he wanted to prove it was a law, and it was in the constitution
2nd Amendment.
amendment 1v
The Eighth Amendment to the US Constitution.
A person could easily argue Worcester v. Georgia, (1832) invoked both the due process clause and takings clause of the Fifth Amendment.
the 1st Amendment guarantee of the free exchange of ideas
Sometimes very destructive and criminal acts are performed in the name of religion. Freedom of religion is certainly a good thing, but I personally would put some additional clarification into the first amendment, about what constitutes religion. There are also many legal issues about the limits of freedom of speech, which wind up being decided by the Supreme Court, and again, it could be useful to define freedom of speech in greater detail, in the actual amendment. It would be difficult to argue that the first amendment is actually bad for the US, but I would certainly argue that the first amendment could be improved.
Liberals may want to change the 8th Amendment as they believe it restricts women's reproductive rights by prohibiting abortion in many cases. They argue that the amendment should be updated to better reflect modern attitudes and provide more autonomy to women in making choices about their own bodies.
That separating the races implied involuntary servitude and inferiority rather than equality
The right to keep and bear arms. Some revisionists argue that this wasn't what was really meant, but they're, basically, wrong.
As I see it, only two amendments restrict personal rights. The 18th prohibition of alcohol (which was repealed in the 21st amendment) and the 22nd restricting an individual to serving 2 terms (or up to 10 years) as president. You could argue the 26th limiting who can vote to those 18 and older as restricting rights too, but first you'd have to argue that minors are entitled to all the rights of adults.
The mood of this passage seems reflective and introspective. Jurgis is contemplating his actions and possibly experiencing self-doubt or regret.