S.B. 1070, ACA, AND FEDEAL PEEMPTION
1070, the ACA, and Federal Preemption

S.B. 1070, the ACA, and Federal Preemption

Tenth Amendment

The Tenth Amendment was intended to limit the scope and power of the federal government, thereby preserving some measure of state autonomy (Lash, 2006). The Tenth Amendment accomplishes this by stating explicitly that the federal government can only exercise those powers enumerated within the U.S. Constitution. All other powers are left to the states. In James Madison's words, a Federalist, the "… powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite." (p. 166). The Tenth Amendment therefore allows states to retain their freedom, sovereignty, and right to self-determination, as long as it does not conflict with the powers conferred to the federal government by the Constitution.

Madison, however, never viewed the Tenth Amendment as restricting the….

Week 5

2. First, the Parkers were contractually obligated to pay the late fees because the fees were not exorbitant and were part of the parties' lease contract. However, unless the lease contract specifically says that the late fees could be charged as additional rent, then the landlord could not consider the late fees additional rent. If the late fees cannot be considered additional rent, then the Parker's failure to pay the late fees cannot be used as a basis to evict the Parkers.

7. The parents and the child probably should not be permitted to recover for emotional distress, although they would be entitled to recover for actual damages. Infliction of emotional distress is an intentional tort, which requires a plaintiff to establish that a defendant acted with a reckless disregard for the likelihood of causing emotional distress and that the Squibb's conduct was outrageous. Therefore, if Squibb knew the drug….

Snyder v. Phelps
The First Amendment is part of the Bill of ights, and prohibits the making of any law " impeding the free exercise of religion," infringing on the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances." Originally, the First Amendment only applied to the Congress. However, in the 20th century, the Supreme Court held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applies the First Amendment to each state, including any local government (Farber, 2002, intro). The First Amendment has been used over and over again to test the limits of free speech or exercising opinions that may be contrary to current public views, or even offensive to some.

This was the case in a 2011 Supreme Court Decision, Snyder v. Phelps (562 U.S. Supreme Court), in which the Court….

The district courts hear cases first, if the case is of federal jurisdiction. If a party decides to appeal a ruling, it goes to an appellate court. The appellate court will not hear a case that has not already passed through the district court. Moreover, when it does hear a case it does not re-try the case on its merits, but merely seeks to see if there was an error in the rule of law in the district court's hearing of and decision on the case. The Supreme Court is also an appellate court, but instead of the case being heard by one judge, the case is heard by all of the Supreme Court justices. They each vote on the issue, with majority rule guiding the decision. This stands in stark contrast to the other courts, which function with one judge
The Supreme Court is also different from the other….

Background of Terrorist Trials in the United States Terrorism occupies a unique liminal position, somewhere between acts of war and criminal acts. Because of this, jurisdiction, the rights of terrorist suspects, and other ethical and legal conundrums have lent themselves to an inconsistent and ambiguous terrorist trial system in the United States. Historically, as now, terrorist trials in the United States have taken place in several different jurisdictions, and prosecutorial discretion can be based on factors like circumstantial and situational variables or on political whim. Whether or not the terrorist incident was allegedly perpetrated by a domestic or an international group may also have a bearing on how a terrorist trial is conducted. Some terrorist trials have taken place in civilian courts and others in military courts, neither of which seem ideally suited to address the complex issues associated with terrorism.
Since September 11, the federal government expanded its own powers to….

Court Systems
The structure and platform on which the legal system is based upon is very important in understanding the total landscape of how justice is carried out within the confines of the government. The purpose of this essay is to explore the inner workings of both the federal and state court systems and highlight their similarities and differences. Also, this essay will investigate the roles of court administrators in the different types of functions that a court serves. A investigation into the state of Colorado and its court structure will also be presented to help give a practical example of the court system. Finally, the essay will address quasi-judicial bodies and their impact on the courts and legal system.

The Basis for Authority

The United States Courts Government Website (n.d.), details a comprehensive overview of the basis of America's court system. The United States Constitution is understood to be the ultimate law….

Court System
The basic structure of the United States legal system comes from the Constitution. Constitutions are living documents that lay down principles and rules, as well as overall functions of how law should be used within society. Constitutions tend to be macro in scope, in that they define responsibilities between the three organs of U.S. Government (Judicial, Legislature and Executive). Laws are individual (micro) edicts that are made to define specific issues under the Constitution. The Constitution is the basic framework, or the strategic direction of law; defining relationships and allowing for reasons that are fundamental to other laws (e.g. privacy, search, etc.). Laws are the manner in which the tactics of the legal system and/or philosophy are carried out and used within society. A Constitution defines the theoretical basis of law, while laws incorporate the process of law and allow the government and its officers to use the Constitution….

Courting Disaster
This study reviews Pat obertson's "Courting disaster: How the Supreme Court is usurping the power of Congress and the people." Pat obertson is the founder and chairperson of the Christian Broadcasting Network, founder of egent University, and The Center for Law and Justice. He and his wife have four children and thirteen grandchildren. They reside in Virginia Beach, Virginia. Using both legal and religious points-of-view, obertson attempts to prove that the current operation of the judicial system is dangerous to both the republican form of government and our individual freedoms. While seeking to strengthen his argument, the author has compiled fascinating facts, quotes, case decisions, and opinions of the Court (Mu-ller-Fahrenholz, 2007).

From this study, it is evident that obertson undertook a political expedition seeking to identify various issues that bedeviled the American society. However, he fails to provide solutions to the identified problems. This is an action conscious book.….

Court Analysis
Justice and Court Administration

Administration and management of courts is filled with challenges. Often depending upon the geographical context of the court, such challenges will include resource shortage, a perpetual docket of criminal cases and the broader complexity of providing civil order and justice to communities while balancing constitutional law and local ordinance. Moreover, the complexity of administering justice in and of itself plays a part in the difficulty of court management, with issues such as the deepening ethnic diversity of encountered populations and shifting ideas about victims' rights playing defining roles in the tasks before any given court. The discussion here on language interpretation services and the timeline in the evolution of victims' rights are offered within the context of court administration.

Language Interpretation Services:

It is often the case that courts will find themselves burdened with the task of wading through the details of officer-defendant confrontations in spite of the….

Federal and State Court Authority
The federal court system was founded by the United States Constitution and derives its authority from that document. The establishment of the federal court system is specifically derived from Article II which created the institution of the Supreme Court, the highest law in the land, and also permitted Congress to establish a system of lower courts. At present, there are 94 district level trial courts and 13 courts of appeal (“Court Role,” 2018). The state courts derive their power from the state constitutions directly, although state authority does not supersede that of federal authority. This was a major sticking-point between federalists and antifederalists and remained a point of contention during the early days of the republic.

State courts possess what is referred to as general jurisdiction, which means that all cases not within the scope of the federal courts are within the jurisdiction of the state courts….

In his joint aticle with Oleg Sminov, "Dift, Daft, o Dag: How the Supemes React to New Membes," Smith takes an even close look at the Supeme Cout and the histoy of its political (o intepetive) makeup. Specifically, these authos find that the Cout counte-balances changes to its ideological makeup though the addition of new membes by changes in the oveall intepetative stances of opposing justices -- the addition of moe libeal justices esults in consevative justices becoming moe consevative, and the addition of consevative justices leads to moe libeal thinking on the pat of libeal justices. This view sees the Supeme Cout and couts in geneal as an essentially political body, just like any othe political body at wok in the fedeal govenment o at othe levels of govenment within any given society, whethe past o pesent.

A Mediation of Theoies and Pactice

Though the thee theoies biefly descibed above appoach….

Federal CourtsThe United States judicial system is based on the federal courts structure as established in Article III of the Constitution. This system has been the subject of numerous studies and publications that seek to explain how it works. illiam A. Fletcher and James E. Pfander wrote a book, Gilbert Law Summaries on Federal Courts, which provides an outline of the federal court system in the U.S. The book provides an outline of Article III courts, the requirement of case or controversy, advisory opinions, and justiciability. In addition, Fletcher & Pfander discuss congressional power over federal court jurisdiction, the jurisdiction of district courts, Supreme Court jurisdiction, and ancillary jurisdiction. Through this outline, the authors also discuss the law applied in federal courts. This paper provides an overview of the federal court system in the United States based on the book by Fletcher and Pfander.History of the Federal Court SystemFletcher &….

federal question refers to the idea that a case involves federal issues, and thus triggers federal jurisdiction. Federal questions include cases involving the U.S. Constitution, acts of Congress and other federal laws, and treaties. Other issues may also trigger federal jurisdiction, such as when litigants are in two different states, or when a litigant has filed suit against a state.
What is diversity jurisdiction?

Diversity jurisdiction refers to federal court jurisdiction based on the fact that the opposing parties come from different states. The amount in controversy must be $75,000 or more, and there are some exceptions to diversity jurisdiction.

What is standing?

Standing means that a party is sufficiently connected to and harmed by an action to file a lawsuit challenging that action. Standing requires that the party be injured, that the injury was causally connected to the action at the subject of the suit, and that the court can provide an….

Feldstein from Arizona. When the hospital was purchased by another company, they canceled the contract with Feldstein claiming that the actions that were taken were illegal. In the case, the court sided with Feldstein saying that a host of hospitals will use a variety of incentives to attract doctors. Under the Stark Law (which prohibits doctors and hospitals from making self referrals) they found that the health care facility did not violate any provision. (Stark Law 2010) However, the transaction was considered to be questionable, because of the unique arrangement that Feldstein and the hospital had about the referrals of patients. As a result, the decision would outline a number of different principals including: illegal activity arguments can be made by either party, recruiting arrangements based on referrals are in violation of federal law, hospitals need to carefully scrutinize recruiting agreements and they should develop strategies to protect themselves….

Does the Federal government have enough power?IntroductionBased on the American Constitution, the nation is under federalism type of government. Federalism was established after the independence of the thirteen states, as described in the Articles of Confederation. However, the Federal Government at the time was very weak, and the Founding Fathers decided to develop a new system of Government. ithin the present Constitution of the United States, the Federal Government has powers to make money, declare war, manage foreign relations, and oversee trade between states and with other countries (Scheiber, 86-88). The federal government shares powers with the states, e.g., formulation and enforcement of laws, taxation, and acquiring loans. This begs the question; does the Federal Government have enough power, too much power, or just the right amount of power? This paper claims that the Federal Government has just the right amount of power, and the discussion herein defends this argument.Powers….

1. The Founding Fathers and the Evolution of Federal Court Jurisdiction

2. Exploring the Living Constitution: Limits on Federal Court Authority

3. Balancing Federal Court Jurisdiction with the Principles of the Founding Fathers

4. The Restrictions on Federal Court Jurisdiction: A Historical Perspective

5. Adapting Federal Court Jurisdiction to the Modern Era: The Living Constitution Debate

6. The Founding Fathers' Intent vs. the Expansion of Federal Court Jurisdiction

7. Analyzing the Limitations of Federal Court Jurisdiction through a Living Constitution Lens

8. Federal Court Jurisdiction and the Original Intent of the Founding Fathers

9. Navigating the Constraints of Federal Court Jurisdiction in a Changing Society

10. The Impact....

Title 1: Constraints and Conflicts: The Boundaries of Federal Court Jurisdiction in Shaping American Governance

Title 2: The Evolving Constitution: Balancing Judicial Power and the Founding Fathers' Vision

Title 3: The Living Constitution and the Limitations of Federal Courts: A Dialogue with the Founding Fathers

Title 4: The Limited Reach of Federal Courts: Protecting State Sovereignty and Individual Rights

Title 5: Balancing Judicial Supremacy and Federalism: The Challenges of Court Jurisdiction in a Divided Nation

Title 6: The Founding Fathers' Legacy and the Current Limits of Federal Court Jurisdiction

Title 7: The Living Constitution vs. Judicial Restraint: Navigating the Tension between Court Power and Constitutional Intent

Title....