what would prevent your state from making a new law that took away voting rights from anyone who did not own their own home?
please explain why is incorporation doctrine the answer?
https://courses.lumenlearning.com/boundless-politicalscience/chapter/civil-liberties-and-the-bill-of-rights/
The incorporation doctrine refers to the process by which the Bill of Rights, which originally only applied to the federal government, is now also applied to state and local governments. It ensures that the rights and liberties protected by the Constitution's amendments are guaranteed to all individuals within the jurisdiction of the United States.
In the scenario you described, where a state attempts to pass a law taking away voting rights from those who do not own their own home, the incorporation doctrine would be relevant because it allows for the examination and potential challenge of such a law based on its constitutionality.
To understand why the incorporation doctrine applies, we can refer to the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. This amendment states that no state shall "deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." It also contains an equal protection clause, which prohibits states from denying any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law.
Based on these principles, the United States Supreme Court has commonly interpreted the Fourteenth Amendment to include fundamental rights and liberties that are protected by the Bill of Rights. This means that the voting rights protected under the First Amendment and the Fifteenth Amendment, which ensures the right to vote shall not be denied based on race or color, are applicable to the states as well.
Therefore, if a state were to attempt to pass a law that deprives individuals of their voting rights based on homeownership status, it would likely be challenged in court on the grounds that it violates the incorporation doctrine and the constitutional right to vote. The Supreme Court may find such a law unconstitutional, as it would likely be seen as a violation of the equal protection clause and the principles of representative democracy underlying the right to vote for all citizens, regardless of their housing status.