User:Pckilgore/Fundamental Rights Under United States Law

The doctrine of fundamental rights is a feature of United States constitutional law under which certain rights that are enumerated or implied in the U.S. Constitution are given a high degree of judicial deference in conflicts between individual liberty and governmental intrusion. The classification of a right as fundamental generally invokes the legal standard of strict scrutiny, which the courts of the United States use to determine whether the United States government or the various state governments may regulate this right.

The Legal Test
First, the court looks to rights explicitly enumerated in the state constitution or federal constitution. If the right is not explicitly enumerated, a right may be found to exist implicitly in the text. To determine whether an implied fundamental right exists, courts examine the right and make arguments that the conduct in question is "deeply rooted in this Nation's history and tradition" or "implicit in the concept of ordered liberty."

Enumerated Fundamental Rights
The Constitution of the United States of America explicitly enumerates several rights.
 * Right to keep and bear arms
 * Right to freedom of association
 * Right to freedom of speech
 * Right to equal protection under the law
 * Right to vote in general election

Implied Fundamental Rights
The Supreme Court of the United States has held that several implied fundamental rights exist.


 * Right to freedom of movement within the country
 * Right to privacy
 * Right to direct a child's upbringing
 * Right to property
 * Right to marry the person of any race
 * Right to procreate irrespective of marital status or other classifications
 * Right to freedom of thought
 * Right to freedom of contract by parties with proportional bargaining power
 * Right to privacy
 * Right to direct a child's upbringing

History in United States Law
In American Constitutional Law, fundamental rights have special significance under the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. Via the due process and equal protection clauses of that amendment, the Supreme Court has held that some rights are so fundamental, that any law restricting such a right must both serve a compelling state purpose, and be narrowly tailored to that compelling purpose.

While the recognition of such rights have changed over time, they are generally coterminous with the rights listed in the Bill of Rights. Although some of the rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights are currently recognized as fundamental, others statements were included to restrict the government's permission with respect to the privileges granted by Citizens, or more clearly explain one of the many rights each Citizen was born with, declared in the preamble of the United States Bill of Rights. There are exceptions to these amendments; states are not required to obey the Fifth Amendment requirement of indictment by grand jury. Many states choose to have preliminary hearings instead of grand juries.

Any restrictions on these rights are evaluated with strict scrutiny. If they are denied to everyone, it is an issue of substantive due process. If they are denied to some individuals but not others, it is also an issue of equal protection

During the Lochner era, the right to freedom of contract was considered to be fundamental and thus restrictions on that right were subject to strict scrutiny. Following the 1937 Supreme Court decision in West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish, though, the right to contract became considerably less important in the context of substantive due process and restrictions on it were evaluated under the rational basis standard.