how to cite 8th amendment

Generate accurate MLA citations for free

• Knowledge Base
• How to cite the Constitution in MLA

How to Cite the Constitution in MLA | Format & Examples

Published on January 26, 2021 by Jack Caulfield . Revised on June 16, 2022.

To cite the Constitution of the United States in MLA style , include information about where you accessed it in the Works Cited entry. In the in-text citation, use article/amendment and section numbers instead of page numbers.

The example below shows how to cite an online version of the constitution.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

Citing a print version of the constitution, referring to the constitution in your text, frequently asked questions about mla citations.

The Constitution has also been published in book form in various editions. To cite one of these, write the title of the book in italics, and list any editors, annotators, or other main contributors to the edition after the title.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

When mentioning the Constitution in your paper, you can generally just call it the Constitution without italicization or quotation marks.

In the parenthetical citation, you should specify the version cited (to match the first words of the Works Cited entry).

• As stated in “The Constitution of the United States: A Transcription,” … (art. 1, sec. 4).
• As stated in the Constitution, … (“Constitution of the United States,” art. 1, sec. 4).

Use the abbreviations “art.” (Article), “amend.” (Amendment), and “sec.” (Section) as appropriate in your citations; convert any roman numerals used in the text to arabic numerals (e.g. “XIV” becomes “14”).

If a source has no author, start the MLA Works Cited entry with the source title . Use a shortened version of the title in your MLA in-text citation .

If a source has no page numbers, you can use an alternative locator (e.g. a chapter number, or a timestamp for a video or audio source) to identify the relevant passage in your in-text citation. If the source has no numbered divisions, cite only the author’s name (or the title).

If you already named the author or title in your sentence, and there is no locator available, you don’t need a parenthetical citation:

• Rajaram  argues that representations of migration are shaped by “cultural, political, and ideological interests.”
• The homepage of The Correspondent describes it as “a movement for radically different news.”

Yes. MLA style uses title case, which means that all principal words (nouns, pronouns , verbs, adjectives , adverbs , and some conjunctions ) are capitalized.

This applies to titles of sources as well as the title of, and subheadings in, your paper. Use MLA capitalization style even when the original source title uses different capitalization .

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Caulfield, J. (2022, June 16). How to Cite the Constitution in MLA | Format & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved July 5, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/mla/constitution-citation/

Is this article helpful?

Jack Caulfield

Other students also liked, how to cite a book in mla, how to cite a website in mla, a complete guide to mla in-text citations, get unlimited documents corrected.

✔ Free APA citation check included ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

Do I need to cite an amendment of the Constitution? If so, how?

I am quoting an exerpt from the 14th amendment and could not find anything on whether or not to cite it.

To cite an Amendment of the Constitution (according to the  APA Style blog ):

• All citations of the U.S. Constitution begin with  U.S. Const . , followed by the article, amendment, section, and/or clause numbers as relevant.
• Example - In text citation : Women gained the right to vote in 1920 (U.S. Const. amend. XIX).
• Example - References page: U.S. Const. amend. XIX.  Retrieved from...

Cite the resource where you found the amendment.

To see other APA examples:

• Visit  APA Help .
• Click on  References and In-text Citation Examples .

Thank you for using ASK US. For further assistance, please contact your Baker librarians .

• Last Updated Mar 09, 2021
• Views 52977
• Answered By Baker Librarians

FAQ Actions

• Share on Facebook

Comments (0)

We'll answer you within 3 hours m - f 8:00 am - 4:00 pm..

How do I cite/reference the U.S. Constitution or, more specifically, the 4th Amendment to the Constitution?

When citing legal resources, APA defers to the popular legal citation style outlined in  The Bluebook : A Uniform System of Citation (21st ed., 2020).

The United States Constitution, the foundational document of our democracy, does not need to be cited in the text of a paper if mentioned generally.  For example:

The U. S. Constitution describes the responsibilities of the three branches of government.

If you are citing a specific part or article of the U.S. Constitution, you must cite it in the text of the paper using an in-text parenthetical reference using the abbreviations used in "Bluebook Style."  For example:

In 1920, Suffragettes succeeding in winning the right for women to vote (U. S. Const. amend. XIX).

The companion References list citation would be:

U. S. Const. amend. XIX.

If citing an article, use the following example as a pattern:

In-text citation:

(U. S. Const. art. IV, § 3).

References list citation:

U. S. Const. art. IV, § 3.

Links & Files

• APA Citation Online Guide
• Paralegal Online Academic Guide
• Justice Studies and Paralegal Studies
• Last Updated Jun 21, 2021
• Views 140800
• Answered By Suzanne Schriefer, Librarian

FAQ Actions

• Share on Facebook

Comments (0)

Hello! We're here to help! Please log in to ask your question.

Need an answer now? Search our FAQs !

How can I find my course textbook?

You can expect a prompt response, Monday through Friday, 8:00 AM-4:00 PM Central Time (by the next business day on weekends and holidays).

Questions may be answered by a Librarian, Learning Services Coordinator, Instructor, or Tutor. 

Stack Exchange Network

Stack Exchange network consists of 183 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow , the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.

Q&A for work

Connect and share knowledge within a single location that is structured and easy to search.

How to mention an amendment to the U.S. Constitution in text in APA style

In the dissertation, several amendments are mentioned in a general way. Do you spell out the amendment numbers or not or does it matter?

• Justice Douglas addressed the Eighth Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment ...
• Justice Douglas addressed the 8th Amendment and the 14th Amendment ...

The university handbook is silent on the matter, so APA style prevails. I looked in the APA 6th edition, which shows examples for in-text citations and for reference entries. But could not find any examples of a general nature.

I also do not have access to the Legal Bluebook.

• citation-style

Received an answer at the APA style blog:

Regular number formatting applies when an amendment is mentioned as part of a sentence: spell out for the first through ninth amendments and use numerals thereafter (e.g., “the fourth amendment,” “the 12th amendment”).

http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2010/06/how-to-cite-the-us-constitution-in-apa-style.html

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for browse other questions tagged thesis citation-style ..

• Featured on Meta
• We spent a sprint addressing your requests — here’s how it went
• Upcoming initiatives on Stack Overflow and across the Stack Exchange network...

Hot Network Questions

• What is the meaning of @ and & in PennyLane?
• Capture multiple errors before raising an exception
• What is meant by "I was blue ribbon" and "I broke my blue ribbon"?
• Pregnancy in a hibernated state
• firefox returns odd results for file:/// or file:///tmp
• Don't make noise. OR Don't make a noise
• Are directed graphs with out-degree exactly 2 strongly connected with probability 1?
• Mysterious plumbing piece
• When do people say "Toiletten" in the plural?
• What is a trillesti?
• Do thermodynamic cycles occur only in human-made machines?
• Confused about the output of `CosIntegral`
• In the UK, how do scientists address each other?
• Raid 0+1 Failure Cases VS. Raid 1+0
• When selling a machine with proprietary software that links against an LGPLv3 library, do I need to give the customer root access?
• Visa requirements for British passport holders going to Ghana via Brussels
• Everything has a tiny nuclear reactor in it. How much of a concern are illegal nuclear bombs?
• Were there any stone vessels (including mortars) made in Paleolithic?
• Has the Supreme Court given any examples where presumptive immunity would be overcome?
• Can you Constrain the Noise Modifier?
• pdfgrep How to locate the pages that contain multiple strings and print the page numbers?
• Interesting NT Question With AP and GCD.
• As an advisor, how can I help students with time management and procrastination?
• Should you use __pc fields in all cases for Person Accounts?

Contact: ✉️ [email protected] ☎️ (803) 302-3545

How to cite the constitution.

The method for citing the Constitution will vary based on whether you use the APA or MLA formats, but both are easy to use and are described fully below.

An Introduction to Citing the Constitution

ConstitutionUS.com provides a full-text copy of the United States Constitution. This site includes the  Bill of Rights , all  twenty-seven Amendments , and indexes to help you find specific details throughout the text.

You can cite the Constitution in any document by using a few standards. But the rules for citing the Constitution will vary surrounding whether you  use the APA or MLA format .

Before making a citation, be sure to know which of the two formats you should be using.

A Note About Passing References

You must cite the Constitution if you’re using it to support a point you wish to make when writing. However, you do not have to reference the Constitution if you make a passing reference to the document without mentioning any precise points in your work.

You can tell you need to reference the Constitution by looking at how specific you are when referencing the overall content.

How To Cite the Constitution Using APA

The first way to cite the Constitution is through the APA format. The American Psychological Association format is for scholarly journal reports and academic documents.

Basic APA constitution citations

The following items will be included in your APA citation. You’ll need to use the proper abbreviations and standards for writing:

• The U.S. Constitution name –  U.S. Const.  You do not need to add a comma after that part, although you will need to add one after each other section.
• Article –  Art.  When citing an article, it is always written in  Roman numerals .
• Amendment –  Amend.  Citing an amendment is also written in  Roman numerals .
• Section –  §.  Use Arabic numerals for citing a section of an article or amendment. You can write § by using Alt-21 in your word processing tool.
• Clause –  cl.  This part also uses Arabic numerals when citing a clause.
• Preamble –  pmbl.  This is for cases where you will cite the preamble of the Constitution.

For example, you might cite a detail in the Constitution about when the President and Vice President’s terms end. An example would come in this form:

“The Twentieth Amendment of the United States Constitution states that the President and Vice President’s terms will expire on January 20 at noon, while Congressional members’ terms end on January 3 at noon (U.S. Const. Amend. XX, §1).”

The citation lists the specific amendment you are citing and the section in that amendment, showing that you understand the subject matter.

The APA format does not require you to list the ConstitutionUS.com website or any other URL in your reference.

Citing articles and amendments that were repealed or amended

You will need to add the proper year when something in the Constitution was repealed or amended if you refer to something that was altered through such means. 

You will cite this by including at the end of your reference in parentheses the year when that part was repealed or amended.

An example of the in-text use of the citation entails how  Article 1 , Section 3, Clause 1 of the Constitution was amended by Section 1 of the Seventeenth Amendment. You could write in this case:

“The Senate was established with the Legislature intending to choose the two senators for each state for six-year terms (U.S. Const. Art. I, §3, cl. 1, amended 1919).”

You are referencing the part of the Constitution that was utilized at the start while also mentioning that the rule was amended in 1919, as the  Seventeenth Amendment  gave people the right to elect their senators through popular elections.

How it appears in your reference list

The next part of the APA citation entails how the Constitution will appear in your reference list. You will use the same listing you utilized in your in-text citation in your reference list.

For the Twentieth Amendment example listed above, you will write:

“U.S. Const. Amend. XX, §1.”

For repealed or amended content, you would need to add parentheses around the time the change took place. For the earlier example, you would list:

“U.S. Const. Art. I, §3, cl. 1 (amended 1919).”

You can also use a similar format when citing the Bill of Rights.

Examples of Citing Constitution Using APA

U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 1. – This citation refers to Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution, which grants Congress the power to lay and collect taxes.

U.S. Const. amend. I. – This citation refers to the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees the freedom of speech, religion, press, assembly, and petition.

U.S. Const. amend. II. – This citation refers to the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which protects the right to bear arms.

U.S. Const. art. III, § 1. – This citation refers to Article III, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution, which establishes the judicial power of the United States.

U.S. Const. art. IV, § 1. – This citation refers to Article IV, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution, which requires states to give full faith and credit to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of other states.

U.S. Const. art. V. – This citation refers to Article V of the U.S. Constitution, which outlines the process for amending the Constitution.

U.S. Const. art. VI, cl. 2. – This citation refers to Article VI, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution, which establishes the supremacy of the Constitution, federal laws, and treaties over state laws.

U.S. Const. amend. X. – This citation refers to the Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which reserves powers not delegated to the federal government to the states or to the people.

U.S. Const. amend. XIII. – This citation refers to the Thirteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which abolished slavery and involuntary servitude.

U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 1. – This citation refers to Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees equal protection under the law to all citizens.

U.S. Const. amend. XV. – This citation refers to the Fifteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits the denial of the right to vote based on race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

U.S. Const. amend. XIX. – This citation refers to the Nineteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which gave women the right to vote.

U.S. Const. amend. XXIV. – This citation refers to the Twenty-Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which abolished the poll tax.

U.S. Const. amend. XXVI. – This citation refers to the Twenty-Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which lowered the voting age to 18.

U.S. Const. art. I, § 9, cl. 8. – This citation refers to Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits the granting of titles of nobility by the federal government.

How To Cite the Constitution Using MLA

The Modern Language Association or MLA is another format you might utilize to cite some documents.

The MLA standard for citing the Constitution differs from what you would use with the APA format, most notably in that you’ll need to list the URL or other source that features the copy of the Constitution you are using.

In-text citations

The in-text MLA citation will entail listing the name of the webpage where you viewed the Constitution. You will list these points:

• The webpage title or name of another source you are using
• The article or amendment in Roman numerals; use the same Art. or Amend. abbreviations
• The section that you should write as Sec.

For example, when referring to a copy of the Constitution on Constitutionus.com, you can use a citation like this:

“ Article III  of the United States Constitution states that impeachment cases do not have to be subject to a trial by jury like with all other crimes (“US Constitution,” Art. III, Sec. 3).”

The most noticeable difference here is that you’ll need to provide details on where you found the Constitution in your MLA citation. You will use this standard:

“Page Title.”  Name of Website , Day, month, year of publication (without commas), URL. Accessed (day, month, and year of access without commas in between).

You can use this example when referring to the earlier example of the Constitution from the last segment:

“US Constitution.”  ConstitutionUS.com , 2020, https://constitutionus.com/. Accessed 10 March 2021.

Examples of quoting the constitution using MLA

“Article I.” ConstitutionUS.com, 2020, https://constitutionus.com/#article-1. Accessed 10 March 2021. (Citing a specific article on the website)

“Article I, Section 2.” ConstitutionUS.com, 2020, https://constitutionus.com/#article-1-section-2. Accessed 10 March 2021. (Citing a specific section on the website)

“Amendment I.” ConstitutionUS.com, 2020, https://constitutionus.com/#amendment-1. Accessed 10 March 2021. (Citing a specific amendment on the website)

“Amendment V.” ConstitutionUS.com, 2020, https://constitutionus.com/#amendment-5. Accessed 10 March 2021. (Citing a specific amendment on the website)

“Article III, Section 1.” ConstitutionUS.com, 2020, https://constitutionus.com/#article-3-section-1. Accessed 10 March 2021. (Citing a specific section on the website)

“Article IV, Section 2.” ConstitutionUS.com, 2020, https://constitutionus.com/#article-4-section-2. Accessed 10 March 2021. (Citing a specific section on the website)

“Amendment XIV, Section 1.” ConstitutionUS.com, 2020, https://constitutionus.com/#amendment-14-section-1. Accessed 10 March 2021. (Citing a specific section on the website)

“Preamble.” ConstitutionUS.com, 2020, https://constitutionus.com/#preamble. Accessed 10 March 2021. (Citing a specific section on the website)

“Article II, Section 2.” ConstitutionUS.com, 2020, https://constitutionus.com/#article-2-section-2. Accessed 10 March 2021. (Citing a specific section on the website)

“Article VI, Clause 2.” ConstitutionUS.com, 2020, https://constitutionus.com/#article-6-clause-2. Accessed 10 March 2021. (Citing a specific clause on the website)

“Article V.” ConstitutionUS.com, 2020, https://constitutionus.com/#article-5. Accessed 10 March 2021. (Citing a specific article on the website)

“Amendment X.” ConstitutionUS.com, 2020, https://constitutionus.com/#amendment-10. Accessed 10 March 2021. (Citing a specific amendment on the website)

“Article III, Section 2.” ConstitutionUS.com, 2020, https://constitutionus.com/#article-3-section-2. Accessed 10 March 2021. (Citing a specific section on the website)

“Article VI, Clause 3.” ConstitutionUS.com, 2020, https://constitutionus.com/#article-6-clause-3. Accessed 10 March 2021. (Citing a specific clause on the website)

“Amendment XIII.” ConstitutionUS.com, 2020, https://constitutionus.com/#amendment-13. Accessed 10 March 2021. (Citing a specific amendment on the website)

What about book versions of the Constitution?

You could always use a book version of the Constitution if you don’t have access to ConstitutionUS.com. For this case, you would use the following format in your works cited space:

Get Smarter on US News, History, and the Constitution

Join the thousands of fellow patriots who rely on our 5-minute newsletter to stay informed on the key events and trends that shaped our nation's past and continue to shape its present.

Check your inbox or spam folder to confirm your subscription.

Book title.  Edited by (First and last names), edition, publisher, year.

You would also refer to the Constitution within the text by ( U.S. Constitution , (amendment or article), (section)).

You can use a similar citation method if you refer specifically to the Bill of Rights.

A Final Word on Citing the Constitution

Be sure you use the right standards when referencing the United States Constitution in your work, whether APA or MLA. Failing to use the correct citation standard could result in penalties in your papers or even allegations of plagiarism.

Watch the following video to learn more about constitution citation:

Edward Savey

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

What Is the Commerce Clause?

Separation of powers in the constitution, who scribed the constitution of the united states, what is censure vs. impeachment, please enter your email address to be updated of new content:.

© 2023 US Constitution All rights reserved

U.S. Constitution.net

How to cite this site – the u.s. constitution online – usconstitution.net, how to cite this site.

Jump to: Citing the Constitution

It is very important when writing a paper for a school project (at any level, from elementary school to graduate school) to properly cite your sources. Where did you find your information? Citations are placed in the text as footnotes or endnotes, and/or placed at the end of your work in a bibliography. This page will handle a few different possibilities. The first is to answer the question “How do I cite a page on this site?” or, as I like to say, “How to cite the site.”

There are two main areas that someone might wish to cite on this site. The first is one of the pages found on the site. Several are simply electronic copies of historical documents, while others are research pages or opinion pages. You should be able to discern which is which pretty easily. Unless the information is a copy of a historical document, and unless otherwise noted, everything here is written by the Webmaster, Steve Mount.

Here is a standard way to cite an HTML page published on the Internet, according to the Columbia Guide to Online Style :

• Mount, Steve. “Constitutional Topic: Martial Law.” USConstitution.net. 30 Nov 2001. http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_mlaw.html (3 Dec 2001)

Specifically, the data is as follows: Author, Title, Site, Modification Date (found at the bottom of every page), URL, and the date the page was accessed. The two dates are critical because of the changeable nature of the Web.

The next citation uses the APA format. This standard comes from the American Psychological Association, and is often used in psychology and other social sciences:

• Mount, S. (2010). Constitutional topic: due process. Retrieved February 23, 2011 from http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_duep.html

Specifically, the data is as follows: Author, Modification Year (found at the bottom of every page), page title, the date the page was accessed, and the URL.

Finally, the MLA style is often used. This style comes from The Modern Language Association. With this style, citations are noted in the text and full references are given in a Works Cited list at the end of the paper.

• Inline: (Mount)
• Works Cited: Mount, Steve. “Constitutional Topic: The Census.” USConstitution.net . 3 Jan. 2011. 27 Feb. 2011 .

Specifically, the data is as follows: Author, Title, Site, Modification Date, thee date the page was accessed, and URL.

The second source of information is this site’s Message Boards. The primary information available in the Message Boards is opinion. Because the opinions are those of the posters, the citation of a message needs to include the name or handle of the poster. Here is an example, in the Columbia Style, for a posting from the Classic Boards on this site:

• Ian. “Re: Question regarding Law.” 2 Dec 2001. USConstitution.net Q&A Board. http://www.usconstitution.net/cgi-bin/wwwbmsg.cgi?const&001280.wwb (3 Dec 2001)

The data is as follows: Poster, Subject, Date Posted, Board Name, URL, and date accessed.

All posts created after November 2003 used the new messaging software. Here is an example for a posting using the new software:

• Andy. “Re: Impeach Scalia?” 5 Feb 2004. Debate Archives. http://www.usconstitution.net/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=debarch;action=display;num=1077548457 (25 Feb 2004)

Citing the U.S. Constitution

Another common question involves how to cite the Constitution itself. There are two forms, a long form and a short form. In a legal document, the short form will suffice in all instances, whereas in a non-legal paper, the long form should be used once, and the short form can be used thereafter.

• “The Constitution of the United States,” Article 1, Section 8, Clause 5.
• “The Constitution of the United States,” Amendment 5.

Short Form:

• U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 5.
• U.S. Const. am. 5.

In place of the “§” symbol, the abbreviation “sect.” can be used. In a paper dealing primarily with the Constitution, there is no need to mention “U.S. Const.”

Criminal Justice: Citing Constitutions in APA Style

• Articles - Databases
• Using APA Professional Style
• Citing sources in APA Style

Citing Constitutions in APA Style

• Testing and Exams
• Citing Sources This link opens in a new window

To cite a whole federal or state constitution, a citation is not necessary. Simply refer to the constitution in text.

The U.S. Constitution has 26 amendments.

The Massachusetts Constitution was ratified in 1780.

Create reference list entries and in-text citations for citations to articles and amendments of constitutions. In the reference list and in parenthetical citations, abbreviate U.S. Constitution to "U.S. Const." and use the legal state abbreviation for a state constitution (e.g. "Md. Const." for the Maryland Constitution; see a list of state abbreviations for legal references at the Legal Information Institute at https://www.law.cornell.edu/citation/4-500). In the narrative, use either "U.S. or "United States" for the U.S. Constitution, and spell out the name of the state for a state constitution--for example, "the Wisconsin Constitution." U.S. Constitution article and amendment numbers are Roman numerals. State constitution article numbers are also Roman numerals, but state constitution amendment numbers are Arabic numerals. URLs are not necessary for the reference. Additional information about the cited source can be included in the narrative, if desired.

American Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American

Psychological Association (7th ed.). https://doi.org/10.1037/0000165-000

Article of the U.S. Constitution

U.S. Const. art. xxx, § x.

U.S. Const. art. 1, § 3.

Parenthetical citation: (U.S. Const. art. I § 3)

Narrative citation:  Article I, Section 3, of the U.S. Constitution

Article of a state constitution

State Const. art. xxx, § x.

S.C. Const. art. IX, § 3.

Parenthetical citation:  (S.C. Const. art. IX, § 3)

Narrative citation:  Article IX, Section 3 of the South Carolina Constitution

Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

U.S. Const. amend. xxx.

U.S. Const. amend. XIX

Parenthetical citation:  (U.S. Const. amend. XIX)

Narrative citation: Amendment XIX to the U.S. Constitution

• Amendments to state constitutions are cited in the same way as amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
• No date is needed in the reference unless the amendment has been repealed.
• << Previous: Citing sources in APA Style
• Next: Testing and Exams >>
• Last Updated: Jun 5, 2024 11:10 AM
• URL: https://guides.library.waubonsee.edu/criminaljustice

Bluebook Citations: Constitutions

• Primary Authorities
• Court Documents
• Constitutions
• Regulations
• Common Mistakes
• EASY Bluebooking
• Weird Bluebook Rules
• Secondary Authorities
• Bluebook Patterns
• Hawaii Legislative Materials

Commonly Cited Primary Authorities

Citations are to the 20th edition of The Bluebook, A Uniform System of Citation .

Rule 11 Constitutions (p. 118)

Constitutions b11, r11, t10, t16.

Cite the United States Constitution, 14th Amendment, Section 2.

CORRECT CITATION:   U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 2.

Cite the Hawaii Constitution, Article 9, Section 1, Clause 2.

CORRECT CITATION:   Haw. Const. art. IX, § 1, cl. 2.

SHORT CITE NOTE:   According to Rule 11, Constitutions, you cannot use a short cite other than Id. for constitutions.

Rule 20.4 Foreign Constitutions

Cite all foreign constitutions by name.  Include [Constitution] if the nature of the document is not otherwise clear from the context.

• << Previous: Court Documents
• Next: Regulations >>
• Last Updated: Aug 28, 2020 8:33 AM
• URL: https://law-hawaii.libguides.com/bluebook

Partnership

Sole proprietorship, limited partnership, compare businesses, employee rights, osha regulations, labor hours, personal & family, child custody & support, guardianship, incarceration, civil and misdemeanors, legal separation, real estate law, tax, licenses & permits, business licenses, wills & trusts, power of attorney, last will & testament, living trust, living will.

• Share Tweet Email Print

How to Cite the Amendments in Bluebook Format

By Elizabeth Stock, J.D.

• How to Cite a Denied Writ of Certiorari

The Bluebook is the resource all attorneys and legal scholars use to properly cite and format legal documents. While writing a law review journal or court document, it may become necessary to understand how to cite an amendment to the United States Constitution. A citation informs the reader where the writer obtained the information included in the document. Rule 11 in the Bluebook provides an easy rule and an example explaining how to cite an amendment properly.

Use small caps to write United States Constitution. The small caps option is found in the font section of most word processing programs. Small caps are different than all caps, and to properly cite an amendment to the United State Constitution, you must use small caps. According to Rule 11, abbreviate United States as U.S. In addition, you must abbreviate Constitution as CONST. with a period after the "t."

Abbreviate the word amendment so the citation reads AMEND. with a period after the "d." Again, AMEND. should be in small caps as well.

Insert the number of the amendment using roman numerals. Place a comma after the roman numeral.

Locate the section symbol, §, in the word processing program by going to "insert" and then "symbol." Insert the amendment's section number after the section symbol. Use standard numbers, not roman numerals, for the section number.

Include a period at the end of the entire citation. Like a sentence, all citations have a period denoting the end of the citation. For example, the proper citation for an amendment to the U.S. Constitution according to the Bluebook is, U.S. CONST. AMEND. XX, §3.

• Cornell University School of Law: Basic Legal Citation

Elizabeth Stock began writing professionally in 2010. Before pursuing a career as a freelance writer, Stock was an editor and note writer for the "Thomas Jefferson Law Review" while attending Thomas Jefferson School of Law in San Diego. Stock recently graduated magna cum laude from Thomas Jefferson earning a Juris Doctor.

Related Articles

• How to Cite an Affidavit
• How to Amend and Restate a Certificate of Incorporation in Delaware
• How to Footnote a Legal Document

• Quick Facts
• Mission and Goals
• Facilty Usage
• Academic Divisions
• Academic Success Center
• Online Learning
• D2L Course Access
• Graduation/Transcripts
• Apply for Admission
• Check Admissions Status
• Check Financial Status
• Tuition & Fees
• Scholarships
• Inquiry Form
• HELPFUL LINKS
• Student/Faculty Email
• OneUSG Connect
• Campus Closings
• QUICK LINKS
• Future Students
• Current Students
• Community / Alumni
• Offices & Departments
• Faculty/Staff

• GHC Libraries

Q. How do I cite an Amendment to the US Constitution in Chicago Manual Style?

• 23 About the Library
• 8 Campus Information
• 19 Citations
• 3 For Faculty
• 21 Galileo Databases
• 13 GIL Express/ILL
• 29 Library Policies
• 10 MS Office
• 25 Research Help
• 14 Technology
• 6 Tutorial Center

Answered By: Iwanna Book Last Updated: Oct 27, 2020     Views: 20198

Links & files.

• Political Science Reference Guide for Chicago Manual of Style

Our Friends at Texas A&M Texarkana put together a guide. Check it out.

Example: U.S. Constitution. amend. XIV, sec. 2.   

Chat with us!

Related topics.

• Share on Facebook

Was this helpful? Yes 1 No 13

APA Citation Guide

• Paper Formatting
• Figures and Images
• Reference Components
• Book Examples
• Article Examples
• Media Examples
• Internet Resources Examples

The Generic Reference

Personal communication, class materials, poster sessions, theses & dissertations, conference proceedings, court decision, executive orders, u.s. constitution, charter of the united nations, secondary sources.

• In-Text Citations

If you are trying to cite a source that is not listed here, and you cannot find guidelines from APA elsewhere, you can create a generic reference. The Publication Manual lists certain elements that should be included in a generic reference:

• Who / Author - Who is responsible for this work? This can be a person (author or editor) or an organization. If there is no author or editor, follow the guidelines discussed in No Author .
• When / Date - When was this work published? A year (Year) is usually acceptable, although you may need to include a month and day (Year, Month Day). If there is no date, use n.d.: (n.d.).
• What / Title - What is this work called? This is the title of the actual work you are using, not necessarily a larger 'container' like a website. If there is no title, you must create one, and enclose it in square brackets [ ] . You may also wish to clarify the format of the item in square brackets, after the title. Examples could be [Painting], [App], or [Video].
• Where / Source - Where can I retrieve this work? This can be a book, website (with URL), journal, publication information, or something else.

Make sure to be familiar with what other APA citations look like and with the formatting rules .

Author. (Date). Title [Format]. Source.

Source: Publication Manual , 9.4

Personal communication can mean letters, memos, emails, interviews, telephone conversations, etc. that your readers will not be able to access. Since these items are not recoverable, it is not necessary to include in a reference list. Use parenthetical citations in the text only.

(D. J. Matthews, personal communication, July 10, 2009)

Source: Publication Manual , 8.9

For information retrieved from a mobile app (such as an iPhone or Android app), cite as follows:

Wiley. (2015). Psychology spotlight (Version 1.8) [Mobile app]. App Store. https://apps.apple.com/us/app/psychology-spotlight/id503789655

(Wiley, 2015)

Source:  Publication Manual , 10.10 (example 79)

Artist, A. A. (copyright year). Title of work [Medium: Painting, drawing, sculpture, photograph, etc.]. Museum, Location. http://xxxxx

Example 1: Physical Work of Art

Da Vinci, L. (1506). Mona Lisa [Painting]. Musée du Louvre, Paris, France.

(Da Vinci, 1506)

Example 2: Artwork Viewed Online

Flack, A. (1988). Islandia, goddess of the healing waters [Sculpture]. Harn Museum of Art, Gainesville, FL, United States. http://www.harn.ufl.edu/collections/8_e.html

(Flack, 1988)

Source:  Publication Manual  10.14 (example 97);  Artwork References [APA Style]

Only include a full reference to lecture notes or class materials that are behind a login screen (such as Canvas) if you are writing for an audience that will be able to retrieve them. Otherwise, cite it as a personal communication .

Author, A. A. (Year). Title of presentation [Lecture notes or PowerPoint slides]. Website. http://xxxxx

Preskill, J. (n.d.). Chapter 4: Quantum entanglement [Lecture notes]. Caltech Particle Theory Group. http://www.theory.caltech.edu/people/preskill/ph229/notes/chap4.pdf

(Preskill, n.d.)

Matthews, D. (2019). [Lecture notes on evaluating Internet resources]. Canvas at Santa Fe College. https://courses.sfcollege.edu/login

(Matthews, 2019)

Source: Publication Manual , 10.14 (example 102); Classroom or Intranet Resources ;  PowerPoint Slide or Lecture Note References [APA Style]

Author, A. A. (Year, Month Days of Conference). Title of poster session  [Poster presentation]. Conference Name, location. http://xxxxx

Rusk, F. (2019, April 10–13). Beyond the research paper: Engaging faculty in alternative information literacy activities and assignments [Poster presentation]. Academic Colleges & Research Libraries, Cleveland, OH, United States.

(Rusk, 2019)

Source:  Publication Manual , 10.5 (example 62)

Author, A. A. (Year). Title of doctoral dissertation or master's thesis  [Type, Institution]. Database/Archive Name. http://xxxxx

Example 1: Doctoral Dissertation

Chang, S. (2009). Relationship between active leisure and active vacations  [Doctoral dissertation, University of Florida]. University of Florida Digital Collections. http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0024249/00001

(Chang, 2009)

Example 2: Master's Thesis

Njuguna, S. W. (2002). Gender education and development: Women's quest for higher education in Kenya  [Master's thesis, Morgan State University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

(Njuguna, 2002)

Example 3: Only Available in Print

Saba, D. R. (1987). Segmenting the sports market: A benefit analysis  [Unpublished Master's thesis]. Florida State University.

(Saba, 1987)

Sources: Publication Manual , 10.6 (examples 64-66);  Published Dissertation or Thesis References ;  Unpublished Dissertation or Thesis References [APA Style]

Cite conference proceedings based on the format they are published in. If published in a journal, cite as a journal article, if published as a book, cite as a book, etc.

Source: Conference Proceeding References [APA Style]

Name v. Name, Volume Source Page (Court Date). http://xxxxx

Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973). https://www.oyez.org/cases/1971/70-18

( Roe v. Wade , 1973)

Source: Publication Manual , 11.4 (examples 1-7)

From the Code of Federal Regulations

Exec. Order No. xxxxx, 3 C.F.R. Page (Year). http://xxxxx

Exec. Order No. 13588, 3 C.F.R. 281–282 (2011). https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/CFR-2012-title3-vol1/CFR-2012-title3-vol1-eo13588

(Exec. Order No. 13588, 2011)

Source:  Publication Manual , 11.7 (example 21)

Name, A. A. (Year). Name of patent (Patent Identifier No. xxx). Patent Organization. http://xxxxx

Whitehorn, S. J., & Zehr, G. E. (2006). Electronic media reader (U.S. Patent No. D591,741 S). U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/60/7a/8d/d1968eca804a80/USD591741.pdf

(Whitehorn & Zehr, 2006)

Source:  Publication Manual , 11.8 (example 22)

Name of the Statute/Act, Title Number Source § Section number(s) (Year of Code Used). http://xxxx

Example 1: Federal Statute

Mental Health Systems Act, 42 U.S.C. § 9401 (1988). https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCODE-2017-title42/USCODE-2017-title42-chap102-sec9401

(Mental Health Systems Act, 1988)

Example 2: State Statute

Florida Patient's Bill of Rights and Responsibilities, Fla. Stat. § 381.026 (1991 & rev. 2017). http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0300-0399/0381/Sections/0381.026.html

(Florida Patient's Bill of Rights and Responsibilities, 1991/2017)

This statute was originally codified in 1991 and was last updated in 2017, so both dates are included.

Source: Publication Manual , 11.5 (examples 8-13)

If you wish to cite the U.S. Constitution as a whole, you may simply mention it in your paper without including a citation in the references list.

However, if you are citing a part of the Constitution, you should use the article, amendment, section, and/or clause numbers.

• Article = art. [use Roman numerals: I, II, III]
• Amendment = amend. [use Roman numerals: I, II, III]
• Section = § [use Arabic numbers: 1, 2, 3]
• Clause = cl. [use Arabic numbers: 1, 2, 3]
• Preamble = pmbl

The founding fathers addressed the process by which new states may join the union (U.S. Const. art. I, § 3).

U.S. Const. art. I, § 3.

During prohibition, the sale of liquor was made illegal (U.S. Const. amend. XVIII, repealed 1933).

U.S. Const. amend. XVIII (repealed 1933).

Source: Publication Manual , 11.9 (examples 23-27)

U.N. Charter art. xx, para. xx.

U.N. Charter art. 1, para. 3.

(U.N. Charter art. 1, para. 3)

Source: Publication Manual , 11.9 (example 28)

A secondary source is a source that is cited in another source. APA strongly suggests that you always track down the original source to use and cite. However, if that is not possible, use the following guidelines.

In your references list, include the source you have in hand . In your in-text citation, use the name/date of the original source, plus the words as cited in and then the source you used.

For example, you are using an article by Akerstedt et al., and they cite information from a study by Wing et al.

Text found in Akerstedt et al: "This issue has not been addressed before, but weekend compensatory sleep seems to counteract obesity in children who have short sleep duration during weekdays (Wing, Li, Li, Zhang, & Kong, 2009)."

Akerstedt, T., Ghilotti, F., Grotta, A., Zhao, H., Adami, H.-O., Trolle-Lagerros, Y., & Bellocco, R. (2019). Sleep duration and mortality – Does weekend sleep matter? Journal of Sleep Research, 28 (1), e12712. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsr.12712

(Wing et al, 2009, as cited in Akerstedt et al., 2019)

Source: Publication Manual , 8.6; Secondary Sources [APA Style]

• << Previous: Internet Resources Examples
• Next: In-Text Citations >>
• Last Updated: Apr 25, 2024 2:03 PM
• URL: https://sfcollege.libguides.com/apa

Commitment to Equal Access and Equal Opportunity

Santa Fe College is committed to an environment that embraces diversity, respects the rights of all individuals, is open and accessible, and is free of harassment and discrimination. For more information, visit sfcollege.edu/eaeo or contact [email protected] .

SACSCOC Accreditation Statement

Santa Fe College is accredited by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC). For more information, visit sfcollege.edu/sacscoc .

Amdt8.4.6 Addiction, Alcoholism, and Homelessness under the Eighth Amendment

Eighth Amendment :

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

The Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause typically applies to a punishment rendered as a sentence for a criminal conviction. The Supreme Court has recognized violations of the Clause when a punishment is grossly out of proportion to the severity of the crime, 1 Footnote Gregg v. Georgia , 428 U.S. 153, 174 (1976) . See generally Amdt8.4.2 Evolving or Fixed Standard of Cruel and Unusual Punishment . which may include situations in which the government punishes an individual for their status rather than their overt actions. 2 Footnote Robinson v. California , 370 U.S. 660, 667 (1962) . For example, in Robinson v. California , the Court struck down a state law that criminalized narcotic addiction as violating the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause. 3 Footnote Id . Though the Court observed that the punishment imposed by the law—90 days’ imprisonment—was not, in the abstract . . . either cruel or unusual, the Court held that imposing such a punishment on an individual based on their status as one addicted to narcotics, rather than any overt act, would violate the Eighth Amendment . 4 Footnote Id .

In Powell v. Texas , however, the Court held that a law criminalizing public drunkenness did not run afoul of the Court’s holding in Robinson when enforced against an individual with chronic alcoholism. 5 Footnote 392 U.S. 514 , 532 (1968) (plurality opinion). Justice White concurred in the result but only because the record did not show that the defendant was unable to stay out of public. Id . at 553–54 (White, J., concurring). Justice White and four dissenting Justices appeared willing to hold that if addiction as a status may not be punished, then neither can the yielding to the compulsion of that addiction. Id . at 548 ; id . at 554, 567 (Fortas, J., dissenting). Observing that the individual was convicted not for being a chronic alcoholic, but for being in public while drunk on a particular occasion, the Court did not find sufficient evidence in the record or the current state of medical knowledge to conclude that individuals suffering from chronic alcoholism would be utterly unable to avoid being publicly intoxicated. 6 Footnote Id . at 532, 534–35 (plurality opinion).

The Court further addressed the applicability of the Eighth Amendment in City of Grants Pass v. Johnson , where it held that city ordinances that impose fines, bans from public property, or prosecutions for criminal trespass on individuals who camp in public parks was not cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment . 7 Footnote City of Grants Pass v. Johnson, No. 23-175, slip op. at 35 (U.S. June 28, 2024). The Court explained that the Eighth Amendment addresses the type of punishment that the government can impose on convicted criminals, not whether the government can criminalize certain activities. 8 Footnote Id . at 15. The Court then considered the nature of the ordinances’ punishments. The Court further held that, because they were not intended to inflict terror, pain, or disgrace, they were not cruel 9 Footnote Id . at 17. and, because large numbers of cities and States across the country have long employed, and today employ, similar punishments for similar offenses, they were not unusual. 10 Footnote Id . Examining whether the ordinances were inconsistent with Robinson , the Court held that Robinson was inapplicable because the ordinances did not target a status. 11 Footnote Id . at 20. Rather, they barred all people from public camping, including vacationers and protesters as well as the homeless. 12 Footnote Id . at 17-21. As such, the ordinances criminalized conduct—camping on public property—not the status of homelessness. 13 Footnote Id . at 21. The Court noted that, in Powell v. Texas , it had declined to extend Robinson to activities that result from allegedly involuntary conduct 14 Footnote Id . at 22-23 (citing Powell , 392 U.S. at 532 ). and instead had distinguished being convicted for alcoholism (status) with being convicted for being drunk in public (conduct). 15 Footnote Id . at 23.

•   Jump to essay-1 Gregg v. Georgia , 428 U.S. 153, 174 (1976) . See generally Amdt8.4.2 Evolving or Fixed Standard of Cruel and Unusual Punishment .
•   Jump to essay-2 Robinson v. California , 370 U.S. 660, 667 (1962) .
•   Jump to essay-3 Id .
•   Jump to essay-4 Id .
•   Jump to essay-5 392 U.S. 514 , 532 (1968) (plurality opinion). Justice White concurred in the result but only because the record did not show that the defendant was unable to stay out of public. Id . at 553–54 (White, J., concurring). Justice White and four dissenting Justices appeared willing to hold that if addiction as a status may not be punished, then neither can the yielding to the compulsion of that addiction. Id . at 548 ; id . at 554, 567 (Fortas, J., dissenting).
•   Jump to essay-6 Id . at 532, 534–35 (plurality opinion).
•   Jump to essay-7 City of Grants Pass v. Johnson, No. 23-175, slip op. at 35 (U.S. June 28, 2024).
•   Jump to essay-8 Id . at 15.
•   Jump to essay-9 Id . at 17.
•   Jump to essay-10 Id .
•   Jump to essay-11 Id . at 20.
•   Jump to essay-12 Id . at 17-21.
•   Jump to essay-13 Id . at 21.
•   Jump to essay-14 Id . at 22-23 (citing Powell , 392 U.S. at 532 ).
•   Jump to essay-15 Id . at 23.

July 5, 2024

U.s. supreme court, loper bright enterprises v. raimondo.

Nos. 22-451 & 22-1219                 6/28/24

Should the holding expressed in Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. , 467 U.S. 837 (allowing executive branch agencies’ interpretations of statutes to take precedence over reviewing courts) be upheld?

No. “ Chevron is overruled. Courts must exercise their independent judgment in deciding whether an agency has acted within its statutory authority, as the APA [Administrative Procedure Act] requires. Careful attention to the judgment of the Executive Branch may help inform that inquiry. And when a particular statute delegates authority to an agency consistent with constitutional limits, courts must respect the delegation, while ensuring that the agency acts within it. But courts need not and under the APA may not defer to an agency interpretation of the law simply because a statute is ambiguous.” Read opinion.

Concurrence (Thomas, J.):

“I join the Court’s opinion in full because it correctly concludes that Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. , 467 U.S. 837 (1984), must finally be overruled. Under Chevron , a judge was required to adopt an agency’s interpretation of an ambiguous statute, so long as the agency had a ‘permissible construction of the statute.’ As the Court explains, that deference does not comport with the Administrative Procedure Act, which requires judges to decide ‘all relevant questions of law’ and ‘interpret constitutional and statutory provisions’ when reviewing an agency action.”

Concurrence (Gorsuch, J.):

“ Chevron deference is inconsistent with the directions Congress gave us in the APA. It represents a grave anomaly when viewed against the sweep of historic judicial practice. The decision undermines core rule-of-law values ranging from the promise of fair notice to the promise of a fair hearing. Even on its own terms, it has proved unworkable and operated to undermine rather than advance reliance interests, often to the detriment of ordinary Americans. And from the start, the whole project has relied on the overaggressive use of snippets and stray remarks from an opinion that carried mixed messages. Stare decisis ’s true lesson today is not that we are bound to respect Chevron ’s ‘startling development,’ but bound to inter it.”

Dissent (Kagan, J., joined by Sotomayor and Jackson, JJ.):

“Who should give content to a statute when Congress’s instructions have run out? Should it be a court? Or should it be the agency Congress has charged with administering the statute? The answer Chevron gives is that it should usually be the agency, within the bounds of reasonableness. That rule has formed the backdrop against which Congress, courts, and agencies—as well as regulated parties and the public—all have operated for decades. It has been applied in thousands of judicial decisions. It has become part of the warp and woof of modern government, supporting regulatory efforts of all kinds—to name a few, keeping air and water clean, food and drugs safe, and financial markets honest. And the rule is right.”

Commentary:

This case re-establishes courts—the judicial branch—as pre-eminent in resolving legal disputes and engaging in statutory construction.

City of Grants Pass v. Johnson

No. 23-175                         6/28/24

Do laws regulating camping on public property violate the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishments?

No. “[I]f many other constitutional provisions address what a government may criminalize and how it may go about securing a conviction, the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against ‘cruel and unusual punishments’ focuses on what happens next. That Clause ‘has always been considered, and properly so, to be directed at the method or kind of punishment’ a government may ‘impose for the violation of criminal statutes.’” The Eighth Amendment “serves many important functions, but it does not authorize federal judges to wrest those rights and responsibilities from the American people and in their place dictate this Nation’s homelessness policy.” Read opinion.

“Suffice it to say, we have never endorsed such a broad view of the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause. Both this Court and lower courts should be wary of expanding the Clause beyond its text and original meaning.”

Dissent (Sotomayor, J., joined by Kagan and Jackson, JJ.):

“Sleep is a biological necessity, not a crime. For some people, sleeping outside is their only option. The City of Grants Pass jails and fines those people for sleeping anywhere in public at any time, including in their cars, if they use as little as a blanket to keep warm or a rolled-up shirt as a pillow. For people with no access to shelter, that punishes them for being homeless. That is unconscionable and unconstitutional. Punishing people for their status is ‘cruel and unusual’ under the Eighth Amendment.”

The dispute in this case arises out of how the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has been construing the Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause. But this decision will have impact beyond the Ninth Circuit. For example, if a prosecutor wishes to pursue a prosecution under §48.05 of the Penal Code (Prohibited Camping), this should be the first decision the prosecutor reads.

Department of State v. Munoz

No. 23-334                         6/21/24

Does a citizen have a fundamental liberty interest in her noncitizen spouse being admitted to the country?

No. The wife in this case is a U.S. citizen, and her husband is a citizen of El Salvador. The couple sought an immigration visa so that they could live together in the U.S. During the consular interviews of her husband, it was discovered that he was a member of MS-13, an international criminal gang, and his application was denied. But because of national security concerns, the reason for the denial was not given to the respondent or her husband. The Court rejected the wife’s argument that her right to live with her non-citizen spouse in the U.S. was protected in the “liberty” portion by the Fifth Amendment, concluding that she did not show this was “an unenumerated constitutional right [that was] deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition. … In fact, Congress’s longstanding regulation of spousal immigration—including through bars on admissibility—cuts the other way.” Read opinion.  

“Whether or not [the respondent] had a constitutional right to the information she wanted, the government gave it to her. I therefore would reverse the Ninth Circuit’s decision without reaching the government’s constitutional arguments.” Read concurrence.

Dissent (Sotomayor, J.):

“The constitutional right to marriage is not so flimsy. The Government cannot banish a U. S. citizen’s spouse and give only a bare statutory citation as an excuse. By denying [the respondent] the right to a factual basis for her husband’s exclusion, the majority departs from longstanding precedent and gravely undervalues the right to marriage in the immigration context.” Read dissent.

In this case, the citizen/wife relied upon procedural due process and not substantive due process. Whether or not that was fatal to her claim, it is clear from the Court’s precedents that the citizen/wife could not rely upon procedural due process to advance the rights of someone other than herself.

Chiaverini v. City of Napoleon, Ohio

No. 23-50                           6/20/24

Does the presence of probable cause for one charge in a criminal proceeding categorically defeat a Fourth Amendment malicious-prosecution claim under 42 U.S.C. §1983 relating to another, baseless charge?

No. “Consistent with both Fourth Amendment and traditional common-law practice, courts should evaluate suits [such as the respondent]’s charge by charge.” The plaintiff is a jeweler who bought a ring for $45 from a petty jewel thief. The owners of the ring found out that the plaintiff had the ring and demanded its return. When he refused to do so, the rightful owners went to the police. The police filed separate complaints for the misdemeanor offenses of receiving stolen property and dealing in precious metals without a license as well as a felony complaint of money laundering. The felony complaint was alleged to be baseless. The plaintiff was arrested for all three charges and held for three days. While not ruling on the merits of the plaintiff’s complaint, the Court found that each charge must be considered individually, and the fact that one charge was valid did not bar the plaintiff’s §1983 claim from proceeding when another charge was alleged to be baseless. Read opinion.

Dissent (Thomas, J.):

“A malicious-prosecution claim bears little resemblance to an unreasonable seizure under the Fourth Amendment. … I would take a far simpler course. Instead of forcing a square peg into a round hole by judging an unreasonable seizure based on the malicious-prosecution tort, I would ‘hold that a malicious-prosecution claim may not be brought under the Fourth Amendment.’” (citations omitted) Read dissent.

Dissent (Gorsuch, J.):

Section 1983 performs vital work by permitting individuals to vindicate their constitutional rights in federal court. But it does not authorize this Court to expound new rights of its own creation. … Despite that settled rule, the Court today doubles down on a new tort of its own recent invention—what it calls a ‘Fourth Amendment malicious-prosecution’ cause of action. Respectfully, it is hard to know where this tort comes from. Stare for as long as you like at the Fourth Amendment and you won’t see anything about prosecutions, malicious or otherwise. Instead, the Amendment provides that ‘[t]he right of the people to be secure … against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.’” Read dissent.

The issue in this case is not over whether the plaintiff’s malicious-prosecution case should succeed. Rather, the issue is whether the plaintiff’s malicious-prosecution case can go forward, even though the officers definitely had probable cause for some of the charges against the plaintiff. The import of this decision is that the Court now firmly recognizes a Fourth Amendment malicious-prosecution claim.

Gonzalez v. Trevino

No. 22-1025                       6/20/24

In a 42 U.S.C. §1983 retaliatory-arrest claim, must the plaintiff always proffer comparative evidence of similarly situated individuals who engaged in the same criminal conduct but were not arrested?

No. The Court found the Fifth Circuit took a too narrow view of Nieves v. Bartlett , 587 U.S. 391 (2019). “We recognized the Nieves exception to account for ‘circumstances where officers have probable cause to make arrests, but typically exercise their discretion not to do so.’ To fall within the exception, a plaintiff must produce evidence to prove that his arrest occurred in such circumstances.” She was charged with intentionally removing a governmental record under Texas Penal Code §37.10(a)(3) and had provided evidence that the Texas anti-tampering statute had never been used in the county “to criminally charge someone for trying to steal a nonbinding or expressive document. “Gonzalez’s survey is a permissible type of evidence because the fact that no one has ever been arrested for engaging in a certain kind of conduct—especially when the criminal prohibition is longstanding and the conduct at issue is not novel—makes it more likely that an officer has declined to arrest someone for engaging in such conduct in the past.” Read opinion.

Concurrence (Alito, J.):

“In sum, Nieves applies to all retaliatory-arrest claims brought under §1983. And that decision means what it says. ‘[P]robable cause should generally defeat a retaliatory arrest claim,’ and a plaintiff bringing such a claim ‘must plead and prove the absence of probable cause for the arrest’ unless he can fit within its narrow exception. Nothing in the Court’s decision today should be understood as casting doubt on this holding.” (citations omitted)

Concurrence (Kavanaugh, J.):

“The Nieves exception is a conduct-based comparison. Only if the conduct does not usually trigger an arrest under any statute can you have a Nieves -exception claim—like jaywalking. Gonzalez’s argument turns not on her conduct (taking government records) but rather on her mens rea . … In short, this is (at most) a case about probable cause as to mens rea , not about conduct-based comparisons. This case has nothing to do with the Nieves exception.”

Concurrence (Jackson, J.):

“Today, the Court rightly recognizes that petitioner Sylvia Gonzalez’s survey—showing that, in the last decade, no one charged with the crime for which she was arrested had engaged in conduct similar to hers—is objective evidence admissible to prove that she ‘was arrested when otherwise similarly situated individuals not engaged in the same sort of protected speech had not been.’ Nieves v. Bartlett , 587 U. S. 391, 407 (2019). That recognition, however, should not be taken to suggest that plaintiffs cannot use other types of objective evidence to make this showing.”

“As I have previously explained, the common-law torts most analogous to retaliatory-arrest claims are false imprisonment, malicious arrest, and malicious prosecution—all of which required a plaintiff to prove ‘the absence of probable cause.’ Gonzalez concedes that there was probable cause for her arrest. Her retaliatory-arrest claim therefore cannot proceed. … There is ‘no basis in either the common law or our First Amendment precedents’ for the exception created in Nieves and expanded upon today. And, the Court should not craft §1983 rules ‘as a matter of policy.’ I would adhere to the only rule grounded in history: Probable cause defeats a retaliatory-arrest claim” (internal citations omitted).

The majority decision is a four-and-one-half page per curiam opinion, so it should not be understood to have issued any drastically new ruling. This case arises out of a dispute between the plaintiff (a city-council-member) and the city manager, and the document at issue was a removal petition aimed at the city manager. It is not much of a stretch to say that law enforcement should be very reluctant to arrest a person under these kinds of political circumstances. Officers may have had probable cause (which the plaintiff conceded), but it does not appear that any arrests for this particular violation had occurred in the past. Thus, the Nieves exception applies, and this lawsuit can go forward.

• Skip to Main Content
• Skip to audio player to listen live

Enter the username on file and we'll send you a code to reset your password.

A verification code has been emailed to

How will Minneapolis respond to homelessness after SCOTUS says sleeping outside can be a crime?

Log in to share your opinion with MPR News and add it to your profile.

Thanks for liking this story! We have added it to a list of your favorite stories.

Cities across the country are now faced with a decision: Should they criminally punish homeless people for sleeping in public outdoor spaces?

Last Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled bans on people sleeping outside did not amount to an Eighth Amendment violation — or cruel and unusual punishment — even when shelter space is scarce. Many homeless advocates are outraged. Some municipalities are applauding the decision.

• Rochester: Camping on city property gets banned in attempt to curb homeless encampments
• Minneapolis: Contested housing development plan plows forward

In Minnesota’s largest city, public camping is illegal — but it doesn’t come with criminal consequences. Enrique Velázquez, Minneapolis director of regulatory services who oversees the city’s response to homeless encampments, says that is not likely to change.

“To my knowledge, we’ve never issued a criminal penalty or citation to individuals who are experiencing homelessness, just for the sake of being homeless. I don’t envision that we will,” he said.

Minneapolis does, however, disperse encampments. This year, the city has evicted Camp Nenookaasi repeatedly ; the camp moved a few blocks away each time.

Velázquez says the city evicts encampments if officials believe they pose a risk to the residents or the public.

• Feb. 1: City crews start clearing fourth Camp Nenookaasi site in Minneapolis
• Jan. 31: Minneapolis City Council committee hears update on now-cleared Nenookaasi encampment
• Jan. 4: Minneapolis clears Camp Nenookaasi, an encampment of unhoused, mostly Native people

Listen to his full conversation with MPR News host Cathy Wurzer on Morning Edition by clicking on the player above.

Support the News you Need

Gifts from individuals keep MPR News accessible to all - free of paywalls and barriers.

• 20-year-old loops Lake Superior solo in 42 days, buoyed by climate change awareness
• Morning Announcements for July 3
• Minneapolis electronic dance community grieves beloved DJ found dead in Olmsted County

The Supreme Court Has Murdered the Constitution

America’s founding document is now an all-but-meaningless scrap of paper. Happy Fourth!

by Ryan Cooper

July 4, 2024

Shawn Thew/Pool via AP

Chief Justice John Roberts is seen before the State of the Union address to a joint session of Congress at the Capitol on March 7, 2024.

Constitutional fetish worship has been a feature of American politics from practically the moment it was enacted. This document, entirely by accident, serves as a core source of government legitimacy, despite the fact that it was hurriedly slapped together over a few months and never worked as intended, not even at the beginning.

It would be a good thing if we had less reverence for the Constitution, allowing us to go about perfecting it democratically, through a deliberative process of representatives of the people. Instead, we get the worst of all possible worlds: a culture of Constitution worship that resists change, yet also massive alterations to the founding document, entirely from unelected men and women in robes.

In short, if you want to change the Constitution, you get the Supreme Court to rewrite it for you. That only requires five justices to exercise the rule-by-decree powers they have arrogated to themselves, instead of the incredibly cumbersome amendment process requiring two-thirds of the Senate and House, and three-quarters of the states, which is impossible in our hyper-polarized times. As Thomas Jefferson once wrote, under judicial review, the Constitution “is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they please.”

Now, one of the central arguments in favor of judicial review is that it is necessary to protect individual constitutional rights from being eroded by the legislature. So let’s look at both sides of the equation, read through the Constitution , and compile a non-exhaustive list of the ragged holes the Supreme Court has blasted in it, through action or inaction.

More from Ryan Cooper

Article I, Section 1: “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States…” The Court has gradually stolen this power from Congress over the years. The recent decisions Relentless v. Department of Commerce and Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo , in which the Court seized control of the entire administrative state, are just the capstones.

Article I, Section 2: “The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States…” In Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP , the Court has signed off on egregious gerrymandering so “the People” in an increasing number of Republican states have little or nothing to do with who is elected to the House.

Article I, Section 3: The last paragraph in this section makes clear that the formal punishment for impeachment is only removal from office and prohibition from holding office again, but also that “the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.” This language obviously takes for granted that presidents can be prosecuted for criminal acts, which the Roberts Court has recently forbidden (see below).

Article I, Section 4: “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations…” Sorry Congress, no election regulations if John Roberts doesn’t like them. In Shelby County v. Holder , which removed most of the strictures preventing southern states from engaging in Jim Crow-era voter suppression, Roberts didn’t even bother to cite the Constitution. Afterwards, of course, southern Republicans immediately started disenfranchising minorities once more.

Article I, Section 7: This grants the House the famous power of the purse, stipulating that “All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives.” Except not anymore, at least if you’re President Donald Trump, in which case the Roberts Court will kindly let you steal $6 billion from the military to build random sections of border wall.

Article I, Section 8 : This enumerates Congress’s powers that, once again, are now possessed by the judiciary. The legislature can make rules if and only if they don’t run afoul of the Court’s political views.

Article II: This entire article, which outlines the fairly modest explicit powers of the president, is dead, dead, dead. In Trump v. United States , Roberts has anointed the president as a king formally above the law, immune from prosecution for everything he does as president, and who can therefore imprison or murder his political opponents with impunity. Roberts may as well have dug up James Madison’s corpse and micturated directly into the eye sockets.

That said, it’s still worth emphasizing that the Court has also deleted both of the Constitution’s anti-bribery clauses for the president. Article I, Section 1 says the president “shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them,” while Article II, Section 9 says that no one holding federal office can “accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.”

In office, Trump funneled unknown but vast quantities of federal money , as well as that of foreign governments, into his own pockets through his various properties. The Roberts Court deliberately ran out the clock on a case invoking the Emoluments Clause on Trump and then dismissed it , making it clear that it’s fine and dandy for the president to loot the government, or take massive bribes from foreign powers.

Article III: It’s worth noting there is no explicit mention of judicial review in the Constitution anywhere.

Article IV, Section 4: This says the “United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government,” but again, the Court has not only stood aside as Republicans set up flagrantly rigged, authoritarian state election systems, but also helped them out.

The total abolition of Article II is certainly the worst thing the Roberts Court has done by a wide margin.

On to the Bill of Rights! First Amendment protections for freedom of worship, speech, and the press are under an all-out assault from right-wing state legislatures. The “ten commandments” (not the actual ones, incidentally) are being set up on government property across several states. Bigoted restraints on the speech rights of teachers and professors have swept the country . Mississippi is persecuting reporters for uncovering flagrant welfare fraud on the part of the state Republican regime. The Court is doing nothing about any of this.

The Second Amendment is not so much dead so much as metastasized in the Roberts Court petri dish, cancer-like, into a sweeping grant of gun rights that every one of the founding fathers would have regarded with slack-jawed horror. It obviously does not protect, and was not intended to protect, an individual right to own as many fully automatic weapons as you like in preparation for your upcoming workplace massacre. But under the Roberts Court that’s what it has become.

The Fourth Amendment’s protection of unreasonable searches and seizures has been steadily eroded by the Court. Any savvy law enforcement officer can easily search your property or read your private communications.

The Fifth Amendment’s requirement that no one be deprived of “life, liberty, or property” without due process of law does not apply to growing categories of citizens. President Obama set up a drone assassination program that killed American citizens , while Trump sent a straight-up death squad to summarily execute the leftist Michael Reinoehl after he shot and killed a far-right activist during an altercation, and Trump repeatedly boasted about it . Again, the Court did nothing in either case.

The right guaranteed in the Sixth and Seventh Amendments to fair jury trials for accused criminals is a dead letter. More than 95 percent of criminal cases end in a plea bargain. The Eighth Amendment protection against cruel and unusual punishment is a dead letter too, especially if you happen to be homeless . Right-wing states can torture people to death with the Court’s blessing .

The Fourteenth Amendment is mostly toast. As to Section 1, states are abridging the “privileges and immunities” of citizens right and left, due process protections are increasingly abridged, and numerous groups, from transgender people to pregnant women and others, are suffering explicit legal discrimination without so much as a peep from the Court. Section 2, which requires that states which disenfranchise their citizens lose representation in the House, has never been enforced . The Roberts Court recently deleted Section 3 , which forbids traitors and rebels from serving in the government, once again to protect Donald Trump from accountability.

The Fifteenth Amendment’s prohibition against disenfranchising people based on race is gone. Not only will the court happily allow GOP states to gerrymander their Black citizens into permanent electoral irrelevance, as noted above the Court also prohibits Congress from doing anything about it.

I could go on, but the point is made.

The total abolition of Article II is certainly the worst thing the Roberts Court has done by a wide margin. It is the worst Supreme Court decision since Plessy v. Ferguson or perhaps even Dred Scott v. Stanford . The intention, obviously, is to pave the way for a Trump dictatorship, like some Enabling Act passed before Hitler actually took power. But it’s in keeping with the thrust of Roberts’ jurisprudence since the moment he was confirmed.

It all calls to mind Alexander Hamilton’s famous argument in Federalist #78 that the judiciary “will always be the least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution; because it will be least in a capacity to annoy or injure them,” in that it controls neither the military nor the budget. The “general liberty of the people can never be endangered from that quarter,” he concluded.

Standing hip-deep in the shreds of constitutional rights that John Roberts and his corrupt, illegitimate cronies have torn up, we can conclude that Hamilton was utterly, completely wrong. But he was right that the Court only has power insofar as Congress and the president agree they do. Perhaps it’s time to reconsider that state of affairs .

You can count on the Prospect , can we count on you?

There's no paywall here. Your donations power our newsroom as we report on ideas, politics and power — and what’s really at stake as we navigate another presidential election year. Please, become a member , or make a one-time donation , today. Thank you!

About the Prospect / Contact Info

Browse Archive / Back Issues

Subscription Services

Privacy Policy

DONATE TO THE PROSPECT

Copyright 2024 | The American Prospect, Inc. | All Rights Reserved