Imvelaphi Yemfundiso Yokuvumelana

I-Incorporation Doctrine imelela enye yezinguquko ezinkulu kakhulu eziguqulwayo emthethweni-sisekelo waseMelika, ngokuyisisekelo iguqula ubuhlobo phakathi kukahulumeni kahulumeni kahulumeni nezwe. Isekela layo lemfundiso inquma ukuthi yimaphi amalungiselelo eSigqi samalungelo esizwe asebenza kuhulumeni nge-Current Procession of the Intelligement. Ngaphambi kwekhulu lama-20, iNkantolo Ephakeme yasekela ukuthi iBhibhele yamaLungelo ibekelwe uhulumeni kuphela, ishiya azimele ukuba achaze isivikelo sawo siqu senkululeko. Icala elingokomthetho lisebenza kuhulumeni nge-Calbestomstion ye-D [FOct:0].[FLT] Barron.[5:33] [18]) ivulile lombono olinganiselwe, ikhipha umthetho owezigebekiwe ukuthi ukuthatha izigebeqeqe. Ngekhulu leminyaka eli-5 cishe, isilinganiso secala semithetho ebekwe yizinkantolo esimisiwe, futhi izikhulu zikahulumeni ezivinjelwe yiziqubulo zokuqala.

Ukubekwa kweSichibiyelo se 144 ngo-1868, namaGazethi ayo noma ama-Immunitunie Claus, i-Act Procession Claus, ne-Encial Protection Clause, kwavula indlela entsha yomthetho-sisekelo. Nokho, ukuchazwa kweNkantolo ePhakamileyo kwakuqala kweSichibiyelo se 144th [FL:0] iSiphakamiso seNdlwana [] AmaCasess [ [1873] [iiiindlela] ngokuphumelelayo) yasusa iMalungelo noma i-Immunonion Classe, yalinganisela isivikelo saso somthetho esilinganiselwe kumalungelo angokomthetho kahulumeni, inqubo yokucabangela iNkade iNkadebenzo ekhethekile.[4]

Indima Yemibono Ephikisanayo Ekushintsheni Lemfundiso

Nakuba imibono eminingi inamandla omthetho, ngokuvamile yimibono ephikisanayo etshala imbewu yoshintsho lwesikhathi esizayo olungokomthetho. Emkhakheni we-Incorporation Doctrine, ukuphikisana kwasebenza njengemibhoshongo ehlakaniphile lapho amajaji achaza khona eminye imibono yobuzwe, inqubo efanelekile, kanye nobukhulu bamalungelo abantu ngabanye. Lemibono engavumelani nayo ayizange ivumelane nje nokungavumelani; yanikeza ukuhlaziywa okuqinile okuthi kamuva izakhiwo ezinkulu zingamukeleka, ngezinye izikhathi amashumi eminyaka kamuva. Ngakho ukuziphendukela kwemvelo akuyona indaba yalokho iNkanto engenziwa yiNkantolo kodwa futhi nokuthi yini ephikisayo eyayingavumelani inkantolo.

Ukungavumelani ekuququzeleni kwamacala kwakuvame ukubekela inselele “ukukhethwa kwendlela ekhona,” eyayisebenzisa kuphela lezozikhuselo zeMilingo yamaLungelo ezazibhekwa“ njengezisekelwe eqenjini lenkululeko emisiwe.” Abagxeki baphikisa ngokuthi lendinganiso yayiwumthetho oweqisayo futhi yashiya ukwahlulela kunakho ukuqondisisa. Kunalokho, laba abaphikisi babesekela“ konke” noma “ukufakwa okuphelele kanye”. [] umbono wokuthi iSichibiyelo seMinyaka Eyishumi nane seSiphendulo senza iBill of Rights yaba ngokomthetho noma ngisho namalungelo engeziwe asebenza ezindaweni zokuqala eziyisishiyagalombili. Nakuba ingqikithi ingazange iqondiswe inani elikhulu, ithonya laso aliphikiswa ekunwebeni kancane kancane phakathi nekhulu leminyaka lekhulu leminyaka leshumi elineshumi namashumi amabili.

Imibono Eyinhloko Engavumelani Nethonya Layo

Impicabadala yoMahluleli Harlan Palko v.Connecticut[[FL:1] (1937)

Isinqumo seNkantolo ku- Palko v. Connecticut iyisibonakaliso esiphawulekayo esikhethayo esihlelweni esikhethayo, kodwa umbono ophikisayo kaMahluleli uJohn Marshall Harlan (umdala) wanikeza umbono ohlukile kakhulu. [ Palko, iningi, likhuluma ngeSishayabeko sobulungisa, likholelwa ukuthi isivikelo seSiphetho seNhla Yesihlanu ezingozini ezimbili asisebenzi ezizweni ngoba“ kwakungekhona embonweni yenkululeko egunyaziwe.” Isakhiwo seningi sabeka ibhaka eliphezulu ukuze kufakwe: lezo “imfanelo ezisekelwe emasikweni nasemasikweni akhundleni abantu bethu, kanye nakuwo njengasezingeni elivamile."

[[3][4] [11] ISiphakamiso se-Harlan saphikisa ngokuthi umqondo wenqubo efanelekile ngaphansi kweSichibiyelo seshumi nane kufanele uqondwe kabanzi. Waphikisa ngokuthi isivikelo seBill of Rights “eyindida” sihlanganisa ububanzi benkululeko kunaleyo iningi eliyivumayo. Ngokuqondile, uHarlan wagcizelela ukuthi ukunqanda ukungezwa kwengozi ephindwe kabili kwakuyilungelo elibalulekile ukuze livikelwe kahle kumbuso kanye nokuphambaniswa kwemithetho. [FFF:] [F1] njengoba inqubo yolwazi ebekwe phambili kamuva ingaphikisangamanga ukuthi zonke izivumelwano zelungelo zisebenza ngokuzenzakalelayo ezizweni, kodwa walahla ukuvivinywa kweningi.[FON] [12] [12], futhi u-F.[4] [12] [4] [eye-pan] [eyense], u-kakhulu u-kakhulu] [[3] [[F.] [F.N] [evos], u-kakhulu] [12]

I-Jaji Black’s Dissdact Adamson v. California (1947)

Mhlawumbe ukungavumelani okukhulu okungokomlando nokuphawulekayo kulempikiswano ehlanganisayo kwavela kuMahluleli uHugo Black Adamson v. California. Ngaleyondlela, iningi, elaliholwa uMahluleli uFelix Frankfurter, lasekela umthetho waseCalifornia owawuvumela umshushisi ukuba ashongo ngokuhluleka kommangalelwa ukufakazela ukuqulwa kwecala. Abamnyama baphikisa ngokuthi lomkhuba wenqabela ilungelo leSichibiyelo sesihlanu ngokumelene nokwethungamelana, ayekholelwa ukuthi sasihlanganiswa ngokugcwele neSiphendulo se - 144th Rendementmentation. Ukungasitha kwabesekunga komcaba kwakungekuyona nje impikiswano ebanzi esekelwe ekwakhelweni lokuqulweni.

UMahluleli Black waphikisa ngokuthi abalayishi beSichibiyelo seshumi nane esihloselwe ukusebenzisa wonke uBill of Rights kumazwe. Wasekela impikiswano yakhe ngokuhlaziya umlando ngokucophelela ngomlando wokulungisa, kuhlanganise nezimemezelo zabaxhasi bayo abakhulu, uJohn Bingham, namanye amalungu eSiphendu soMkhandlu. Abamnyama baphikisa ngokuthi amalungelo noma ama-Immunites Claus, uma echazwe kahle, ayeyofeza ingqikithi yokuhlanganisa nomlando wokulungisa, kodwa ukuthi iNkantolo i-Slaast Casers- House-'s [[FLT:]] i-Castter i-'intelligedro.

Umehluko omnyama [[FLT: 0] u-Adamson awuzange ukholise iningi ngo-1947, kodwa waba nethonya elikhulu ekuhlanganisweni kwe-jurisprudence elandelayo. UMahluleli Mnyama waqhubeka esekela ingqikithi yokuhlanganiswa kwecala ngemva kwendaba, futhi imibono yakhe yathola ukuhlelwa njengesakhiwo seNkantolo eshintshiwe. INkantolo ye-Warren, eyayengamele kusukela kuma-1950 kuya kuma-1960, yamukela umbono omkhulu kakhulu wamalungelo afakiweyo, wasondela embonweni ka-Black. [[FLT:]] [FLT]] .[5] [FFLT][4] [5]] [5], [eyenzile .[FLT] [4] [eye-Eyense] [eye-pan] [evolution:] [F] [F]] [F] [5]] [4] [4], ngokufut.[4]

I-Whitney v. California (1927])

Nakuba [[FLT: 0] [icala loMhlangano] lalikhuluma ngokuyinhloko ngombono wenkululeko yokukhuluma ngaphansi kweSichibiyelo Sokuqala − elaye lafakwa Gitrow v. New York [1925]) (i-Justice Louis Brandeis (ngokuvamile ephazanyiswa ekunqabeni kwenkululeko eqinile yokwenqabela) yincwadi yesisekelo emlandweni. I-Brandheirs yabhala ngokwehlukana ukuphikisana ngokuthi iSigwebo seSigqi se-145tic Programme soMkhithiso (intente) ivikele kakhulu kunamalungelo efuna nje kuphela; ihlanganisa inkululeko engaphansi kwenkululeko efana neyasebungane neyasemhlanganeni ebaluleke kakhulu. “okwabakwamunyulwa yiwo abaseke ekutholeni kwabo ukukhululeka ekutholeni imvume yokuzimela ukuthi u-Clauslausleth Claus."'ithe ) enzisekuveza inkululeko enkulu kakhulu kubantu abakhona eSizweni."

Umbono weBradei wathonya ukuthatha kweNkantolo kamuva “ingozi esobala nekhona” ekuhloleni imingcele yokukhuluma, indinganiso eyaphakamisa ukuvikelwa kwendlela yezombangazwe ngaphezu kwezithakazelo zombuso. Nakuba uBradeis engakufuni ngokucacile ukuhlanganisa ingqikithi, ukucabanga kwakhe kwasekela ukufundwa okubanzi kweSichibiyelo seMibulunganiso Yesine esasizosetshenziswa kamuva ukuhlanganisa izinkulumo zeSichibiyelo Sokuqala esinamandla agcwele ngokumelene nemibuso. Umbono wakhe ulokhu uyindinga lokuqonda i-Pregimple yefilosofi yokuhlanganisa.

ISipho soMahluleli uDouglas [[FL:0] Hurtado v. California (1884)

Nakuba kuxoxwa ngaphambili kakhulu kunalokhu kungavumelani, ukungavumelani kweJaji uStephen Field kubhekiselwa ku-Hurtado v. California kuvame ukukhonjwa njengokwandulela ukuqubuka. [Ku] iHurtado[, iNkantolo yathi imfuneko yeSiphakamiso seHlathiso seHlathiso-Primende ayisebenzi ezifundazweni. I-Jaji, ihlangene noMahluleli lika-Joseph Bradley, iphiwe, iphikisa ngokuthi i-Gazehlo ye-Dintshiwe ye-Dintshiwerbethi ye-Clausle ifaka konke ukuvikelwa kweMiciso yelungelo elihlobene nokuphatha kobulungisa. Ukungathwa kwe-Filiyoliyoli akuyiphathiswanga i-Androme. I-Grine, futhi iveza i-Galting of the gription of the grivertiveold of the grivertive

Ukuziphendukela Kwemvelo Ngezici Eziyinhloko

Ukwehlukana uPalko, u-Adamson , [[FLT:] kanye [[FLT]]Whitney [[ akawushintshanga ngokushesha umthetho, kodwa adala inqolobane yokucabanga okungokomthetho ukuthi izinkantolo zamuva zatholakele. Inqubo yokuhlanganisa inqubo yashesha ngemva ko-1920, ngeNkathi i-Equlu lwe-Bill yamaLungelo ngemva kwezinye izigaba. Inkathi elandelayo iqokomisa izenzakalo ezibucayi:

  • Gitlow v. New York (1925): INkantolo yahlanganisa isimemezelo senkululeko yokukhuluma yokuqala, iphethe ukuthi ayinakunikezwa inkululeko yokukhuluma (6) nombono onqanyulwe ngokuphawulekayo ekufakeni iSichibiyeli sokuqala sonke.
  • [FLT] Near v. Minnesota[[FL:2] (1931]):[[INkantolo:3] yahlanganisa inkululeko yombhalo wokunyathelisa, ishaya umthetho wezwe ovumela ukuvinjelwa ngaphambi kokuba.
  • [[INKANTLO:0] Cantwell v.Connecticut[[FL:2] (1940):[[INkantolo:3] yahlanganisa ukusebenzisa izigaba zenkolo mahhala.
  • Everson v. ibhodi yemfundo (1947): INkantolo yafaka isigqebhezana sokumiswa, isebenzisa ukwehlukana kwesonto nombuso ezizweni.
  • [FLT]] Mapp v.Ohio (1961): INkantolo yahlanganisa umthetho weSine seSichibiyelo, ifuna izinkantolo zikahulumeni ukuba zingabufaki ubufakazi obutholakala ngokuhlola okungekho emthethweni.
  • Gideon v. Wainwright (1963):[[INkantolo:3] yahlanganisa iSichibiyelo seSithandathu nelungelo lokululeka emacaleni ayingozi.
  • Malloy v. Hogan (1964): Inkantolo yahlanganisa ilungelo lesihlanu lokuzihlela ngokumelene nokuzishintsha-yi-incincrication/ukushintsha okuqondile komqondo [ku- Palko[ kanye no-Adamson.]
  • [FLT][FUNT:1] v. Louisiana (1968): Inkantolo yahlanganisa ilungelo leSithandathu leSichibiyelo lokuqulwa yijaji ezicabeni ezingathi sína, yamukela ngokucacile “ukungaguquguquki kwezengqondo” ukuhlolwa okusekelwa yiJaji Harlan Palko[.
  • [[INQUBO:0][FLT] Benton v. Maryland [1969] Inkantolo yahlanganisa isigaba seSichibiyelo sesihlanu sempoqo ephindwe kabili, engaphezulu] Palko futhi yaqinisekisa umbono wesiphendulo seHarlan.

Lezi zimo zibonisa indlela ecacile: ukuphikisana kwemibono eyakhuthaza umbono obanzi wokufakwa kwecala ekugcineni waba yindawo yeningi. Inkantolo yasuswa endleleni ekhetha kakhulu eyashiya iBill of Rights iqinisekisa ukuthi imfuno enkulu yamajaji ayifakwanga esigqimisweni esicishe siphelele. Namuhla, cishe wonke amalungiselelo eSigqebhezana samalungelo abantu esivikela inkululeko yomuntu ngamunye aye afakwa, ngokungefani kuphela (njengendawo yeSithathu Seziphekezelo esine yeSitha neSiphendulo sesinqumo esikhulu seNhlanu, imfuneko yeNkanto enqaba ngokucacile ukuhlanganisa [iH.]] iNkanto ebekwe ]).

Imibuzo Yanamuhla Nezingxoxo Eziqhubekayo

Imfundiso ehlanganiswayo ihlala iyindawo eqinile yomthetho-mfashini, nakuba uhlaka lwezimo lusuncishiwe kakhulu manje. Nokho, imibono ephikisanayo iyaqhubeka ifeza indima ekulolongeni imingcele yayo. Ngokwesibonelo, McDonald v. City of Chicago[[ [20] [2010], iNkantolo yafaka iSimendo sesibili sokulungisa isokuyigcina nokuphatha izikhali [FLT:] P[FLT] [FLT] [F] [3] inqunyu yodwa. Kodwa abahluleli abambalwa baphikisa ukuthi iSiphendulo sesibili sasingabalulekile ngendlela efanayo namalungelo athile, sibuye sibuye sifake izimpikiswano ezingakhethi [FLT] [FF] [5] kulelozwezwezwe linye] [F] [F] [5] [5], futhi umqulu onyunyunyu .[ft]

Impikiswano ngobukhulu bokufakwa kweSichibiyelo seNguquko se-Eighth ihlanganisa nokunqatshelwa kwenhlawulo ephakeme kakhulu nesijeziso esinonya nesingavamile u-Claus. Timbs v. Indiana (2011]), iNkantolo ihlanganisa izihlawumbi ezibizayo ezingaphezulu kakhulu, kodwa imibuzo ejulile ishiyekile ngokuthi iSimemezelo seSiphendulo seGadi yeGadi le 145 se-Clausse noma iMalungelo noma i-Immunicle imoto efanele yokuhlanganisa. Ezinye izazi namajaji, kuhlanganise noMahluleli Clarence Thomas, ibizwa ngokuvuselela amalungelo noma i-Immuniclaus njengesisekelo esiqinile sokuhlanganisa i-Black Distrust [Foctive] [Foctson] [2] Uma i-Foctedner, ihlelwe futhi i-ekani yenye iNka.

Imithombo yangaphandle yokufunda ngokwengeziwe ihlanganisa i-Convenly Information Istitut ye-Incorporation Doctrine, i-Oyez iproject ye [[ i-Timbs v. i-Indiana [[[[FLT]][FLT][5], kanye ne-[FLT] Constitution Center yeSikhundla sesizwe esibonisa isibuyekezelo se-Inguqulo [[FLTLT:7]]. Le mithombo inikeza umongo owengeziwe wokuziphendukela kwemvelo nokubaluleka kwamanje.

Isiphetho

Imfundiso ye-Incorporation Doctrine isuka emfundisweni ewumngcingo, kahulumeni ehlangene nomthetho we-Bill of Rights ukuya ekwakheni uhlelo oluqinile oluvikela inkululeko eyisisekelo ekuphathweni uhulumeni. Lokhu kuguqulwa kubangelwa kakhulu ukulahla imibono enjengokuthi iHarlan, Black, Brandeis, neField. Lokhu kungavumelani nakancane nemiphumela yecala elithile; banikeza izinkolelo ezivumelanayo ezithathelwa phambili kancane kancane ezizuze ukwamukelwa njengemithetho engokomthetho nezindinganiso zomphakathi. Izimpikiswano zasebenza njengezimpawu zokuhlakanipha, ziqondisa iNkantolo kusetshenziswa kwelungelo elibanzi neyunifomu yelungelo lelungelo. Namuhla, imfundiso ehlanganisa imfundiso ifana nesiqinisekiso sokungavumelani kwemithetho yemithetho yaseMelika engokomthetho womthetho we-othoricralizimu, futhi ibekela inse inse isikhathi, futhi idla izibalo eziningi.