document_title: Direct current

question_text: is a 12 volt system ac or dc

question_tokens: is a 12 volt system ac or dc

text: Direct current

text: History[edit]

text: Direct current was produced in 1800 by Italian physicist Alessandro Volta's battery, his Voltaic pile.[5] The nature of how current flowed was not understood. French physicist André-Marie Ampère conjectured that current travelled in one direction from positive to negative.[6] When French instrument maker Hippolyte Pixii built the first dynamo electric generator in 1832, he found that as the magnet used passed the loops of wire each half turn, it caused the flow of electricity to reverse, generating an alternating current.[7] At Ampère's suggestion, Pixii later added a commutator, a type of "switch" where contacts on the shaft work with "brush" contacts to produce direct current.

text: The late 1870s and early 1880s saw electricity starting to be generated at power stations. These were initially set up to power arc lighting (a popular type of street lighting) running on very high voltage (usually higher than 3000 volt) direct current or alternating current.[8] This was followed by the wide spread use of low voltage direct current for indoor electric lighting in business and homes after inventor Thomas Edison launched his incandescent bulb based electric "utility" in 1882. Because of the significant advantages of alternating current over direct current in using transformers to raise and lower voltages to allow much longer transmission distances, direct current was replaced over the next few decades by alternating current in power delivery. In the mid-1950s, high-voltage direct current transmission was developed, and is now an option instead of long-distance high voltage alternating current systems. For long distance underseas cables (e.g. between countries, such as NorNed), this DC option is the only technically feasible option. For applications requiring direct current, such as third rail power systems, alternating current is distributed to a substation, which utilizes a rectifier to convert the power to direct current.

text: Various definitions[edit]

text: The term DC is used to refer to power systems that use only one polarity of voltage or current, and to refer to the constant, zero-frequency, or slowly varying local mean value of a voltage or current.[9] For example, the voltage across a DC voltage source is constant as is the current through a DC current source. The DC solution of an electric circuit is the solution where all voltages and currents are constant. It can be shown that any stationary voltage or current waveform can be decomposed into a sum of a DC component and a zero-mean time-varying component; the DC component is defined to be the expected value, or the average value of the voltage or current over all time.

text: Although DC stands for "direct current", DC often refers to "constant polarity". Under this definition, DC voltages can vary in time, as seen in the raw output of a rectifier or the fluctuating voice signal on a telephone line.

text: Some forms of DC (such as that produced by a voltage regulator) have almost no variations in voltage, but may still have variations in output power and current.

text: Circuits[edit]

text: A direct current circuit is an electrical circuit that consists of any combination of constant voltage sources, constant current sources, and resistors. In this case, the circuit voltages and currents are independent of time. A particular circuit voltage or current does not depend on the past value of any circuit voltage or current. This implies that the system of equations that represent a DC circuit do not involve integrals or derivatives with respect to time.

text: If a capacitor or inductor is added to a DC circuit, the resulting circuit is not, strictly speaking, a DC circuit. However, most such circuits have a DC solution. This solution gives the circuit voltages and currents when the circuit is in DC steady state. Such a circuit is represented by a system of differential equations. The solution to these equations usually contain a time varying or transient part as well as constant or steady state part. It is this steady state part that is the DC solution. There are some circuits that do not have a DC solution. Two simple examples are a constant current source connected to a capacitor and a constant voltage source connected to an inductor.

text: In electronics, it is common to refer to a circuit that is powered by a DC voltage source such as a battery or the output of a DC power supply as a DC circuit even though what is meant is that the circuit is DC powered.

text: Applications[edit]

text: This section needs expansion with: more examples and additional citations (see also introduction). You can help by adding to it. (October 2015)

text: Domestic[edit]

text: DC is commonly found in many extra-low voltage applications and some low-voltage applications, especially where these are powered by batteries or solar power systems (since both can produce only DC).

text: Most electronic circuits require a DC power supply.

text: Domestic DC installations usually have different types of sockets, connectors, switches, and fixtures from those suitable for alternating current. This is mostly due to the lower voltages used, resulting in higher currents to produce the same amount of power.

text: It is usually important with a DC appliance to observe polarity, unless the device has a diode bridge to correct for this.

text: Automotive[edit]

text: Most automotive applications use DC. The alternator is an AC device which uses a rectifier to produce DC. Usually 12 V DC are used, but a few have a 6 V (e.g. classic VW Beetle) or a 42 V electrical system.

text: Telecommunication[edit]

text: Through the use of a DC-DC converter, higher DC voltages such as 48 V to 72 V DC can be stepped down to 36 V, 24 V, 18 V, 12 V, or 5 V to supply different loads. In a telecommunications system operating at 48 V DC, it is generally more efficient to step voltage down to 12 V to 24 V DC with a DC-DC converter and power equipment loads directly at their native DC input voltages, versus operating a 48 V DC to 120 V AC inverter to provide power to equipment.

text: Many telephones connect to a twisted pair of wires, and use a bias tee to internally separate the AC component of the voltage between the two wires (the audio signal) from the DC component of the voltage between the two wires (used to power the phone).

text: Telephone exchange communication equipment, such as DSLAMs, uses standard −48 V DC power supply. The negative polarity is achieved by grounding the positive terminal of power supply system and the battery bank. This is done to prevent electrolysis depositions.

text: High-voltage power transmission[edit]

text: High-voltage direct current (HVDC) electric power transmission systems use DC for the bulk transmission of electrical power, in contrast with the more common alternating current systems. For long-distance transmission, HVDC systems may be less expensive and suffer lower electrical losses.

text: Other[edit]

text: Applications using fuel cells (mixing hydrogen and oxygen together with a catalyst to produce electricity and water as byproducts) also produce only DC.

text: Light aircraft electrical systems are typically 12 V or 20 V DC.


document_title: United States Bill of Rights

question_text: who were the main proponents of amending the constitution to include a bill of rights

question_tokens: who were the main proponents of amending the constitution to include a bill of rights

root

text: United States Bill of Rights

text: Background

text: The Philadelphia Convention

text: Prior to the ratification and implementation of the United States Constitution, the thirteen sovereign states followed the Articles of Confederation, created by the Second Continental Congress and ratified in 1781. However, the national government that operated under the Articles of Confederation was too weak to adequately regulate the various conflicts that arose between the states.[5] The Philadelphia Convention set out to correct weaknesses of the Articles that had been apparent even before the American Revolutionary War had been successfully concluded.[5]

tag: p

text: The convention took place from May 14 to September 17, 1787, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Although the Convention was purportedly intended only to revise the Articles, the intention of many of its proponents, chief among them James Madison of Virginia and Alexander Hamilton of New York, was to create a new government rather than fix the existing one. The convention convened in the Pennsylvania State House, and George Washington of Virginia was unanimously elected as president of the convention.[6] The 55 delegates who drafted the Constitution are among the men known as the Founding Fathers of the new nation. Thomas Jefferson, who was Minister to France during the convention, characterized the delegates as an assembly of "demi-gods."[5] Rhode Island refused to send delegates to the convention.[7]

text: On September 12, George Mason of Virginia suggested the addition of a Bill of Rights to the Constitution modeled on previous state declarations, and Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts made it a formal motion.[8] However, the motion was defeated by a unanimous vote of the state delegations after only a brief discussion. Madison, then an opponent of a Bill of Rights, later explained the vote by calling the state bills of rights "parchment barriers" that offered only an illusion of protection against tyranny.[9] Another delegate, James Wilson of Pennsylvania, later argued that the act of enumerating the rights of the people would have been dangerous, because it would imply that rights not explicitly mentioned did not exist;[9] Hamilton echoed this point in Federalist No. 84.[10] Because Mason and Gerry had emerged as opponents of the proposed new Constitution, their motion—introduced five days before the end of the convention—may also have been seen by other delegates as a delaying tactic.[11] The quick rejection of this motion, however, later endangered the entire ratification process. Author David O. Stewart characterizes the omission of a Bill of Rights in the original Constitution as "a political blunder of the first magnitude"[11] while historian Jack N. Rakove calls it "the one serious miscalculation the framers made as they looked ahead to the struggle over ratification".[12]

text: Thirty-nine delegates signed the finalized Constitution. Thirteen delegates left before it was completed, and three who remained at the convention until the end refused to sign it: Mason, Gerry, and Edmund Randolph of Virginia.[13] Afterward, the Constitution was presented to the Articles of Confederation Congress with the request that it afterwards be submitted to a convention of delegates, chosen in each State by the people, for their assent and ratification.[14]

text: The Anti-Federalists

text: Following the Philadelphia Convention, some leading revolutionary figures such as Patrick Henry, Samuel Adams, and Richard Henry Lee publicly opposed the new frame of government, a position known as "Anti-Federalism".[15] Elbridge Gerry wrote the most popular Anti-Federalist tract, "Hon. Mr. Gerry's Objections", which went through 46 printings; the essay particularly focused on the lack of a bill of rights in the proposed constitution.[16] Many were concerned that a strong national government was a threat to individual rights and that the president would become a king. Jefferson wrote to Madison advocating a Bill of Rights: "Half a loaf is better than no bread. If we cannot secure all our rights, let us secure what we can."[17] The pseudonymous Anti-Federalist "Brutus"[a] wrote,

text: We find they have, in the ninth section of the first article declared, that the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless in cases of rebellion—that no bill of attainder, or ex post facto law, shall be passed—that no title of nobility shall be granted by the United States, etc. If every thing which is not given is reserved, what propriety is there in these exceptions? Does this Constitution any where grant the power of suspending the habeas corpus, to make ex post facto laws, pass bills of attainder, or grant titles of nobility? It certainly does not in express terms. The only answer that can be given is, that these are implied in the general powers granted. With equal truth it may be said, that all the powers which the bills of rights guard against the abuse of, are contained or implied in the general ones granted by this Constitution.[19]

text: He continued with this observation:

text: Ought not a government, vested with such extensive and indefinite authority, to have been restricted by a declaration of rights? It certainly ought. So clear a point is this, that I cannot help suspecting that persons who attempt to persuade people that such reservations were less necessary under this Constitution than under those of the States, are wilfully endeavoring to deceive, and to lead you into an absolute state of vassalage.[20]

text: The Federalists

text: Supporters of the Constitution, known as Federalists, opposed a bill of rights for much of the ratification period, in part due to the procedural uncertainties it would create.[21] Madison argued against such an inclusion, suggesting that state governments were sufficient guarantors of personal liberty, in No. 46 of The Federalist Papers, a series of essays promoting the Federalist position.[22] Hamilton opposed a bill of rights in The Federalist No. 84, stating that "the constitution is itself in every rational sense, and to every useful purpose, a bill of rights. He stated that ratification did not mean the American people were surrendering their rights, making protections unnecessary: "Here, in strictness, the people surrender nothing, and as they retain everything, they have no need of particular reservations." Patrick Henry criticized the federalist point of view, writing that the legislature must be firmly informed "of the extent of the rights retained by the people ... being in a state of uncertainty, they will assume rather than give up powers by implication."[23] Other anti-federalists pointed out that earlier political documents, in particular the Magna Carta had protected specific rights. In response, Hamilton argued that the Constitution was inherently different:

text: Bills of rights are in their origin, stipulations between kings and their subjects, abridgments of prerogative in favor of privilege, reservations of rights not surrendered to the prince. Such was the Magna Charta, obtained by the Barons, swords in hand, from King John.[24]

text: Massachusetts compromise

text: In December 1787 and January 1788, five states—Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Georgia, and Connecticut—ratified the Constitution with relative ease, though the bitter minority report of the Pennsylvania opposition was widely circulated.[25] In contrast to its predecessors, the Massachusetts convention was angry and contentious, at one point erupting into a fistfight between Federalist delegate Francis Dana and Anti-Federalist Elbridge Gerry when the latter was not allowed to speak.[26] The impasse was resolved only when revolutionary heroes and leading Anti-Federalists Samuel Adams and John Hancock agreed to ratification on the condition that the convention also propose amendments.[27] The convention's proposed amendments included a requirement for grand jury indictment in capital cases, which would form part of the Fifth Amendment, and an amendment reserving powers to the states not expressly given to the federal government, which would later form the basis for the Tenth Amendment.[28]

text: Following Massachusetts' lead, the Federalist minorities in both Virginia and New York were able to obtain ratification in convention by linking ratification to recommended amendments.[29] A committee of the Virginia convention headed by law professor George Wythe forwarded forty recommended amendments to Congress, twenty of which enumerated individual rights and another twenty of which enumerated states' rights.[30] The latter amendments included limitations on federal powers to levy taxes and regulate trade.[31]

text: A minority of the Constitution's critics, such as Maryland's Luther Martin, continued to oppose ratification.[32] However, Martin's allies, such as New York's John Lansing, Jr., dropped moves to obstruct the Convention's process. They began to take exception to the Constitution "as it was," seeking amendments. Several conventions saw supporters for "amendments before" shift to a position of "amendments after" for the sake of staying in the Union. The New York Anti-Federalist "circular letter" was sent to each state legislature proposing a second constitutional convention for "amendments before", but it failed in the state legislatures. Ultimately, only North Carolina and Rhode Island waited for amendments from Congress before ratifying.[29]

text: Article Seven of the proposed Constitution set the terms by which the new frame of government would be established. The new Constitution would become operational when ratified by at least nine states. Only then would it replace the existing government under the Articles of Confederation and would apply only to those states that ratified it.

text: Following contentious battles in several states, the proposed Constitution reached that nine state ratification plateau in June 1788. On September 13, 1788, the Articles of Confederation Congress certified that the new Constitution had been ratified by more than enough states for the new system to be implemented and directed the new government to meet in New York City on the first Wednesday in March the following year.[33] On March 4, 1789, the new frame of government came into force with eleven of the thirteen states participating.

text: Proposal and ratification

text: Anticipating amendments

text: The 1st United States Congress, which met in New York City's Federal Hall, was a triumph for the Federalists. The Senate of eleven states contained 20 Federalists with only two Anti-Federalists, both from Virginia. The House included 48 Federalists to 11 Anti-Federalists, the latter of whom were from only four states: Massachusetts, New York, Virginia and South Carolina.[34] Among the Virginia delegation to the House was James Madison, Patrick Henry's chief opponent in the Virginia ratification battle. In retaliation for Madison's victory in that battle at Virginia's ratification convention, Henry and other Anti-Federalists, who controlled the Virginia House of Delegates had gerrymandered a hostile district for Madison's planned congressional run and recruited Madison's future presidential successor, James Monroe, to oppose him.[35] Madison defeated Monroe after offering a campaign pledge that he would introduce constitutional amendments comprising a Bill of Rights at the First Congress.[36]

text: Originally opposed to the inclusion of a bill of rights in the Constitution, he had gradually come to understand the importance of doing so during the often contentious ratification debates. By taking the initiative to propose amendments himself through the Congress, he hoped to preempt a second constitutional convention that might, it was feared, undo the difficult compromises of 1787, and open the entire Constitution to reconsideration, thus risking the dissolution of the new federal government. Writing to Jefferson, he stated, "The friends of the Constitution, some from an approbation of particular amendments, others from a spirit of conciliation, are generally agreed that the System should be revised. But they wish the revisal to be carried no farther than to supply additional guards for liberty."[37] He also felt that amendments guaranteeing personal liberties would "give to the Government its due popularity and stability".[38] Finally, he hoped that the amendments "would acquire by degrees the character of fundamental maxims of free government, and as they become incorporated with the national sentiment, counteract the impulses of interest and passion".[39] Historians continue to debate the degree to which Madison considered the amendments of the Bill of Rights necessary, and to what degree he considered them politically expedient; in the outline of his address, he wrote, "Bill of Rights—useful—not essential—".[40]

text: On the occasion of his April 30, 1789 inauguration as the nation's first president, George Washington addressed the subject of amending the Constitution. He urged the legislators,

text: whilst you carefully avoid every alteration which might endanger the benefits of an united and effective government, or which ought to await the future lessons of experience; a reverence for the characteristic rights of freemen, and a regard for public harmony, will sufficiently influence your deliberations on the question, how far the former can be impregnably fortified or the latter be safely and advantageously promoted.[41][42]

text: Crafting amendments

text: James Madison introduced a series of Constitutional amendments in the House of Representatives for consideration. Among his proposals was one that would have added introductory language stressing natural rights to the preamble.[43] Another would apply parts of the Bill of Rights to the states as well as the federal government. Several sought to protect individual personal rights by limiting various Constitutional powers of Congress. Like Washington, Madison urged Congress to keep the revision to the Constitution "a moderate one", limited to protecting individual rights.[43]

text: Madison was deeply read in the history of government and used a range of sources in composing the amendments. The English Magna Carta of 1215 inspired the right to petition and to trial by jury, for example, while the English Bill of Rights of 1689 provided an early precedent for the right to keep and bear arms (although this applied only to Protestants) and prohibited cruel and unusual punishment.[31]

text: The greatest influence on Madison's text, however, was existing state constitutions.[44][45] Many of his amendments, including his proposed new preamble, were based on the Virginia Declaration of Rights drafted by Anti-Federalist George Mason in 1776.[46] To reduce future opposition to ratification, Madison also looked for recommendations shared by many states.[45] He did provide one, however, that no state had requested: "No state shall violate the equal rights of conscience, or the freedom of the press, or the trial by jury in criminal cases."[47] He did not include an amendment that every state had asked for, one that would have made tax assessments voluntary instead of contributions.[48]

text:
First. That there be prefixed to the constitution a declaration that all power is originally vested in, and consequently derived from the people.
That government is instituted, and ought to be exercised for the benefit of the people; which consists in the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the right of acquiring and using property, and generally of pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.
That the people have an indubitable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to reform or change their government, whenever it be found adverse or inadequate to the purposes of its institution.

Secondly. That in article 1st, section 2, clause 3, these words be struck out, to wit: "The number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty thousand, but each State shall have at least one Representative, and until such enumeration shall be made;" and in place thereof be inserted these words, to wit: "After the first actual enumeration, there shall be one Representative for every thirty thousand, until the number amounts to—, after which the proportion shall be so regulated by Congress, that the number shall never be less than—, nor more than—, but each State shall, after the first enumeration, have at least two Representatives; and prior thereto."

Thirdly. That in article 2nd, section 6, clause 1, there be added to the end of the first sentence, these words, to wit, "But no law varying the compensation last ascertained shall operate before the next ensuing election of representatives."

Fourthly. That in article 2nd, section 9, between clauses 3 and 4, be inserted these clauses, to wit, The civil rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall any national religion be established, nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience by in any manner, or on any pretext infringed.
The people shall not be deprived or abridged of their right to speak, to write, or to publish their sentiments; and the freedom of the press, as one of the great bulwarks of liberty, shall be inviolable.
The people shall not be restrained from peaceably assembling and consulting for their common good, nor from applying to the legislature by petitions, or remonstrances for redress of their grievances.
The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed, and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country: but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms, shall be compelled to render military service in person.
No soldier shall in time of peace be quartered in any house without the consent of the owner; nor at any time, but in a manner warranted by law.
No person shall be subject, except in cases of impeachment, to more than one punishment, or one trial for the same office; nor shall be compelled to be a witness against himself; nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor be obliged to relinquish his property, where it may be necessary for public use, without a just compensation.
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
The rights of the people to be secured in their persons, their houses, their papers, and their other property from all unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated by warrants issued without probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, or not particularly describing the places to be searched, or the persons or things to be seized.
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, to be informed of the cause and nature of the accusation, to be confronted with his accusers, and the witnesses against him; to have a compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor; and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
The exceptions here or elsewhere in the constitution, made in favor of particular rights, shall not be so construed as to diminish the just importance of other rights retained by the people; or as to enlarge the powers delegated by the constitution; but either as actual limitations of such powers, or as inserted merely for greater caution.

Fifthly. That in article 2nd, section 10, between clauses 1 and 2, be inserted this clause, to wit: No state shall violate the equal rights of conscience, or the freedom of the press, or the trial by jury in criminal cases

Sixthly. That article 3rd, section 2, be annexed to the end of clause 2nd, these words to wit: but no appeal to such court shall be allowed where the value in controversy shall not amount to — dollars: nor shall any fact triable by jury, according to the course of common law, be otherwise re-examinable than may consist with the principles of common law.

Seventhly. That in article 3rd, section 2, the third clause be struck out, and in its place be inserted the classes following, to wit:
The trial of all crimes (except in cases of impeachments, and cases arising in the land or naval forces, or the militia when on actual service in time of war or public danger) shall be by an impartial jury of freeholders of the vicinage, with the requisite of unanimity for conviction, of the right of challenge, and other accustomed requisites; and in all crimes punishable with loss of life or member, presentment or indictment by a grand jury shall be an essential preliminary, provided that in cases of crimes committed within any county which may be in possession of an enemy, or in which a general insurrection may prevail, the trial may by law be authorized in some other county of the same State, as near as may be to the seat of the offence.
In cases of crimes committed not within any county, the trial may by law be in such county as the laws shall have prescribed. In suits at common law, between man and man, the trial by jury, as one of the best securities to the rights of the people, ought to remain inviolate.

Eighthly. That immediately after article 6th, be inserted, as article 7th, the clauses following, to wit:
The powers delegated by this constitution, are appropriated to the departments to which they are respectively distributed: so that the legislative department shall never exercise the powers vested in the executive or judicial; nor the executive exercise the powers vested in the legislative or judicial; nor the judicial exercise the powers vested in the legislative or executive departments.
The powers not delegated by this constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the States respectively.

Ninthly. That article 7th, be numbered as article 8th.

text: Federalist representatives were quick to attack Madison's proposal, fearing that any move to amend the new Constitution so soon after its implementation would create an appearance of instability in the government.[50] The House, unlike the Senate, was open to the public, and members such as Fisher Ames warned that a prolonged "dissection of the constitution" before the galleries could shake public confidence.[51] A procedural battle followed, and after initially forwarding the amendments to a select committee for revision, the House agreed to take Madison's proposal up as a full body beginning on July 21, 1789.[52][53]

text: The eleven-member committee made some significant changes to Madison's nine proposed amendments, including eliminating most of his preamble and adding the phrase "freedom of speech, and of the press".[54] The House debated the amendments for eleven days. Roger Sherman of Connecticut persuaded the House to place the amendments at the Constitution's end so that the document would "remain inviolate", rather than adding them throughout, as Madison had proposed.[55][56] The amendments, revised and condensed from twenty to seventeen, were approved and forwarded to the Senate on August 24, 1789.[57]

text: The Senate edited these amendments still further, making 26 changes of its own. Madison's proposal to apply parts of the Bill of Rights to the states as well as the federal government was eliminated, and the seventeen amendments were condensed to twelve, which were approved on September 9, 1789.[58] The Senate also eliminated the last of Madison's proposed changes to the preamble.[59]

text: On September 21, 1789, a House–Senate Conference Committee convened to resolve the numerous differences between the two Bill of Rights proposals. On September 24, 1789, the committee issued this report, which finalized 12 Constitutional Amendments for House and Senate to consider. This final version was approved by joint resolution of Congress on September 25, 1789, to be forwarded to the states on September 28.[60][61]

text: By the time the debates and legislative maneuvering that went into crafting the Bill of Rights amendments was done, many personal opinions had shifted. A number of Federalists came out in support, thus silencing the Anti-Federalists' most effective critique. Many Anti-Federalists, in contrast, were now opposed, realizing that Congressional approval of these amendments would greatly lessen the chances of a second constitutional convention.[62] Anti-Federalists such as Richard Henry Lee also argued that the Bill left the most objectionable portions of the Constitution, such as the federal judiciary and direct taxation, intact.[63]

text: Madison remained active in the progress of the amendments throughout the legislative process. Historian Gordon S. Wood writes that "there is no question that it was Madison's personal prestige and his dogged persistence that saw the amendments through the Congress. There might have been a federal Constitution without Madison but certainly no Bill of Rights."[64][65]

text:
[hide]Approval of the Bill of Rights in Congress and the States[66]

Seventeen Articles
Approved by the House
August 24, 1789

Twelve Articles
Approved by the Senate
September 9, 1789

Twelve Articles
Approved by Congress
September 25, 1789

Ratification
Status

First Article:
After the first enumeration, required by the first Article of the Constitution, there shall be one Representative for every thirty thousand, until the number shall amount to one hundred, after which the proportion shall be so regulated by Congress, that there shall be not less than one hundred Representatives, nor less than one Representative for every forty thousand persons, until the number of Representatives shall amount to two hundred, after which the proportion shall be so regulated by Congress, that there shall not be less than two hundred Representatives, nor less than one Representative for every fifty thousand persons.
First Article:
After the first enumeration, required by the first article of the Constitution, there shall be one Representative for every thirty thousand, until the number shall amount to one hundred; to which number one Representative shall be added for every subsequent increase of forty thousand, until the Representatives shall amount to two hundred, to which number one Representative shall be added for every subsequent increase of sixty thousand persons.
First Article:
After the first enumeration required by the first article of the Constitution, there shall be one Representative for every thirty thousand, until the number shall amount to one hundred, after which the proportion shall be so regulated by Congress, that there shall be not less than one hundred Representatives, nor less than one Representative for every forty thousand persons, until the number of Representatives shall amount to two hundred; after which the proportion shall be so regulated by Congress, that there shall not be less than two hundred Representatives, nor more than one Representative for every fifty thousand persons.
Pending:
Congressional Apportionment Amendment

Second Article:
No law varying the compensation to the members of Congress, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.
Second Article:
No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.
Second Article:
No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.
Ratified:
May 5, 1992[3]
Twenty-seventh Amendment

Third Article:
Congress shall make no law establishing religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, nor shall the rights of Conscience be infringed.
Third Article:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Third Article:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Ratified:
December 15, 1791
First Amendment

Fourth Article:
The Freedom of Speech, and of the Press, and the right of the People peaceably to assemble, and consult for their common good, and to apply to the Government for a redress of grievances, shall not be infringed.
(see Third Article above)

Fifth Article:
A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the People, being the best security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed, but no one religiously scrupulous of bearing arms, shall be compelled to render military service in person.
Fourth Article:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Fourth Article:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Ratified:
December 15, 1791
Second Amendment

Sixth Article:
No soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in any house without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
Fifth Article:
No soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in any house without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
Fifth Article:
No soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in any house without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
Ratified:
December 15, 1791
Third Amendment

Seventh Article:
The right of the People to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Sixth Article:
The right of the People to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Sixth Article:
The right of the People to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Ratified:
December 15, 1791
Fourth Amendment

Eighth Article:
No person shall be subject, except in case of impeachment, to more than one trial, or one punishment for the same offense, 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.
Seventh Article:
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 witnesses 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.
Seventh Article:
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.
Ratified:
December 15, 1791
Fifth Amendment

Ninth Article:
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, 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 to have the assistance of counsel for his defence.
Eighth Article:
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, 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 favour, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defence.
Eighth Article:
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 to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
Ratified:
December 15, 1791
Sixth Amendment

Tenth Article:
The trial of all crimes (except in cases of impeachment, and in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia when in actual service in time of War or public danger) shall be by an Impartial Jury of the Vicinage, with the requisite of unanimity for conviction, the right of challenge, and other accostomed [sic] requisites; and no person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherways [sic] infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment by a Grand Jury; but if a crime be committed in a place in the possession of an enemy, or in which an insurrection may prevail, the indictment and trial may by law be authorised in some other place within the same State.
(see Seventh Article above)

Eleventh Article:
No appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States, shall be allowed, where the value in controversy shall not amount to one thousand dollars, nor shall any fact, triable by a Jury according to the course of the common law, be otherwise re-examinable, than according to the rules of common law.
Ninth Article:
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by Jury shall be preserved, and no fact, tried by a Jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
Ninth Article:
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by Jury shall be preserved, and no fact, tried by a Jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
Ratified:
December 15, 1791
Seventh Amendment

Twelfth Article:
In suits at common law, the right of trial by Jury shall be preserved.
(see Ninth Article above)

Thirteenth Article:
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Tenth Article:
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Tenth Article:
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Ratified:
December 15, 1791
Eighth Amendment

Fourteenth Article:
No State shall infringe the right of trial by Jury in criminal cases, nor the rights of conscience, nor the freedom of speech, or of the press.

Fifteenth Article:
The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Eleventh Article:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Eleventh Article:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Ratified:
December 15, 1791
Ninth Amendment

Sixteenth Article:
The powers delegated by the Constitution to the government of the United States, shall be exercised as therein appropriated, so that the Legislative shall never exercise the powers vested in the Executive or Judicial; nor the Executive the powers vested in the Legislative or Judicial; nor the Judicial the powers vested in the Legislative or Executive.

Seventeenth Article:
The powers not delegated by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it, to the States, are reserved to the States respectively.
Twelfth Article:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Twelfth Article:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Ratified:
December 15, 1791
Tenth Amendment

tag: table

text: Ratification process

text: The twelve articles of amendment approved by congress were officially submitted to the Legislatures of the several States for consideration on September 28, 1789. The following states ratified some or all of the amendments:[67][68][69]

text:
New Jersey: Articles One and Three through Twelve on November 20, 1789, and Article Two on May 7, 1992
Maryland: Articles One through Twelve on December 19, 1789
North Carolina: Articles One through Twelve on December 22, 1789
South Carolina: Articles One through Twelve on January 19, 1790
New Hampshire: Articles One and Three through Twelve on January 25, 1790, and Article Two on March 7, 1985
Delaware: Articles Two through Twelve on January 28, 1790
New York: Articles One and Three through Twelve on February 24, 1790
Pennsylvania: Articles Three through Twelve on March 10, 1790, and Article One on September 21, 1791
Rhode Island: Articles One and Three through Twelve on June 7, 1790, and Article Two on June 10, 1993
Vermont: Articles One through Twelve on November 3, 1791
Virginia: Article One on November 3, 1791, and Articles Two through Twelve on December 15, 1791[70]
(After failing to ratify the 12 amendments during the 1789 legislative session.)

tag: ol

text: Having been approved by the requisite three-fourths of the several states, there being 14 States in the Union at the time (as Vermont had been admitted into the Union on March 4, 1791),[63] the ratification of Articles Three through Twelve was completed and they became Amendments 1 through 10 of the Constitution. President Washington informed Congress of this on December 30, 1791.[71]

text: As they had not yet been approved by 11 of the 14 states, the ratification of Article One (ratified by 10) and Article Two (ratified by 6) remained incomplete. The ratification plateau they needed to reach soon rose to 12 of 15 states when Kentucky joined the Union (June 1, 1792). On June 27, 1792, the Kentucky General Assembly ratified all 12 amendments, however this action did not come to light until 1996.[72]

text: Article One came within one state of the number needed to become adopted into the Constitution on two occasions between 1789 and 1803. Despite coming close to ratification early on, it has never received the approval of enough states to become part of the Constitution.[64] As Congress did not attach a ratification time limit to the article, it is still technically pending before the states. Since no state has approved it since 1792, ratification by an additional 27 states would now be necessary for the article to be adopted.

text: Article Two, initially ratified by seven states through 1792 (including Kentucky), was not ratified by another state for eighty years. The Ohio General Assembly ratified it on May 6, 1873 in protest of an unpopular Congressional pay raise.[73] A century later, on March 6, 1978, the Wyoming Legislature also ratified the article.[74] Gregory Watson, a University of Texas at Austin undergraduate student, started a new push for the article's ratification with a letter-writing campaign to state legislatures.[73] As a result, by May 1992, enough states had approved Article Two (38 of the 50 states in the Union) for it to become the Twenty-seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution. The amendment's adoption was certified by Archivist of the United States Don W. Wilson and subsequently affirmed by a vote of Congress on May 20, 1992.[75]

text: Three states did not complete action on the twelve articles of amendment when they were initially put before the states. Georgia found a Bill of Rights unnecessary and so refused to ratify. Both chambers of the Massachusetts General Court ratified a number of the amendments (the Senate adopted 10 of 12 and the House 9 of 12), but failed to reconcile their two lists or to send official notice to the Secretary of State of the ones they did agree upon.[76][63] Both houses of the Connecticut General Assembly voted to ratify Articles Three through Twelve but failed to reconcile their bills after disagreeing over whether to ratify Articles One and Two.[77] All three later ratified the Constitutional amendments originally known as Articles Three through Twelve as part of the 1939 commemoration of the Bill of Rights' sesquicentennial: Massachusetts on March 2, Georgia on March 18, and Connecticut on April 19.[63] Connecticut and Georgia would also later ratify Article Two, on May 13, 1987 and February 2, 1988 respectively.

text: Application and text

text: The Bill of Rights had little judicial impact for the first 150 years of its existence; in the words of Gordon S. Wood, "After ratification, most Americans promptly forgot about the first ten amendments to the Constitution."[78][79] The Court made no important decisions protecting free speech rights, for example, until 1931.[80] Historian Richard Labunski attributes the Bill's long legal dormancy to three factors: first, it took time for a "culture of tolerance" to develop that would support the Bill's provisions with judicial and popular will; second, the Supreme Court spent much of the 19th century focused on issues relating to intergovernmental balances of power; and third, the Bill initially only applied to the federal government, a restriction affirmed by Barron v. Baltimore (1833).[81][82][83] In the twentieth century, however, most of the Bill's provisions were applied to the states via the Fourteenth Amendment—a process known as incorporation—beginning with the freedom of speech clause, in Gitlow v. New York (1925).[84] In Talton v. Mayes (1896), the Court ruled that Constitutional protections, including the provisions of the Bill of Rights, do not apply to the actions of American Indian tribal governments.[85] Through the incorporation process the United States Supreme Court succeeded in extending to the States almost all of the protections in the Bill of Rights, as well as other, unenumerated rights.[86] The Bill of Rights thus imposes legal limits on the powers of governments and acts as an anti-majoritarian/minoritarian safeguard by providing deeply entrenched legal protection for various civil liberties and fundamental rights.[87][88][89] The Supreme Court for example concluded in the West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943) case that the founders intended the Bill of Rights to put some rights out of reach from majorities, ensuring that some liberties would endure beyond political majorities.[87][88][89][90] As the Court noted the idea of the Bill of Rights “was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts.”[90][91] This is why “fundamental rights may not be submitted to a vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections.”[90][91]

text: First Amendment

text: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.[92]

text: The First Amendment prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances. Initially, the First Amendment applied only to laws enacted by Congress, and many of its provisions were interpreted more narrowly than they are today.[93]

text: In Everson v. Board of Education (1947), the Court drew on Thomas Jefferson's correspondence to call for "a wall of separation between church and State", though the precise boundary of this separation remains in dispute.[93] Speech rights were expanded significantly in a series of 20th- and 21st-century court decisions that protected various forms of political speech, anonymous speech, campaign financing, pornography, and school speech; these rulings also defined a series of exceptions to First Amendment protections. The Supreme Court overturned English common law precedent to increase the burden of proof for libel suits, most notably in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964).[94] Commercial speech is less protected by the First Amendment than political speech, and is therefore subject to greater regulation.[93]

text: The Free Press Clause protects publication of information and opinions, and applies to a wide variety of media. In Near v. Minnesota (1931)[95] and New York Times v. United States (1971),[96] the Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment protected against prior restraint—pre-publication censorship—in almost all cases. The Petition Clause protects the right to petition all branches and agencies of government for action. In addition to the right of assembly guaranteed by this clause, the Court has also ruled that the amendment implicitly protects freedom of association.[93]

text: Second Amendment

text: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.[92]

text: The Second Amendment protects the individual right to keep and bear arms. The concept of such a right existed within English common law long before the enactment of the Bill of Rights.[97] First codified in the English Bill of Rights of 1689 (but there only applying to Protestants), this right was enshrined in fundamental laws of several American states during the Revolutionary era, including the 1776 Virginia Declaration of Rights and the Pennsylvania Constitution of 1776. Long a controversial issue in American political, legal, and social discourse, the Second Amendment has been at the heart of several Supreme Court decisions.

text:
In United States v. Cruikshank (1875), the Court ruled that "[t]he right to bear arms is not granted by the Constitution; neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The Second Amendment means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress, and has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the National Government."[98]
In United States v. Miller (1939), the Court ruled that the amendment "[protects arms that had a] reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia".[99]
In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment "codified a pre-existing right" and that it "protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home" but also stated that "the right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose".[100]
In McDonald v. Chicago (2010),[101] the Court ruled that the Second Amendment limits state and local governments to the same extent that it limits the federal government.[102]

tag: ul

text: Third Amendment

text: No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.[92]

text: The Third Amendment restricts the quartering of soldiers in private homes, in response to Quartering Acts passed by the British parliament during the Revolutionary War. The amendment is one of the least controversial of the Constitution, and, as of 2016[update], has never been the primary basis of a Supreme Court decision.[103][104][105]

text: Fourth Amendment

text: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.[92]

text: The Fourth Amendment guards against unreasonable searches and seizures, along with requiring any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause. It was adopted as a response to the abuse of the writ of assistance, which is a type of general search warrant, in the American Revolution. Search and seizure (including arrest) must be limited in scope according to specific information supplied to the issuing court, usually by a law enforcement officer who has sworn by it. The amendment is the basis for the exclusionary rule, which mandates that evidence obtained illegally cannot be introduced into a criminal trial.[106] The amendment's interpretation has varied over time; its protections expanded under left-leaning courts such as that headed by Earl Warren and contracted under right-leaning courts such as that of William Rehnquist.[107]

text: Fifth Amendment

text: 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.[92]

text: The Fifth Amendment protects against double jeopardy and self-incrimination and guarantees the rights to due process, grand jury screening of criminal indictments, and compensation for the seizure of private property under eminent domain. The amendment was the basis for the court's decision in Miranda v. Arizona (1966), which established that defendants must be informed of their rights to an attorney and against self-incrimination prior to interrogation by police.[108]

text: Sixth Amendment

text: 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 to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.[92]

text: The Sixth Amendment establishes a number of rights of the defendant in a criminal trial:

text:
to a speedy and public trial
to trial by an impartial jury
to be informed of criminal charges
to confront witnesses
to compel witnesses to appear in court
to assistance of counsel[109]

text: In Gideon v. Wainwright (1963), the Court ruled that the amendment guaranteed the right to legal representation in all felony prosecutions in both state and federal courts.[109]

text: Seventh Amendment

text: In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.[92]

text: The Seventh Amendment guarantees jury trials in federal civil cases that deal with claims of more than twenty dollars. It also prohibits judges from overruling findings of fact by juries in federal civil trials. In Colgrove v. Battin (1973), the Court ruled that the amendment's requirements could be fulfilled by a jury with a minimum of six members. The Seventh is one of the few parts of the Bill of Rights not to be incorporated (applied to the states).[110]

text: Eighth Amendment

text: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.[92]

text: The Eighth Amendment forbids the imposition of excessive bails or fines, though it leaves the term "excessive" open to interpretation.[111] The most frequently litigated clause of the amendment is the last, which forbids cruel and unusual punishment.[112][113] This clause was only occasionally applied by the Supreme Court prior to the 1970s, generally in cases dealing with means of execution. In Furman v. Georgia (1972), some members of the Court found capital punishment itself in violation of the amendment, arguing that the clause could reflect "evolving standards of decency" as public opinion changed; others found certain practices in capital trials to be unacceptably arbitrary, resulting in a majority decision that effectively halted executions in the United States for several years.[114] Executions resumed following Gregg v. Georgia (1976), which found capital punishment to be constitutional if the jury was directed by concrete sentencing guidelines.[114] The Court has also found that some poor prison conditions constitute cruel and unusual punishment, as in Estelle v. Gamble (1976) and Brown v. Plata (2011).[112]

text: Ninth Amendment

text: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.[92]

text: The Ninth Amendment declares that there are additional fundamental rights that exist outside the Constitution. The rights enumerated in the Constitution are not an explicit and exhaustive list of individual rights. It was rarely mentioned in Supreme Court decisions before the second half of the 20th century, when it was cited by several of the justices in Griswold v. Connecticut (1965). The Court in that case voided a statute prohibiting use of contraceptives as an infringement of the right of marital privacy.[115] This right was, in turn, the foundation upon which the Supreme Court built decisions in several landmark cases, including, Roe v. Wade (1973), which overturned a Texas law making it a crime to assist a woman to get an abortion, and Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992), which invalidated a Pennsylvania law that required spousal awareness prior to obtaining an abortion.

text: Tenth Amendment

text: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.[92]

text: The Tenth Amendment reinforces the principles of separation of powers and federalism by providing that powers not granted to the federal government by the Constitution, nor prohibited to the states, are reserved to the states or the people. The amendment provides no new powers or rights to the states, but rather preserves their authority in all matters not specifically granted to the federal government.[116]

text: Congress has sometimes gotten around the Tenth Amendment by invoking the Commerce Clause in Article One[117] or by threatening to withhold funding for a federal program from noncooperative States, as in South Dakota v. Dole (1987).

text: Display and honoring of the Bill of Rights

text: George Washington had fourteen handwritten copies of the Bill of Rights made, one for Congress and one for each of the original thirteen states.[118] The copies for Georgia, Maryland, New York, and Pennsylvania went missing.[119] The New York copy is thought to have been destroyed in a fire.[120] Two unidentified copies of the missing four (thought to be the Georgia and Maryland copies) survive; one is in the National Archives, and the other is in the New York Public Library.[121][122] North Carolina's copy was stolen from the State Capitol by a Union soldier following the Civil War. In an FBI sting operation, it was recovered in 2003.[123][124] The copy retained by the First Congress has been on display (along with the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence) in the Rotunda for the Charters of Freedom room at the National Archives Building in Washington, D.C. since December 13, 1952.[125]

text: After fifty years on display, signs of deterioration in the casing were noted, while the documents themselves appeared to be well preserved.[126] Accordingly, the casing was updated and the Rotunda rededicated on September 17, 2003. In his dedicatory remarks, President George W. Bush stated, "The true [American] revolution was not to defy one earthly power, but to declare principles that stand above every earthly power—the equality of each person before God, and the responsibility of government to secure the rights of all."[127]

text: In 1941, President Franklin D. Roosevelt declared December 15 to be Bill of Rights Day, commemorating the 150th anniversary of the ratification of the Bill of Rights.[128] In 1991, the Virginia copy of the Bill of Rights toured the country in honor of its bicentennial, visiting the capitals of all fifty states.[129]


document_title: War for the Planet of the Apes

question_text: where was war fir the planet of the apes filmed

text: War for the Planet of the Apes

text: Plot[edit]

text: Two years have passed[9] since the human-hating bonobo Koba attacked the human survivors in San Francisco. Since then, Caesar and his tribe of intelligent apes have been forced against a rogue U.S. military faction known as Alpha-Omega. Led by a ruthless Colonel, Alpha-Omega employs many apes formerly loyal to Koba, derogatorily called "donkeys".

text: An Alpha-Omega platoon launches an attack on an ape outpost, but it fails and four soldiers, including one named Preacher and a "donkey" gorilla named Red, are captured. Caesar releases the soldiers, hoping the display of mercy will show the Colonel that the apes are not savages; Red escapes by injuring the albino gorilla Winter. Later, Caesar's eldest son Blue Eyes and lieutenant Rocket return from a long journey. Blue Eyes reports that they found a place across the desert that is ideal for the apes. Despite an uneasy Winter asserting that the apes should leave immediately, Caesar decides they need to prepare first. That night, the Colonel leads a team of soldiers in infiltrating the apes' home, where he kills Blue Eyes and Caesar's wife Cornelia. Upon discovering this, Caesar attempts to prevent the Colonel's escape but fails. Afterward, the apes are unable to find Winter, who they believe betrayed them out of fear.

text: In the morning, the tribe gathers to journey to safety. Leaving his youngest son, Cornelius, in the care of Blue Eyes' wife Lake, Caesar departs to exact revenge while serving as the decoy for the other apes. Accompanied by Rocket, his orangutan adviser Maurice, and his gorilla lieutenant Luca, the apes enter a seemingly abandoned village, where they come upon a soldier who deserted the Colonel's army. Caesar kills him in self-defense. They then discover a mute girl, who Maurice befriends and adopts, giving her a small rag doll. They then find Winter at a beachside military camp, having become a "donkey". They confront Winter, who tells Caesar that the Colonel departed for the border, to meet more soldiers. Winter then attempts to call out for help, but the other apes restrain him, and Caesar accidentally suffocates him. While following the military, the apes discover soldiers who have been shot and left for dead. Their examination of a surviving soldier reveals that he is mute like the girl. Caesar then kills him in an act of mercy.

text: Later, the apes give chase after a hooded figure who stole one of their horses and are surprised to discover he is an intelligent ape from another zoo, named Bad Ape. While camping with Bad Ape, they discover that he knows where the border is and he hesitantly agrees to lead them there. The group reaches the border, where they see a quarantine facility. While attempting to get a closer look, Luca is killed protecting Caesar from some soldiers. An angered Caesar decides to proceed alone rather than continue to endanger his allies. While there, however, Caesar learns that Alpha-Omega captured his tribe and are forcing them to build a wall without food or water. Caesar is then captured by Red, who brings him to the Colonel. He is forced to work with the other apes, and when he inspires them to stop working, the Colonel threatens to kill Caesar to get the apes to continue.

text: Caesar deduces that the Colonel is barricading the facility to fend off other military forces who are against him for killing his own soldiers. The Colonel informs Caesar that the Simian Flu virus had mutated, and the human carriers subsequently became mute and devolved into a primitive state. He then has Caesar tortured with starvation to force the other apes to work. The mute girl, named Nova by Maurice, sneaks into the facility to give Caesar food, water, and her rag doll. To prevent her from being discovered, Rocket allows himself to be captured as a diversion. The next day, the Colonel comes to see if Caesar is still alive, and confiscates the doll upon discovering it. Together, Caesar and Rocket are able to work out a means of escape via an underground tunnel leading out of the facility. Though the plan is successful, Caesar remains behind to confront the Colonel as the facility comes under attack by the army of dissenting soldiers. However, he finds the Colonel infected by the virus via contact with Nova's doll. Caesar chooses not to kill the Colonel, instead watching him commit suicide.

text: The escaping apes are caught in the crossfire between the two armies while Red watches uncertainly. Caesar attempts to blow up a large fuel tank to take out the Alpha-Omega forces from behind, but he is shot with a crossbow by Preacher. Red then uses a grenade launcher to kill Preacher and save Caesar's life before he is shot dead by a soldier. Caesar succeeds in blowing up the tank and escapes the facility as it is consumed in a cascade of explosions, which then triggers an avalanche that wipes out the dissenting soldiers. The apes, carrying Nova, all survive by climbing nearby trees. They then cross the desert to find an oasis. While the other apes celebrate their new home, Maurice discovers Caesar's fatal wound. He promises to tell Cornelius who his father was and what he did for the apes. Caesar then dies peacefully while Maurice mourns his death and the other apes look on.

text: Cast[edit]

text: Apes[edit]

text:
Andy Serkis as Caesar, an intelligent common chimpanzee who is leader to a tribe of genetically enhanced apes.[10]
Steve Zahn as "Bad Ape", a common chimpanzee who lived in a zoo before the Simian Flu outbreak, and was a hermit before joining Caesar's group.[11][12]
Karin Konoval as Maurice, a Bornean orangutan who is Caesar's adviser.[10]
Terry Notary as Rocket, a common chimpanzee who is Caesar's brother-figure.[13]
Ty Olsson as Red, a Western lowland gorilla who was once a follower of Koba, now serving the Colonel to defeat Caesar. Olsson previously played Chief Hamill in Rise.[14]
Michael Adamthwaite as Luca, a Western lowland gorilla in Caesar's tribe. Luca was previously played by Scott Lang in Dawn.[15]
Toby Kebbell as Koba, a bonobo who had previously waged war against the humans in Dawn; he now appears in Caesar's hallucinations.
Judy Greer as Cornelia, Caesar's wife.[10]
Sara Canning as Lake, a common chimpanzee in Caesar's tribe, who is also Blue Eyes' mate and later Cornelius's caretaker.[16]
Max Lloyd-Jones as Blue Eyes, Caesar and Cornelia's oldest son.[17]
Devyn Dalton as Cornelius, Caesar and Cornelia's youngest son, and Blue Eyes' younger brother. Dalton previously played Cornelia in Rise.
Aleks Paunovic as Winter, an albino Western lowland gorilla in Caesar's tribe who sided with the Colonel out of fear.[18]

text: Humans[edit]

text:
Amiah Miller as Nova, a mute orphan whom Maurice befriends and cares for.[19][20]
Woody Harrelson as The Colonel, the leader of the paramilitary organization Alpha-Omega, who is obsessed with wiping out Caesar and his tribe to preserve humans as the dominant species.[21][22] His full name was revealed in the film's screenplay as Colonel J. Wesley McCullough.[23]
Gabriel Chavarria as Preacher, a human soldier working under the Colonel in Alpha-Omega.[24]

text: Production[edit]

text: Development[edit]

text: After seeing his cut of Dawn, 20th Century Fox and Chernin Entertainment signed Matt Reeves to return as director for a third installment of the reboot series. In January 2014, the studio announced the third film, with Reeves returning to direct and co-write along with Bomback, and Peter Chernin, Rick Jaffa and Amanda Silver serving as producers.[25][26] During an interview in mid-November 2014 with MTV, Andy Serkis said they did not know the next film's setting. "...It could be five years after the event. It could be the night after the events of where we left 'Dawn.'"[27] In May 2015, the title was first given as War of the Planet of the Apes.[28] By October 2015, it had been retitled as War for the Planet of the Apes.[11]

text: When director Reeves and screenwriter Bomback came on board to helm Dawn, the film already had a release date, which led to an accelerated production schedule. However, with the third installment, Fox wanted to give the duo plenty of time to write and make the film. Taking advantage of this, the two bonded with each other more than before.[29]

text: In interviews for Dawn, Reeves talked about the inevitable war Caesar would have with the humans: "As this story continues, we know that war is not avoided by the end of Dawn. That is going to take us into the world of what he is grappling with. Where he is going to be thrust into circumstances that he never, ever wanted to deal with, and was hoping he could avoid. And now he is right in the middle of it. The things that happen in that story test him in huge ways, in the ways in which his relationship with Koba haunts him deeply. It’s going to be an epic story. I think you’ve probably read that I sort of described it where in the first film was very much about his rise from humble beginnings to being a revolutionary. The second movie was about having to rise to the challenge of being a great leader in the most difficult of times. This is going to be the story that is going to cement his status as a seminal figure in ape history, and sort of leads to an almost biblical status. He is going to become like a mythic ape figure, like Moses."[30]

text: Toby Kebbell, who portrayed Koba in Dawn, had expressed interest in reprising his role or performing as other characters.[31] Plans to include Koba in a larger role in the film were abandoned early, with Bomback saying, "If you stayed until the very end of Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, you hear Koba’s breathing. We did that to give us a tiny crack of a possibility that we could revive Koba if we wanted to. Very early on in spitballing, we realized there was nothing more to do with Koba – certainly nothing that would exceed what he had done in the last story. But we knew we wanted to keep him alive as an idea. In playing out the reality of what happened at the end of the last film, Caesar would be traumatized by having to kill his brother. That would have resonance, and we wanted to make sure that did not get lost. So the answer was that we could go inside Caesar’s mind at this point and revisit Koba that way."[32]

text: Casting[edit]

text: In August 2015, Deadline reported that Gabriel Chavarria had been cast as one of the humans in the film.[33] In September 2015, The Hollywood Reporter announced that Woody Harrelson had been cast as the film's antagonist, and that Chavarria's role was supporting.[21] In October 2015, TheWrap reported that Steve Zahn was cast as a new ape in the film.[11] It was also announced that actress Amiah Miller was cast as one of the film's humans, with Judy Greer and Karin Konoval reprising their roles as Cornelia and Maurice,[10][19] while Aleks Paunovic and Sara Canning were cast as new apes.[18][16]

text: Filming[edit]

text: Principal photography on the film began on October 14, 2015 in the Lower Mainland in Vancouver, under the working title Hidden Fortress.[34][35] Filming was expected to take place there until early March 2016.[36] Parts of the film were expected to shoot for up to five days in the Kananaskis in late January and early February.[37] In March, Serkis confirmed that he had finished shooting his portions.[38]

text: Visual effects[edit]

text: As with Rise and Dawn, the visual effects for War were created by Weta Digital; the apes were created with a mixture of motion-capture and CGI key-frame animation, as they were performed in motion-capture technology and animated in CGI.

text: Influences[edit]

text: At New York Comic-Con 2016, Reeves explained that he and Bomback were influenced by many films before writing. He said, "One of the first things that Mark and I did because we had just finished Dawn was that we decided to watch a million movies. We decided to do what people fantasize what Hollywood screenwriters get to do but no one actually does. We got Fox to give us a theater and we watched movie after movie. We watched every Planet of the Apes movie, war movies, westerns, Empire Strikes Back... We just thought, 'We have to pretend we have all the time in the world,' even though we had limited time. We got really inspired."[39]

text: Additionally, during production, Reeves and Bomback sought broader inspirations from films like The Bridge on the River Kwai and The Great Escape. Feeling that there was a need to imbue Biblical themes and elements, they also watched Biblical epics like Ben-Hur and The Ten Commandments. The influences and inspirations were made evident in the relationship between Caesar and Woody Harrelson's Colonel, a military leader with pretensions toward godhood. Reeves has compared their relationship to the dynamic between Alec Guinness's British Commander and Sessue Hayakawa's prison camp Colonel in Bridge on the River Kwai. Another comparison is in Caesar's journey to find the Colonel, flanked by a posse of close friends – a situation Reeves explicitly tied to Clint Eastwood's war-weary soldier in The Outlaw Josey Wales.[29] Influences from the film Apocalypse Now, notably Harrelson's character and his Alpha-Omega faction being similar to Colonel Kurtz's renegade army, were also noted by several journalists.[40][41][42] Harrelson has also acknowledged the similarities and inspiration.[43]

text: Soundtrack[edit]

text:
War for the Planet of the Apes

Soundtrack album by Michael Giacchino

Released
July 7, 2017 (Digital)
July 21, 2017 (Physical)

Recorded
2017

Genre
Film score

Label
Sony Masterworks

Michael Giacchino film scores chronology

Spider-Man: Homecoming
(2017)Spider-Man: Homecoming2017
War for the Planet of the Apes
(2017)
Coco
(2017)Coco2017

text: On October 17, 2015, it was confirmed that Michael Giacchino, the composer and writer of the soundtrack for Dawn, would return to compose War's score.[44] The soundtrack was digitally released to iTunes and Amazon on July 7, 2017,[45] and in its physical form by Sony Masterworks on July 21, 2017.

text: Release[edit]

text: The film was initially set for a July 29, 2016, release. However, in January 2015, Fox postponed the film's release date to about a year later on July 14, 2017.[46][5]

text: Marketing[edit]

text: Special behind-the-scenes footage for the film was aired on TV on November 22, 2015, as part of a contest announcement presented by director Matt Reeves and Andy Serkis.[47] The footage aired during The Walking Dead on AMC.[48][49] The announcement allowed winners to wear a performance-capture suit and appear in a scene as an ape.[50] The announcement was released on 20th Century Fox's official YouTube page later the same day.[51]

text: At a New York Comic Con special event on October 6, Reeves, Serkis and producer Dylan Clark debuted an exclusive look at the film.[52]

text: Serkis has also mentioned that the film would be accompanied by a video game, for which he performed motion capture.[53] Titled Planet of the Apes: Last Frontier, the game was released for the PlayStation 4, Xbox One and PC in fall 2017.[54]

text: Home media[edit]

text: War for the Planet of the Apes was released on Digital HD on October 10, 2017, and on Blu-ray and DVD on October 24, 2017 by 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment.[55]

text: Reception[edit]

text: Box office[edit]

text: War for the Planet of the Apes grossed $146.9 million in the United States and Canada and $343.8 million in other territories for a worldwide total of $490.7 million, against a production budget of $150 million.[4]

text: In North America, the film was projected to gross $50–60 million in its opening weekend,[56] however, given its acclaimed status and strong word-of-mouth, rival studios believed the film had the potential to debut as high as $70–80 million.[3][57][58] War was closely monitored by analysts while the summer was witnessing a decline in ticket sales, a situation that they blamed on franchise fatigue for an overabundance of sequels and reboots (such as Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales, Transformers: The Last Knight and The Mummy). However, box office analysts noted that well-reviewed films have tended to perform in-line with estimates (Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2, Wonder Woman and Spider-Man: Homecoming).[59][60][61] The film grossed $5 million from Thursday night previews at 3,021 theaters, up 22% from the $4.1 million earned by its predecessor, and $22.1 million on its first day. It went on to debut to $56.3 million, topping the box office, albeit with a 22% drop from Dawn's $72.6 million debut.[62][63] In its second weekend, the film grossed $20.9 million (a drop of 62.9%, more than the 50.4% fall Dawn saw), finishing 4th at the box office.[64] In its third weekend, the film made $10.5 million (dropping another 49.9%), finishing 6th at the box office. It was lower than the third weeks of both Rise ($16.1 million) and Dawn ($16.8 million).[65]

text: Outside North America, War for the Planet of the Apes received a scattered release in a span of three months (July–September). The film began its release in about a third of the marketplace on July 14, albeit only in two major markets, and was projected to have an opening of $50–60 million, with the potential to go higher if smaller Asian markets over-perform, as they have for recent tent poles.[3] The film ended up having an international debut of $44.2 million, including $9.27 million in the United Kingdom.[66]

text: Critical response[edit]

text: War for the Planet of the Apes received praise for the cast's performances (particularly Serkis), Reeves's direction, visual effects, musical score, cinematography and its morally complex storyline.[67] On review aggregator site Rotten Tomatoes, the film has an approval rating of 93% based on 296 reviews, with a rating average of 8.1/10. The website's critical consensus reads, "War for the Planet of the Apes combines breathtaking special effects and a powerful, poignant narrative to conclude this rebooted trilogy on a powerful – and truly blockbuster – note."[68] On review aggregator Metacritic, which assigns a weighted average rating to reviews, the film has a score of 82 out of 100, based on 50 critics, indicating "universal acclaim".[69] Audiences polled by CinemaScore gave the film an average grade of "A–" on an A+ to F scale, the same score earned by its two immediate predecessors.[62]

text: Scott Collura of IGN awarded the film a score of 9.5 out of 10, saying: "War for the Planet of the Apes is an excellent closing act to this rebooted trilogy, but also one that does enough world-building that the series can potentially continue from here – and it’s a rare case where, after three movies, we’re left wanting more."[70] A.O. Scott of The New York Times said of the film, "“War for the Planet of the Apes,” directed by Matt Reeves, is the grimmest episode so far, and also the strongest, a superb example — rare in this era of sloppily constructed, commercially hedged cinematic universes — of clear thinking wedded to inventive technique in popular filmmaking," and lauded Andy Serkis's performance in the film, stating that "Andy Serkis’s performance as Caesar is one of the marvels of modern screen acting."[71]

text: Peter Travers of Rolling Stone gave the film 3.5 out of 4 stars, and said that Serkis performed "with a resonant power and depth of feeling that's nearly Shakespearean. Oscar, get busy: Serkis deserves the gold," and went on to say that "War for the Planet of the Apes – No. 9 in the simian cinema canon – is the best of the Apes films since the 1968 original."[72] Eric Kohn of Indiewire gave the film a B+ rating, and praised Matt Reeves's directing, saying "It’s a given that an expensive 21st century sci-fi movie with talking animals, exploding tanks, and jarring machine guns would look and sound great, but Reeves applies these effects with such a measured strategy that they’re always working in service of a greater narrative agenda." Kohn went on to applaud the visuals and musical score, stating that "The breathlessly paced montage of flying bullets and angry monkeys raining down on terrified men, aided by Michael Giacchino’s vibrant score, is a strong indicator of the next-level craftsmanship that distinguishes these movies from so many cacophonous Hollywood spectacles; not only is the action easy to follow, but you care for the motion-captured characters at the center of it, while the humans cower in fear."[73]

text: Accolades[edit]

text:
List of awards and nominations

Award
Date of ceremony
Category
Recipient(s) and nominee(s)
Result
Ref.

Golden Trailer Awards
June 6, 2017
Best Motion/Title Graphics
War for the Planet of the Apes: 20th Century Fox, Wild Card
Nominated
[74][75]

Best Summer 2017 Blockbuster TV Spot

Hollywood Film Awards
November 5, 2017
Hollywood Visual Effects Award
Dan Barrett, Dan Lemmon, Joe Letteri, and Erik Winquist
Won
[76][77]

Hollywood Post Alliance
November 16, 2017
Outstanding Visual Effects - Feature Film
Dan Barrett, Anders Langlands, Dan Lemmon, Joe Letteri, Luke Millar, Erik Winquist, and Weta Digital
Won
[78][79]

Teen Choice Awards
August 13, 2017
Choice Movie: Summer
20th Century Fox
Nominated

Washington D.C. Area Film Critics Association
December 8, 2017
Best Motion Capture Performance
Andy Serkis
Won
[80]

Best Motion Capture Performance
Steve Zahn
Nominated

San Francisco Film Critics Circle
December 10, 2017
Best Actor
Andy Serkis
Won
[81][82]

Best Original Score
Michael Giacchino
Nominated

San Diego Film Critics Society
December 11, 2017
Best Visual Effects
War for the Planet of the Apes
Won
[83]

Chicago Film Critics Association
December 12, 2017
Best Original Score
Michael Giacchino
Nominated
[84]

Seattle Film Critics Society
December 18, 2017
Best Original Score
Michael Giacchino
Nominated
[85][86]

Best Visual Effects
Joe Letteri, Dan Lemmon, Dan Barrett, and Joel Whist
Won

Utah Film Critics Association
Best Actor
Andy Serkis
Won
[87]

Los Angeles Online Film Critics Society
December 19, 2017
Best Animated / Visual Effect Performance
Andy Serkis
Won
[88][89][90]

Best Score
Michael Giacchino
Nominated

Best Action / War
War for the Planet of the Apes
Nominated

Best Blockbuster
Nominated

Best Visual Effects
Won

Phoenix Film Critics Society
Best Visual Effects
War for the Planet of the Apes
Won
[91]

North Carolina Film Critics Association
December 29, 2017
Best Special Effects
War for the Planet of the Apes
Won
[92]

Columbus Film Critics Association
January 4, 2018
Actor of the Year (for an exemplary body of work)
Woody Harrelson
Runner-up
[93]

Golden Tomato Awards
January 3, 2018
Best Sci-Fi/Fantasy Movie 2017
War for the Planet of the Apes
2nd Place
[94]

Houston Film Critics Society
January 6, 2018
Best Actor
Andy Serkis
Nominated
[95][96]

Best Original Score
Michael Giacchino

Best Visual Effects
War for the Planet of the Apes

Critics' Choice Movie Awards
January 11, 2018
Best Action Movie
War for the Planet of the Apes
Nominated
[97]

Best Visual Effects
Won

Georgia Film Critics Association
January 12, 2018
Best Actor
Andy Serkis
Nominated
[98]

Best Original Score
Michael Giacchino
Nominated

Screen Actors Guild Awards
January 21, 2018
Outstanding Performance by a Stunt Ensemble in a Motion Picture
War for the Planet of the Apes
Nominated
[99][100]

Art Directors Guild
January 27, 2018
Excellence in Production Design for a Fantasy Film
James Chinlund
Nominated
[101]

Annie Awards
February 3, 2018
Outstanding Achievement for Character Animation in a Live Action Production
Daniel Barrett, Sidney Kombo-Kintombo, Emile Ghorayeb, Luisma Lavin Peredo, and Alessandro Bonora
Won
[102]

Satellite Awards
February 10, 2018
Best Film Editing
William Hoy
Won
[103]

Best Original Score
Michael Giacchino
Nominated

Best Sound
War for the Planet of the Apes
Nominated

Best Visual Effects
Nominated

Visual Effects Society Awards
February 13, 2018
Outstanding Visual Effects in a Photoreal Feature
Joe Letteri, Ryan Stafford, Daniel Barrett, Dan Lemmon, Joel Whist
Won
[104]

Outstanding Animated Character in a Photoreal Feature
Eteuati Tema, Aidan Martin, Florian Fernandez, Mathias Larserud for "Bad Ape"
Nominated

Dennis Yoo, Ludovic Chailloleau, Douglas McHale, Tim Forbes for "Caesar"
Won

Outstanding Created Environment in a Photoreal Feature
Chris McLaughlin, Ryan Salcombe, Seungjin Woo, Francesco Dell'Anna for "Hidden Fortress"
Nominated

Phillip Leonhardt, Paul Harris, Jeremy Fort, Thomas Lo for "Prison Camp"
Nominated

Outstanding Effects Simulations in a Photoreal Feature
David Caeiro Cebrian, Johnathan Nixon, Chet Leavai, Gary Boyle
Won

Outstanding Compositing in a Photoreal Feature
Christoph Salzmann, Robin Hollander, Ben Morgan, Ben Warner
Won

British Academy Film Awards
February 18, 2018
Best Special Visual Effects
Daniel Barrett, Dan Lemmon, Joe Letteri, and Joel Whist
Nominated
[6]

Golden Reel Awards
February 18, 2018
Outstanding Achievement in Sound Editing – Dialogue / ADR
Supervising Sound Editors: Douglas Murray, Will Files; Supervising Dialogue Editor: R.J. Kizer; Vocal Editors: Kim Foscato, P.K. Hooker, Doug Jackson, Lindsay Alvarez; ADR Editors: Laura Graham, and Jim Brookshire
Won
[105][106]

Outstanding Achievement in Sound Editing – Effects / Foley
Supervising Sound Editors: Douglas Murray, Will Files; Sound Effects Editors: David Grimaldi, Jack Whittaker, Ken McGill, P.K. Hooker, Doug Jackson, Lindsay Alvarez; Foley Editors: John Morris, Matthew Harrison, Thom Brennan, Willard Overstreet; Foley Artists: Dan O'Connell, and John T. Cucci
Nominated

International Film Music Critics Association Awards
February 22, 2018
Score of the Year
Michael Giacchino
Nominated
[107][108]

Best Original Score for a Fantasy/Science Fiction/Horror Film
Michael Giacchino
Won

Film Music Composition of the Year
"End Credits" from War for the Planet of the Apes by Michael Giacchino
Won

Academy Awards
March 4, 2018
Best Visual Effects
Daniel Barrett, Dan Lemmon, Joe Letteri, and Joel Whist
Nominated
[109]

Saturn Awards
June 2018
Best Science Fiction Film
Peter Chernin, Dylan Clark, Rick Jaffa and Amanda Silver
Pending
[110]

Best Director
Matt Reeves
Pending

Best Actor
Andy Serkis
Pending

Best Special Effects
Joe Letteri, Dan Lemmon, Daniel Barrett and Joel Whist
Pending

text: Future[edit]

text: In October 2016, it was reported that a fourth Planet of the Apes film was being discussed.[111][112]


document_title: New York House of Refuge

question_text: when did the house of refuge in new york first open

text: New York House of Refuge

text: The New York House of Refuge was the first juvenile reformatory established in the United States.[1] The reformatory was opened in 1824 on the Bowery in Manhattan, New York City,[2] destroyed by a fire in 1839, and relocated first to Twenty-Third Street and then, in 1854, to Randalls Island.[3]

text: Through its 111-year history the reformatory was privately funded, receiving only guidance, supervision and additional funding from state agencies.

text: History[edit]

text: James W. Gerard and Isaac Collins of the Society for the Prevention of Pauperism conceived of the idea for the House of Refuge in 1822. Gerard visited prisons, conferred with justices and criminal lawyers, and in 1822 submitted a proposal to the Society for the establishment of a reformatory for juveniles that would segregate them from adult prisoners. The Society appointed John Griscom to chair a committee to draw up a detailed plan for the facility. Other members of the committee were Isaac Collins, Cornelius Dubois, James W. Gerard, Hiram Ketchum, and Eleazer Lord. On December 19, 1823 Griscom submitted a detailed report that was enthusiastically adopted by Cadwallader Colden and thirty managers of the Society. Funds were privately raised and on March 29, 1824, by an act of New York State legislature, the Society was merged into the House of Refuge.[4]

text: One of the inmates of the House of Refuge was Austin Reed, whose posthumously published memoir The Life and Adventures of a Haunted Convict recounted, in part, his tenure in the institution in the 1830s.[5]

text: The institution drew acclaim from touring French prison reformers Gustave de Beaumont and Alexis de Tocqueville in 1831, and writer Charles Dickens, who described it approvingly in his 1842 American Notes.[6]

text: Architect and construction engineer R.G. Hatfield (1815 - 1879) designed the House of Refuge's vast new 1854 building on Randalls Island, following a fire at the previous Manhattan location. [7]

text: Beginning in 1901 female inmates were removed to the newly-opened New York State Reformatory for Women, now the Taconic Correctional Facility. In the 1930s, younger male inmates (ages 12 to 15) were transferred to the new state training school at Warwick, and the older boys to the newly constructed state prison in Coxsackie. [8] The House of Refuge closed on May 11, 1935.