5th Amendment Simplified

The 5th Amendment
Summary of 5th Amendment

Click here or scroll down for the 5th Amendment Simplified.

5th Amendment
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

The 5th Amendment is possibly one of the most quoted constitutional amendments in movies as it includes the ‘right to plead the 5th’!

What Is the 5th Amendment?

The 5th Amendment is part of the Bill of Rights, ratified on December 15, 1791, and relates to criminal proceedings. It is sometimes also called the self-incrimination amendment.

US Courtroom
The Fifth Amendment is synonymous with ‘pleading the 5th.’

In summary, the 5th Amendment includes:

  • Allowing people to be indicted by a grand jury before going to trial
  • Protection against being made to answer more than once for the same crime (Double Jeopardy)
  • Allowing people to keep from self-incriminating
  • The right to fair treatment by the court system

Let’s look at these 5th Amendment rights in more depth and how they affect the United States Constitution.

Trial By Grand Jury

The first line of the Amendment mentions that the courts can only try people for “infamous” crimes if a grand jury indicts them.

hammer and gavel
The 5th Amendment gives the right to request a trial by grand jury.

What’s a grand jury?

A grand jury is different from the trial jury you’d see in a courtroom TV show because it doesn’t deliver a verdict. It only delivers indictments.

What does a grand jury do?

The grand jury will look at all the evidence of a case (including some that might not be admissible to a trial jury, such as illegally-obtained evidence) and decide whether or not it’s sufficient to indict (indictment is simply a word for “legally accuse”) the person of the supposed crime.

What crimes does the 5th Amendment apply to?

The text of the Fifth Amendment technically only applies to federal felonies.

While all states have laws that permit grand juries, only about half use grand juries, it also only applies to “infamous” or “capital crimes.” This means any crime with a penalty of more than one year of incarceration, a felony, or a crime that permits the death penalty.

Protection Against Double Jeopardy

Tiles spelling justice
Double Jeopardy is the part of law that says that you can’t be tried for the same crime twice.

The Fifth Amendment also prevents people from being made to answer for the same crime twice (referred to as “double jeopardy”).

This means that a person can’t be tried twice or sent to prison twice for the same offense.

This does not apply in the case of a mistrial or if the defendant requests an appeal. A person may also be tried once on the state level and again on a federal level.

The 5th Amendment is sometimes also called the Double Jeopardy Amendment.

What Does the Right to Due Process Mean as Part of the 5th Amendment?

The Fifth Amendment states that a person cannot be “deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.”

US Supreme Court
United States Supreme Court.

“Due process” means that trials will be conducted fairly and within the bounds of the law. For example, anyone accused of a crime can expect to go through a set procedure and therefore has a right to due process.

Again, this provision technically only applies to federal courts. Still, through the Fourteenth Amendment, the United States Supreme Court has expanded the guarantee of due process to cover all the states.

This is known as the Due Process Clause.

Protection Against Self-Incrimination and To Plead the 5th

plead the 5th right
As part of our constitutional rights, we are allowed to plead the 5th so that we don’t incriminate ourselves.

Most people are aware of the expression,

“I plead the Fifth.”

When a person suspected of a crime says this, they assert their right to avoid self-incrimination as guaranteed under the Fifth Amendment. It is also called invoking the 5th Amendment.

A person could say something that could be used as evidence against them in a trial.

Therefore, they don’t have to respond to a question if they don’t want to because what they say might be used against them. They are invoking their 5th Amendment rights of protection.

United States Constitution plaque
To plead the 5th, means that you are taking advantage of the 5th Amendment right of not incriminating yourself.

The famous “Miranda warning” issued by police also finds its roots in the Fifth Amendment – “you have the right to remain silent” directly references the section on self-incrimination.

Right to Just Compensation

A government can take private land for public use if it so desires. This ability is called eminent domain. For example, a government could seize part of someone’s estate and use it to construct a new highway section.

The Fifth Amendment puts a limit on eminent domain. If the government does this, they have to pay the owner.

The value paid is called fair market value – essentially, the government must pay what the property’s value would be if bought by an individual on the open market.

What Rights Does the 5th Amendment Protect?

In summary, the following are the rights that the 5th Amendment protects:

  • Right to Just Compensation
  • Right to Due Process
  • Right of Protection Against Double Jeopardy
  • Right to plead the 5th for Protection against Self-Incrimination
  • Right to a Trial by Grand Jury
5th amendment funny
Sometimes there are things that call for pleading the 5th.

Interesting 5th Amendment Trials

Blockburger v. United States

When the case of Blockburger v. United States went to trial in 1932, the court followed that the prosecution couldn’t be committed twice for the same crime. 

By breaking two different laws during the one offense, one commits double jeopardy, with both crimes having to be charged separately.

Chambers v. Florida

In 1940, Four black men were placed under arrest by the police in order to have them confess to committing murder. As a result, they were sentenced to capital punishment for their crimes.

The United States Supreme Court was in opposition to the decision. Justice Hugo Black wrote that it removed the defendant’s right to equality to stand before the court and make their plea.

He claimed that the acts taken against the men were those which resembled tyranny and that it was unlawful to place such threats on the men, putting them in a state of vulnerability.

Although this didn’t entirely negate the use of violence against black people by the police in Southern states, it did prove that the United States Constitution wasn’t in favor of it.

Ashcraft v. Tennessee

This case took place in 1944. Following a 38-hour interrogation, the Tennessee police force extracted a confession from their suspect.

Justice Black led the Supreme Court once more and sought to overrule the criminal charge. He expounded that the justice system of America didn’t support forceful confessions under custodial interrogation.

He agreed with foreign countries who upheld that it was unlawful to convict people of crimes under acts that involved physical or mental abuse to achieve it. 

America’s government would never sway that way either, was the announcement of Justice Black.

It wasn’t the first nor the last time that America would see such coercion being used by law enforcement, but this was an example of how confessions under such conditions were deemed less trusted.

Miranda v. Arizona

While on many occasions, coercion was abused, as we’ve seen, that wasn’t the only issue whereby cases were overruled for unjust practice. 

Arrestees must be read their rights to ensure they understand them before they can be taken into custody.

That’s not just the law now, but it also was back in 1966 when Miranda fought against the state of Arizona. 

If the court didn’t enforce this right, unfair convictions would likely run rife, so it had to be imposed to prevent this from happening.

Chief Justice Earl Warren oversaw the case. To instill fairness, he announced that law enforcement must exercise fairness, read them their rights, and remove any unnecessary forceful pressure regardless of the suspect’s background.

While this case was undoubtedly controversial, the outcome has stood the test of time. Still today, more than 50 years later, the Miranda rule remains in place. 

This concludes that law enforcement must abide by fair practices and follow the guidance of the law when placing suspects under arrest.

Dates of Proposal and Ratification for 5th Amendment

As part of the Bill of Rights, the 5th Amendment was proposed to the legislatures of the several States by the First Congress on September 25, 1789. It was ratified by the following States, and the notifications of ratification by the Governors thereof were successively communicated by the President to Congress:
New Jersey, November 20, 1789
Maryland, December 19, 1789
North Carolina, December 22, 1789
South Carolina, January 19, 1790
New Hampshire, January 25, 1790
Delaware, January 28, 1790
New York, February 24, 1790
Pennsylvania, March 10, 1790
Rhode Island, June 7, 1790
Vermont, November 3, 1791
Virginia, December 15, 1791

Ratification was completed on December 15, 1791.

The amendment was subsequently ratified by the legislatures of:

Massachusetts, March 2, 1939
Georgia, March 18, 1939
Connecticut, April 19, 1939

Please watch the following video for a 5th Amendment Summary:

5th Amendment Quiz

If you would like to download a PDF with our quiz, then please go to:

Download the quiz PDF

Alternatively, you can take our online quiz here:

5th Amendment Quiz

One Response

  1. we were issued a show cause in connection with a child protective order. i appealed the show cause and was found no guilty by one judge on 4/12/21 . we appeal the cpo to circuit court and i stated the same testimony but that judge didnt find my word creditable and used i against me in the finding of facts. now because of this cpo i had to hand in my concealed gun permit. can I petition /or motion in cicuirt court in connection and referrence both cases and ask for custody of my daughter back as well as my permit.

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published.