Definition
A bill of rights is a formal, authoritative declaration of fundamental rights and liberties belonging to the people, typically enacted at moments of constitutional founding, governmental change, or revolution. The term has three principal legal referents:
1. THE ENGLISH BILL OF RIGHTS (1689). The statute 1 W. & M. St. 2, c. 2, enacted by Parliament following the Glorious Revolution. It asserted and confirmed the rights of English subjects against the Crown — including freedom from unlawful taxation, the right to petition, and the prohibition of excessive bail and cruel punishments — and settled the Protestant succession to the throne. This is the historical anchor for the term in English and early American legal writing.
2. THE UNITED STATES BILL OF RIGHTS. The first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution, ratified in 1791. Drafted primarily by James Madison and proposed in response to Anti-Federalist objections to the original Constitution's silence on individual rights, these amendments guarantee freedoms including speech, religion, press, assembly, petition, the right to keep and bear arms, protections against unreasonable searches and seizures, due process, and the reservation of unenumerated powers to the states and the people. In modern American legal usage, "the Bill of Rights" most commonly refers to these ten amendments.
3. STATE BILLS OF RIGHTS. Declarations of rights incorporated into the constitutions of American states, many of which predate the federal Bill of Rights. Several state declarations — including Virginia's Declaration of Rights (1776) — served as direct models for the federal amendments. State bills of rights remain independently operative and may provide broader protections than federal counterparts.
---
Common Language
Wiktionary: "A formal statement of the rights of a specified group of people."
The common definition is accurate as far as it goes, but it obscures the most important legal dimension: a bill of rights is not merely a statement of aspirations. In constitutional law, it functions as enforceable, judicially cognizable law that limits government power. The legal question is not just what rights are declared, but against whom they apply, how they are enforced, and whether they bind state governments as well as the federal government — questions the common definition does not begin to address.
---
Common Confusion
The term "Bill of Rights" is sometimes conflated with the broader concept of constitutional rights or civil liberties generally. Not all constitutional rights derive from the Bill of Rights proper. The Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments — the Reconstruction Amendments — are a distinct source of fundamental rights and are not part of the Bill of Rights. Researchers should also note that the phrase "GI Bill of Rights," colloquially applied to veterans' benefits legislation (most famously the Servicemen's Readjustment Act of 1944), borrows the rhetorical force of the term but is entirely unrelated to constitutional law.
---
Why It Matters in Research
The central research challenge is the incorporation doctrine: the Bill of Rights was originally understood to constrain only the federal government, a position confirmed in Barron v. Baltimore (1833). The Fourteenth Amendment (1868) became the vehicle through which most — but not all — Bill of Rights protections were applied to the states, through a process of selective incorporation that unfolded piecemeal across the twentieth century. Researchers tracing a specific right must determine: (a) whether the right has been incorporated, (b) when incorporation occurred, and (c) whether incorporated rights apply to the states with identical force as to the federal government.
Pre-twentieth century sources — including Bouvier, Black's, and Burrill — do not address incorporation at all, because the doctrine had not yet developed. Their definitions describe the Bill of Rights as a statement of popular rights without engaging with its enforceability against state governments. This is not an error in those sources; it accurately reflects the legal understanding of the time. Researchers using historical treatises to understand the Bill of Rights must supply this analytical gap themselves.
For state constitution research, the critical trap is assuming that state bills of rights mirror the federal text. They frequently do not. Some state provisions are broader; some narrower; some use different language that state courts have interpreted independently of federal doctrine. A researcher cannot assume that a state "free speech" clause or "due process" provision means what the federal counterpart means.
The term also appears in non-constitutional contexts — labor law, patient rights legislation, tenants' rights statutes — where it carries rhetorical but not constitutional weight. These uses should not be confused with constitutional analysis.
---
Historical Dictionary Support
Black's, Bouvier's, and Burrill's converge on the same core formulation: a bill of rights is a "formal and public declaration of popular rights and liberties." All three anchor the term in the English statute of 1689 and note its adoption into American state constitutions. Burrill's is most careful to specify the formal character — "expressed in the form of a statute" — and to note the connection to revolutionary or constitutional change. Bouvier's adds the useful cross-reference to Blackstone (1 Bl. Com. 128) and Kent's Commentaries, which remain the foundational treatise authorities for this period.
What all three sources share, and what reflects their era accurately, is that neither the enforceability of these declarations against state governments nor the mechanics of judicial enforcement receives treatment. The Bill of Rights in their framing is primarily a political and structural document. The transformation of the Bill of Rights into an instrument of judicially enforceable individual rights — through Fourteenth Amendment incorporation, substantive due process, and the expansion of federal judicial power — postdates all three dictionaries and is therefore entirely absent from their accounts.
No divergence among the three sources is significant. The definitions are essentially parallel, with Burrill's providing the most textured historical context.
---
Jurisdictional Note
The federal Bill of Rights applies to federal government action and, through incorporation via the Fourteenth Amendment, to most state government action. State bills of rights operate independently under state constitutional law and may provide broader protections than the federal floor. Researchers working in state courts should not assume that federal Bill of Rights precedent governs the interpretation of analogous state provisions.
---
Encyclopedia Cross-Reference
Incorporation of the Bill of Rights Against the States (The Law Mind Constitutional Law Encyclopedia) — essential companion for understanding how and when individual amendments were made applicable to state governments.
---