Arguments Against The 6th Amendment

According to a recent study, more than 80% of those charged with felonies are indigent. As a result, they are unable to hire an attorney and instead rely on representation by a public defender (Brunt). Therefore, it is implausible to spend the appropriate amount of time on a single case. Yet, the 6th amendment states, “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and

““The U.S. implemented this amendment, because, in England, the judicial system would prolong cases for years, and secretly never take them to court” (Zietlow). The United States did not want these cases to reappear in the U.S. court system, therefore we ratified this amendment in order to stop this. To add to that, “The amendment grants accused individuals a right to a lawyer to defend them if they want one. If the accused individual cannot afford to pay a lawyer, they have a right to have a government lawyer appointed to defend them” (Zietlow). This clause is in the constitution on the grounds thats you should have a fair chance to defend yourself, due to which we could not adequately or professionally represent ourselves. Also, “The amendment guarantees a speedy and public trial before an impartial jury of one’s peers. Failure to bring a trial in a timely manner can lead to dismissal of the charges” (Zietlow). The piece of amendment that was just stated is describing the right to a public trial, and the right to have the trial in a timely manner, so the defendant is not wrongly kept in jail, for an extended amount of

There is no way defenders could realistically do an adequate job on each case if they do not have enough time to review the case, and build a strong foundational argument. There is on average 5 million cases per year are given to public defenders (Peng). Therefore Mrs. Tina Ping stated, “An unconstitutionally high caseload means that I often see my new clients only once in those two months. It means that I miss filing important motions, that I am unable to properly prepare for every trial, that I have serious conversations about plea bargains with my clients in open court because I did not spend enough time conducting confidential visits with them in jail. I plead some of my clients to felony convictions on the day I meet them. If I don’t follow up to make sure clients are released when they should be, they can sit in jail for unnecessary weeks and months” (Peng), so by the seer lack of public defenders, some lawyers have cases representing life sentences their first week out of law school (Peng), are are expected to successfully defend the defendants, against the perplex justice system, and the relentless laws. Furthermore, “In June, the American Civil Liberties Union sued Idaho, claiming