Friends and neighbors,
Over the past two months, we have examined our Constitution’s first eight amendments. From speech to religion, to the rights afforded to us in our homes and even upon conviction of a crime, each amendment uniquely protects our existing fundamental rights.
But our Founding Fathers were aware that not every fundamental right could be put into a written constitution. Therefore, the Ninth Amendment was included in the Bill of Rights.
The Ninth Amendment reads:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
At the time of the Constitution’s ratification, there was a fierce debate between the Federalists and Anti-Federalists about the notion of a bill of rights. Anti-Federalists strongly supported including a bill of rights to the Constitution. They believed this would ensure that key fundamental rights would be protected against potential abuses of a future federal government. Federalists, on the other hand, opposed enumerating any rights because it could imply that those not listed in a bill of rights were simply nonexistent.
James Madison, the father of our Constitution, initially wanted to place the language from the Ninth Amendment in Article I – the article that includes the Congress’ powers and limitations. But after careful deliberation and committee work, Madison’s idea for protecting unenumerated rights was eventually placed among the first ten amendments that we now know as the Bill of Rights.
While we know much about the history of the Ninth Amendment, its meaning today is subject to many varying interpretations by judges and scholars alike. Some argue that the Ninth Amendment protects “collective rights” of the people. For example, the Declaration of Independence refers to the collective rights of the people to alter or abolish a destructive form of government. Other scholars have written that enumerated and unenumerated rights should be afforded equal protection. This means that restrictions on an individual’s liberty by a law is presumed invalid unless the legislature can justify the restriction as both necessary and proper.
Federal and state courts have cited the Ninth Amendment numerous times. Yet, the Supreme Court has not definitively interpreted the rights held by the Ninth Amendment in a majority opinion of five or more Justices in recent history. A few Justices, however, have done so in concurring and dissenting opinions but those opinions are not precedents in future cases. Further, several Supreme Court cases tried to use the Ninth Amendment in their rulings, but it was ultimately necessary to pair the Ninth Amendment with other amendments.
For example, the Court cited the First, Fifth, Ninth, or Tenth amendments in its United Public Workers v. Mitchell (1947) decision. Through these amendments, the Court held that the Hatch Act – a federal law that limits certain political activities of federal employees – does not unconstitutionally restrict the rights of the federal government employees.
In my next update, I will write about the Tenth Amendment in the Bill of Rights. The Tenth Amendment is like the Ninth in that is relates to the power not enumerated in the text of the Constitution and says that they are retained by the states or to the people.
I enjoy hearing from you about our Constitution and the rights it affords us. You need to know your rights to use them. There is no other country that has such a strong constitution. You can call me at 651-296-5655 or send me an email at sen.mary.kiffmeyer@senate.mn. Please also take time to talk with others about our timeless and incredibly valuable Constitution that is available to you and in use every day of your life.
Sincerely,
Mary