Liberty Analysis

Running Head: Liberty Analysis

LIBERTY ANALYSIS

Student’s Name

Course Name

Name of Instructor

Date

Liberty Analysis

Introduction

Herein, this document contains a liberty analysis discussion for the Supreme Court case:

1 as listed in the course textbook. The details of the Scenario is as follows.

“Benjamin Gitlow was indicted in the Supreme Court of New York, with three others, for the

statutory crime of criminal anarchy. New York Penal Law, 160, 161.1 He was separately tried,

convicted, and sentenced to imprisonment….The case is here on writ of error to the Supreme

Court, to which the record was remitted. The contention here is that the statute, by its terms and

as applied in this case, is repugnant to the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”

(Gitlow v. People of the State of New York, 1925)

This paper presents an analysis of the side of the presented controversy winning that will

promote liberty. In 5 paragraphs, a meaning of liberty is explored against the case, indicating

where the particular aspect of liberty does not apply, and why it so does not. The five meanings

used in this assignment include: independence, federalism. Personal responsibility, personal

liberties and living in the jurisdiction of a government with constitutionally defined limits.

Benjamin Gitlow’s winning of the case would promote the self-governance of the people

of the state. Revisiting the case to ascertain that the alleged offended statutes was sufficiently

relevant in the case of Gitlow and his mates shall uphold the sovereignty of the state in that its

decision was objectively arrived at. The independence of the state is sufficiently upheld so long

as the state is objectively acting on the case as directed by the law, and in particular the XIV

amendment clause demanding a reasonable application of the law. “Citizens of every race and

color … shall have the same right in every State and territory to…p142” (Iachetta, 2018). This

clause implies that the rights of other individuals in the state are equally important as those of the

Liberty Analysis

accused and that none is to be maligned (Maltz, 2015). Gitlow and his associates are in no way to

deserving a right of independence in this case.

Annulling of the indictment against the four individuals, or a revision of the proceedings

against the accused is a promotion of the liberty of personalities in sight of federalism. This is so

on the grounds that the XIV amendment (Fox Jr, 2015) provided. The amendment declared that

neither the federal government nor the states shall deny any person their absolute rights without

sufficient and exhaustive legal procedure. The accused therefore has a right to be given a more

considerate hearing before abridging his liberty so substantially. “This Court has held … that the

Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments protect certain fundamental personal liberties from

abridgement by the Federal Government or the States…p150” this implies that it is within the

assignment of the Supreme Court to as much as possible attempt to protect the rights of citizens.

In light of personal responsibility, Gitlow’s losing of the case will promote personal

responsibility by requiring him and his mates to bear the resulting court action against their

personal choices. While nature provides that any person deserves a non-restriction to act, the

court is obliged to protect that right by only taking into consideration applicable statutes and

enforcing their intended implications. “The indulgence of evil is followed by punishment, because

it is an inexorable law of man’s organization. The choice of good is followed by happiness,

contentment, and prosperity. (Iachetta, 2018, P. 127)” Thereby, having indulged in statutory

offense, the three parties deserve punishment as much as the right they initially have. Activity

66A desambiguates - “No State shall … deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without

due process of law” (Iachetta, 2018) and hence provides the capacity for the Court of Law to

restrict the accused’s liberties after sufficient court procedure.

Liberty Analysis

The Supreme Court maintaining the accused guilty is crucial to promote the recognition

of the importance of personal liberty (Morris, 2001) as well as the non-infinite nature of

freedom. It is not a matter of liberty for an individual to engage in criminal anarchy in the

alleged claim of dwelling within one’s provisions of personal liberty. Gitlow is off the limits of

personal liberty by engaging in action that infringes the liberty of other persons. The accused‘s

personal liberty is therefore non-important as far as the case at hand is concerned. “The

indulgence of evil is followed by punishment, because it is an inexorable law of man’s

organization. The choice of good is followed by happiness, contentment, and prosperity. P127”

This clause reflects an imminent punishment on the engagement of a person in unreasonable

freedom and action. Therefore, Gitlow and his mates are guilty for their constitutionally explicit

crime, and deserve the pronounced sentence. This way, both they and other parties will learn an

importance aspect regarding exercise of one’s freedom.

In light to living under a government that observes constitutionally established limits

(Buchanan, 1975), considering the writ of error submitted to the Supreme Court is significant so

as to promote adherence to constitutionalism. The XIV amendment, which is now part of the law

defines the role of the government in protection of human liberty. It is in this sense that the court

owes the accused a chance to ascertain the dialectical adherence of the ruling to constitutionally

established principles. “the personal liberty of individuals...[consisting] in the power of

locomotion, of changing situations or moving one’s person to whatsoever place one’s own

inclination may direct, without imprisonment, or restraint, unless by due course of law... Activity

66A defines, as quoted, that the due process of law is sufficient to deny Gitlow and mates of such

liberties they inherently deserve.

Conclusion

Liberty Analysis

As discussed in this assignment, the accused is both deserving a more intricate legal

procedure to grant their conscience that they are fully protected by the judicial authority; as well

as fully liable for their uninformed action which drew legal restraints of freedom. Either way, some

meanings of freedom as per the 5 feature guide used in this assignment, do not apply either in part

or wholly to the accused. For instance, the controversy at hand is less concerning personal liberty

since the accused proceeded to engage in extralegal action claiming the liberty of freedom,

personal responsibility and independence. This paper thus maintains that liberty must be granted

in such a manner that maintains the liberty of every other party in the society, thus maintaining a

holistic view of the society.

Liberty Analysis

References

Buchanan, J. M. (1975). The limits of liberty: Between anarchy and Leviathan. University of

Chicago Press(714).

Fox Jr, J. W. (2015). The Fourteenth Amendment and the Privileges and Immunities of

American Citizenship. . Constitutional Commentary, 567-611.

Iachetta, M. S. (2018). Basic Principles of American Government.

Maltz, E. M. (2015). The Forgotten Provision of the Fourteenth Amendment: Section 2 and the

Evolution of American Democracy. La. L.Rev., 76(2015), 149.

Morris, T. D. (2001). Free Men All: The Personal Liberty Laws of the North, 1780-1861. The

Lawbook Exchange.

Place new order. It's free, fast and safe

Paper type

Deadline

Page count

550 words

Total price: $ 15.00

Our customers say

Jeff Curtis

USA, Student

"I'm fully satisfied with the essay I've just received. When I read it, I felt like it was exactly what I wanted to say, but couldn’t find the necessary words. Thank you!"

Ian McGregor

UK, Student

"I don’t know what I would do without your assistance! With your help, I met my deadline just in time and the work was very professional. I will be back in several days with another assignment!"

Shannon Williams

Canada, Student

"It was the perfect experience! I enjoyed working with my writer, he delivered my work on time and followed all the guidelines about the referencing and contents."

Place new order. It's free, fast and safe

Our customers say

Jeff Curtis

Ian McGregor

Shannon Williams