learned under the rule of Britain to the American System. In the American courts the Framers believed
it was important to have a fair court system, so the right to have a trial by
jury is mentioned a number of times, and is a fundamental part of the United
States legal system.
Together with the due process clause of the 5th
Amendment and the right to an impartial jury enumerated in the 6th Amendment,
the 7th Amendment guarantees civil litigants the right to not just a jury, but
to a jury who is not biased for any reason.
Terms:
Bill of
Rights - The first ten amendments of the U.S. Constitution; a formal summary
of those rights and liberties considered essential to a people or group of
people.
Declaration
of Rights - Enacted in 1689, the English Bill of Rights is one
of the fundamental documents of English constitutional law, marking a
fundamental milestone in the progression of English society from a nation of
subjects to a nation of free citizens with God-given rights. The evolution began with the Magna Carta in
1215.
Questions
for Discussion:
1. What historic
line does the 7th Amendment preserve?
2. Must the
States abide by the 7th Amendment?
3. Can a person
bringing suit waive the right to a jury trial?
Amendment
VIII
Excessive
Bail, Cruel and Unusual Punishment
The
8th Amendment reads, “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines
imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”
As a nation founded on
honorable Judeo-Christian principles, the United States legal system is
expected to be fair and just. This means
that Americans should insist upon a due process that protects individuals from
excesses and abuses by the judicial system.
Such expectations include that no individual should be singled out, or
treated differently, in the eyes of the courts.
A fair and equitable judicial system includes no excessive bails or fines,
or cruel and unusual punishment, for one person while others guilty of similar
crimes do not receive similar treatment.
Today’s definitions attempt to set a limit on where
“excessive” or “unusual” lies. When a
harsh penalty is applied for a crime, even when it is similar to the punishment
received by others for the same crime, challenges are launched regarding if the
penalty matches the crime. These
challenges are fine, and an important part of the American judicial system
seeking to adjust itself in regards to its fairness, but the debates during the
Federal Convention and State ratification conventions did not focus so much on
where the line between excessive and not excessive, or unusual as opposed to
usual, exists as much as are the bails, fines and punishment consistent with
the bails, fines and punishment consistent with others guilty of the same.
Questions
for Discussion:
1. In the
context of the time period during which the 8th Amendment was written, what was
meant by “cruel and unusual punishment?”
2. How has the
original definition of “cruel and unusual punishment” changed since the
founding of the United States?
3. How does the
8th Amendment apply the concept of uniformity to cases?
4. Why would the
Founding Fathers see the need to enumerate the right of an individual to be
protected from cruel and unusual punishment?
Resources:
Joseph
Andrews, A Guide for Learning and
Teaching The Declaration of
Independence and The U.S. Constitution - Learning from the Original
Texts Using Classical Learning Methods of the Founders; San
Marcos: The Center for Teaching the Constitution (2010).
Philip B.
Kurland and Ralph Lerner, The Founder’s
Constitution –
Volume Five - Amendments I-XII; Indianapolis: Liberty Fund (1987).
Copyright
2014 Douglas V. Gibbs
No comments:
Post a Comment