The Constitution guarantees certain enumerated rights like freedom of religion and some scholars believe only enumerated rights explicitly mentioned in the constitution are protected under due process. Abortion was never mentioned in the constitution so is abortion a protected right? Under Substantive Due Process, we look to ensure interests are compelling and beneficial. 4 of the 9 justices do not believe in substantive due process though some have stated to keep it due to stare decisis
@@kylefontenot5937 incorrect. Roe v. Wade was overturned upon rather standard review of analysis of non-enumerated fundamental rights, where the analysis is that the framers envisioned, as evidenced from the federalist papers, that the non-enemerated rights were drawn as common law rights such that we look to Blackstone to see a solid use of the right claimed by the time of Blackstone and contemporaries before calling it a "fundamental" right. Justice Alito assumes arguendo in the majority opinion the correct posture of the case under fourteenth amendment substative due process clause and distinguishes it as a constructively moot argument because the case fails to correctly meet the proper test.
Thanks for the informative content. Question - On appeal how would substantive rights and due process, be grounds for an arbitrary rationale in its judgement?
Just sub'd. Thank you for this clear explanation. Florida passed a law commonly referred as Florida's Free Kill law because it denies family access to the cours of a decedent who died of medical malpractice if the decedent was single, over 24, and had no children under 25. The government interest was to curtail the exodus of doctors leaving Florida due to rising insurance rates. This hasn't been challenged under this doctrine, I believe. The alternative solution is to require doctors to be better at what they do and thus cause no med-mal while better serving the People. But, it was easier to deny the People their rights since the insurance company had their lobby with financial backing.
I have a question. Who decides which Rights are Fundamental especially since according to the 9th Amendment the enumeration of certain Rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the People. If the People determine what Rights are Fundamental then the government would in fact be denying and disparaging by its construing the enumeration as fundamental and Unenumerated Rights as not. Further more this seems to be a method with which the Government is also failing to respect The Peoples 10th Amendment powers as so expressed by the 10th by saying Or to the People. Please explain why I am mistaken in my understanding. Thank you...
why would this suit be brought under substantive DP instead of EP? in your SDP Vs. EPA analysis you mentioned that substantial DP would effect all people and EPA some people... would people who can get pregnant not be considered some people ? thank you !!
You said we could ask a question, if we had one. The 14th Amendment. I was told that Substantive Due Process also asks the question if it is an "unalienable" right in which the State can not address, due to it being outside of their purview. Is this correct? Does the 14th Amendment allow to judge to only rule on certain alienable rights? Thoughts? Thanks.
Did you find the answer? My non legal and with no jurisdiction, I would say that you are Correct. It’s flows with ruling in favour one one litigant on an issue issue manifested from an illegal transaction.
I've been dealing with a criminal case where I was falsely accused for almost 3 yrs my rights are continuesly being violated my due process was voided not by me by the state they waived my prelim without my consent my right to call witnesses in my defense it took my attorney almost e yrs to file motions I told him to 8 mons prior to filing and it took me schooling him on depravation of rights under color of law and the civil rights act I'm innocent with all proof needed but they want me to still take a deal which will completely destroy my life and I was kidnapped Terry stopped molested assaulted and battered and unlawfully detained for 88 days I got my attrny a month and half in I asked for counsel 2xs in the beginning of the interview and then when I caught him fabricating and falsyfing evidence I told him my rights were being violated and I want an attrny which he said I don't get an attrny and continued questioning me which is unconstitutional now mind you the attrny officer is being investigated for cannibalism and s x trafficking with members of the LDS church whom had been lightly prosecuted because they are part of David Leavitts crew so I feel he has a vendetta against me to make up for the people he got off this case is a miscarriage of justice obstruction of justice and malicious my question is what should I do I know I can file misconduct with a slam dunk against my attorney I have how to prove misconduct and what constitutes as such and I know what an attrny is supposed to do to protect his client and protecting my rights is the main job can you give me your insight on this please
Since you point out fundamental rights as those which emanate from The Bill of Rights, the Tenth Amendment "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people" would seem to constrain the government from impinging on ANY rights unless substantive due process is applied. Wouldn't this seem to perhaps have negative impact on the administrative/bureaucratic state which skirts due process?
It seems like the more the government gets involved in supporting citizens' healthcare, education, finances, etc. and business' finances, hiring practices, etc. the more easily it is to argue the government has a compelling interest in everything.
How does substantive due process for a 14th amendment violation? Can you give an example of a law enforcement officer issuing a ordinance to a non inhabitant of the county, therefore the ordinance does not pass the scrutiny test.
On a real note, I wish there were legal representation like you where I live…..more of you is what our country needs to play this “legal” game of WORDS of the law “perhaps”. Now days, attorneys have turned into sell outs working more for the dollar bill than doing what their job originally entailed.
This video was posted before the Whitmer case (2020) but the US COA said there is a fundamental right to a basic minimum education just so everyone is aware.
You forgot to mention intermediate scrutiny :) in the hypo you described the plaintiff could have argued the university treated women differently then men...maybe??
🌎🙏🙏🙏 Thank you. Attorney rights preliminary hearing speedy trial rights rights to appeal. And my writ of habeas corpus should have never been suspended. Thank God I have a chance to file a 1983 civil rights suit
The right to an education, wealth, age are subject to rational basis. The burden is on the individual to show the trier of fact that the law is not rationally related to a legitimate government interest. Now, when it comes to parental rights with respect to what education the child should receive, the test the court will apply is the strict scrutiny test. The law must be narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling government interest or the least restrictive means to bring about the action. The burden is on the govt. Jay is a good bar tutor. He very knowledgeable in the area of Con Law.🤪😜🤪
I missed something in the example. She said that switching to a special curriculum would interfere with her "Right to Procreate." Were the other curricula allowing fornication and procreation during class time?
Very good video, learning as much as I can , I believe the child support system, well certain aspects of the structure is a violation of people's substantive due process rights. Garnishing wages automatically after a divorce for child support, jail time for non payment of child support by saying that you have violated a court order to pay monies. All of that is a due process violation and a substantive due process violation in my opinion. Debtors prison has been deemed illegal but essentially thats what child support is, the due process right , the right to a trial by jury before life liberty and property can be taken doesn't apply in a child support case which to my knowledge is a civil case . So in other words the due process rights secured by the constitution (which details what due process is) , for losing your freedom and property in a case before a court of law has been legislated away in family court. Procedural due process in family court denies you of a trial by jury, you have no choice . So a judge hears the matter and can rule based on evidence , now that is fine, but why should you not have the option to have a jury trial if the matter in controversy amounts to 20 dollars or more? So why are peoples civil rights i.e due process rights which are secured by the constitution and state constitution not being adhered to before their property , tangible or intangible are to be seized? That in it's self is a substantive due process right violation , you , I , we all have a right to acquire property and be secure in our persons without un warranted search and seizure . That is a human right. The laws that we are subjected to, violate your civil rights, abridges your substantive rights. the right to life liberty and property can not be taken without due process (i.e trial by jury) which you are not afforded and entitled to before your wages are garnished , i.e your property. Freedom lost due to non payment or contempt of court for non payment in a civil procedure which can land you in jail without a trial by jury. Which is a bill of attainder, which is illegal. Correct me if I am enterpretting this all wrong? From what I understand from what you have stated , the government has to have a compelling interest, that interest must be compelling enough to create legislation which would abridge the freedoms (i.e substantive rights ) of the citizens and I assume the many laws that make up the title 4D system is such an interest .
I feel like the judge is violating substantive due process by allowing non custodial parent with zero overnights per year tax exemption. Allowing him to lie on his tax return and violate my tax payer bill of rights. 26 usc 6701 violation and 26 usc 7602. I want to file a 1983 claim. Looking for a lawyer. I also want to file 1983 on oppositions attorney. For comments he made that just because I was the only one in the court room who knew the tax laws, that they are not obligated to fallow them.
In second 14 you said "substantive" is in the 14th amendment...is "substantive" actually in the 14th amendment? I don't see it anywhere in any copies I get online. also at second 95 you mention "the right not to procreate" as being mentioned in the "Bill of Rights" (I think you said that sorta) - Where is that? Did you mean "the right to choose to engage in the act of reproduction"? Hard to take anything else you said with any seriousness unless that first 95 seconds are factual. It's almost like you are biased....?
I know he is trying to help students prepare for the CA bar but I wish he would step back and say “the whole notion of substantive process is nonsense. The fourteenth amendment guarantees that you can only be executed, incarcerated, or fined by the state after due process of law. It is a procedural guarantee, not a substantive one.”
This is out of date. The 2nd Amendment is no longer a “footnote 4” issue and now enjoys a “Text, History, and Tradition” test. There are no tiers of scrutiny that apply to the 2nd Amendment.
How is education not a fundamental right? Even though some kids may complain about having to go to school, the right to an equal educational opportunity is one of the most valuable rights you have. The Supreme Court said this in the landmark Brown v. Board of Education case when it struck down race segregation in the public schools.
You just explained this better in 6 minutes than my con law professor has over the last 3 weeks. Thanks!
Thank you so much. You are saving law students from panic attacks !
I’m currently studying for my bar exam for February 2024 and your videos are beyond helpful. Love your channel and content!
Can you make a video regarding substantive due process and how it relates to the overturning of Row v. Wade?
The Constitution guarantees certain enumerated rights like freedom of religion and some scholars believe only enumerated rights explicitly mentioned in the constitution are protected under due process. Abortion was never mentioned in the constitution so is abortion a protected right? Under Substantive Due Process, we look to ensure interests are compelling and beneficial. 4 of the 9 justices do not believe in substantive due process though some have stated to keep it due to stare decisis
@@kylefontenot5937 incorrect. Roe v. Wade was overturned upon rather standard review of analysis of non-enumerated fundamental rights, where the analysis is that the framers envisioned, as evidenced from the federalist papers, that the non-enemerated rights were drawn as common law rights such that we look to Blackstone to see a solid use of the right claimed by the time of Blackstone and contemporaries before calling it a "fundamental" right. Justice Alito assumes arguendo in the majority opinion the correct posture of the case under fourteenth amendment substative due process clause and distinguishes it as a constructively moot argument because the case fails to correctly meet the proper test.
This is very helpful! Thank you!
Thanks man - this really helped for my "We The People" Application.
Helpful, especially with the example. Thanks!
This is quite helpful and simple to understand.
thank this for explaining this better!
you are a gift to us all
Thank you!
Thank you very much for this video,
In France this is difficult to understand these notions in our law lessons and your video is very helpful :)
This is precise! Thank you until it's too much... then, thank you, thank you, thank you!
I’m
great video this helped so much
THANK YOU!
Thank you so much
Very helpful :)
Thanks for the informative content. Question - On appeal how would substantive rights and due process, be grounds for an arbitrary rationale in its judgement?
I love all of your simplified videos! They are extremely helpful. Would you be able to make any on Defamation and Hearsay? Thanks for your time!
Thank you! We'll add those subjects to our list.
Excellent
Best explanation ever
Just sub'd. Thank you for this clear explanation.
Florida passed a law commonly referred as Florida's Free Kill law because it denies family access to the cours of a decedent who died of medical malpractice if the decedent was single, over 24, and had no children under 25. The government interest was to curtail the exodus of doctors leaving Florida due to rising insurance rates.
This hasn't been challenged under this doctrine, I believe. The alternative solution is to require doctors to be better at what they do and thus cause no med-mal while better serving the People. But, it was easier to deny the People their rights since the insurance company had their lobby with financial backing.
Hello! What’s the best way to distinguish the differences between sub due process and equal protection?
I have a question. Who decides which Rights are Fundamental especially since according to the 9th Amendment the enumeration of certain Rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the People. If the People determine what Rights are Fundamental then the government would in fact be denying and disparaging by its construing the enumeration as fundamental and Unenumerated Rights as not. Further more this seems to be a method with which the Government is also failing to respect The Peoples 10th Amendment powers as so expressed by the 10th by saying Or to the People. Please explain why I am mistaken in my understanding. Thank you...
why would this suit be brought under substantive DP instead of EP? in your SDP Vs. EPA analysis you mentioned that substantial DP would effect all people and EPA some people... would people who can get pregnant not be considered some people ? thank you !!
You said we could ask a question, if we had one. The 14th Amendment. I was told that Substantive Due Process also asks the question if it is an "unalienable" right in which the State can not address, due to it being outside of their purview. Is this correct? Does the 14th Amendment allow to judge to only rule on certain alienable rights? Thoughts? Thanks.
Did you find the answer? My non legal and with no jurisdiction, I would say that you are Correct. It’s flows with ruling in favour one one litigant on an issue issue manifested from an illegal transaction.
I've been dealing with a criminal case where I was falsely accused for almost 3 yrs my rights are continuesly being violated my due process was voided not by me by the state they waived my prelim without my consent my right to call witnesses in my defense it took my attorney almost e yrs to file motions I told him to 8 mons prior to filing and it took me schooling him on depravation of rights under color of law and the civil rights act I'm innocent with all proof needed but they want me to still take a deal which will completely destroy my life and I was kidnapped Terry stopped molested assaulted and battered and unlawfully detained for 88 days I got my attrny a month and half in I asked for counsel 2xs in the beginning of the interview and then when I caught him fabricating and falsyfing evidence I told him my rights were being violated and I want an attrny which he said I don't get an attrny and continued questioning me which is unconstitutional now mind you the attrny officer is being investigated for cannibalism and s x trafficking with members of the LDS church whom had been lightly prosecuted because they are part of David Leavitts crew so I feel he has a vendetta against me to make up for the people he got off this case is a miscarriage of justice obstruction of justice and malicious my question is what should I do I know I can file misconduct with a slam dunk against my attorney I have how to prove misconduct and what constitutes as such and I know what an attrny is supposed to do to protect his client and protecting my rights is the main job can you give me your insight on this please
😊
Is privacy a fundamental right?
Since you point out fundamental rights as those which emanate from The Bill of Rights, the Tenth Amendment "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people" would seem to constrain the government from impinging on ANY rights unless substantive due process is applied.
Wouldn't this seem to perhaps have negative impact on the administrative/bureaucratic state which skirts due process?
It seems like the more the government gets involved in supporting citizens' healthcare, education, finances, etc. and business' finances, hiring practices, etc. the more easily it is to argue the government has a compelling interest in everything.
How does substantive due process for a 14th amendment violation? Can you give an example of a law enforcement officer issuing a ordinance to a non inhabitant of the county, therefore the ordinance does not pass the scrutiny test.
On a real note, I wish there were legal representation like you where I live…..more of you is what our country needs to play this “legal” game of WORDS of the law “perhaps”. Now days, attorneys have turned into sell outs working more for the dollar bill than doing what their job originally entailed.
Thx from the dane with a legel interest for no reason
This video was posted before the Whitmer case (2020) but the US COA said there is a fundamental right to a basic minimum education just so everyone is aware.
You forgot to mention intermediate scrutiny :) in the hypo you described the plaintiff could have argued the university treated women differently then men...maybe??
There is no intermediate scrutiny under Due Process
intermediate is equal protection clause
🌎🙏🙏🙏 Thank you. Attorney rights preliminary hearing speedy trial rights rights to appeal. And my writ of habeas corpus should have never been suspended. Thank God I have a chance to file a 1983 civil rights suit
Just the 14th ?
Didnt get it
The right to an education, wealth, age are subject to rational basis. The burden is on the individual to show the trier of fact that the law is not rationally related to a legitimate government interest.
Now, when it comes to parental rights with respect to what education the child should receive, the test the court will apply is the strict scrutiny test. The law must be narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling government interest or the least restrictive means to bring about the action. The burden is on the govt. Jay is a good bar tutor. He very knowledgeable in the area of Con Law.🤪😜🤪
🌎🙏🙏🙏✝️ 🇺🇸Thank you
Substantive due process aka “we would like this to be a right, therefore it is.”
What happens when the government starts making executive orders and mandates that conflict with or violate present legislation ?
As long as the central government grows more powerful from said "mandate" then nothing should happen. Thanks for asking.
I missed something in the example. She said that switching to a special curriculum would interfere with her "Right to Procreate." Were the other curricula allowing fornication and procreation during class time?
I guess Dredd Scott was decided correctly
Clarence Thomas sent me here.
If only we had some due process rights against his corruption.
I'll simplify it- it's nonsense. - Justice Thomas, 2022
Very good video, learning as much as I can , I believe the child support system, well certain aspects of the structure is a violation of people's substantive due process rights.
Garnishing wages automatically after a divorce for child support, jail time for non payment of child support by saying that you have violated a court order to pay monies.
All of that is a due process violation and a substantive due process violation in my opinion.
Debtors prison has been deemed illegal but essentially thats what child support is, the due process right , the right to a trial by jury before life liberty and property can be taken doesn't apply in a child support case which to my knowledge is a civil case .
So in other words the due process rights secured by the constitution (which details what due process is) , for losing your freedom and property in a case before a court of law has been legislated away in family court.
Procedural due process in family court denies you of a trial by jury, you have no choice . So a judge hears the matter and can rule based on evidence , now that is fine, but why should you not have the option to have a jury trial if the matter in controversy amounts to 20 dollars or more?
So why are peoples civil rights i.e due process rights which are secured by the constitution and state constitution not being adhered to before their property , tangible or intangible are to be seized?
That in it's self is a substantive due process right violation , you , I , we all have a right to acquire property and be secure in our persons without un warranted search and seizure .
That is a human right.
The laws that we are subjected to, violate your civil rights, abridges your substantive rights. the right to life liberty and property can not be taken without due process (i.e trial by jury) which you are not afforded and entitled to before your wages are garnished , i.e your property.
Freedom lost due to non payment or contempt of court for non payment in a civil procedure which can land you in jail without a trial by jury.
Which is a bill of attainder, which is illegal.
Correct me if I am enterpretting this all wrong?
From what I understand from what you have stated , the government has to have a compelling interest, that interest must be compelling enough to create legislation which would abridge the freedoms (i.e substantive rights ) of the citizens and I assume the many laws that make up the title 4D system is such an interest .
I feel like the judge is violating substantive due process by allowing non custodial parent with zero overnights per year tax exemption. Allowing him to lie on his tax return and violate my tax payer bill of rights. 26 usc 6701 violation and 26 usc 7602. I want to file a 1983 claim. Looking for a lawyer. I also want to file 1983 on oppositions attorney. For comments he made that just because I was the only one in the court room who knew the tax laws, that they are not obligated to fallow them.
In second 14 you said "substantive" is in the 14th amendment...is "substantive" actually in the 14th amendment? I don't see it anywhere in any copies I get online. also at second 95 you mention "the right not to procreate" as being mentioned in the "Bill of Rights" (I think you said that sorta) - Where is that? Did you mean "the right to choose to engage in the act of reproduction"? Hard to take anything else you said with any seriousness unless that first 95 seconds are factual. It's almost like you are biased....?
Super helpful, thanks! Wish that our country considered healthcare and education fundamental rights... those shouldn't get lumped in with bowling lol
Why is there no due process when they increase a sex offenders level, which is basically more punishment.
I know he is trying to help students prepare for the CA bar but I wish he would step back and say “the whole notion of substantive process is nonsense. The fourteenth amendment guarantees that you can only be executed, incarcerated, or fined by the state after due process of law. It is a procedural guarantee, not a substantive one.”
this distinction is an alien idea, so be careful, for 50 years they consumed alien food and its in law all the time
This is out of date. The 2nd Amendment is no longer a “footnote 4” issue and now enjoys a “Text, History, and Tradition” test. There are no tiers of scrutiny that apply to the 2nd Amendment.
This aged like milk
There is no such thing as substantive due process. Substantive due process is simply "we made it up"
How is education not a fundamental right? Even though some kids may complain about having to go to school, the right to an equal educational opportunity is one of the most valuable rights you have. The Supreme Court said this in the landmark Brown v. Board of Education case when it struck down race segregation in the public schools.
Education is not protected by the constitution. It is one of the powers left up to the states or the people in the 10th amendment.
Medical care is NOT a fundamental right. Only in the US! 🤣