Paper Topic:

City Ordinance Against Loitering

Running head : ORDINANCE AGAINST LOITERING

City Ordinance Against Loitering (name (university (professor (subject (date

Abstract

Most of the authorities in law suggest that legislation which makes a crime to loiter runs afoul with the Constitution for its vagueness and broadness . The meaning and guidelines lacks sufficient definiteness to guide the police and judges in the determination of guilt thus giving them a wide discretion in arbitrarily enforcing the law

City Ordinance Against Loitering

The Bill of Rights in the United States Constitution and its amendments guarantees citizens of the United

States the right to equal protection of laws as provided under the Fourteenth Amendment , right to due process as provided by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments , the right against cruel and unusual punishment as provided under the Eighth Amendment , and the right to free expression as provided under the First Amendment These are only some of the freedoms and rights provided by the law of the land which makes a man equal to all men

It is basic in law that the language of the Constitution will prevail if conflicts between several provisions law arises . The Constitution is considered the ultimate law and all other laws must emanate from it

Today , there are several laws passed by our legislature that runs contrary with the Constitution . Ordinances and statutes are being questioned by several officers of the court and even laymen who are empowered with knowledge and wisdom of the laws . City ordinances against loitering are the most common and controversial law that often violates every citizens highly protected fundamental rights

Most of the victims of these ordinances are the grassroots of the society or the homeless people whose lives are spent mostly in the streets . An increasing number of cities have enacted ordinances that deals aggressively against loitering . However , the extremely unequal restrictions are now increasingly being challenged as unconstitutional in courts (Library , n .d . It can be easily concluded that ordinances against loitering are considered unconstitutional because of their broadness and vagueness . It is violative of the due process of law as it does not afford a fair notice to the citizens as to what particular conduct is forbidden (The Oklahoma , n .d . It does not also provide an explicit standards and therefore would allow unfettered discretion to the police and judges in arbitrarily arresting and convicting citizens (The Oklahoma , n .d . The words and provisions of this kind of ordinance are often ambiguous , as persons of common intelligence would not be able to understand the spirit of the law . It is fundamental that laws and statutes must be drawn in a language sufficient to apprise the public and not merely guess at its meaning (FindLaw , n .d . As decided in the case of Connally v . General Construction Company , the court said statute which either forbids or requires the doing of an act in terms so vague that men of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its application violates the first essential of...

3 pages

106.5 KB

Free sing-up