ing to students a sense of the judicial process and of the fact that
cases do not arrive at the Supreme Court's doorstep like aban-
doned orphans in the night.

In writing such a text, many hard decisions must be made
about what issues should be covered and particularly what cases
should be the subjects of in-depth studies. Because a supplemen-
tary text of this length cannot conceivably embrace an analysis of
all aspects of modern civil liberties policy as enunciated in the
decisions of the Supreme Court, I believe I should indicate at the
outset both to colleagues who may use this text in the classroom
and to the students who with varying degrees of reluctance will be
constrained to read it the reasons for my choices.

The backbone of modern civil liberties policy, as I see it, is
the evolution of the meaning of the due process clause of the
Fourteenth Amendment. In regard to civil liberties, this evolution
has had two phases: the nationalization of the Bill of Rights, and
(still in its early stages) the Court's interpretation of the due
process clause to embrace rights not listed in the Bill of Rights or,
indeed, elsewhere in the Constitution. Chapter I deals, therefore,
with the nationalization process and the extension of the meaning
of the due process clause. The remaining chapters deal with what,
in my opinion, are the most important fields in which the Court's
civil liberties decisions have concentrated in recent years: criminal
procedure, free expression, church-state relations, and equal
protection.

In the selection of the case studies I have followed essentially
three criteria: (1) the inherent importance of the Court decision in
providing a good summary of civil liberties policy; (2) the poten-
tial interest of the case to students; and (3) the likelihood that the
decision will continue to represent civil liberties policy for some
reasonable time in the future. I should add that these factors are
listed roughly in order of their importance in my selection.

With these considerations in mind, I selected Duncan v.
Louisiana to illustrate the nationalization of the Bill of Rights
because of its inherently interesting background and because it
contains the last major statements of the total incorporation,
selective incorporation, and fundamental rights-fair trial
approaches to interpretation of the due process clause of the

-vi-