Pcm Dr. Yale the Supreme

¶ … Pcm

Dr. Yale

The Supreme Court and Civil Rights & Liberties Assignment

points

Our civil liberties and civil liberties are arguably in the hands of the nine justices of the Supreme Court. These cases listed below illustrate that phenomenon in vivid ways. Each case presents a significant constitutional question relevant to the guarantees of civil liberties found in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Each case had strong arguments on both sides. None of the cases listed below was decided unanimously, thus members of the Supreme Court disagreed on the outcome.

Select a case from those listed (you may not choose another case). And answer the questions below. In your document, just list the question number, then your answer. Print a copy for your records if you like, but send a copy to me following the instructions in the assignment section of Blackboard.

Due Date: Listed in Blackboard.

LULAC v Perry (2006)

Tx redistricting case

Roper v Simmons (2005)

Death penalty

Hamdan v Rumsfeld (2006)

Criminal Justice

Stogner v California (2003)

Ex Post Facto Clause

Citizens United v. FEC (2010)

Corporate free speech

District of Columbia v Heller (2008)

Gun Control

Maryland v Shatzer (2009)

Miranda Rights

Kelo et al. v City of New London (2005)

Property and eminent domain

You may need to use more than one of the following websites to gather the information you need about your case http://www.law.cornell.edu/, www.findlaw.com/casecode/supreme.html, www.supremecourtus.gov, www.oyez.org

Instructions: Writing style counts so use complete sentences, paragraph form, and error-free grammar and spelling. Details count so provide them as you answer each question. Coherence and thoroughness count so be sure that you are thoroughly answering each question and clearly explaining yourself. In your document, just list the question number, then your answer. Finally, make sure your answers are your own work, not copied from Wikipedia or some other website.

1. a. Type the name of the case you selected here:

Kelo et al. v City of New London (2005).

b. Who are the litigants named in the suit? -- describe who they are.

Kelo is the plaintiff, a property-owner whose property is being expropriated by the government for public use. The City of New London is the respondent, a city that wishes to use Kelo's property for an economic revitalization project with MERCK.

c. Describe the facts of the case. Who did what to whom and why did one side bring a lawsuit?

The City of New London signed a deal to build a new campus for a pharmaceutical manufacturer as part of an economic redevelopment plan. The city then bought out the owners of the property to be used for the campus. Most of the owners agreed to sell their property to the city and Kelo was the last holdout. The city then exercised its power of eminent domain and condemned Kelo's property for use in its economic redevelopment plan. Kelo then brought suit in state court claiming that the Government condemned their property in violation of the "public use" clause of the Fifth Amendment.

2. Regarding the U.S. Supreme Court's Decision:

a. What part of the U.S. Constitution is relevant according to the Supreme Court opinion? (The First Amendment free exercise clause for example.)

The Fifth Amendment Takings Clause, which states "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." This case is particularly concerned with the "public use" part.

b. As the Supreme Court saw it, what was the specific constitutional question (or questions if there were more than one) before them? (Boil it down to one or two yes/no questions, put in your own words. For example, "does the criminalization of abortion violate the U.S. Constitution's 1st, 4th, 5th, and 9th Amendment guarantees?" For example.)

Whether the City of New London's taking of private property to sell to private interests as part of an economic development plan constitutes a "public use" within the meaning of the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

c. What was the vote of the 9 justices? (Was it a 5 to 4 decision for example)

It was a 5-4 decision, with Justices Stevens, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer composing the Majority and Stevens writing the Majority Opinion. Justices Scalia, O'Connor, Rehnquist, Thomas composed the Minority, with O'Connor and Thomas writing the Dissents.