I-Incorporation Doctrine ifana nenye yentuthuko elandela impela eMthethweni waseMelika. Ngokusebenza kwayo, inkululeko eyisisekelo ebekwe eBill of Rights , ngokubopha kuphela uhulumeni wezwe((*) yanwetshwa ukuze ivimbele uhulumeni wezwe nohulumeni bendawo kanye. Lokhu kuguqulwa akwenzekanga ngokuphazima kweso; kwavela kuchungechunge lwezimpi eziqinile ezingokomthetho ezihlanganisa ikhulu lamashumi amabili kuya kulokhu. Inselele inselele ukufinyelelwa kweSiphetho seSiphendulo se - 145 se-Claus, salololonga ubuhlobo besimanje phakathi kombuso nombuso, futhi okungamalungelo anqunyiwe ahloselwe ukuvikelwa inseleleko engokomlando ehlanganisa kokubili izinga lamanje lenkululeko nezingxoxo zomthetho ngamunye.

Imvelaphi Yemfundiso Yokuvumelana

Isizukulwane esisungulile asizange silindele ukuthi iBill of Rights yayizosebenza kumazwe. ISishaya-mthetho sokuqala sasikisela ukubuyiselwa kokuqala okuyishumi njengokulinganiselwa kuhulumeni kahulumeni osanda kudalwa, umklamo oqinisekiswe ngokucacile yiNkantolo Ephakeme ku- Barron v. Baltimore (1833). Ngalowombono ovumelanayo, uMahluleli omkhulu uJohn Marshall wayekholelwa ukuthi iSiphendulo Sezinziso Sesihlanu asizange sibopha idolobha laseBaltimore ngenxa yokuthi iBill of Rights yayisebenza kuphela ngokumelene nohulumeni wezwe. Emashumini ayisikhombisa alandelayo, iziphakamela isivikelo sawo siqu. [FLT:] [ult:1]

Indawo yashintsha ngemva kweMpi Yombango. IziNguqulo zeSichibiyelo seshumi nane ezagunyazwa ngo-1868, zamisa imingcele emisha mayelana namandla kahulumeni. Isigaba Sokuqala Sesinciphiso simemezela: “Awukho uHulumeni ozokwenza noma ukuphoqelela noma yimuphi umthetho ozovimbela amalungelo noma ukugoma kwezakhamuzi zase-United States; futhi akukho Hulumeni oyohlupha noma yimuphi umuntu ukuphila, inkululeko, noma impahla, ngaphandle kwenqubo efanelekile yomthetho; noma ukuphika noma yimuphi umuntu onegunya elilingana nemithetho.” Lamagama ayoba isisekelo semibhalo ye-Incorpogation Trinity, kodwa injongo yawo yayincintiswa kakhulu kusukela ekuqaleni.

Ku Icala leNdlu yeNdlu yoLuntu (1873), iNkantolo Ephakeme yalinganisela kakhulu ukufinyelela kwamalungelo noma ama-Immunitunie u-Claus, iphethe ukuthi yayivikela kuphela iqoqo elincane lamalungelo esizwe futhi hhayi isiqinisekiso esibanzi esitholakala kuBill of Rights. Lesi sinqumo savala ngokuphumelelayo indlela eyodwa ekwaziyo ukuvikela amalungelo ezweni lonke. INkanto esikhundleni sayo yaphendukela eMthethweni weNkantolo ku-Celaces, iyichaza ukuba ihlanganise “inkululeko ethile eyisisekelo yenkululeko yokuthi amadolobha awanakungakwazi ukuvimbela imvume. Lokhu okungahlulwayo, uma kuvela-case-case ukusondela kwe-Inquluetonston kuchaza indlela ekwaziyo ukuvikela amalungelo esizwe sekhulu leminyaka elizayo.

Ekuqaleni kwekhulu lamashumi amabili kwaba nokuthakazelelwa kokuqala okuphumelelayo kwale nkolelo. Ukulwa ne-'transfect v'. New Jersey (08]]], iNkantolo yavuma ukuthi ezinye izivikelo zamalungelo abantu kungenzeka ukuthi “ziyizinto ezithandwayo” futhi ngaleyondlela zifakwe ngenqubo efanele, nakuba zazingalisebenzisi ilungelo lokumelana nokuzihlukanisa ngokwayo nezindawo kuleyondaba. Imbewu yayitshalwe, kodwa igcwele yayidinga izinselele zezimpawu zezwe.

Izinselele Zokuqala Nokuqala Kokukhetha

I - “cracking ” (1925): I - Cracking of the Federal Wall

Impumelelo ewujuqu yavela kumthetho Gitlow v. New York, 268 U.S. 652 (1925). uBenjamin Gitlow, umshisekeli wezenhlala - kahle, waboshwa ngaphansi kwesiphithiphithi sezephulamthetho eNew York sokukhipha ipheshana elikhuthaza ukugumbuqelwa kukahulumeni. Ekudluliseleni, abameli bakhe baphikisa ukuthi iSimemezelo sokuqala sokukhuluma sivikelekile kumthetho kahulumeni. Inkantolo Ephakeme yavuma ukuzwa icala, futhi lapho ekugcineni isekela ukukholelwa kweGitsow ekutholeni imvume (ukuthi inkulumo ayivikelekanga ngenxa yokuthi iveze “ingozi namanje”), iNkadebhulo yenze isimemezelo:“ Ngenxa yezinjongo zamanje futhi ithathe inkululeko yenkululeko, futhi ivikelwe yinkululeko yokulawula phakathi kwe-Gitsowdroption (ivey) encishiswe yilungelo eliyinkulu le-ogggduzenziswe yinqubo engcono kanye kanye neyo."'interruption.

Ledictum(*) ngokomthetho ayidingwanga ukubamba − kwabekwa umthetho wokuthi iNkantolo yayizimisele ukusebenzisa izivikelo zokukhuluma ezizweni. IGitlow yaba icala lokuqala lapho iNkantolo Ephakeme yafaka khona ilungiselelo leBhili Lamalungelo elungelweni ngeSimemezelo seSiphendu se-185 se-STIT Procession Clause. Isinqumo savula umnyango ukuze kutholakale iziphakamiso eziningi ezalandela, futhi inkathi yokusetshenziswa kwemithetho ekhethekile.

Izenzakalo Ezinkulu Zokuqala Zangemva Kokuthola Imoto

Eminyakeni elandela ngokushesha iGitlow, iNkantolo yahlanganisa amanye amalungelo amaningana eSichibiyelo Sokuqala. Stomberg v. California (1931] yawisa umthetho kahulumeni ovimbela ukuboniswa kwefulege elibomvu, ifaka ilungelo lenkululeko yenkululeko yokuhlangana nenkulumo engokomfanekiso. [[FLT:] Neminesota [1931] [[FLT] wasebenzisa inkululeko yamavoluntelo ekhululekile ezimisweni, wamisa ukuthi imingcele yangaphambili yayingamukeleki ngokusemthethweni ezindaweni zombili izigaba zesizwe nezinganiso zesizwe. [FLD] [f] Jonge v. [FFFFF] [FF] [3]

Kodwa iNkantolo yahamba ngokuqapha nezinye izinguquko. kuPalko v.Connecticut, 302 U.S. 319 [1937], ummangalelwa waphikisa ngokuthi umthetho kaConnecticut uvumela umbuso ukuba uvumele umemeze isigebengu esigwebayo esimelene nempoqo yeSiphazamiso seSiphendu sesihlanu, athi kufanele sifakwe. UJaji Benjamin Cardozozo, abhalele inkantolo, walahla iphuzu layo elibalulekile. Waveza ukwahlukana okubalulekile: kuphela lawomalungelo “ayenziwa emqondweni wokufuna inkululeko engokomthetho” futhi“ awephula umthetho wecebo lokulawula icebo lokulunga-mthetho we-Gast" futhi “engeke ufakwe ngenqubo ephelele. Icebo lokuzinhlenga, ewucabangela ngokulinganayo, eqondeneyo ngenxa yesilinganiso sendlela enziwayo yeSivume somthetho." ISinqulo sethu esivamile, imvume esivamile, isikhulu seNkathi, isikhulu esingundayo, njengoba sifaka isikhulu seNka u

“Uhlelo lwenkululeko” lwaluzobusa amashumi eminyaka. Ngaphansi kwaleyondinganiso, iNkantolo yanezela amalungelo kancane kancane kusukela kweyesine, eyesihlanu, eyesi-6, neye-8h Isichibiyeli, kodwa ngemva kokuhlola ngamunye ngokumelene nomthetho oyisisekelo wokulunga. Le nqubo yokuhlanganisa yayisho ukuthi amalungiselelo amaningi eBill of Rights ayehlala engahlanganisiwe kwaze kwaba kamuva kakhulu (nenye), abanye, njengasekunxebeni kwecala elikhulu, akuzange kusetshenziswe kuhulumeni.

UAdamson California (1947): Impikiswano Ephelele Yokuncintisana

Ukuhlaselwa okuqondile kakhulu kohlelo lokuhlanganisa ngokukhetha kwavela kuAdamson v. California, 332 U.S. 46 (1947). U-Admiral Dewey Adamson wabekwa icala lokubulala enkantolo yombuso waseCalifornia. Ecaleni, umshushisi wakhuluma ngehluleka kuka-Adamson ukunikeza ubufakazi, futhi ijaji layala abahluleli ukuthi kungaveza ukuthula kwakhe. UAdamson waphikisa ngokuthi lokhu kuphula ilungelo leSiphendulo sesihlanu ngokumelene nokuziphindisela, athi kufanele kuhlanganiswe ngokuphelele nezifunda. INkantolo Ephakeme, ngovoti 5-4, yalahla impikiswano yakhe.

UMahluleli uFelix Frankfurter, ebhalela iningi, waqinisekisa iPalko “inkululeko” yokuhlolwa. Wakholelwa ukuthi isiGungu seSichibiyelo sesihlanu asizange sisetshenziswe ezizweni nge-Guate Procement Clause ngoba ukulunga kwecala kwecala kuhloselwe uhulumeni, kwakuwumthetho okhethekile. Ukungavumelani nomthetho - sisekelo. Umthetho, owawuholwa nguMahluleli uHugo Black, wafaka umbambo wokuphikisana ngamandla. Umbhulala waphikisa ngokuthi incazelo yokuqala yeSiphazamiso se-145 seZigunyaziso noma i-Immunistein Claus Claus ehlonice ihloselwe ukwenza ukuba iBill yesibopho senkululeko ewumbisweni. U-Blabelton (ult) u-Greamston (ult.) wahlanganisa ngisho nelungelo elivamile lokusekela u-Rumley, wahlanganisa ngisho nelungelo lokusekela u-Rogn.

U-Adamson akawushintshanga umthetho; iNkantolo yaqhubeka isebenzisa i-overse. Kodwa ukuphikisana okunamandla kwaphakamisa ingqikithi yenkulumo ehlanganisa isigaba esiphakeme kakhulu senkulumo yomthetho-sisekelo. Nakuba umbono kaBlack ungakaze ulawule iningi, wathonya izinqumo zamuva futhi waphoqelela iNkantolo ukuba icacise ngokucace ngokwengeziwe ukuthi kungani amalungelo athile ayeyisisekelo kanti amanye ayengewona. Icala lihlala liyisisekelo sempikiswano ephathelene ne-listrucism, i-textism, nendima efanele ye-judiary.

Izinselele Zamuva Nokwanda Kokweshelwa

Isigebengu NeNkantolo YaseWarren

Ukwanda okuphawulekayo kwe - Incorporation Doctrine kwenzeka ngaphansi kweSikhulu seJaji u-Earl Warren ngo-1960. INkantolo yaseWarren yalahla indinganiso evalwe kakhulu kaFrankfurter “yokulunga okungokolwazi” ikhetha umthetho othi noma iliphi ilungiselelo “ligxile kakhulu emasikweni nasemikhubeni yabantu bethu kangangokuba liyobhekwa njengesisekelo esiyisisekelo” liyohlanganiswa ngokugcwele, kanye nazo zonke izincazelo zalo ezingokomthetho. Lokhu kwaholela ekuvusebeni kwesizwe ukubekwa kwelungelo lobugebengu.

Izindaba eziyinhloko zihlanganisa:

  • Mapp v.O.1961): wahlanganisa umthetho weSichibiyelo sesine, wavimbela izifundazwe ekusebenziseni ubufakazi obutholakele ngokungemthetho.
  • Gideon v. Wainwright (1963): Wahlanganisa iSichibiyelo seSithandathu nelungelo lokwelulekwa, ukuqinisekisa ummeli wabamangalelwa abangezwani ezimweni zecala.
  • Malloy v. Hogan (1964): Ngokwengxenye u-Adamson wabusa, ehlanganisa ilungelo leSichibiyelo sesihlanu ngokumelene nokuziphindiselela.
  • Pointer v. Texas (1965): ISichibiyelo sesithupha sahlanganisa ilungelo lokubhekana nofakazi.
  • Klopefer v. North Carolina (1967): ISichibiyelo seSithandathu sahlanganisa isibopho sokuqulwa kwecala ngokushesha.
  • Duncan v. Louisiana (1968): ISichibiyelo seSithandathu sahlanganisa ilungelo lokuqulwa kwecala lamajaji emacaleni obugebengu angathi sína.

Ekupheleni kwenkathi yeWarren, cishe zonke izivikelo ezatholakala ezindaweni zokuqala eziyisishiyagalombili zazisetshenziswa. Okuwukuphela kwezindawo ezihlukile kwakuyisiHlanzo seSithathu sokuhlanganisa amasosha (esingazange sibekwe emongweni we-internation), iSimemezelo esikhulu seSimemezelo seSigqi sezente seSigebengu, ukuqulwa kwecala lokulunga kwezehlulelo, kanye neSiphendulo seSikhulu seSikhulu seGandebethi (naba iSiphakathi seSiphakamiso sonya neSijekethiso sika Clausleus [FL:0]] Robinson v. California (1962). [FLT.[FLD:1]]). I-Incoration Reconstmentmentmentation Regiption [ence]], ngenxa yazo zonke izinjongo, kwaba yinqubo eyasetshenziswa kakhulu nguBill Recodeclation yesizwe.

Izinselele Zesiphendu sesibili: Impepho NoMcDonald

Inselele ebaluleke kakhulu yamuva kwekhulu lama-202 neyasekuqaleni kwekhulu lokuqala ye-Incorporation Trinity yayihlanganisa ilungelo lokugcina nokuphatha izikhali. Emashumini eminyaka, iSichibiyelo Sesibili saqondwa njengokuvikela ilungelo elihlangene eliboshelwe ekusebenzeni kobupolisa, futhi iNkantolo Ephakeme yanqaba ukuzwa izinselele. [inguquko eshintshiwe nge-Diverse of Columbia v. Heller (2008), lapho iNkantolo, ngevoti engu-5-4, ikholelwa ukuthi iSiphendulo sesibili sivikela khona umuntu ukuba abe nento yokuzidubula ngaphakathi ekhaya. Nokho, iHellar yayikhuluma kuphela ngesifundazwe saseHlathini saseFilini leFilime / produace [Fluece] nenga ngakwesobunxele noma ngabe isebenza ngesihloko sokudla komthetho.

Lowombuzo waphendulwa eminyakeni emibili kamuva uMcDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S.742 (2010). . Otis McDonald, isakhamuzi saseChicago, wabekela inselele ukuvinjelwa kwedolobha ngesandla, ephikisa ukuthi iSichibiyelo sesibili safakwa phakathi kweSiphendulo seGawula seminyaka Engamashumi Amane. INkakhulu yavumelana, kodwa izahlulelo zahlukanisa phakathi isiqu esifanele. Umbono wobuningi, owabhalwa nguSamuel Alito, wathembela kuMklamo weSivumelo, uveza isiboniso esikhethiwe manje esingakhethiyo. UCalference, ngokuvumelana nesahlulelo, wanikeza indlela ehlukile: wavumelana nomthetho noma i-Immedians kufanele ukuba uvikele izikhali futhi u-Clausssmes, kusukela ekutholeni uThosekutholeni u-Ase.

McDonald kwakuyindawo ephawulekayo yabasekeli beSichibiyelo Sesibili futhi yabonisa ukuthi i - Incorporation Doctrine ihlala iyinkundla enamandla nephikiswana ngayo. Yavuselela futhi isithakazelo sezazi nesokwahlulela emalungelweni noma eSikhungweni sikaClaus njengenye indlela yokuhlangana, nakuba iNkantolo ingakayithathi leyo ndlela kunoma iliphi icala elilandelayo.

Impikiswano Eqhubekayo Namalungiselelo Angenayo

Naphezu kokuhlanganiswa okucishe kuphele kweSimemezelo samalungelo abantu, amalungiselelo amaningana asele ngaphandle kokufinyelela kweSichibiyelo seshumi nane. Okuvelele kakhulu yilokhu:

  • , iNkantolo Ephakeme yeSichibiyelo seGrand Jury Indictment Claus: [[FLT]] Ku [FFLT:2] Hurtado v. California (1884], iNkantolo Ephakeme yenqaba ukufuna izimemezelo zokusebenzisa izigijimi ezinkulu; lesisinqumo asikaze sithathelwe isigwebo. Cishe ingxenye yezifundasasebenzisa amajaji amakhulu, kodwa uMthetho-sisekelo awubafuni ukwenza kanjalo.
  • [1] ISichibiyelo se-Civil Jury Julqualir Kwesokudla: Inkantolo Ephakeme egcinwe Minneapolis & St. Louis Railtrand Co. v. Bomolis (16) [ukuthi iSichibiyelo seSembeki asifakwanga ngokomthetho.] Ngakho - United States ingalinganisela ukuqulwa kwejaji lomphakathi, uma nje benikeza enye inqubo.
  • ISichibiyelo esiphindiwe sokuhlanganisa amasosha: [Ngaphandle kokuba singabekwanga ngokuqondile emongweni wezwe, umbhalo nomlando kusikisela ukuthi kungahlanganiswa njengelungelo eliyisisekelo lokuvikela izindaba zomuntu siqu zasekhaya, kodwa alikho icala leNkantolo Ephakeme eliye layikhuluma.
  • Isichibiyeli seSichibiyelo esiKhulu se-Oural Bail Claus: Nakuba izijeziso ezinonya nezingajwayelekile zafakwa eRobinson, ilungiselelo lebheyili elidlulele alisetshenziswanga ngokomthetho ezizweni, nakuba izinkantolo eziphansi ngokuvamile zicabanga ukuthi zihlanganisiwe.

Ngakho - ke, uhlobo olukhethayo lokufaka umbiko luveza ukuthi ukuvumelana nenqubo yobugebengu neyomphakathi kuyaqhubeka kubangela ukuhlaziywa nokuhlaziywa kwezazi. Abanye abagxeki baphikisa ngokuthi amalungelo angenazo izimpawu okufanele asetshenziswe ngokugcwele; abanye bagomela ngokuthi izindinganiso zikahulumeni zithethelela ukuvunyelwa kwamazwe ukuba azame.

Imiphumela Yezinselele Ezingokomlando

Ukunqoba Kokukhetha

Umphumela ohlala njalo wenselele engokomlando eMbusweni we-Incorporation ukwakhiwa okuqinile kokuhlanganiswa ngokukhetha njengesimiso sokubusa. INkantolo ayikaze yamukele ingqikithi yemfundiso eqanjwa uMahluleli Black noma imfundiso yokuhlanganisa ingqikithi kanye nokusekelana kanye nokukhuthazwa nguMahluleli Murphy. Kunalokho, iye yasebenzisa iBhili ngalinye lamaLungelo liqinisekisa amazwe ngemva kokuzimisela okucacile ukuthi ilungelo liyisisekelo senkululeko nobulungisa. Lendlela iye yaveza indikimba yomthetho kokubili eyinkokhelo kanye ne-Pragmatic, ivumela iNkantolo ukuba ilungise imingcele yokuvikela ngaphandle kokushintsha imithetho yecala ngaphambi kokuba ihlelwe ngokwenhla kabanzi.

Ukukhetha ukuhlanganisa kwalondoloza indima yokuhlola kwezwe ezindaweni lapho ukuvumelana kubhekwa njengokungadingeki ngokomthetho-mthetho. Ngokwesibonelo, ngenxa yokuthi iSichibiyelo seSemberi asifakwanga, izifundazwe zikhululekile ukumisa imikhawulo ehlukene yokuqulwa kwamajaji ezicabeni zomphakathi. Ngokufanayo, ukuhlelwa kwesigaba esikhulu sabahluleli kuvumela ukusebenzisa ezinye izindlela ezilawulayo njengezokuzwa kokuqala. Lokhu kuveza umklamo womthetho womthetho ngesikhathi esifanayo ukuqinisekisa ukuthi inkululeko ebaluleke kakhulu ivikelwe ezweni lonke.

Ithonya Ebuthweni Lomphakathi Nasemandleni Okwahlulela

Imfundiso yokuHlakanisela ishintshe kakhulu ukulinganisela kwamandla phakathi kukahulumeni kahulumeni kahulumeni nezifundazwe. Ngaphambi kweGitlow, izifundazwe zazinenkululeko ephelele ekuchazeni inqubo yobugebengu nenkululeko yomphakathi. Ngemva kokuhlanganiswa kweNkantolo Ephakeme yaba umsekeli womthetho womthetho ophakeme, ukubukeza imithetho yendawo nezinkolelo ngaphansi kwezindinganiso ezifuna inzuzo ze-Bill of Rights. Lokhu kushintsha kuye kwanconywa njengokudingekile ekuvikeleni amalungelo abantu ekuxhashazweni okukhulu kwemithetho yomthetho nenguquko kahulumeni.

Indima yeNkantolo iye yanwebeka ngaphezu kwencazelo ebanzi yemibhalo ukuze ihlanganise ukuhlolwa okubanzi kwalokho okungamalungelo “angokolwazi". Lokho kuphenya ngokungenakugwenywa kuhilela izahlulelo zokuziphatha nezingokomlando, futhi kuye kwaholela ezimpikiswaneni ezicashile zokuvimbela ukwahlulela kanye nezenzo zokwahlulela. Ukungavumelani ezicatshangelweyo emacaleni anjengoPalko noAdamson kuxwayise ukuthi iNkantolo iyakuba “ukungalinganiswa” uma ingena ngokukhululekile kakhulu emalungelweni. Nokho, i-Constition of protectionation, iphikisa ukuthi i-Grandmentation yeshumi nanea yaklanywa ukubeka imingcele engokomthetho, nokuthi iNkantolo ixwayisa ngamandla.

Ukuqhubeka: Amalungelo Amasha Nezimpikiswano Ezidala

Izinselele ezingokomlando ze-Incorporation Doctrine azizona nje imfundo; ziyaqhubeka zibumba izimpikiswano zamanje. Ngokwesibonelo, impikiswano mayelana nama-Ofunsini noma ama-Immunities uClause iye yaphinde yavela ezimweni eziphathelene namalungelo ezibhamu, ukukhipha isisu, nenkululeko yezomnotho. Dobs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (20222)[FOMbutho wabesifazane] [FOLT]], iNkantolo yeNkantolo i-Rodev. Wade ne-Cated Parenty v. Casey, iphethe ukuthi i-Haded Reveloption ye-14th ayikhuli ekukhipheni isisunulo. Lesinqumo sinciphekelele ekuhlolweni okungokomlando ukuthi ukuthi ukukhishwa kwezisulo kuvela ekukhipheni kwesiko sesiko simo esivamile siphikisa sokuzinzile.

Ngokufanayo, iSichibiyelo Sesibili sisalokhu siyinto ephilayo. Ngemva kokuba uMcDonald, izinkantolo eziphansi ziye zazama ukusebenzisa “ilungelo elibalulekile” ukuhlolwa ukuze kubekwe isifunda nezimiso zezibhamu zendawo. Isinqumo samuva seNkantolo ePhakamileyo e iNew York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bren (2022) yacacisa ukuthi iSimende Sesibili sivikela ilungelo lokuphatha izibhamu obala, futhi ukuthi singamane sithethelele imingcele yezikhali ngokubonisa “isiko eliyinqaba” lomthetho womthetho owe-Pisishologini. Lokho kugcizelela ngokuqondile ukugcizelela komlando nomthetho wesiko njengesisekelo sokulawula amalungelo ayisisekelo.

Imfundiso ye-Incorporation Doctrine futhi ihlangene nezimpikiswano zanamuhla eziphathelene nokushintshwa komthetho womthetho wobugebengu, ukulandisa kwamaphoyisa, kanye nokuziphendulela kwemishini. Ngokwesibonelo, isivikelo seSichibiyelo sesine sokuhlola okungacabangeli nokuquleka, njengoba sifakwe [ku- Map v. i-Ohio, manje isebenza kuhulumeni nakumthetho wendawo. INkanto edinga ukuvumelana naleyo isivikelo nobuchwepheshe obusha obunjengomakhalekhukhwi, i-GPPPG, ne-raempee, ne-drones. Icala ngalinye elisha lincike ngokusekelwe ekuqondeni okuyisisekelo ukuthi iNguqulo yesine ibopha izigodlo zesine.

Isiphetho

Izinselele ezingokomlando zePalko, ukuphikisana okuhlangene nomthetho-sisekelo, ukuguquguquka okukhulu komthetho-mthetho, impikiswano enzima, kanye nenkululeko eyandayo. Kusukela ekumangaleni eGitlow eyavula umnyango wokubekwa kwesizwe, ngokulinganisela ngokucophelela iPalko, ingqikithi yokungavumelani kuka-Adamson, izinguquko ezigcwele zeSinkantolo saseWarren, kanye neSiphendulo sesibili esihlanganiswe kuMc. Umthetho womthetho we-Gajistem, lemfundiso iye yaqala ukuba ingumthombo oyinhloko womthetho-mthetho-mthetho-siseko waseMelika. Iqinisekise ukuthi inkululeko ehlelwe kuyi-Bill of Rights ayizona izithembiso nje kuhulumeni wohulumeni wombuso kodwa ize impela, isivikelo esiphoqelelwe esikhona esimelene nombuso oqashelwayo.

Kodwa imfundiso ihlala ingaphelele futhi iphikiswa. Amalungiselelo angahlanganisiwe, ukunakekela okusha emalungelweni ombuso noma e-Immunion Claus, kanye nokusetshenziswa okuqhubekayo kokuhlaziywa kwamalungelo ayisisekelo kwezindaba ezintsha konke kubonisa ukuthi i-Incorporation Doctrine ayiwona umsebenzi ophelile. Iwuhlelo oluphilayo olukhona izinkantolo eziqhubeka ngalo zifaka phakathi kwezindinganiso eziphikisanayo zobuzwe, inkululeko, nobulungisa. Ukuqonda izinselele ezakha lemfundiso (nemiphumela) nezomuntu ofuna ukuqonda incazelo yanamuhla ye-Bill of Rights and the Domementmentmentation.