Legislation and bills that are passed and laid down are important in protecting the civil rights and liberties of the citizens this includes such legislation including that which is written in the constitution in which legally bounds the USA. However the bills and legislation that is passed can sometimes hinder the protection of civil rights and Liberties this is shown in America with the implementation of the Patriot Act 2001 in which doesn’t protect the citizens civil rights and liberties this is the act allows the executive to look into crucial information and also deviate the constitution in the 1st amendment with freedom of religion with the act discriminating against religions and ethnic backgrounds. This piece of legislation deviates the law in which gives the president an advantage and limit the civil liberties and rights to those who are accused of being a terrorist. In Britain there is legislation in which makes the British citizen weary as legislation in Britain can be changed as no government is restricted by previous legislation a case of civil liberties and rights not being protected in the Uk is the case in which Iain Duncan Smith's department has introduced legislation to 'protect the national economy' from a £130m payout to jobseekers. This was retrospective legislation in which went against the civil rights and liberties of the people as the government changed the law to suits itself so they didn’t have to pay out. This questions the accountability of the British Executive as even nations that violate human rights and liberties such as Iran and Turkey have it written into there constitutions banning retrospective legislation questioning the fairness and the rights of the citizens as a an act which may not be a crime now could cause a person to be accused of crime as retrospective legislation should not be so manipulative in deciding the outcome to protect the government.
Civil Rights and liberties are sometimes not protected due to the influence held by the courts in which gives little precedence to either state courts in what happens this is important as decisions and rulings may change from state level to supreme level in which a decision can be overturned in which can dictate either way if civil rights and liberties are protected. In the USA there are several different levels of court from Federal District Courts to the Supreme Court similar to that with the Crown Court to the European Court of justice. This has shown can be said that the smaller courts are just minnows in which they are heard but not listened to as they don’t have the concluding decision if someone has done something right or wrong in which can hinder the protection of civil liberties and rights as one court may rule one judging one court may rule another judging however even if the smaller court is right the more supreme court can overrule the decision .This is shown with the Abu Qadata case in which the British wanted to extradite him for terrorist activity .This shows that in the UK Qadatas right are not protected .However when Qadata is faced upon a European court this protects his rights more showing indirectly the British Court protects civil rights and liberties through the Human Rights Act and Lisbon Treaty .This has been the case since Van Gend en Loos v Nederlandse Administratie der Belastingen.This is also true to be said in the United States when States Court rulings get overturned .This can be very critical with the Grutter v. Bollinger upheld the University of Michigan Law School's consideration of race and ethnicity in admissions. In her majority opinion, Justice O'Connor said that the law school used a “highly individualized, holistic review of each applicant's file.” Race, she said, was not used in a “mechanical way.” .Not protecting the 9th Amendment in which certain rights may not be denied this was presented non individualized, mechanical,” and thus unconstitutional. Even though this case was overturned this then invalidates the 10th amendment in which powers should not be delegated to the United States by the constitution. Validating the point that some civil liberties and rights aren’t protected by the supreme court but influenced to suit the courts standing on particular idea due to the ideology and position in which the court stands for. Showing that the supreme court is unconstitutional in its own right and overturn potentially right hearings.
Overall I have found that analyzing and distinguishing between both sides of the argument that the UK’s civil right and liberties are loosely protected and don’t offer real protection with constant change and manipulation in law to such government .While also the British law takes 2nd preference to EU law by weakening the powers and decisions of judges have on the UK due to strict regulations .This is as the USAs constitution and superior body enforces the protection of Civil Rights/Liberties and it’s not until other authoritative Bodies step in and enforce the civil rights and liberties that the UK can protect them better in which shows the UK has to be pushed to enforce civil rights and liberties.