Petition Power: Can It Change Constitutional Law?

The right to petition is a fundamental human right, empowering individuals or groups to voice their concerns and seek redress from their government or authorities. This right is protected under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits Congress from interfering with petitioning activities. While petitions cannot directly change constitutional law, they are a powerful tool for citizens to express their opinions and influence policymakers. Throughout history, petitions have played a significant role in social and political change, such as the women's suffrage movement and the fight for racial equality. In the digital age, online petitions have become a popular way to raise awareness and gather support for various causes. While the impact of petitions varies, they remain a valuable exercise of free speech and a means to hold governments accountable.

The right to petition in the US Constitution

The right to petition is a fundamental principle in the US Constitution, protected by the First Amendment, which states:

> "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

The right to petition has a long history, dating back to ancient Egypt, where workers petitioned for better working conditions. In the US, the right to petition was so cherished in the 18th century that it was included in the First Amendment. The first significant exercise of this right was in the form of petitions to end slavery, with over 1,000 petitions and 130,000 signatures presented to Congress. This was followed by women's suffrage petitions in the mid-19th century, with 30,000 women signing petitions by 1878.

Today, petitions are still a common way for citizens to express their opinions and advocate for change. There are three main types of petitions: legal, public purpose, and internet petitions. Legal petitions are filed by attorneys in pending cases or lawsuits, while public purpose petitions are addressed to policymakers, government bodies, or administrative agencies and are shared publicly to gain support. Internet petitions are conducted entirely online and are often used to raise awareness about an issue.

While the right to petition is protected by the First Amendment, it is important to note that it does not guarantee a response from government policymakers. The Supreme Court has interpreted the Petition Clause as being similar to the Free Speech Clause, but has acknowledged that there may be differences between the two. The precise role of the Petition Clause in 21st-century democracy remains to be fully explored.

History of the right to petition

The right to petition is enumerated in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which specifically prohibits Congress from abridging "the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances". The right of petition took its rise from the modest provision made for it in chapter 61 of the Magna Carta (1215).

The concept and practice of petitioning go far back into human history, with records of ancient Egyptian workers petitioning for improved working conditions. In the 18th century, as the United States was taking shape, petitioning was open to everyone, including those not eligible to vote, and it became an important means of expressing opinions, persuading legislators, and influencing the political landscape of the new nation. In fact, scholars have determined that petitioning led to more legislative action in early America than any other source.

In the United States, the right to petition has been used by disenfranchised groups, including women, African Americans, Native Americans, and others, to engage elected officials and participate in politics. Women's use of petitions is especially significant in American history, with their petitions playing a major part in important national social movements, including the abolition of slavery and the campaign for women's suffrage. In 1836, the U.S. House of Representatives adopted a gag rule, declaring that all petitions regarding slavery would be ignored, but this only emboldened petitioners, who pointed to the suppression of the debate as an infringement of the rights of all Americans.

The right to petition has also been used by the unemployed to march on Washington and present petitions, although their leaders were arrested for unlawfully walking on the grass of the Capitol. In 1932, the march of veterans on Washington demanding bonus legislation was defended as an exercise of the right to petition, but the Administration regarded it as a threat against the Constitution and called out the army to expel the marchers and burn their camps.

Types of petitions

Petitions are a request to do something, typically addressed to a government agency or public official. They are a way for individuals or groups to express their opinions and seek redressal for their grievances. While petitions cannot directly change constitutional law, they can play a role in influencing policymakers and legislators to consider and address the issues raised.

There are several types of petitions, including:

Legal Petitions

Legal petitions are filed by attorneys in a pending case or lawsuit, requesting a court to issue a specific order. These petitions follow specific court rules and forms, and are not shared beyond the court and involved parties.

Public Purpose Petitions

Public purpose petitions are addressed to policymakers, government bodies, or administrative agencies, requesting them to take or refrain from taking a specific action. They are shared publicly to gather support and signatures. These petitions typically have minimal or no requirements and are often used to raise awareness about an issue.

Internet Petitions

Internet petitions, also known as e-petitions, are conducted entirely online and are usually addressed to government officials or representatives. They may not always specify the actions to be taken and do not always follow established civic or political processes. However, they are effective in raising public awareness and gathering support for a particular cause or issue.

Petitions for Ballot Initiatives

These petitions are used to collect signatures to place an issue on the ballot for a public vote or to enable a candidate to get on the ballot. They provide a way for citizens to directly participate in the democratic process and influence policy decisions.

Petitions for Redress of Grievances

This type of petition seeks to address specific grievances or wrongdoings and request corrective action from the government or other authorities. The right to petition for redress of grievances is protected by the First Amendment in the United States Constitution.

Limitations of petitions

Petitions are a common way for people to express their opinions and seek action from government officials. While the right to petition is protected by the First Amendment in the United States Constitution, there are limitations to its effectiveness in changing constitutional law.

One limitation is that petitions are not always effective in garnering a response from policymakers or government officials. The First Amendment does not require government officials to listen or respond to petitions, and they may be entered into the public record without any further action. This reduces the petitioning process to a formality, with no obligation to address the concerns raised.

Another limitation is that petitions may not have the force of law behind them. While they can raise awareness about an issue and demonstrate public support for a particular cause, they may not directly result in legal changes. This is especially true for internet petitions, which are often more about raising awareness than following established political processes.

Additionally, the impact of petitions may be limited by the political system in which they operate. In systems where incumbent legislators have a strong advantage, it can be challenging for petitions to gain traction or influence policy decisions. The success of a petition can also depend on the number of signatures it gathers, and it may be difficult to obtain a significant number of signatures in certain contexts.

Furthermore, the right to petition has been interpreted by courts in ways that limit its effectiveness. For example, the Supreme Court has often interpreted the Petition Clause as being coextensive with the Free Speech Clause, which can diminish the unique importance of the right to petition. In some cases, courts have ruled that certain groups, such as sex offenders, are prohibited from circulating petitions, further restricting the reach of petitions.

While petitions can be a powerful tool for civic engagement and have been used throughout history to advocate for important causes, they have limitations in terms of their ability to directly change constitutional law.

Petitions and the Supreme Court

Petitions are a request to do something, typically addressed to a government agency or public official. The request is made on behalf of a group, with individuals of the group recording their assent, such as signing their name. The right to petition is a basic practice in the US, with its origins in the country's early history. The First Amendment of the US Constitution guarantees the right to petition the government, stating that "Congress shall make no law respecting... the right of the people... to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." This right is also found in the 1689 Bill of Rights, which explicitly declares "That it is the Right of the Subjects to petition the King and all Commitments and Prosecutions for such Petitioning are Illegal".

The right to petition has been used throughout US history to advocate for significant social and political change. For example, in the mid-19th century, women submitted petitions to Congress to end slavery and gain suffrage. By 1878, Congress had received petitions for suffrage from 30,000 women across the country, and petition drives became a significant hallmark of the women's suffrage movement. Similarly, in 1836, over 130,000 citizens signed petitions to Congress advocating for an end to slavery.

The US Supreme Court has interpreted the Petition Clause of the First Amendment as coextensive with the Free Speech Clause, as seen in the case of Smith v. Arkansas State Highway Employees. In this case, the Court ruled that the Arkansas State Highway Commission's refusal to consider employee grievances when filed by a union did not violate the First Amendment. However, in its 2010 decision in Borough of Duryea v. Guarnieri, the Court acknowledged that there may be differences between the Petition Clause and the Speech Clause.

While the right to petition is guaranteed by the First Amendment, it does not require government policymakers to listen or respond to the communications of members of the public on public issues. The Supreme Court has ruled that the right to petition is cognate with the right to redress grievances in Parliament, as stated in the 1689 Bill of Rights. This means that while citizens have the right to petition the government, the government is not obligated to take action or respond to every petition.

Frequently asked questions