<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Daily quote by Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution</title>
    <link>https://t.inks.page/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution</link>
    <atom:link href="https://t.inks.page/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution/rss.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <description>Follow any website on Inks</description>
    <generator>inks.page</generator>
    <item>
<title>2026-04-07</title>
<link>https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution?t=2026-04-07</link>
<description><![CDATA[<li>In enacting the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause, the Framers similarly chose to employ the 'life, liberty, or property' formulation, though they otherwise deviated substantially from the States' use of Magna Carta's language in the Clause. When read in light of the history of that formulation, it is hard to see how the 'liberty' protected by the Clause could be interpreted to include anything broader than freedom from physical restraint. That was the consistent usage of the time when 'liberty' was paired with 'life' and 'property'. And that usage avoids rendering superfluous those protections for 'life' and 'property'. If the Fifth Amendment uses 'liberty' in this narrow sense, then the Fourteenth Amendment likely does as well.
<ul><li><a href="/wiki/Clarence_Thomas" title="Clarence Thomas">Clarence Thomas</a>, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-556_3204.pdf"><i>Obergefell v. Hodges</i></a> (2015).</li></ul></li>]]></description>
<pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

  </channel>
</rss>
