美国权利法案(英語:United States Bill of Rights)是美国宪法前十条修正案的统称。这些修正案的提出,是为了缓解那些反对批准宪法的反联邦党人(英语:Anti-Federalists)的担忧,其中保障了多项个人自由,限制了政府的司法和其他方面权力,并将一些权力保留给各州和公众。起初这些修正案仅针对联邦政府有效,不过在第十四条修正案通过后,美国最高法院通过一系列统称合併原則的进程,将权利法案中的大部分条款应用到了各州。
9月12日,弗吉尼亚州的乔治·梅森建议在宪法中增加权利法案,马萨诸塞州的埃尔布里奇·格里让这一建议成为正式提案[3]:341。但是,各州代表经过短暂蹉商后一致否决了该提案。当时反对权利法案的麦迪逊之后表示,这样一些从州权利法案中调用的内容所能够提供的只是一种反抗暴政的幻觉[3]:343。宾夕法尼亚州代表詹姆斯·威尔森(英语:James Wilson)之后认为,列举人民权利的行为是危险的,因为这会意味着没有明确提及的权利就不存在[3]:343,汉密尔顿也在联邦党人文集第84卷中对这一看法表示赞同[4]:327。并且,由于梅森和格里曾结成同盟反对新宪法,所以他们在会议结束5天前提出的动议,也就很自然地被一些代表视为一种拖延战术[2]:226。然而,这项动议的快速否决嗣後危及了整个宪法的批准进程。作家大卫·O·斯图尔特(英语:David O. Stewart)称原宪法权利法案的缺席是“第一等级的政治失误”[2]:226,而历史学家杰克·N·瑞科夫(Jack N. Rakove)称这是“对未来获得批准充满期待制宪者的一次重大失算”[4]:288。
费城会议结束后,包括帕特里克·亨利、塞缪尔·亚当斯和理查德·亨利·李在内的一些美国独立战争领袖公开表示反对新宪法,他们被称为“反联邦党人”[5]:20。埃尔布里奇·格里撰写了最受欢迎的反联邦党人文章《议员格里先生之反对》(Hon. Mr. Gerry's Objections),前后进行了46版印刷,文章中特别针对新宪法缺乏权利法案进行了批评[5]:63。许多人都担心强大的中央政府将对个人权利构成威胁,总统将成为事实上的国王。杰弗逊在给麦迪逊的信中,也赞成增加权利法案:“半个面包也比没有强。如果我们没法保证自己所有的权利,那就保障那些咱能保证的吧。”[6]
After the enumeration required by the first article of the Constitution, there shall be one Representative for every thirty thousand, until the number shall amount to one hundred, after which the proportion shall be so regulated by Congress, that there shall be not less than one hundred Representatives, nor less than one representative for every forty thousand persons, until the number of Representatives shall amount to two hundred; after which the proportion shall be so regulated by Congress, that there shall be not less than two hundred Representatives, nor more than one Representative for every fifty thousand persons.[5]:278 在宪法第一条要求的列举之后,每3万人口应有一名代表,直到数字达到100,之后的比例由国会规定,一共不应少于100名代表,每4万人口至少选一名代表,直到议员数达到200;之后的比例由国会规定,一共不应少于200名代表,每5万人至少选一名代表。
No law varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.[5]:278 改变参议员和众议员服务报酬的法律,在众议员选举举行之前都不得生效[21][22]。
第二条起初获得了14个州中的6个批准,但在1791后近一个世纪都没有得到任何一州批准。1873年,俄亥俄州为抗议国会加薪而批准了这条修正案,又一个多世纪后,怀俄明州于1978年批准了修正案。1982年,德克萨斯州一位名叫格里高利·沃森(英语:Gregory Watson)的本科生发起了一项完成批准程序的运动,到了1992年,50个州中已经有38个予以批准。由于这长达两个世纪的批准历程实在非同寻常,这条修正案的通过是由美国国家档案馆馆长唐·W·威尔逊(英语:Don W. Wilson)证实,再由联邦国会于1992年5月20日通过投票核准的,这一条也就从此成为了第二十七条修正案开始生效[23]
权利法案通过后的前150年里,几乎没有对美国司法构成什么影响,用戈登·S·伍德的话来说:“批准之后,大部分美国人很快忘记了有关宪法前十条修正案的事。”[18]:72直到1931年前,法院都没有做出过保护言论自由权利的重要判决[5]:258。历史学家理查德·拉宾斯基(英语:Richard Labunski)将法案漫长的休眠期归因于三个因素:首先,社会文化需要经过一段时间的发展后,才能让司法和民意容忍和接受法案中的条款;其次,联邦最高法院在19世纪的大部分时间里都主要专注于解决政府间权力平衡的问题;第三,法案起初只对联邦政府有效,这一限制在1833年的巴伦诉巴尔的摩案(英语:Barron v. Baltimore)中予以了肯定[5]:258-259[24][25]。
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.[29] 国会不得制定关于下列事项的法律:确立国教或禁止信教自由;剥夺言论自由或出版自由;或剥夺人民和平集会和向政府请愿申冤的权利。[21][22]
在1947年的埃弗森诉地方教育委员会案(英语:Everson v. Board of Education)中,法院援引托马斯·杰弗逊的信函称第一修正案在“政教之间立起了一道分离之墙”(a wall of separation between church and State),但这两者分离的确切边界仍然存在争议[30]。法院通过20至21世纪的一系列判决显著扩张了言论自由权的覆盖范围,保护了各种形式的政治言论,匿名言论,竞选资金,色情内容和学校誓词等。这些判决也给第一条修正案的保护范围定义了一系列的例外情况。在最具知名度的纽约时报诉沙利文案中,最高法院推翻了英国普通法的先例,增加了诽谤诉讼中原告的举证负担[31]。在第一修正案下商业言论所受的保护不及政治言论,因此对其也有着更多的规管限制[30]。
在2008年的哥倫比亞特區訴海勒案(英语:District of Columbia v. Heller)中,法院裁决认为第二条修正案“编入了一个预先存在的权利”,即在与军队服役无关的情况下仍然保护个人拥有武器的权利,并保护传统、合法方式使用武器的权利,如在家中自卫等,但该权利也并非不受限制。“这并不是一种允许以任何方式、任何目的来保有和携带任何武器的权利。”[38]在2010年的麦克唐纳诉芝加哥案中[39],法院认为第二条修正案对各州和地方政府和限制与对联邦政府的限制程度是一样的[40]。
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.[29] 在和平时期,未经房主同意,士兵不得在民房驻扎;除依法律规定的方式,战时也不允许如此。[21][22]
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.[29] 人民的人身、住宅、文件和财产不受无理搜查和扣押的权利,不得侵犯。除依照合理根据,以宣誓或代誓宣言保证,并具体说明搜查地点和扣押的人或物,不得发出搜查和扣押状。[21][22]
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.[29] 无论何人,除非根据大陪审团的报告或起诉,不得受判处死罪或其他不名誉罪行之审判,惟发生在陆、海军中或发生在战时或出现公共危险时服现役的民兵中的案件,不在此限。任何人不得因同一罪行为而两次遭受生命或身体的危害;不得在任何刑事案件中被迫自证其罪;不经正当法律程序,不得被剥夺生命、自由或财产。不给予公平赔偿,私有财产不得充作公用。[21][22]
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.[29] 在一切刑事诉讼中,被告享有下列权利:由犯罪行为发生地的州和地区的公正陪审团予以迅速而公开的审判,该地区应事先已由法律确定;得知被控告的性质和理由;同原告证人对质;以强制程序取得对其有利的证人;取得律师帮助为其辩护。[21][22]
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.[29] 在普通法的诉讼中,其争执价值超过20美元,由陪审团审判的权利应受到保护。由陪审团裁决的事实,合众国的任何法院除非按照普通法规则,不得重新审查。[21][22]
第七条修正案规定,所有争执价值超过20美元的联邦民事诉讼需由陪审团裁决,也规定法官不得在联邦民事审判中推翻陪审团裁决的事实。在1973年的科尔格罗夫诉巴廷案(英语:Colgrove v. Battin)中,最高法院裁决认为该修正案中要求的陪审团最少要有6名成员。第七条修正案是权利法案中唯一没有应用到各州的一条。[49][50]
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.[29] 不得要求过多的保释金,不得处以过重的罚金,不得施加残酷和非常的惩罚。[21][22]
这条修正案在诉讼中引用最频繁的条款是最后一项,禁止施加残酷和非常的惩罚[52][53]。这一条款也是1970年代前唯一一个上诉到最高法院的案件中偶而会涉及的条款,具体情况通常与死刑有关。在1972年的弗曼诉佐治亚州案(英语:Furman v. Georgia)中,部分大法官认为死刑本身就违反了这条修正案,认为这一条款可以反映出公众对于可以接受的惩罚标准,將随着公众舆论的改變而不断发生变化;另外一些大法官认为,死刑审讯中的某些做法存在不可接受的武断情况。因此法院判决中的多数意见认为死刑违宪,美国也因此持续数年没有执行过死刑[54][55]。到了1976年的格雷格诉佐治亚州案(英语:Gregg v. Georgia)中,最高法院的立场有了改变,裁决中认为只要陪审团是根据具体的量刑指引而做出判决,那么死刑就是合宪的[56][55]。此外,最高法院还在1976年的埃斯特尔诉甘布尔案(英语:Estelle v. Gamble)裁决中认为,一些监狱中存在的恶劣情况也属于“残酷和非常的惩罚”[57][52]。
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.[29] 本宪法对某些权利的列举,不得被解释为否定或忽视由人民保留的其他权利。[21][22]
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.[29] 本宪法未授予合众国、也未禁止各州行使的权力,保留给各州行使,或保留给人民行使之。[21][22]
^ 9.09.19.2Hamilton, Alexander. Federalist Papers, #84. On opposition to a Bill of Rights.. The Founders' Constitution. University of Chicago Press. [2013-09-18]. (原始内容存档于2013-01-14).
^Text of Madison's speech, at the James Madison Center. [2009-03-18]. (原始内容存档于2009-03-18). That there be prefixed to the constitution a declaration That all power is originally vested in, and consequently derived from the people. That government is instituted, and ought to be exercised for the benefit of the people; which consists in the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the right of acquiring and using property, and generally of pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety. That the people have an indubitable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to reform or change their government, whenever it be found adverse or inadequate to the purposes of its institution. Secondly. That in article 2nd. section 2, clause 3, these words be struck out, to wit, "The number of representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty thousand, but each state shall have at least one representative, and until such enumeration shall be made." And that in place thereof be inserted these words, to wit, "After the first actual enumeration, there shall be one representative for every thirty thousand, until the number amount to after which the proportion shall be so regulated by congress, that the number shall never be less than nor more than but each state shall after the first enumeration, have at least two representatives; and prior thereto." Thirdly. That in article 2nd, section 6, clause 1, there be added to the end of the first sentence, these words, to wit, "But no law varying the compensation last ascertained shall operate before the next ensuing election of representatives." Fourthly. That in article 2nd, section 9, between clauses 3 and 4, be inserted these clauses, to wit,The civil rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall any national religion be established, nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience by in any manner, or on any pretext infringed. The people shall not be deprived or abridged of their right to speak, to write, or to publish their sentiments; and the freedom of the press, as one of the great bulwarks of liberty, shall be inviolable. The people shall not be restrained from peaceably assembling and consulting for their common good, nor from applying to the legislature by petitions, or remonstrances for redress of their grievances. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed, and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country: but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms, shall be compelled to render military service in person. No soldier shall in time of peace be quartered in any house without the consent of the owner; nor at any time, but in a manner warranted by law. No person shall be subject, except in cases of impeachment, to more than one punishment, or one trial for the same office; nor shall be compelled to be a witness against himself; nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor be obliged to relinquish his property, where it may be necessary for public use, without a just compensation. Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. The rights of the people to be secured in their persons, their houses, their papers, and their other property from all unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated by warrants issued without probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, or not particularly describing the places to be searched, or the persons or things to be seized. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, to be informed of the cause and nature of the accusation, to be confronted with his accusers, and the witnesses against him; to have a compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor; and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense. The exceptions here or elsewhere in the constitution, made in favor of particular rights, shall not be so construed as to diminish the just importance of other rights retained by the people; or as to enlarge the powers delegated by the constitution; but either as actual limitations of such powers, or as inserted merely for greater caution. Fifthly. That in article 2nd, section 10, between clauses 1 and 2, be inserted this clause, to wit: No state shall violate the equal rights of conscience, or the freedom of the press, or the trial by jury in criminal cases. Sixthly. That article 3rd, section 2, be annexed to the end of clause 2nd, these words to wit: but no appeal to such court shall be allowed where the value in controversy shall not amount to————dollars: nor shall any fact triable by jury, according to the course of common law, be otherwise re—examinable than may consist with the principles of common law. That in article 3rd, section 2, the third clause be struck out, and in its place be inserted the classes following, to wit: The trial of all crimes (except in cases of impeachments, and cases arising in the land or naval forces, or the militia when on actual service in time of war or public danger) shall be by an impartial jury of freeholders of the vicinage, with the requisite of unanimity for conviction, of the right of challenge, and other accustomed requisites; and in all crimes punishable with loss of life or member, presentment or indictment by a grand jury shall be an essential preliminary, provided that in cases of crimes committed within any county which may be in possession of an enemy, or in which a general insurrection may prevail, the trial may by law be authorized in some other county of the same state, as near as may be to the seat of the offence. In cases of crimes committed not within any county, the trial may by law be in such county as the laws shall have prescribed. In suits at common law, between man and man, the trial by jury, as one of the best securities to the rights of the people, ought to remain inviolate. Eighthly. That immediately after article 6th, be inserted, as article 7th, the clauses following, to wit: The powers delegated by this constitution, are appropriated to the departments to which they are respectively distributed: so that the legislative department shall never exercise the powers vested in the executive or judicial; nor the executive exercise the powers vested in the legislative or judicial; nor the judicial exercise the powers vested in the legislative or executive departments. The powers not delegated by this constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the States respectively. Ninthly. That article 7th, be numbered as article 8th.
^ 13.013.1Levy, Leonard W. Origins of the Bill of Rights. Yale University Press. 2001-03-01: 35 [2013-09-17]. ISBN 978-0300089011. (原始内容存档于2013-07-06). Madison introduced "amendments culled mainly from state constitutions and state ratifying convention proposals, especially Virginia's."
^
Bernstein, Richard B. Twenty-Seventh Amendment. Encyclopedia of the American Constitution. – 通过HighBeam Research . 2000 [2013-09-19]. (原始内容存档于2013-09-19).
^ 30.030.130.230.3
Cox, Archibald. First Amendment. Encyclopedia of the American Constitution. – 通过HighBeam Research . 1986 [2013-09-19]. (原始内容存档于2014-09-21).
^Fifth Amendment. Gale Encyclopedia of Everyday Law. – 通过HighBeam Research . 2006-01-01 [2013-09-19]. (原始内容存档于2014-09-21).
^ 48.048.1The Sixth Amendment. Constitutional Amendments: From Freedom of Speech to Flag Burning. – 通过HighBeam Research . 2008-01-01 [2013-09-19]. (原始内容存档于2013-09-21).
^ 52.052.1
Krantz, Sheldon. Cruel and Unusual Punishment. Encyclopedia of the American Constitution. – 通过HighBeam Research . 1986 [2013-09-19]. (原始内容存档于2014-10-29).
^ 55.055.1
Weisberg, Robert. Capital Punishment. Encyclopedia of the American Constitution. – 通过HighBeam Research . 1986 [2013-09-19]. (原始内容存档于2014-09-21).
^
Barnett, Randy E. Ninth Amendment (Update). Encyclopedia of the American Constitution. – 通过HighBeam Research . 2000 [2013-09-19]. (原始内容存档于2013-09-21).
^History of the Bill of Rights. Revolutionary-War-and-Beyond.com. [2013-09-20]. (原始内容存档于2013-07-03).However, the Maryland Archives report that the unknown National Archives copy {pictured above in Wikipedia article} is the Maryland Copy