Steel, John M.

English

UW Law Digital Commons (University of Washington)

Washington Law Review Volume 45 Number 3 5-1-1970 The Role of a Bill of Rights in a Modern State Constitution: Introduction John M. Steel Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wlr  Part of the Constitutional Law Commons Recommended Citation John M. Steel, The Role of a Bill of Rights in a Modern State Constitution: Introduction, 45 Wash. L. Rev. 453 (1970). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wlr/vol45/iss3/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews and Journals at UW Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington Law Review by an authorized editor of UW Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact cnyberg@uw.edu. WASHINGTON LAW REVIEWVolume 45, Number 3, 1970THE ROLE OF A BILL OF RIGHTS IN AMODERN STATE CONSTITUTIONINTRODUCTIONIn an era of public and private trespass upon fundamental rights,libertarians must refer back to and expand upon written principles,rather than resort to unauthorized self-help and poorly articulatedoutrage. Professors Countryman and Morris examine from distinctperspectives the contemporary need for and desirability of a State Billof Rights.Widespread discontent with the activism of the United StatesSupreme Court, and backlash by powerful political figures at theCourt's apparent circumvention of supposed "principles" of federalism,seem calculated to halt the era of judicial energy which prevailedduring the leadership of Chief Justice Earl Warren. Yet, while thefuture of the Court as an adaptive organism may be cast in doubt byCongressional attempts at reversal and by Executive attempts at dilu-tion, there is no question that the society which the Court servescannot be suffered to stagnate in a pool of static rights. The internalmotion of our society, constantly erupting under the pressures andconflicts engendered by the threat of nuclear destruction, unpopularwars, environmental contamination, racial hatred, glaring social in-justice, and political ferment evidenced by totalitarian tendencies onboth sides of the fence, requires untiring reinterpretation of ourtraditional rights and creation of new rights previously unknown. Inthe years ahead, it will be increasingly necessary for the States inour federal scheme to assume a role of activism designed to adapt ourlaw and libertarian tradition to changing civilization.In these papers, first presented at the State Constitutional RevisionConference at the University of Washington School of Law, June 13and 14, 1968, Professors Countryman and Morris illuminate, respec-453Washington Law Review Vol. 45: 453, 1970tively, the need for a State Bill of Rights and the content which thoserights must embrace.John M. SteeltI. WHY A STATE BILL OF RIGHTS?*VERN COUNTRYMAN**There is a school of thought among policemen, prosecutors, legisla-tors, lawyers, law professors and other scholars that the SupremeCourt of the United States has given us more of a Bill of Rights underthe federal Constitution than we need. This view is by no meansunanimous, but it is widespread.' Periodically this view manifestsitself in thus far unsuccessful efforts in Congress to restrict the juris-diction of the Supreme Court. One such effort was defeated in theSenate less than a month ago.' A few years ago the Council of StateGovernments was sponsoring an amendment to the Constitution tocreate a "Court of the Union," made up of the chief justices of thefifty states, to review decisions of the Supreme Court involving "rightsreserved to the states or to the people."3Some of the criticism of the Court does not rise above the level of1 Articles Editor, Washington Law Review.* This article was presented at the State Constitutional Revision Conference,sponsored by the University of Washington School of Law, Seattle, Washington (June13-14, 1968).** Professor of Law, Harvard University. B.A., University of Washington, 1939,LL.B., 1942.1. For collections of, and rebuttals to, expressions of this view, see Choper, On theWarren Court and Judicial Review, 17 CATHOLIC U.L. REv. 20 (1967); Kamisar, Onthe Tactics of Police-Prosecution Oriented Critics of the Courts, 49 CoN-. L.Q. 436(1964); BLACK, THE PEOPLE AND THE COURT (1960).2. The Senate acted to delete from S. 917, 90th Congress, 2d Session the so-calledOmnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Bill, provisions which would deprive the fed-eral courts of habeas corpus jurisdiction over state criminal convictions and of juris-diction to review in any manner state court rulings on the admission of confessions andof evidence of police line-up identifications. 114 CONG. REc. S6037-S6045 (daily ed.May 21, 1968).3. See Monroe, To Preserve the United States, 8 ST. Louis L.J. 533 (1964).454

The Role of a Bill of Rights in a Modern State Constitution: Introduction

https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1907&context=wlr

The Role of a Bill of Rights in a Modern State Constitution: Introduction

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

UW Law Digital Commons (University of Washington)