In the United States of America, a sentence of a possibility of six months or more requires one to be tried by a jury. In federal courts, a jury comprises of twelve peers who reach a unanimous decision. This is essential for fairness in terms of proving validity evidence against the accused in criminal cases. In order for one to be convicted of an offense, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty; a role the jury is supposed to play. However, state courts do not have a jury since they are the laboratories of justice.
Citizens have a right to own handguns, but rights must always have limitations. Since two citizens have equal and same rights, there must be limiting factors to regulate them infringing on each other’s rights. In the recent case of McDonald v Chicago, it was held that citizens have a right to own a handgun but that may be regulated. An individual’s right to bear arms is incorporated and applied to the states through the 14th Amendment Due Process Clause.
On the issue of gay marriages, the United States Federal Government said it would honor gay marriages for the federal benefit under the case of Windsor v US. Section three of the Defenses against Marriage Act defines marriage as only the union of one man and one woman as husband and wife. States obligated to follow the federal government’s directives on gay marriages or they may establish their own legislations to govern them. Governor Gary Herbert’s refusal to recognize gay marriage is based on the fact that Utah’s law was unconstitutional.
In conclusion, Equal Protection of Laws doctrine needs to be adhered to the extent that they are consistent with the Constitution of the United States of America. States have sovereignty; persons have rights, so democracy has limits because these two cannot be realized to the maximum without infringing on the other’s rights or sovereignty. McDonald v Chicago and Windsor v US are cases in point.
Works Cited
Cornell University Law School. Right to Trial by Impartial Jury. 30 January 2014. 7 February 2014. <www.law.cornell.edu/anncon/html/amdt6frag3_user.html>.
McDonald v Chicago . No. 2010-R-0314. US Supreme Court. 20 August 2010.
