The first and second amendments have always favored one demographic in America. The first amendment has within the past few years turned into the right to hateful speech and the right to openly discriminate against a group of people under the guise "religious freedom". Hate groups are using the first amendment as a means to further spread their hate. Religious zealots are using the first amendment to openly discriminate against gay people saying that by doing so is against their religious freedom. Recently the religious freedom stance has been taken to discriminate against gay people for housing.
The second amendment is a hot topic issue with all the school shootings that have happened in the past few years. Those that support the second amendment translating into the right of an individual citizen to own any gun they want to are in the minority. Most people support the second amendment but want tougher laws to prevent people who should not have a gun to get their hands on one. In my opinion, the second amendment needs to be completely overhauled and spelled out clearly what the average American citizen should be allowed to have and how many of them.
I should note that while I support a person's right to say I fully support a person's right to say what they want without persecution from the government. That is what makes this country, unlike North Korea, a great place to live in. What I don't agree with is these religious zealots using the first amendment to justify their hatred. The first amendment is more than being able to speak your mind openly. The first amendment has been used within the past few years as a means to openly discriminate against groups of people. Gays and Muslims are under attack by Christian fanatics who use their religious freedom granted by the first amendment as a means to deny those groups services including housing. I forget what state it was that just this year ruled that it was within a person's first amendment right to deny gay people housing because the "gay lifestyle" conflicts with their religious convictions.
The sixth amendment that guarantees the right to a fair and speedy trial I do feel that one's social status does influence how speedy and fair of a trial they get. With pro bono cases the lawyers are supposed to treat their client as if the client was paying him directly. Unfortunately this is not always the case. Many times when the courts appoint the lawyer to the defendant, the lawyer is already swamped with cases and doesn't have enough time to fully devote to their new client.
The eighth amendment favors the rich who can afford to post the bail. Judges rarely set the bail so high that a rich person can not afford to make it. A poorer person will most likely sit in jail for the duration of their trial and not be able to assist in his own case the way a rich person who is able to afford the bail could. That alone makes the eighth amendment beneficial to a rich person and not a poor person. If a rich person is accused of murder and the judge sets bail for him, he is in a better position to pay it than if a poor person were to be accused of murder and the judge sets bail for him for the exact same amount. Bail is never, well mostly never, set low. Bail is typically tens of thousands of dollars at a minimum and can reach upwards of a million dollars. John Doe who works at the local Wal-Mart is unlikely to be able to afford the same amount of bail set that James Smith who works on Wall Street could.