Civil Rights and Liberties

The right to peaceful assembly guaranteed in the first amendment is stated in a clear way. It ensures that the government or any others can't deny the citizens of America, the freedom of speech, assembly, and press. Suppose that John, a seventeen-year-old decides to meet his friends at the local arcade at ten p.m. However, the curfew ordinance in his town makes it illegal for John to leave his house at this time. Isn't it Johns given right to leave his house if he pleases to do so? Some states don't think so. Dallas and New Orleans are just of two over fifty cities that enforce curfew laws. However, the court of Appeals in San Diego and Bellingham Washington, have deemed curfew laws unconstitutional. Why? For one, the courts stated that the ordinances infringed minor's free expression rights. The ordinances failed to provide exceptions for legitimate activities and were vaguely expressed.

 For curfew laws to be declared along the lines of not infringing the constitution, states must be able to prove that the ordinances will drastically reduce juvenile crime and also clearly express exceptions to the rule. Attending a school play for instance is an exception. However, even that places limits on a person's freedom. In Palo Atlo Ca., a temporary curfew was tried for one year. After the trail period, the Palo Alto city council chose not to renew the ordinance. The American Civil Liberties Union backed the freedom of the youth in this case stating that the curfew "unjustified government intrusion on children's rights and parental rights".

 On the other side of the spectrum in Dallas, the curfew laws upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1994 has reduced juvenile crime by thirty percent. In this case, the court decided that the law fit along the lines of being constitutionally protected and by upholding it, the court decided that limited freedom was necessary to maintain order. The court had to look at the situation regarding the whole community rather than the individual to establish that the ordinance is necessary.

 Regarding civil rights, at one end we argue that curfews forfeit an individuals rights which, according to the Constitution, guarantees every citizens the rights to move, think, and act in a legitimate manner. At the other end, we argue that placing certain ordinances in geographical areas in terms of safety and well-being can benefit that area which are also guaranteed by the constitution in the form of civil rights (e.g. freedom from fear).