Washington, D.C. – As the United States approaches the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence in 2026, foundational tenets established by the nation’s founders are facing significant scrutiny. Central to their vision was the belief that government must uphold accountability and adhere to the rule of law, concepts that are increasingly being challenged.
In crafting the Declaration, the founders articulated their frustrations over King George III’s perceived encroachments on colonists’ rights. This discontent was not merely a rallying cry; it laid the groundwork for the U.S. Constitution, which would encapsulate principles of due process more than a decade later.
The judicial interpretation and implementation of due process have emerged as vital issues in contemporary America, particularly against the backdrop of recent initiatives by the former Trump administration targeting migrant deportations. In recent months, the U.S. Supreme Court has delivered a series of rulings on deportation cases, examining the due process clause embedded in the Constitution.
One pivotal ruling came in April 2025 in the case Trump v. J.G.G., where the court asserted that deportations should not be executed without due process. However, the landscape shifted with D.H.S. v. D.V.D., where the court halted a lower court’s attempts to extend due process protections to individuals facing deportation to South Sudan, where they could be subjected to torture and possible death.
These decisions present a confusing picture regarding the application of due process and raise pressing questions about its true meaning within the legal framework.
The concept of due process finds its roots in medieval England, evolving from the Magna Carta, a landmark document of the 13th century which established legal limitations on governmental authority. The Magna Carta’s assertion that no individual should be deprived of liberty or property without lawful judgment laid the groundwork for the rule of law in England.
Over time, these principles were refined, culminating in the 1354 English statute that reinforced the necessity of due process, stating that no person should be removed from their property or face punishment without an adequate legal framework. This evolution would inspire the emerging revolutionary sentiment among American colonists in the 18th century.
Thomas Paine’s pamphlet, Common Sense, released in January 1776, played a critical role in shifting colonial attitudes toward independence. His writings encouraged a departure from seeking reforms under monarchy to advocating for a system where the law itself serves as the sovereign authority.
Following independence, the framing of American state constitutions sought to formalize due process principles. Virginia’s Declaration of Rights in 1776 emphasized that the government must adhere to "the law of the land," reflecting a collective desire to protect citizens from governmental overreach.
The establishment of the Bill of Rights in 1791 solidified the foundation for due process at the federal level, ensuring individuals could not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without appropriate legal procedures. The adoption of the 14th Amendment after the Civil War broadened these protections to cover actions taken by both state and federal authorities.
In the 1970 case Goldberg v. Kelly, the Supreme Court articulated a comprehensive definition of due process, ruling that individuals facing the withdrawal of governmental benefits have the right to receive notice, defend themselves, and have their cases evaluated by impartial adjudicators.
The court further held that the specific requirements of due process can vary depending on the nature of the case, including what is at stake and the potential for governmental error. In situations where a person’s life is at risk, more stringent procedural safeguards are warranted.
Regardless of the context, the essential elements of fair notice, opportunity for defense, and impartial adjudication must remain significant. The Supreme Court has emphasized that efforts to provide due process must not be mere formalities; they must ensure meaningful protections for those affected.
This complex landscape of due process raises essential questions about the future of legal protections in the realm of immigration and beyond, as America continues to grapple with its foundational principles at a time of political and social upheaval.
This article was automatically written by Open AI, and the people, facts, circumstances, and story may be inaccurate. Any article can be requested for removal, retraction, or correction by writing an email to contact@publiclawlibrary.org.