The Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution provides equal protection for all citizens in all manners of the law, at least in theory. In practice, equal protection is not executed perfectly, but it does remain an ideal to which each section of the criminal justice system can and usually does aspire. In the criminal justice system, all defendants are entitled to an attorney, which is why a public defender is appointed to those who cannot afford an attorney of their choice. Theoretically, a public defender could offer the same caliber of legal representation as a big shot lawyer, but rarely is this actually the case. If a defendant does believe that he or she was misrepresented, then there are avenues for protest but it may be extremely difficult for an indigent individual to receive the exact parallel of legal representation as a wealthy person would. A defendant who loses…… [Read More]
Confessions and Interrogations
The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees, under its "due process" clause, protection from the use of involuntary confessions. A confession is considered to be involuntary if the confession was not obtained from a rational intellect and a free will. ("Confessions") In other words, a person must consciously know what they are confessing to as well as freely admit to it. This definition includes a prohibition on confessions that are physically coerced (such as torture), but also against psychological ploys that are deemed to be coercive. In fact, coercion by the police is the necessary factor in determining whether or not a confession is involuntary. This means that the circumstances of the confession are the main issue, and if they are found to be coercive, then the confession is not admissible. ("Confessions")
In a world where torture has become a common means of gaining information,…… [Read More]
Fourth Amendment to the Constitution covers the protection of the individual from unlawful searches and seizures when in the privacy of their own home. Because of the Fourth Amendment, law enforcement officers are required to secure an official court order or warrant to search the premises, and that warrant must be based on probable cause.
Although the Fourth Amendment does protect against the intrusion onto private property, there are several exceptions to the Fourth Amendment in which law enforcement is given leeway and greater degrees of power over the individual. Courts have also ruled increasingly in favor of the rights of law enforcement officers to infringe upon Fourth Amendment rights in specific situations, as with "stop and frisk" scenarios in which probable cause can be loosely defined and based on subjective police impressions of suspicious behavior ("Valid Searches and Seizures Without Warrants," n.d.). Another exception to Fourth Amendment rights relates…… [Read More]
Constitution were the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments ratified in 1865-70, which abolished slavery and granted equal citizenship and voting rights to blacks for the first time in U.S. history. All of these passed Congress as compromise measures between the Radical and moderate Republican factions in Congress, and were resisted intensely by Democrats in the North and South as violations of the rights of states and a tyrannical exercise of power by the central government. Then as now, of course, these were often code words for the fact that many whites simply did not favor black equality and voting rights. In the South, the Ku Klux Klan used violence and terror to prevent these amendments from being fully implemented, and after 1876-77, they succeeded in making them dead letters -- rights that existed only on paper but never enforced in reality. So it remained until the civil rights revolution of…… [Read More]
The 14th also lays down the rules as to how the U.S. Congress is made up, it points out that no one can be elected to national office if they have been found guilty of treason. The 14th also deals with the legal rights of slaves after the Civil ar; those "being 21 years of age, and citizens of the United States," and male, whall not have their right to vote "abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime…"
And, importantly, the 14th Amendment (third article) states that "No state shall infringe the right of trial by jury in criminal cases, nor the rights of conscience, nor the freedom of speech, or of the press." That is according to the Congress of the United States, August 24, 1789 (from the John Hopkins University Press).
Abortion Law Homepage. (2006). Overview. Retrieved 25 Feb. 2008 from http://members.aol.com/abtrbng/
FindLaw. (2007).…… [Read More]
g., juries that reflect the ethnic makeup of communities, another form of affirmative action). In the Crown Heights riots (1991) in Brooklyn, New York, Lemrick Nelson was on trial for violation of federal civil rights laws (he allegedly killed a Jewish student). The district court judge, Judge Trager, using "nontraditional" methods, attempted to create diversity on the jury by using ethnic criteria (blacks and Jews) in an attempt to reflect the actual ethnic makeup of Brooklyn (ilkenfeld, 2002). The Second Circuit Court, however, "struck down" judge Trager's construction of an ethnically reflective jury; the Second Circuit held that Trager's court "violated the Equal Protection Clause." The circuit explained that "...potential jurors' Fourteenth Amendment rights to be free from racially discriminatory state action preclude treating individual jurors differently based on a desire to maintain a certain aggregate jury composition" (ilkenfeld, 2002), according to an account in the Columbia Law Review.
An…… [Read More]
It is a traditional belief in America that a man's home is his castle, meaning that he is lord and master of his home and no one may enter, not even the government, without his permission. This was such an important issue among the American colonists that it was included into the Constitution when they broke away from Great Britain. In short, the fourth amendment states that no private property could be searched or seized without a proper warrant; and a warrant could not be issued without due cause. Over time belief in this absolute principle has gradually softened and a number of exceptions to this rule have come into place. Police and other authorities have been given exceptions to this rule in certain circumstances and it is not uncommon for evidence, that was gathered without a warrant, to be accepted in a trial. This is the situation…… [Read More]
Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment
The equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment extended to protections of the Bill of ights to all Americans, including pregnant women. Therefore, it is fundamentally unconstitutional under the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to criminalize pregnant women who take illegal drugs for fetal abuse or neglect without applying the same conditions on pregnant women who endanger their unborn child by drinking alcohol, smoking, or otherwise failing to provide the best possible nurturing environment for the fetus. This paper reviews the relevant peer-reviewed and scholarly literature together with the precedential case law concerning these issues to support this view, followed by a summary of the research and important findings in the conclusion.
eview and Analysis
A growing body of research concerning fetal development together with innovations in modern healthcare technologies have provided researchers with new insights about what can harm or nurture…… [Read More]
Outside of court, this takes place by way of affidavits and depositions (Sanders, 2007).
The Amendment's final part assures the accused person the right to aid of counsel. Legal representation was once a benefit only accessible to the rich. The poor were frequently left to their own devices in English courts. While defendants in America can decide to represent themselves, the right to counsel gives one the right to gratis legal help. In criminal trials, poor defendants are given legal counsel. Nationwide, community legal services, legal aid societies and other factions help the poor deal with civil issues. No matter how well the founding fathers' accomplished on their plan, our judicial system is not ideal. It is well-known that injustices and frustrations are daily legal incidences. Even so, the framers made enormous progress for daily citizens through the 6th Amendment to make sure American courts truly are the people's courts…… [Read More]
Jehovah's Witnesses are a good example of a religious entity that claims the right the First Amendment freedom of religion clauses. Jehovah's Witnesses may act as a thorn in many families across America, however, they have been the root cause of much of our freedom of religion laws. Jehovah's Witnesses brought many cases of religion to the court system in the 1930s and 1940s. Before then, the court system handled very few court cases regarding freedom of speech and freedom of religion. These cases formed the foundation of the First Amendment protection of all citizens.
The Court has attempted to create and implement a system for determining church and state decisions. This is accomplished with a three-part test for laws dealing with religious establishment. The determination if the law is constitutional is this: does it have a secular purpose? It should not advance or inhibit religion. Finally, it cannot foster…… [Read More]
First Amendment, the Constitution, and the Supreme Court
Freedom of and from religion and freedom of speech are the distinct provisions of the First Amendment; it gives citizens of the United States the unalienable human right to assembly and speech. However, the language is intentionally vague. The framers of the Constitution, anticipating unknown applications of the amendment, gave power to the Supreme Court to act as ultimate arbiter in matters involving its provisions. The Constitution of the United States is a living document and the interpretation of its amendments by the Supreme Court changes over time. Freedom of speech and the press, and religious freedom, are exercised according to the Supreme Court's rulings in cases that come before it. Exploration of these cases illuminates the evolving meaning of the First Amendment and the freedoms granted therein.
The First Amendment to the Constitution is partially designed to protect journalists and news-content…… [Read More]
For all Americans, the Fourth Amendment is an essential element of the U.S. Constitution that protects everyone's rights. This has influenced the way that the criminal justice system is interacting with defendants and the tactics that are utilized by law enforcement when conducting investigations. To fully understand how this is impacting society and legal proceedings requires studying various sources. This will be accomplished using academic information (i.e. books, case law and journal articles) to highlight the issues. In the future, this paper will contribute to a greater understanding as to how it requires maintaining a balance in protecting individual rights and giving the government effective tools for enforcing the law. (McInnis, 2009) (Lively, 1999)
The Fourth Amendment is designed to provide Americans with protections against unreasonable search and seizure. It has several different provisions that have been subject to various legal interpretations to include: the use of…… [Read More]
U.S. Constitution: Discussion Questions
A) he Fourteenth Amendment: the Case of Whitney V. California
274 U.S. 357
Whitney V. California (No. 3)
Argued: October 6, 1925
Decided: May 16, 1927
Location: Socialist Convention at Loring Hall
Factual Analysis: Anita Charlotte Whitney, who subscribed to the CLPC (Communist Labor Party of California), found herself was arraigned for breaching the state's 'Criminal Syndicalism Act', which forbade any actions aiding or advocating crime commission, including "terrorism as a means of accomplishing a change in industrial ownership or control, or effecting any political change" (LII, n.d.).
was the 'Criminal Syndicalism Act' repugnant to the Fourteenth Amendment? By penalizing those who advocate unlawful and violent methods of altering political and industrial situations and not penalizing individuals who advocate the same methods with the aim of maintaining such conditions, the statute, in the view of the defendant, contravened the 'Equal Protection Clause of the…… [Read More]
Or, as Saletan points out, those three elements "by deduction, are the due process test" (2011).
But this ought to leave a bad taste in one's mouth because all three of these elements can be manipulated to violate one's due process right.
"hich leaves us with an awkward bottom line. If the target is a suspected terrorist, "imminence" can be redefined to justify killing him. If the weapon is a drone, feasibility of arrest has already been ruled out -- that's why the drone has been sent to do the job. So in any drone strike on a U.S. citizen suspected of terrorism, only one of the three questions we supposedly apply to such cases is really open: Has he been fighting alongside al-Qaida? If he has, we can kill him. That's the same rule we apply to foreigners. In effect, citizenship doesn't matter. The "due process" test is empty"…… [Read More]
In this particular scenario, the police stopped a driver based upon the fact that the driver matched the description of the cashier who was the victim of the robbery and the driver had an Alabama student parking sticker (the store's robber was wearing a cap and a t-shirt from this university). The suspect was not speeding when the license was obtained, it should be noted. But the actions of the officer were consistent with stop-and-identify laws which permit police to ask suspects for licenses or other identification.
Supreme Court has generally not looked favorably upon stop-and-identify laws when they have been under its review. In the case of Kolender v. Lawson, 461 U.S. 352 (1983), one of the most recent stop-and-identify cases, the statute was deemed "unconstitutionally vague on its face within the meaning of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by failing to clarify what…… [Read More]
Amendments to the Constitution
In any criminal cases, the individual will be arraigned before the judge. This is when they will be informed about the charges and given the chance to enter a plea. Once this takes place, is the point a preliminary hearing is scheduled. It focuses on the evidence and if there is enough to warrant a trail. If the judge is convinced there is enough evidence, they will schedule a date and time for a jury trial. This is when there will be series of hearings challenging the discovery process, the evidence and any that could have been collected in violation of the Constitution. In these situations, the judge will rule on the evidence and determine which items can be included at trial. During the process, both sides will call witnesses and try to prove their case. (Hess, 2014) (Parpworth, 2012)
At the heart of these issues…… [Read More]
Anti-Miscegnation Statutes in the United States
Anti-Miscegenation Statutes in the United States
Previous to Loving v. Virginia, there were several cases on the subject of miscegenation. In Pace v. Alabama (1883), the Supreme Court made a ruling that the conviction of an Alabama couple for interracial sex, confirmed on the plea by the Alabama Supreme Court, did not disrupt the Fourteenth Amendment. Interracial marital sex was considered a felony, whereas adulterous sex ("infidelity or fornication") was just a misdemeanor. On plea, the United States Supreme Court made a ruling that the illegalization of interracial sex was not a defilement of the equal protection clause since whites and non-whites were penalized in equivalent amount for the wrongdoing of involving in interracial sex. The court did not see the need to sustain the constitutionality of the prohibition on interracial marriage that was likewise part of Alabama's anti-miscegenation law. After Pace v. Alabama,…… [Read More]
Bill of ights defines the protections afforded individual citizens under the Constitution against excessive government intrusions into private lives and arbitrary prosecutions. These rights are contained in the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. Since these Amendments were first adopted by the ratifying states the courts have interpreted the intent of each and created rules that attempt to keep the government from running roughshod over these rights. In 1944, the Federal ules of Criminal Procedures were generated by the Supreme Court and Congress turned them into law (LII, 2010).
One of the most important rights is to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures under the Fourth Amendment (LII, 2010). A warrant issued by a magistrate or judge is typically required before a police officer can enter a private citizen's residence or other property and conduct a search. In addition, the focus…… [Read More]
Americans are aware that they are entitled to "their day in court" but may not fully understand the full range of due process protections that are contained in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. To determine the facts, this paper reviews the relevant literature to provide a discussion concerning the meaning, history and importance of the constitutional concept of "due process" as contained in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. A brief discussion analyzing the conflicting positions of Justices Hugo Black and Felix Frankfurter with respect to the incorporation of American citizens' rights under the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and how these Justices' positions helped develop the concept of due process is followed by a summary of the research and important findings concerning due process in the conclusion.
.eview and Discussion
According to Black's Law Dictionary, "due process of law" means…… [Read More]
Troy Stone is showing how the police engaged in questionable tactics. This is based upon the fact that they have a witness who identified him. Yet, they were not able to come up with any corroborating evidence to directly link him to the murder. To make matters worse, they violated his constitutional rights in the process. These issues are highlighting how there were questionable tactics used to obtain the confession. To fully understand what is occurring requires focusing on: possible arguments which can be raised on Stone's behalf, if there was a violation of his constitutional rights and case law that supports these claims. Together, these elements will illustrate how Stone's civil rights were violated during the course of the investigation.
Discuss the arguments you think Taylor will raise on Stone's behalf regarding the lineup, interrogation, and confession.
There are a number of arguments which can be raised that will…… [Read More]
Such is the case with Tennessee v Lane, a case in the Supreme Court that focused on the legality of Congress to enact laws such as the Americans with Disabilities Act under section V of the Fourteenth Amendment. The High Court ultimately found that Congress does have the power to enact a law which may run contrary to an individual state's sovereign immunity in cases that implicate access to the courts (Tennessee v Lane, 2004).
The suite was brought by plaintiffs who were disabled, lived in Tenessee, and claimed that they were unable to access the upper flowers of the state courthouses, thus denying them a public service under Title II of the ADA. The state of Tennessee argued that the 11th Amendment prohibited the suite. Congress, said Tennessee, could use its powers to remedy discrimuination that was blatant and purposeful, but not in general because of a state's sovereign…… [Read More]
The death penalty is not unconstitutional and is even mandatory for certain crimes with the judge and jury having little discretion in the matter in order to avoid violating the provision that prohibits 'cruel and unusual punishment' the methods used for execution of the death penalty should be humane and sensible. While the criminal may lack in possessing any compassion whatsoever that this complete lack of the ability to have or posses real compassion that resulted in their being sentenced to death is a consideration in the regard given those sentenced to death. Finally, there should be no lack of certainty that the individual being put to death was the perpetrator of the crime committed.
VI. The ISSUES & the DEATE[S]
The issues and debates surrounding the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution are becoming more heated with each passing day and while the general public…… [Read More]
Institutional Authority vs. Law Enforcement on Campus
The purpose of this work is to examine the legal and ethical consideration that governs the "division of authority" between educational institutions and the law enforcement agencies, or campus police in relation to incidents involving students. Further this work will consider the effect that the failing view of education has had on the view of the importance of education. Finally this work will explore the 4th and 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and what effect these two amendments should have on aspects of administration affairs in relation to students.
In 1894 Yale University and the New Haven Police Department joined efforts in the prevention of crime on the college campus. The role of the officer on campus was ill defined and there are still discrepancies today as to exactly what the dividing line between the campus police officer and the university administration…… [Read More]
The effect that ever changing societal values have on the Supreme Court's interpretation of the U.S. Constitution
The effect that ever changing societal values have on the Supreme Court's interpretation of the U.S. Constitution
The effect that ever changing societal values have on the Supreme Court's interpretation of the U.S. Constitution
Constitution represents the supreme law that directs political, social, cultural, and economic aspects of the nation. All other laws must be in line with the constitution in order to be effective and efficient in their application. Social or societal values have continuous effects on the interpretation of the constitution. The main objective of the constitution is to protect the interest of the individuals in the society. This objective makes the constitution relevant to the societal values within the context of the United States of America. The societal values keep changing in the contemporary world thus resulting into…… [Read More]
Mapp V. Ohio
Over the centuries, there has been considerable debate as to the application of the Bill of ights when it comes to the states. This is because a series of court cases decided it was only relevant when it came to the federal government (i.e. Barron v. Baltimore and United States v. Cruickshank). However, with the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment, these states were obligated to follow them. This has shifted the debate as to if this aspect of the Constitution is relevant to state and local officials. To determine if this is correct requires examining a fictional case in contrast with Mapp V. Ohio. This will be accomplished by carefully studying the facts of the case, the Fruit of the Poisonous Tree Doctrine (under Mapp V. Ohio), the application of the rule of law and discussing how this would affect the ruling from the fictitious scenario. Together,…… [Read More]
The first route entails that the House and the Senate must each ratify the proposed Amendment by a two-thirds majority. Then the bill must be ratified by three-fourths of the states' legislatures within a reasonable time period. The second method would be for the creation of a Constitutional Convention to hear and propose the amendment to the states; this method also requires three-fourths of the state legislatures to approve the amendment. This second procedure has never before been used to amend the U.S. Constitution. In either case, however, it would take a number of years before the Amendment for Total Equality would become law. Furthermore, consitutional amendments are historically rare, and the proposals signficantly outnumbers the legal amendments. Several steps can be taken to ensure the timely implementation of this much-needed constitutional amendment.
Proponents of the proposed Amendment for Total Equality have a steep uphill battle to climb. The tide…… [Read More]
'" (Aspen, 1997, p.95).
The primary step is to change the mindset of lawyers. They have to stop believing that they run the show and instead focus them as members of a team along with the judge to ensure that the legal system works for the innocent people in the right direction. Its important that every lawyer strikes a balance between his or her obligations to the clients and the justice system.
As a supplement, more stringent laws should be implemented and the actions of the prosecution should come under closer scrutiny to ensure that they will abide by the ethics and professional code of conduct as laid down by the lawmakers.
Plan for administrators
"Few problems can pose a greater threat to free, democratic societies than that of wrongful conviction -- the conviction of an innocent person. Yet relatively little attention has been paid to this problem, perhaps because…… [Read More]
Economic View of the Death Penalty
In 1972, The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the case of Furman v. Georgia that the death penalty, as applied in three capital cases in the state of Georgia was "cruel and unusual punishment and in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. (Hastings and Johnson, 2001, paraphrased) A mere four years later the state of Georgia was once against before the Supreme Court in the case of Gregg v. Georgia, a case in which the decision handed down by the court found that the death penalty was in fact constitutional. (Hastings and Johnson, 2001, paraphrased) The objective of this study is to examine the practice of the death penalty from an economic perspective. Towards this end, this study will examine the literature in this area of study. According to a recent report there are several states considering abolition of the death penalty including…… [Read More]
The true spirit and meaning of the amendments, as we said in the Slaughter-House Cases (16 Wall. 36), cannot be understood without keeping in view the history of the times when they were adopted, and the general objects they plainly sought to accomplish. At the time when they were incorporated into the Constitution, it required little knowledge of human nature to anticipate that those who had long been regarded as an inferior and subject race would, when suddenly raised to the rank of citizenship, be looked upon with jealousy and positive dislike, and that State laws might be enacted or enforced to perpetuate the distinctions that had before existed. Discriminations against them had been habitual.
100 U.S. 303, 306).
Furthermore, while the Court's decision was based on Strauder's right to an impartial jury, the Court believed that all-white juries were discriminatory against the potential jury pool. It held that:
The…… [Read More]
Constitutionality of a Postcard-Only Mail Policy
Postcard-Only Prison Mail Policy
Constitutionality of a Prison Postcard-Only Mail Policy
The Constitutionality of a Prison Postcard-Only Mail Policy
The state Department of Corrections (DOC) has requested a legal opinion of its postcard-only mail policy covering all incoming and outgoing letters and packages. The DOC is facing several lawsuits alleging the restrictive mail policy is violating the Constitutional rights of inmates, as well as external parties wishing to communicate with inmates through the mail. The following opinion represents a review of the applicable case law and whether the mail policy could withstand Constitutional challenges.
The lawsuits that have been filed against the DOC for implementing a postcard-only mail policy allege violations of free speech protected by the First Amendment, privacy violations under the Fourth Amendment, and procedural due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Based on considerable…… [Read More]
(387 U.S. 33). Furthermore, the notice requirement meant that allegations had to particular. (387 U.S. 33). The juvenile and his parents did not get notice until the hearing on the merits, which meant that it was not timely notice. Furthermore, Arizona had no provision protecting children's right against self-incrimination, but the Court determined that a juvenile is at greater risk of self-incrimination than an adult.
The Court also looked at the Sixth Amendment, which provides that:
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed; which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have…… [Read More]
U.S. Supreme Court and the Rights of Inmates
The objective of this study is to identify the constitutional amendments that deal directly with the rights of correctional inmates. For each amendment, this work will describe the rights of inmates and correctional procedures that evolved to protect those rights. Lastly, this work will explain the role of the U.S. Supreme Court in interpreting correctional law, inmates' rights and correctional procedures.
Four Amendments That Address Rights of Prisoners
The primary areas of constitutions rights for inmates incarcerated in U.S. prisons are derived from four constitutional amendments. Those four amendments include the following:
(1) First Amendment -- This amendment governs to what extent authorities restrict the rights of inmates in regards to religion, speech press, and in general, the right to communicate with persons outside the jail. (Thigpen, Hutchinson, Persons and Holland, 2007)
(2) Fourth Amendment -- due process and equal protection. This…… [Read More]
Is Capital Punishment Cruel and Unusual?
hat is cruel and unusual punishment? Does the definition of cruel and unusual punishment change with time and changing social mores? Does the determination of whether or not a punishment is cruel and unusual depend on the crime committed, the criminal being punished, or both? These are all very important questions, which must all be examined before one can determine whether or not capital punishment is cruel and unusual punishment.
Cruel and unusual punishment is a difficult term to define, as it depends on the values and mores of the defining society. The prohibition against cruel punishment basically means that the punishment should fit the crime. For example, determining when death is an appropriate issue has been one of the complicating factors in the death penalty debate. Historically, the death penalty was previously available for a variety of crimes, ranging from theft…… [Read More]
Brian Short v. State of Florida
Is it legal for the State of Florida to prohibit the marriage of two very short people to each other, using the rationale that two short people are likely to produce short children and short children are less likely to help maintain dominance in state athletic programs and in more danger of falling into holes and not fitting properly into seatbelts?
elevant Legal Concepts from Text
The Fourteenth Amendment prohibits the making or enforcing of any laws "which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States" (U.S. Const. amend. XIV).
elevant Case Law from Text
"Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival" (Loving v. Virginia). "To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the…… [Read More]
First Amendment Cases
There are several provisions in the First Amendment to the United States' constitution, all of which have been implemented in various court cases. In Engels v. Vitale, which centered around the legality of a mandated school prayer in New York state, many would perceive the issue as one of a "freedom of religion." More specifically, however, this case involved the First Amendment's clause that, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion," which was applied to state governments by the Fourteenth Amendment. This is known as the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, and is quite distinct from the provision allowing the free exercise of religion.
In Oregon v Smith, it was determined that a state employee could indeed be terminated and denied unemployment benefits for the use of an illegal substance (in this case peyote) even when its use was part of a religious…… [Read More]
Finally, a lot of defense lawyers assist in helping men and women go free because of a technicality. On the whole however, it is a better system after the Gideon case because less innocent people are being convicted of crimes they did not commit.
In the Case of Miranda v. rizona 384 U.S. 436 (1966), the Court ruled that a defendant's admission was only admissible provided he had been properly advised of his right to counsel and of his right to remain silent, and if he waived these rights, the waiver had to be voluntary and knowingly. This case involved a burglary suspected who admitted to rape and kidnapping while in police custody. The defendant, Ernesto Miranda was sentenced to concurrent 20-30-year sentences for the two crimes he confessed to.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that due to the coercive nature of questioning by the police involved, there is no…… [Read More]
They are occasionally informed too poorly to make an opinion, or are simply uninterested in some aspects of politics. Public opinion used to be measured through voting, letter writing, and demonstrating. However, those who write letter and demonstrate generally have views that are more extreme than those of the public (166-168). Thus, the public opinion poll was introduced. Examples of public opinion polling include President Barack Obama's approval rating, which is currently 68%, and the 72% that believe the U.S. will be "better off in four years" (Gallup). Public opinion polls are important because they "keep the public well informed," as well as keeping the public in touch with important shifts in public opinion" ("Are opinion polls useful?").
Using a random sampling method, the public opinion poll uses probability to reflect the views of the public. That is, by using a random selection of the population, the opinions of the…… [Read More]
Changing Abortion Guidlines
Abortion and the constitution
Changing abortion guidelines
Abortion is the deliberate termination of human pregnancy; this process is performed the first 3 weeks of pregnancy. According to oe v. Wade it states that a woman is entitled to personal privacy protection, this is due to the fact that it includes the woman's determination of whether to bear a child or not. The judicial oversight of legislation was increased by the Courts under the privacy line of the cases; consideration was of abortion related laws in all the States of America (Sarah, K. 2010).
Looking at the historical review of medical and legal views concerning abortion, the Courts found out that the modern prohibitions were not in line with the recent vintage thus lacking historical foundation that would have played a fundamental role of preserving them constitutional review (Edward, L. 2002). The Courts also discovered that the word…… [Read More]
My overall advice to Mr. Smith would be that he has a weak case, at best.
To evaluate whether Susie has a valid equal protection claim, one must start by determining whether the city ordinance is a state action. As a city is a branch of the state, the smoking ordinance would be considered a state action. The next step is to determine whether she belongs to a suspect class or whether a fundamental right is being violated. Although being a woman places her in a quasi-suspect class, this ordinance does not involve a distinction between the genders. Instead the issue is between smokers and non-smokers and as such, there is no suspect class involved. Furthermore, there is no fundamental right involved as neither the right to smoke or to open a business is considered a fundamental right. (Chemerinsky, 2002; p. 157).
Under these facts, the court will…… [Read More]
Bakke v. Regents of the University of California
The so-called Bakke decision was the earliest in which the United States Supreme Court addressed affirmative action. The case certainly did not mean and end to the issues involved, and there have been several attempts to overturn the Bakke decision since. It has been referred to as a reverse discrimination case, and it was of great import when it was decided in the late 1970s after nearly a decade of affirmative action to bring more blacks and members of other minorities into the mainstream of work and academic life through programs of recruitment and special assistance to redress historical imbalances and discrimination. The issue of affirmative action remains a difficult one for Americans to this day. Affirmative action is often characterized as a quota system, though quotas need not be part of affirmative action at all. The Bakke case was an early…… [Read More]
Due Process Law and 5th & 14th Amendment Issues in Gilbert v. Homar, 117 S.Ct. 1807 (1997)
Title and Citation: Gilbert v. Homar, 117 S.Ct. 1807 (1997)
Type of Action: eview by the U.S. Supreme Court of a ruling made by the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, which held that a university police officer's right to due process was violated by his employer when the former was immediately suspended without following a felony arrest. East Stroudsburg University (ESU) sought to overturn the Third Circuit's reversal of the district court's original summary judgment for the university, with the Supreme Court granting certiorari.
Facts of the Case: ichard L. Homar was employed as a campus police officer by ESU, until an incident occurred in which Homar was arrested on drug charges relating to a raid executed at a family friend's house. Despite simply being at a friend's house…… [Read More]
Judge roderick concluded that the Compulsory Process Clause of the Sixth Amendment does not give a defendant the right to require immunization of a witness, but that such a right is "probably" contained in the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. Id. However, he declined to accord the defendants the benefit of this "probable" Fifth Amendment right to defense witness immunity for two reasons. First, he ruled that the defendants' motion was untimely, since it should properly have been made at the beginning of the trial. Second, he concluded that defense witness immunity would be available only to secure testimony that was material and exculpatory and that the defendants had not shown that any of the witnesses for whom they sought immunity would give material, exculpatory testimony."
The only federal appellate decisions that have ruled in favor of defense witness immunity are stated to appear to be the Third…… [Read More]
American Government Politics. Discussed is the fourth amendment and the current policies of searches and seizures. Four sources used. Footnotes.
Americans hold very dear the Bill of Rights. Among the ten amendments that make up the Bill of Rights is the Fourth, one many refer to as the most ambiguous of the all the amendments. Search and seizure law is drawn from the Fourth and over the years the Supreme Court has come to view that its main purpose is the protection of a citizen's property and privacy. However, according to the conclusion of the Court, the Fourth Amendment does not "protect all property interests or apply to all situations where people might wish to protect their privacy." Perhaps, never has this amendment felt more threatened than today. The attacks on the orld Trade Center on September 11th, spurred the hite House Administration to create the office of…… [Read More]
ACLU v Reno:
A definitive victory for free speech
The First Amendment in the United States of America's Constitution is perhaps the hallmark of what current President ush refers to continually as our "freedom." It represents the fundamental difference between America and so many other countries that do not offer their citizens rights to freedom of speech, religion and the press.
Specifically, the First Amendment of the United States Constitution guarantees the right to freedom of religion and freedom of expression without government interference. See U.S. Const. amend. I. Within that, the concept of freedom of expression consists of the rights to freedom of speech, press, assembly and to petition the government for a redress of grievances, and the implied rights of association and belief. The Supreme Court and the lower courts interpret the extent of the protection afforded to these rights. The Supreme Court has interpreted the First Amendment…… [Read More]
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…… [Read More]
They point out that neither the Constitution nor the Supreme Court has precluded the States or localities from enforcing the criminal provisions of immigration law.
Because the enforcement of the criminal provisions of Federal Law has not been expressly prohibited by the Constitution, it would be reserved to the states respectively. According to the Tenth Amendment of the .S. Constitution, "The powers not delegated to the nited States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
This is interpreted to mean that the states have implied powers in addition to the powers explicitly enumerated to them in the Constitution.
With this understanding of the Constitution, proponents argue that the disputed SB 1070 provisions are not immigration law provisions, but criminal law provisions.
For example, the provision making it a state crime for an alien to be in Arizona…… [Read More]
Murphy v. Waterfront Commission, 378 U.S. 52 (1964)
Title and Citation: Murphy v. Waterfront Commission, 378 U.S. 52 (1964)
Type of Action: eview by the U.S. Supreme Court of a ruling made by the New Jersey State Supreme Court, which held that petitioners subpoenaed to testify at a hearing on the state level -- petitioners who had been immunized against prosecution on the state level -- were indeed in contempt of court for refusing to testify on the grounds that doing so would provide self-incriminating evidence which could be used against them on the federal level.
Facts of the Case: The petitioners had been subpoenaed to testify during a hearing overseen by the Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor, one which focused on a work stoppage at the piers in Hoboken, New Jersey. Petitioners refused to answer several questions during this hearing on the grounds that doing so may tend…… [Read More]
Authors Donald Lively and ussell Weaver describe Hustler Magazine as Falwell's "antagonist (p. 79)," no doubt representing for Falwell abuses of our Constitutional freedoms.
"In 1983, Hustler Magazine decided to parody Falwell using a Campari Liqueur advertisement. The actual Campari ads portrayed interviews with various celebrities about their 'first times.' Although the advertisement actually focused on the first time that the celebrities had sampled Campari, the ads portrayed the double entendre of the first time that the interviewees had engaged in sex. Hustler mimicked the Campari format and created a fictional interview with Falwell in which he stated that his 'first time' was during a drunken incestuous rendezvous with his mother in an outhouse (p. 79)."
The Oregon Commentator, May, 2007
There is probably no limit to the outrage that was felt by Falwell, and by his support base, both of which would have been offended, first, by using Falwell…… [Read More]
" (Foster, 1999) Within this framework there is no reference to gun ownership by individuals and according to Foster's report: "...it is reasonable to assume that private arms are intended for destruction under the term." (Foster, 1999)
The work of David . Kopel, a former assistant district attorney in Manhattan and presently a practicing attorney in Colorado writes in the work entitled: "Trust the People: The Case Against Gun Control" a policy brief published at the Cato Institute that: "Gun control is based on the faulty notion that ordinary American citizens are too clumsy and ill-tempered to be trusted with weapons. Only through the blatant abrogation of explicit constitutional rights is gun control even possible." (1988) Kopel relates that less than one in 3,000 gun owners commit murder. Each year approximately 7,000 individuals commit suicide and 300 or fewer people die in accidents involving handguns. As a matter of fact,…… [Read More]
ights Accused 1.Fully defined due process origins, Completed 90-100% accuracy, 2.Fully explained due process protects accused abuses federal government. Complete 90-100% accuracy, thoroughness, logic, Used (3) reference directed.
Due process was one of the first rights that were created in the U.S. constitution. The history of due process comes from the year 1355 when the phrase was coined at the time when there was the first government. The Great Charter of the Liberties of England statute stated that no man would be imprisoned or prevented from enjoying their freedom or liberty or be outlawed or exiled unless by lawful judgment that is passed or by the law of the land. Several years later in the 28th year of the reign of King Edward III, it became a declaration that no man was allowed to be deprived of their property, be imprisoned, disinherited or killed without being charged by the due…… [Read More]
arresting officer what crimes would you charge him with?
If one were the arresting officer, it appears as though the only charges that this individual could be charged with would be grand theft auto.
If you were the defense attorney what argument(s) in court do you make in court challenging the police stop of your client?
As the client's defense attorney, one area of defense that I would no doubt engage in, would be the civil rights violations that come attached to racial profiling. In this example, there is a very clear and very rampant violation occurring in that the driver of the care was being targeted as a potential suspect in this crime, based solely on the fact that he is of a Hispanic national origin. This practice is largely based on the belief that certain kinds of people commit certain types of crimes, which can cause the biased…… [Read More]
Congress will assemble at least one a year, beginning on the first Monday in December.
Section 5: Congress must have a minimum number of members in attendance in order to meet, and that it has the authority to fine those who don't show up. Members may be expelled if there is disorderly behavior or if the rules of proceedings are violated. The concurrence of 2/3 majority can expel a member from Congress. A journal of proceedings must be kept to record what goes on and votes that are made. Neither house can adjourn without the direct permission of the other.
Section 6: Members of the Congress will be paid for their services. They will have immunity from arrest and freedom of speech while in office unless they commit treason, which is a felony, or a breach of the peace. While in office, no member of Congress may accept another office…… [Read More]
In Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution, Congress was limited from prohibiting the importation of slaves, at least until 1808. For twenty years, Congress was, by virtue of the Constitution, enjoined from any attempt to limit slave importation. Finally, however, Congress did pass a law outlawing the slave trade as of January 1, 1808.
The final mention of slavery in the Constitution virtually prevented slaves from gaining freedom by escaping to a non-slave state. The Fugitive Slave Clause states that the laws of one state could not excuse a person from "service or labor" in another state; in short, escaped slaves were to be extradited from free states back to slave states because the escapees were not truly human with rights to liberty, but rather property with no rights.
Three of every four Southerners lived, after 1808, in the coastal states of Maryland, Virginia, and North and South Carolina;…… [Read More]
Impact of the Slaughter-House Cases
The adoption of the constitution of the United States of America faced opposition from groups that feared the takeover of a centralized government. This opposition arose from the fear that this new centralized government would demean and embarrass the states by forcing or administering and contradicting the state's decisions, laws and policies. Opponents of the constitution feared that "the powers granted to the proposed government were not sufficiently guarded, and might be used to encroach upon the liberties of the people" (McClain 18). After the ratification of the constitution by the states the desire for amendments and regulations that restricted the powers of the new government was voiced by representatives of those states.
There was extreme fear that the everyday rights and liberties of citizens of a state would be impacted, restricted and oppressed by a centralized form of government. The desire to…… [Read More]
Tucker, deputy sheriff of said county, from giving and securing to the said Robert R. Smith and others, naming them, the due and equal protection of the laws of said state, in this, to-wit, that at and before the entering into said conspiracy, the said Robert R. Smith and others, naming them, were held in the custody of said deputy sheriff by virtue of certain warrants duly issued against them, to answer certain criminal charges, and it thereby became and was the duty of said deputy sheriff to safely keep in his custody the said Robert R. Smith and others while so under arrest, and then and there give and secure to them the equal protection of the laws of the State of Tennessee, and that the defendants did then and there conspire together for the purpose of preventing and hindering the said deputy sheriff from then and there safely…… [Read More]
The Fourteenth Amendment is specifically concerned with due process. Moreover, while due process may not be violated by allowing states to establish different guidelines for their criminal trials and procedures than those established in the federal system, the Court seems to recognize that if something has been established as a necessary minimum to guarantee due process in the federal system, it will also be the minimum in the states.
One thing about this case, and about most states' existing criminal systems, is that it differentiates between misdemeanors and felonies, by providing that those charged with felonies are entitled to an appointed attorney. However, the distinction between misdemeanors and felonies seems untenable; people charged with misdemeanors face the threat of the loss of liberty and property. If due process cannot be protected without an attorney, and the Court feels that this threat is the same regardless of the degree of punishment,…… [Read More]
K. Comment: I agree with the majority opinion. The Constitution is the absolute guiding law of the land, and the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees that its protections will be extended to state actions. The Fourth Amendment guarantees a right to privacy and assures citizens that they will be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. The Fourth Amendment also imposes a warrant requirement for the majority of searches, so that most searches that occur without a warrant violate the Fourth Amendment. The search in this case certainly violated the Fourth Amendment, but whether or not the constitutional violations were as egregious as in this case should not be the determinant of whether evidence is excluded, because the Constitution absolutely bans all unreasonable searches and seizures. hile the dissent suggests that other remedies can help a defendant who has been subjected to an unreasonable search and seizure, the fact is that none of…… [Read More]
" (Paul v. Davis)
The majority went on to argue that it is almost impossible to guess at any logical stopping place to the afore-prescribed theory of reasoning. Davis' interpretation of the law as set out in his briefs would seem almost necessarily to manifest itself in every legally cognizable injury which may have been inflicted by a state official - of any sort, not just a police officer -- acting under "color of law" establishing a violation of the Fifth Amendment as extended to the 50 states by the aforementioned Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution.
According to the majority, "We think it would come as a great surprise to those who drafted and shepherded the adoption of that Amendment to learn that it worked such a result, and a study of our decisions convinces us they do not support the construction urged by respondent."
Section 4: The Result
Consequently,…… [Read More]
The Supreme Court ruled that the Federal government lacked constitutional authority, mandated by the Fourteenth Amendment, to outlaw racial discrimination by private individuals and organizations. The court ruling stated that the Civil ights Act of 1875 was unconstitutional. The decision was challenged by the Justice Harman as a narrow interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment, but the Court nevertheless with overwhelming majority ruled that neither the Thirteenth nor the Fourteenth Amendment granted the Federal state jurisdiction over these five cases. "This ruling," as argued by some scholars, "practically put an end to the federal government's attempt to enforce the guarantees of the Fourteenth Amendment" (Barnes and Connolly, 1999, p. 338).
In both cases, the U.S. Supreme Court recognized the rights of individual states that narrowly defined the provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment. In the Slaughterhouse Cases, the Louisiana State protected a monopoly power to the detriment of individual workers. The Supreme…… [Read More]
The United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of Illinois and argued that the Fourteenth Amendment was designed to protect against race discrimination only…" Gibson, 2007, Background to Muller v. Oregon section ¶ 1). The Court ruled that the Fourteenth Amendment did not include the protection of women's rights.
The following depicts Justice Bradley's concurring opinion regarding Bradwell's
Man is, or should be, woman's protector and defender. The natural and proper timidity and delicacy which belongs to the female sex evidently unfits it for many of the occupations of civil life. The constitution of the family organization, which is founded in the divine ordinance, as well in the nature of things, indicates the domestic sphere as that which properly belongs to the domain and functions of womanhood.... The paramount destiny and mission of woman are to fulfill the noble and benign offices of wife and mother. This is the law…… [Read More]