Earl Warren Research Paper

Crime Control and Due Process Models Earl Warren's involvement in the American Justice system played an important role in shaping American history as a whole. Warren was Chief Justice of the U.S. between 1953 and 1969 -- a period filled with significant events in the country's history. As a consequence, Warren was provided with the mission to play an active role in many of these respective events that was responsible for making decisions that would reflect on the whole country rather than just on the individuals who took part in the trial.

Connection between the Due Process Model and Warren's decisions

The Due Process Model is characteristic to Warren's decisions, considering that the American Chief Justice focused on fighting for people's rights. Initially thought to be a moderate conservative and to thus act in agreement with Eisenhower's thinking in general, Warren gradually proved to be a determined liberal. Eisenhower actually chose to elect Warren as a Chief Justice of the U.S. because he "represents the kind of political, economic, and social thinking that I believe we need on the Supreme CourtHe has a national name for integrity, uprightness, and courage that, again, I believe we need on the Court." (Eisenhower in Schulman 22)

Warren mainly managed to act in disagreement with what Eisenhower expected from him as a result of his tendency to focus on liberal ideas more than on ideas that addressed the well-being of the country as a whole. He appeared to be fueled by his interest in helping people on an individual level rather than helping the country while ignoring persons whose rights were taken away from them. Eisenhower apparently hated Warren's attitudes toward the legal system and believed that appointing him Chief Justice was one of the worst mistakes that he performed during his administration (Eisenhower in Schulman 23).

The Brown v. Board of Education case is essential in putting across Warren's involvement in controversial matters. The case ended up generating a decision that desegregated public schools and that eventually enabled non-white individuals (African-Americans in particular) to be able to attend schools...

...

By declaring school segregation unconstitutional, Warren was able to influence law enforcement officers throughout the country to change their understanding of the system. While they previously were unhesitant about openly discriminating African-Americans, they gained a more complex understanding of the situation and they acknowledged that it was wrong to put across such behaviors.
Other Supreme Court cases that Warren presided over were similarly effective in making moral values more appreciated in the U.S. Loving v. Virginia legalized marriages between individuals with different skin colors while Gideon v. Wainwright and Miranda v. Arizona provided defendant with more rights.

Most of these cases were meant to emphasize Warren's position on the justice system: he believed that the authorities were inclined to abuse both guilty and innocent individuals and that something thus needed to be done in order to make trials and punishments as fair as possible.

Operational differences between the due process model and the crime control model

In contrast to the due process model (that promotes the idea that the authorities need to focus on factors like a person's life, liberties, and property when dealing with the respective individual) the crime control model takes on a harsher attitude toward crime in general. It is aimed at fighting crimes through all means available, even if this means that defendants are not going to be provided with a fair treatment.

The crime control model is based on the assumption that law enforcement officers are perfect and that everything they decide needs to be considered when dealing with a criminal. In such a situation, a jurist would have to act in agreement with decisions these individuals make without questioning them. This means that criminals are always considered guilty in this context and they are always treated as if they were guilty.

The primary purpose of the crime control model is to catch and punish offenders. The rationale behind this type of action is to discourage criminal behaviors and to thus control…

Sources Used in Documents:

Works cited:

Barkan, S. & Bryjak, G. "Fundamentals of Criminal Justice: A Sociological View," (Jones & Bartlett Learning, 28 Jan 2011)

Cray, E. "Chief Justice: A Biography of Earl Warren," ( Simon and Schuster, 1997)

Ferdico, J.N. Fradella, H., & Totten, C. "Criminal Procedure for the Criminal Justice Professional," (Cengage Learning, 22 Jan 2012)

Roach, K. "Due Process and Victims' Rights: The New Law and Politics of Criminal Justice"


Cite this Document:

"Earl Warren" (2014, October 11) Retrieved April 26, 2024, from
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/earl-warren-192608

"Earl Warren" 11 October 2014. Web.26 April. 2024. <
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/earl-warren-192608>

"Earl Warren", 11 October 2014, Accessed.26 April. 2024,
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/earl-warren-192608

Related Documents

Carolene Products). The Warren Court's doctrine certainly moved aggressively in these general directions: its aggressive reading of the first eight amendments in the Bill of Rights (as "incorporated" against the states by the Fourteenth Amendment); its commitment to unblocking the channels of political change ("one-man, one-vote"), and its vigorous protection of the rights of racial minority groups. (Ely). In general, there were eight legal areas in which the Warren Court

Decisions of Rehnquist & Warren The field of constitutional law, at least in the area of criminal procedure, has been an interesting study for the past fifty years. Unlike other areas of the law, the study of criminal procedure has undergone major transformations as a result of the decisions of the last three courts, the Warren, Burger and Rehnquist courts. These three courts have changed the legal landscape in the cases

Supreme Court Chief Justices Warren and Rehnquist Compare and contrast approaches to criminal procedures by U.S. Supreme Courts: The Warren vs. The Rehnquist Court A common philosophical debate within the legal community is when the approach advocated by so-called 'conservative' justices (often called strict constructionism) is pitted against more 'liberal' and freer interpretations of constitutional words and history. Throughout much of the 20th century, it was often said that the more liberal

For example, he voted to require that schools utilize resources to support religions activities if they designate resources to non-religious activities (Board of Education. v. Mergens, 1990). Further, Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (2002) called for vouchers to be given to families of low socioeconomic standing for both religious and secular educational institutions. This being said, Rehnquist was not able to completely disrupt the social change that Warren had started in

JFK Inaugural Speech It was a very cold day on January 20th, 1961, when John Fitzgerald Kennedy took the oath of office, was sworn in as the new president, and delivered a rousing speech to a shivering audience and to a television audience worldwide. The young president was forceful, quite eloquent and used phrases that have become iconic in the American experience. This paper reviews and critiques the speck. John Fitzgerald Kennedy

Bill of Rights and Today's Criminal Justice System The administration of justice and security in America is based upon Constitutional powers, originally drafted in the Bill of Rights. While the Constitution has been amended several times since its inception, its laws still stand and have been defined by courts in landmark cases that have decided how particular amendments may be interpreted. In the light of these cases and the Constitution itself,