Amendment+7+(2)

Our Amendment:
"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 reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law. "

What our amendment means:
You have the right to a trial with a jury in common law, but not necessarily in a federal or state case. And that the jury hears the facts to determine the verdict, while the judge determines the penalty based on the jury's findings.

Supreme Court Cases:
[] [] [] []
 * Curtis V. Loether:** A woman took people to court because she said that they had discriminated against her and did not rent her appartment because she was black. They wanted a jury trial and she did not. The district court said that a jury was not required, but the court of appeals reversed that and said that the seventh amendment gave right to a jury trial.
 * Ross V. Bernhard:** The stockholders claimed that their contract had been violated. The court decided that the right to a jury trail is based on the circumstances, in this case there were 2 separate claims the stockholder to corporation did not have a jury trial, because it was a trail about equality, while the corporation to stockholder trial did have a jury, because it was based on legal matters.

Restraints:
You can not take someone to court for the came thing twice. In a Court of Equity (equality) there does not need to be a jury.

Freedom:
The 7th amendment gives US citizens the freedom to have a trail heard by a jury of our peers.

Debates:
Some debates are what exactly is common law? In approximately 1619, the term common-law " (2) appears and is defined by Merriam-Webster as "//a) of, relating to, or based on the common law, or b) relating to or based on a common-law marriage//. I don't believe that the definition referring to common law marriage applies to this Amendment. To put it as simply as possible: when a court encounters a case in which the details are so unique that no precedent has been set by a previous court, the ruling issued by that court becomes "common law" and is the precedent by which the next court in similar circumstances bases it's ruling on. That first court established the "Common Law" in regards to this particular situation. []

Predictions:

 * Rachael -** I predict that like everything else in life, perspectives will change within the next 20 years and the way we currently view the 7th amendment will evolve to fit the needs of future generations. Based on the 7th amendment I would say that the rights of US citizens will be less restricted. Like double jeopardy, you can not be taken to civil court twice for the same thing. Even if later it is found that it could not have been anyone but that person. Even though this does not happen every day, it is still a problem that can and will occur.
 * Tyler** - I don't think there will be any major changes in the law in the next twenty years. It just guarantees a jury trial, there's not much that can be changed. There isn't much that it restricts now, and there's not much that can be restricted.
 * Billy** - My prediction is that the rights of the American people will become more and more restricted as the laws become more and more clear.

Period 2 (2009)

Constitution Projects (2)

Constitutional Law