Freedom to Petition
Although Americans largely rely on their elected representatives to conduct the affairs of the nation and individual states, counties and cities, the right of the people to directly petition the government for relief remains a basic right for all U.S. citizens. That right is guaranteed in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, as well as in Article I, Sec. 9 of the Missouri Constitution, which states, "That the people have the right peaceably to assemble for their common good, and to apply to those invested with the powers of government for redress of grievances by petition or remonstrance."
The historical origins of this right date back at least as far as the English Magna Carta. Among the liberties granted to the English people by King John -albeit under the coercive influence of the rebellious nobility -- was the right of barons to petition the king for redress of a wrong that had been brought to their attention and to demand its correction. Further bolstering of this right was granted through the English House of Commons in 1669 and the English Bill of Rights in 1689.
Despite these idealistic goals, the early American colonists found a far different situation. In 1765, the colonists began to chafe under what they considered to be the abuse of the newly enacted British Stamp Act, which placed stamp duties on such things as legal documents, newspapers and playing cards. It was this act which engendered the cry of, "No taxation without representation."
In the years which followed, the American colonists made every effort to assert their right, as British subjects, to petition the king for redress of grievances. Although this was a right ostensibly granted to them, it had been denied. The colonists considered the right to petition the king a basic right and were alarmed that it should be denied to them. This denial was, ultimately, instrumental in fomenting the rebellion in America against the crown. In fact, the Declaration of Independence assigned as one of the reasons for the break from England the fact that "Our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury."
Thus, it is no surprise that when our early leaders set out to formulate the framework under which the nation would be governed, they were determined to ensure that Americans would have a written guarantee of the right which had been denied them as British subjects. Four state constitutions -- those of Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire and North Carolina -- specifically guaranteed such a right. Indeed, James Madison, in addressing the question of amendments to the Constitution, told members of the House of Representatives in June of 1789 that the "people should not be restrained from applying to the legislature by petitions, or remonstrances, for redress of their grievances." His plea did not go unattended, as the right of Americans to petition the government was included in the First Amendment.
As with any constitutional provision, the courts of the nation have continued to interpret the meaning of the right to petition the government. U. S. Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas broadened the meaning of the provision with his opinion in the 1966 case of Adderly v. Florida:
"The right to petition for redress of grievances has an ancient history, and is not limited to writing a letter or sending a telegram to Congressman; it is not confined to appearing before local city council, or writing letters to the President or Governor or Mayor. Conventional methods of petitioning may be, and often have been, shut off to large groups of our citizens. Legislators may turn deaf ears, formal complaints may be routed endlessly through a bureaucratic maze; courts may let the wheels of justice grind very slowly. Those who do not control television and radio, those who cannot afford to advertise in newspapers or circulate elaborate pamphlets may only have a limited type of access to public officials. Their methods should not be condemned as tactics of obstruction and harassment as long as the assembly and petition are peaceable . . ."
The expansion of the definition of legitimate methods of petitioning the government ensures that Americans will not have their grievances ignored, as were those of the American colonists two centuries ago. But, as with all individual rights, the right to petition is subject to some limitations. The courts have held, for example, that this right does not sanction persons distributing leaflets for their cause on property which is not public, such as a shopping center, if the owner objects.
A notable case involving the right to petition was decided by the Supreme Court in 1962 in the case of NAACP v. Dutton. The Virginia NAACP had a staff of attorneys used in litigation involving civil rights, particularly school desegregation cases. The organization urged individuals whose rights had been violated to pursue such suits, and it then provided the individuals with attorneys. The Virginia legislature attempted to curtail the practice by making it illegal for any attorney to accept compensation from any person or organization not a party to the judicial proceeding, and by making it an offense for any organization to solicit such business for an attorney. The U. S. Supreme Court overturned the Virginia statute, holding that it represented a violation of the constitutional right to petition. The court's opinion, written by Justice William Brennan, states:
".Groups which find themselves unable to achieve through the ballot frequently turn to the courts . . And under the conditions of modern government, litigation may well be the sole practicable avenue open to petition for redress of grievances."
Thus, through the Constitution, the courts and the people, Americans continue to enjoy the right to petition the government in a number of ways. This landmark of our legal heritage, like those others which were the products of the wisdom of our early leaders, ensures a government responsive to the needs and wishes of its people.