The Freedom of Petition Clause is the part of the First Amendment to
the United States Constitution that reads "Congress shall make no
law... abridging... the right of the people... to petition the Government for a
redress of
grievances."
The Freedom of Petition Clause guarantees that
Americans can petition the government to redress their grievances
without fear of retribution or punishment. This was an important
principle valued by the Founding Fathers because of their experience of
trying to get King George III and Parliament to redress their
grievances.
Gun Control
Protest
The Supreme Court has ruled that the right to petition the government
includes the right to do such things as picket, mail letters, sign
petitions, publish materials or use other types of communication to
get a message across to the government. It is also generally combined
with the right to free speech and the right of assembly to ensure that
people can form groups or associations to get their messages across.
The Freedom of Petition Clause applies equally to state and local
governments, as well as to the federal government. The Courts have also
established that citizens can petition all branches of government,
including the executive, legislative and judicial branches. This does
not mean however, that citizens have a right to personally meet with
the official they wish to petition, but they can submit petitions to
their offices or designated person according to established procedures.
The
Freedom of Petition Clause played an important role in the Civil Rights
fight for African Americans. The Court ruled in many cases that African
Americans had the right to do such things as picket, protest and
conduct
peaceful sitins and boycotts.
The Freedom to Petition may be
restricted by the government with reasonable restrictions as to time,
place and manner. For example, someone does not have the right to
expect their petition to be heard at 3:00 in the morning. Someone
petitioning the government for redress of grievances must prove that
they have legal standing in the matter, meaning that they must show
that they are personally affected in the matter addressed.
Why is the
Freedom of Petition Clause important?
If you remember reading the Declaration
of Independence, Congress included a list of grievances
against the British government. The grievances included such things as
the king not obeying his own laws, preventing the people from
establishing their own elected rulers, keeping standing armies
in their land without their consent, imposing taxes without
their consent, denying the right to trial by jury in some
cases, encouraging the slave population to rebel against them
and many
others.
The very last grievance mentioned in the Declaration of Independence is
this:
"In every stage of these
Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in
the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only
by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every
act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free
people."
The people of the American colonies had sent repeated requests to the
King and to Parliament asking for relief from their long list of
grievances. Instead of addressing these concerns, King George and
Parliament had responded by adding more and more restrictions,
regulations, taxes and hardships upon them.
The First Congress of the United States wanted to ensure that if the
people had a grievance with the government, they could petition the
government without the fear of being punished in return. Consequently,
the Freedom of Petition Clause was included in the First
Amendment of the Bill of Rights. You
can read more about the Purpose of the Bill of Rights here.
History of
the Freedom of Petition Clause
Click to view larger image of
King John signing Magna Carta - 1215
English history had many instances of people
being imprisoned or
otherwise punished for trying to point out to the government something
that they thought was unjust. The monarchy had absolute power until
1215 with the signing of the Magna Carta. This document was an
agreement signed by King John that agreed to certain
limitations upon the government. This document did not guarantee
certain rights to all the people, but it set the precedent for
the subjects of the kingdom to set limits upon the rulers.
One of the clauses of Magna Carta appoints 25 barons to petition the
king for grievances if any are found. It reads like this:
"... if we, (referring to the
King) or our justiciar, or our bailiffs or any one of our officers,
shall in anything be at fault towards anyone, or shall have broken any
one of the articles of this peace or of this security, and the offense
be notified to four barons of the foresaid five and twenty, the said
four barons shall repair to us (or our justiciar, if we are out of the
realm) and, laying the transgression before us, petition to have that
transgression redressed without delay. And if we shall not have
corrected the transgression (or, in the event of our being out of the
realm, if our justiciar shall not have corrected it) within forty days,
reckoning from the time it has been intimated to us (or to our
justiciar, if we should be out of the realm), the four barons aforesaid
shall refer that matter to the rest of the five and twenty barons, and
those five and twenty barons shall, together with the community of the
whole realm, distrain and distress us in all possible ways, namely, by
seizing our castles, lands, possessions, and in any other way they can,
until redress has been obtained as they deem fit, saving harmless our
own person, and the persons of our queen and children; and when redress
has been obtained, they shall resume their old relations towards us."
Later, the English Bill of Rights of 1689 expanded this right to all
people in the kingdom. The part of the English Bill of Rights
addressing the freedom to petition the government reads like this:
"That it is the right of the
subjects to petition the king, and all commitments and prosecutions for
such petitioning are illegal."
On June 8, 1789, James Madison introduced seventeen proposed
amendments
to
the US Constitution. One of these included the Freedom of Petition
Clause. Congress voted to accept twelve of these amendments on
September 25, 1789. The amendments were sent to the states for
ratification. With the vote for ratification by Virginia on December
15, 1791, ten of these amendments became law, including the First
Amendment, which included the Freedom of Petition Clause. The First
Ten Amendments are also known as the American Bill of Rights.
You
can read more about the History of the Bill of Rights here.
Freedom
of Petition Clause cases
The first test of the Freedom of Petition Clause came with the Alien
and Sedition Acts of 1798. These acts made it a criminal offense to
criticize the government or its officials. Many people believed it was
solely a political act of President John Adams and his supporters who
were afraid that their Federalist Party was about to lose power in the
election of 1800.
A few people were convicted under the laws. Many people presented
petitions to Congress asking for the repeal of the Alien and Sedition
Acts, but the case never went before the Supreme Court. Instead, after
the election, the laws were allowed to expire and President Thomas
Jefferson pardoned those who had been convicted.
The Freedom of Petition Clause came to prominence during the
1830's when many people were petitioning the government to abolish
slavery. On January 28, 1840, the Congressmen that controlled Congress
passed a resolution stating that:
"That
no
petition, memorial, resolution, or other paper praying the
abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia, or any State or
Territories of the United States in which it now exists, shall be
received by this House, or entertained in any way whatever."
John Quincy
Adams
President John Quincy Adams was successful at leading the charge to
have this law repealed five years later. Currently, Congressmen can
present petitions to the Congress by submitting them to the Clerk who
then enters them in the official Congressional Journal.
There are two particularly memorable First Amendment Supreme Court
cases dealing with the Freedom of Petition Clause. United
States vs. Cruikshank (1876) is an early and memorable
case that affirmed the right to petition the government. In this case,
several white men that had been convicted for the murder of several
African Americans appealed their conviction to the Supreme Court. The
Court threw out their conviction, saying that their indictment was
filed on insufficient grounds.
The verdict in parts state that:
"The
very idea of a government, republican in form, implies a right on
the part of its citizens to meet peaceably for consultation in respect
to public affairs and to petition for a redress of grievances."
In Hague vs. Committee
for Industrial Organization (1939), the Supreme Court also
affirmed the right of freedom to petition the government. In this case,
a local
city mayor was using a city ordinance to prevent the Committee for
Industrial Organization from meeting in public places in the city,
calling it a communist organization. The organization was trying to
organize labor union meetings and distribute literature that promoted
its view of labor relations. The Court ruled that the ordinance
prevented the organization from assembling and petitioning the
government. You
can read the complete verdict of Hague vs. Committee for Industrial
Organization here.
Freedom of
Petition Clause - Does the
Government have to respond?
An interesting question about the Freedom of Petition Clause is whether
or not the government is required to respond to its citizens'
petitions. The First Amendment says only that citizens have the right
to petition the government, it does not say the government has to
respond.
However, English history regarding the freedom to petition the
government did require a response from the government. The Magna Carta
required a response from the monarchy. It reads like this:
"[The barons] ...laying the
transgression before us, petition to have that
transgression redressed without delay. And if we shall not have
corrected the transgression (or, in the event of our being out of the
realm, if our justiciar shall not have corrected it) within forty days,
reckoning from the time it has been intimated to us (or to our
justiciar, if we should be out of the realm), the four barons aforesaid
shall refer that matter to the rest of the five and twenty barons, and
those five and twenty barons shall, together with the community of the
whole realm, distrain and distress us in all possible ways, namely, by
seizing our castles, lands, possessions, and in any other way they can,
until redress has been obtained as they deem fit..."
Some people argue that it is implicit within the Freedom of Petition
Clause that the government must respond to grievances of the people,
otherwise, there would be no point for the citizens to petition the
government.
The First Continental Congress seems to agree. In 1774, the Congress
sent a letter to the citizens of Quebec encouraging them to join in the
rebellion against England. Part of their letter reads like this:
“If money is wanted by rulers who
have in any manner oppressed the people, they may retain it until their
grievances are redressed, and thus peaceably procure relief without
trusting to despised petitions or disturbing the public tranquility."