 What I noticed is the first word, Congress. Congress shall make no law. And when you compare this to the English bills of rights, the English bills of rights restrict the power of the king. And the American Bill of Rights, somewhat ironically, restricts the power of Congress. It's ironic because what we've done is create a Republican form of government where we vest Congress with enormous authority, but we're saying that Congress is the most likely entity to violate our liberties. On the one hand, we have enormous confidence in the power of Congress to represent the will of the people, but on the other, we are looking at Congress as a potential abuser of liberty. If you look at the verbs, and you compare it, say, to the Maryland Constitution. The Maryland Constitution says the hostility is ought not, you know, should not. In this, it says shall. And if you look at the verb throughout the bill of rights or in the Constitution itself, there is an absolute prohibition and shall not do this. There's a tremendous amount of litigation that is represented in the Fifth Amendment. The Double Jeopardy Clause, something we're all familiar with, which is if you've been tried and found innocent, you cannot be brought on the same case before another court. Or you cannot be compelled to be a witness against yourself and self-crimination. The Due Process Clause directly relates to a English protection. Article Four of the English Petition of Right stated that no man should be put out of his land or tenements or taken or imprisoned or disinherited nor put to death without being brought to answer by due process of law. And so the Due Process Clause is a direct descendant of that as are many other provisions in the Bill of Rights. Following the Civil War, African American citizens were not given due process rights by the various states, which resulted in the Fourteenth Amendment being passed, which would protect their rights, their liberties, as citizens of the United States against the abuse of the state. One of the most confusing things in my mind about the Bill of Rights is who does it limit? A good example of this is the case that would be decided in 1833 called Baron v. Baltimore. And the issue here was the fact that the city of Baltimore in its collective wisdom was improving the streets in Thel's Point. And the owner of a wharf discovered that every time it rained, his wharf was getting silted up more and more and more. The issue was whether or not the city owed him money for destroying his wharf. He lost in the state courts and so being very inventive, what he did was to sue in federal court and he argued that this was a taking without compensation and violated his Fifth Amendment rights. So it makes its way to the Supreme Court and Justice Marshall says that you don't have a cause of action because the Bill of Rights says Congress shall make no law. It doesn't say that the states shall make no law. So the Baron v. Baltimore stands for the proposition that the federal Bill of Rights only attaches against federal government action and you cannot go against the states. The Bill of Rights ends with two very important amendments, the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, which are designed to protect rights that are not enumerated or to reserve to the states rights not given or powers not given to the national government. So what this is designed to do is to address and Hamilton feared in Federalist 84 that if you forget to enumerate rights that they will be lost. So the Ninth Amendment says that those not enumerated shall be retained by the people. The Tenth Amendment, on the other hand, is trying to deal with the powers of the state. Those powers not given to the national government in Article I, Section 8 or those powers not prohibited to the states in Article I, Section 10, everything else is reserved to the states, respectively. So, for instance, when Alexander Hamilton wanted to create a Bank of the United States in 1791, Thomas Jefferson, who opposed this, said that this violates Article 10 because it is not a power enumerated in the Constitution and since it's not enumerated, it would be reserved to the states and the states have the power to create banks. This is the first debate over the meaning of the Tenth Amendment and the use of the so-called Elastic Clause, the Necessary and Proper Clause of the Constitution to enact those things not specifically enumerated in Article I, Section 8.