"endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights"
you have the freedom of speech and you have the freedom of the press but what you did was not in your rights. It is like in Schenck vs. the United States you have the right to speak freely but if your speech is dangerous then you cannot say it.
first amendment freedom of speach clause
hey I have the first amendment and what I did was within my rights
yes the first amendment is “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” This amendment gives you the right to speak freely, the right of religion, freedom of the press, the right of peaceful assembly and the right to petition the government. This amendment gives you the basic rights that you use in your day to day lives.
first amendment the establishment clause
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." that is the first amendment
Sante Fe Independent School District v. Doe and Stone v. Graham showed that some public showing of religion that might influence or offend people of other religions is not allowed according to the establishment clause
If a person were to give a speech or put up a poster about their religion at a school or a public place that would be against the establishment clause
fourth amendment the right to protect against searches and seizure unless allowed by a warrant
The fourth amendment says "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
Katz v. United States and California v. Greenwood showed that any searches of possessions and peoples persons is not allowed without a warrant ever
in Katz v. United States the FBI listened in on a specific phone call without a warrant. in California v. Greenwood an FBI agent was not "searching" bags
sixth amendment assisted of counsel for defense
the sixth amendment says "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense."
Gideon v. Wainwright they violated the sixth amendment and did not provide him assistance to his defense.
When someone is arrested it is their right to have a lawyer or someone to defend them if they have to go to court. by not allowing him a lawyer they are going against the sixth amendment
eighth amendment cruel and unusual punishments shall not be inflicted
in this case there are three types of times when this did apply. Atkins v. Virginia and Miller v. Alabama are one, both cases have children who committed homicidal crimes and got life in prison without parole.
the eighth amendment clearly states that there should be no unusual punishments given "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."
Graham v. Florida is another, He did not commit a homicidal crime but still got life in prison without parole. the third is Roper v. Simmons, in that case the person in question had a mental deficit and got the death penalty