long-term impact of Florence v. The Board of Chosen Freeholders. This will be accomplished by: studying the parties involved, discussing the facts of the case, identifying the constitutional issues, examining the decision in terms of the vote, the opinion of the court, the dissenting views and the significance of the case. Once this takes place, is when we can provide specific insights that will illustrate how this will affect the way law enforcement is interacting with prisoners.
In criminal law, there are those decisions that will have a dramatic impact upon the way law enforcement is interacting with suspects. Sometimes, there are certain cases that will give the police the power to use greater amounts of authority. When this happens, there is a transformation in how different constitutional ideas are interpreted and utilized.
A recent example of this can be seen by looking no further than the Supreme Court case…… [Read More]
Marbury v. Madison
Supreme Court Case Study
Every year Supreme Court provides decision in cases that really impact the American citizen's rights. The aim of this analysis is to keenly check cases handled by the Supreme Court and the way they were given their final verdict. The parties involved sometimes get that the cases favor them or not depending on the existing laws or even through undermining the constitution. The case in the United state law involving Marbury v. Madison,5 U.S. 137 (1803). This case created the basis for implementation of judicial review in the United States under Article III within the constitution. It became the first time in the history of the estern where a court invalidated a law through terming it as unconstitutional.
From the appointments made by President John Adams, illiam Marbury was appointed federal justice of peace. Nevertheless, Thomas Jefferson became the President prior to Marbury…… [Read More]
Chief Justice Warren noted in the syllabus of the case,
Today, education is perhaps the most important function of state and local governments. Compulsory school attendance laws and the great expenditures for education both demonstrate our recognition of the importance of education to our democratic society. It is required in the performance of our most basic public responsibilities, even service in the armed forces. It is the very foundation of good citizenship. Today it is a principal instrument in awakening the child to cultural values, in preparing him for later professional training, and in helping him to adjust normally to his environment. In these days, it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity of an education. Such an opportunity, where the state has undertaken to provide it, is a right which must be made available to all on…… [Read More]
Supreme Court of the United States is commonly held to be the last bastion of getting a legal standard correct and complete. While legal precedents shift and change over time, the court eventually "gets it right" or at least comes to a settled position. However, there are other times where the court clearly gets it wrong and technically ensconces something that is wrong-minded and ill-conceived. Although Plessy v. Ferguson is up there (and for much the same reason), the Dred Scott case came first and has been deemed as one of the most egregious (and racist) decisions in the course of the history of the United States. While then-Chief Justice Taney believed the decision to be on solid legal ground, the case's decision was eventually overturned and it was a reversal that never should have been necessary.
Dred Scott was a born slave, having been born in 1799 in…… [Read More]
Supreme Court opinions and dissents are essentially reflections of judicial self-restraint or judicial activism. Generally, the Supreme Court reflects judicial self-restraint or judicial activism through the use of the doctrine of standing in majority opinions and in dissenting opinions respectively. This implies that judicial self-restraint and judicial activism are terms in current legal language that describe opposite approaches that are taken by judges to interpret various issues relating to a case (Pinelli, p.31). In this instance, judges interpret the meaning of words and the intentions of their authors in a manner that is considered adequate in resolving a case. Judicial self-restraint and judicial activism are evident in the opinions and dissents of Supreme Court cases such as Allen v. right, Lujan v. Defenders of ildlife, and Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council.
The Concepts of Judicial Self-Restraint and Judicial Activism
Generally, judicial self-restraint and judicial activism are concepts that have…… [Read More]
Chisholm vs. Georgia Supreme Court Case
The case of Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 U.S. 419 in the year 1793 is considered by many to be the first great United States Supreme Court case (ikipedia PP).
In 1792, South Carolina residents executing the estate of Alexander Chisholm sued the state of Georgia in the Supreme Court over payments due them for goods that Chisholm had supplied to Georgia during the American Revolutionary ar (ikipedia PP). United States Attorney General Edmund Randolph argued the case for the plaintiff before the Court (). Georgia did not appear, claiming that as a sovereign, a state did not have to appear in Court to hear a suit against it which it did not consent (ikipedia PP).
In a 4-1 decision, the Court found in favor of the plaintiff, with Chief Justice of the United States John Jay concurring with Justices Blair, ilson, and Cushing, and…… [Read More]
What is interesting about this decision is how the Supreme Court was able to draw a fine line that allowed the rule of law to continue, yet not to such a point that it would interfere with Congress' post-war actions in the now occupied South. At the time of the decision, Congress was held by a Republican majority. What this case holds is that because the South seceded, during the war they and their courts did not uphold the authority of the Constitution. Thus, habeas corpus could be suspended and trials against military officers and civilians could occur in military courts. Therefore, because of this decision, the punishment of occupied south could occur as planned.
This decision is in sharp contrast to decision handed down prior to and during the Civil War. During that time period the focus was on maintaining the unity of the entire country and therefore the…… [Read More]
5 May, 2005. Retrieved at http://news.public.findlaw.com/ap/o/51/05-06-2005/ca790022a837290c.html. Accessed on 11 May, 2005
Civil liberties groups unite against a surveillance society. 21 April, 2005. Retrieved at http://www.out-law.com/php/page.php?page_id=civillibertiesgrou1114086814&area=newsAccessed on 11 May, 2005
First Amendment History. 5 January, 2005. Retrieved at http://www.illinoisfirstamendmentcenter.com/Main.asp?SectionID=16&SubSectionID=30&ArticleID=49Accessed on 11 May, 2005
In ACLU Case, Federal Court Strikes Down Patriot Act Surveillance Power as Unconstitutional. September 29, 2004. Retrieved at http://www.aclu.org/SafeandFree/SafeandFree.cfm?ID=16603&c=282Accessed on 11 May, 2005
Ramasastry, Anita. Reform the Patriot Act to ensure civil liberties. April 20, 2005. Retrieved at http://civilliberty.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/04/20/ramasastry.patriotact/. Accessed on 11 May, 2005
Somers, Andrew. Will Trading Your Freedom for a Sense of Security Really Make You Safe? Retrieved at http://civilliberty.about.com/library/content/blPatriotAct.htm. Accessed on 11 May, 2005
The USA Patriot Act Six Months Later: A Statement by Members of the Free Expression Network. Retrieved at http://www.freeexpression.org/patriotstmt.htm. Accessed on 11 May, 2005
Twight, Charlotte. Watching You Systematic Federal Surveillance of Ordinary Americans. Cato riefing Paper No. 69, October 17,…… [Read More]
New Haven Firefighters
The Supreme Court case of Ricci v. DeStefano was heard in April of 2009, and the Court's decision was issued in favor of the plaintiffs on 29 June, 2009. The plaintiffs here, Ricci et al., were nineteen firefighters from New Haven, Connecticut who had sued the administration of New Haven mayor John DeStefano over the decision to disregard results from a written examination given for promotion within the city fire department. Ricci et al. alleged reverse discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which prohibits employment discrimination based on race: it is necessary to note in this context that the vast majority of the plantiffs in Ricci were white, with two Hispanics included, and that the administrative decision made in New Haven was based on the fact that no African-American firefighters were able to pass the test and thus be eligible for promotion.…… [Read More]
HOLT V. HOBBS: PETITIONE'S SIDE OF THE CASE
The objective of this study is to answer the legal question of whether the Arkansas Department of Corrections grooming policy violate the eligious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act by preventing Holt from growing a one-half inch beard in accordance with his religious beliefs.
Facts of the Case
The petitioner in this case, Gregory Holt is who also known as Abdul Maalik Muhammad, an inmate at the Arkansas Department of Corrections and a Salafi Muslim filed seeking an injunction and requesting temporary relief from the Arkansas Department of Corrections policy on grooming reported to allow mustaches that were trimmed and beard that were one-quarter inch in length when dermatological problems were diagnosed by the prison's physicians. Holt claimed that the grooming policy violated the eligious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (LUIPA). Holt had agreed to limit the length of his beard…… [Read More]
eligious Freedom-First Amendment
Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah
eligious Freedom is one of the key principles on which the foundation of our country was laid. United States has always supported and endorsed free exercise of religion and this right has been considered so important that it became part of the First Amendment, which clearly states that:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. (1)
However while this is the golden ideal and a shining example of our country's commitment to religious freedom, there have been several instances in the past when either the government itself or some sections of the public tried to stifle religious rights of…… [Read More]
United States Patent and Trademark Office granted a patent to the Monsanto Company for its genetically modified seeds in 1994, and in 2006, the company developed a soybean that was resistant to glyphosate-based herbicides, including those that they sell directly to farmers. Indiana farmer Vernon Hugh Bowman started purchasing Monsanto seeds in 1999, agreeing to the company's policy that the seeds only be used for one growing season. Yet that same year, Bowman purchased second-generation soybean seeds from a grain elevator, essentially a third-party vendor.
The third-party vendor seeds are intended for use not as future generation seeds but as harvest crops used in animal feed or consumption. However, to save costs, Bowman replanted the grain elevator seeds, beliving those seeds to be exempt from the patent provisions. Monsanto sued Bowman successfully. The Appellate and Supreme Courts substantiated the original decision and ruled that Bowman had to pay Monsanto for…… [Read More]
Right to Privacy and Consenting Adults: Examining the Sodomy Cases
The 1986 case of Bowers v. Hardwick represents the continued legacy of homophobia of the era. This case demonstrates how homophobia has amounted to longstanding oppression for gay people, and has continually thwarted justice from protecting them or ever serving them. Michael Hardwick was in his late 20s when he was bartending at a gay bar in Georgia. He threw a beer bottle into an outdoor trash can and was written up by the police for public drinking (Bazelon, 2012). The terms of this citation come under suspicion as its possible that the police officer who wrote the ticket was just targeting him because he knew he was gay and worked at a local gay bar. The details of this citation of extremely dubious. The police officer that wrote the wrong day on the citation, ensuring that Hardwick would not…… [Read More]
he appellate court applied the precedent of Saucier v. Katz (2001), which states the application of the qualified immunity test. According to Saucier, an officer can be stripped of qualified immunity protection only if their conduct violates a constitutional right and every reasonable law enforcement officer would have known that, at the time of the incident, their actions were in violation of the law. Because the road Harris was traveling down was empty, the court found the Scott's action unreasonable and thus outside his immunity.
On appeal to the Supreme Court, the Court reversed, finding that Scott had acted reasonably in accordance with the Fourth Amendment. he Court stated, "A police officer's attempt to terminate a dangerous high-speed car chase that threatens the lives of innocent bystanders does not violate the Fourth Amendment, even when it places the fleeing motorist at risk of serious injury or death."
Clearly this case…… [Read More]
U.S. Supreme Court: Kelo v. New London (2005)
Supreme Court case Kelo v. City of New London involved the issue of eminent domain which is granted to governmental bodies including federal, state and local governmental bodies by the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution which means that the government is authorized to take land that is privately owned if the land is to be used by the public and the owner is paid a fair price for the land or what is referred to as 'just compensation'. Prior to Kelo v. City of New London the power of eminent domain was typically exercised by cities for acquisition of facilities that were clearly intended for public use such as schools, bridges or freeways. The case of Kelo v. City of New London however, involved what was a "new trend among cities to use eminent domain to acquire land for the redevelopment…… [Read More]
United States Supreme Court ruling on same sex marriage. The paper also examines how that decision impacted management policy decisions in terms of public safety administration. An examination of the ruling's overall impact on public policy is also given. eactions on the ruling are given in the end.
Background knowledge on same sex marriage
For the majority of Americans, the matter of same sex marriage may have first come to their knowledge when it burst into the political limelight in late 2003. At this time, Massachusetts' highest court ruled that the state had no authority or grounds on which to deny lesbian and gay couples the right to marriage. In the next few months after the ruling in the state same sex marriage ceremonies were conducted in many counties and cities across the United States (U.S.) including mass weddings in the city of San Francisco. This brought a lot of…… [Read More]
District of Columbia v. Heller Case Brief
Case Facts: The District of Columbia Code prohibited carrying an unregistered firearm and banned the registration of handguns through its provisions. However, the provisions granted the chief of police the liberty to grant one-year licenses for handguns. Additionally, the Code required individuals owning legitimately registered firearms to keep them unloaded and disassembled or with locked trigger unless they were in business places or being utilized for legalized recreational activities.
A special police officer in Washington, D.C., Dick Anthony Heller, was permitted to carry a handgun while on duty. He applied for a one-year registration license from the city of Washington for a handgun he wanted to keep at home. Based on the provisions of the District of Columbia Code, Heller's application was rejected. Consequently, he sued the District of Columbia on the premise that the provisions of this Code violated the Second Amendment.…… [Read More]
Justice Antonin Scalia's philosophy and contributions to the US Supreme Court, and the effect of his demise on the Court, particularly on Amendments IV, V, VI and VIII.
Philosophy and Impact of the Death of Scalia
Owing to Justice Scalia's disruptive nature, a number of impolite social media posts, op-eds and tweets are expected from parties who were usually not in agreement with his philosophy. Despite the presence of other "conservative" Justices, Antonin Scalia's aggressive and frequently insulting views either infuriated the opposition or made individuals who agreed with him feel immensely superior and triumphant. I personally believe he can be rightfully counted among the best orators in American history and also the best writer ever among Supreme Court Justices. With respect to the Court's future, numerous diverse responses on the part of politicians are to be expected in the near future (Burrus, 2016). My hope and prediction is that…… [Read More]
Supreme Court established in analyzing the constitutionality of punishment? List and discuss at least three of them.
The only specific mention of definition of legally administrable punishment in the U.S. Constitution is that the punishment not be cruel and unusual, a vague semantic term that has proved fertile ground for both opponents and proponents of the death penalty. Capital punishment, however, was declared unconstitutional in Furman v. Georgia (1972). This was not because it meted out death to a defendant. Rather, it was the grounds that it was administered in a cruel and unusual fashion. Thus it was in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Also, Georgia's capital punishment laws were meted out in an unclearly defined fashion that was overly subjective, and according to sociological data submitted to the court, seemed to unfairly penalize African-Americans. It was also thus in violation of the equal protection clause…… [Read More]
Supreme Court has ruled that soliciting money in a busy airport is something that the government can stop because it is so disruptive. What other activities do you think the government could prevent because they are too disruptive?
It's a little hard to justify how the Supreme Court found asking for solicitations in an airport to be "too disruptive," because the person being solicited simply has to say "No thanks," and go on his or her way." We see people soliciting for organizations in busy intersections. If the car in front of us has to fish for money, they can delay progress through the intersection, which could lead to accidents. That seems like far more of a disruption, and yet it seems to fall within the law. It would seem, based on the airport ruling, that if soliciting in an airport can be banned, then collecting money in intersections could…… [Read More]
Winship was decided by the Burger Court in 1970, Docket number 778. The case involves a twelve-year-old boy, Samuel Winship, who was arrested for stealing $112 from a woman's locker. Section 744(b) of the New York Family Court Act provided that determination of a juvenile's guilt differs from an adult defendant, requiring only a "preponderance of evidence" and not evidence "beyond a reasonable doubt." Based on the "preponderance of evidence" clause, the Family Court initially found Winship guilty, "despite acknowledging that the evidence did not establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt," ("In Re Winship"). Winship appealed, and the appeal was rejected and later sent to the Supreme Court, which granted certiorari and deemed "preponderance of evidence" methods unconstitutional based primarily on the Fourteenth Amendment due process clause.
The outcome of the case strengthens the burden of proof requirements for all criminal cases, juvenile or not. However, juvenile defendants are…… [Read More]
Miranda uling: Its Past, Present and Future
In almost all cases, the Miranda ruling of 1966 applies to police interviews with criminal suspects, although other Supreme Court decisions extend some of the rights to legal counsel and prevention of self-incrimination to public and private employers. According to the Supreme Court, the Miranda Warnings must be given prior to questioning to all persons who have been arrested and are in police custody, although one loophole "permits the police to question suspects without giving them their Miranda rights in those settings where it is unclear whether custody is present" (Wrightsman and Pitman 2010). In addition, suspects might not understand all these rights, especially because local and state police forces around the United States use hundreds of different versions of these rather than one standard set of warnings. At times, police training manuals also advise officers how to avoid giving the warnings or…… [Read More]
Court Service Management
How does a court system cope with a changing of the guard when a new administration is elected and key executives and managers are replaced, and/or when policy changes direction as a new political party assumes power?
The court deals with transitions of power by maintaining the established traditions and principles from the Constitution. This is used to ensure that case precedent is respected and to provide stability for the entire political system. As the basic guarantees of the Constitution will not change and cannot be adjusted based upon a new party coming to power. In this case, the structure and attitudes will remain the same. This is from the institution and its practices remaining in place. egardless of what is happening with transitions in power. (Koopmans, 2003) (Neubauer, 2012) (Oakley, 2009)
However, the courts will be impacted by these changes to a certain extent. This will…… [Read More]
Supreme Court's recent decision to ban the execution of mentally challenged individuals raises important ethical issues. Judges must be able to determine if a person is indeed mentally challenged. hile the legal system and psychology have made important insights into this issue, there is still some inconsistency in the definition and application of mental retardation in the judicial system. Accordingly, an analysis of the ethical principles underlying the issue is useful. Ultimately, a combination of both deontological and teleological approaches may provide the best ethical guidelines for such a complex issue.
The ethical factors involved in handing down any death sentence are complex. This is especially true when the accused is a mentally challenged individual. In the American criminal justice system, the court must be assured that an accused individual is fully responsible for their actions in order to hold responsible for their crime. In other words, in order to…… [Read More]
Tribe refers to what Ronald Dworkin says later in the book. Dworkin holds that everyone is an originalist now but that they are not seeking what the lawmakers expected but what they meant to say in their law, suggesting perhaps that they may not be writing laws as clearly as could be or that the vagaries of language often make it difficult to do so without some form of originalist mind set. Tribe points out that what both originalists and textual critics are doing is to try to determine what is intended over what is expected, meaning that a law could be written to say one thing but would have unintended consequences just the same. here Tribe differs is in the fact that he does not believe it is possible to discover which provisions are which by a close reading of the text or by legislative history. Tribe also does…… [Read More]
If this is the idea that we convey here today what is going to stop the imposition of regulations in other areas of the State's social and economic life just because Congress feels that there might be a relationship to highway use or safety. In the end this is going to allow Congress to effectively be able to regulate almost any area of a State's social, political, or economic life on the theory that use of the interstate transportation system is somehow improved. The bigger question is whether or not this infringement upon the State's rights, which have been afforded to them by the Constitution, is going to stop with this or are we going to see it spill over into other areas. I feel that setting this precedence is only going to open the door for further abuses and violations of the State's rights as they have been given.…… [Read More]
counter-majoritarian difficulty is what some refer to as the most well-known issue in constitutional theory. A phrase created by Alexander Bickel, the Yale Professor introduced it in his book titled The Least Dangerous Branch: The Supreme Court at the Bar of Politics. Although it is not certain what Bickel meant by making that phrase, it grew to have a life of its own. Essentially now it means when unelected judges nullify the actions of legislators/electedexcutives through utilization of the power of judicial review, acting contrary to the will of the majority as conveyed by representative institutions.
Those that consider democratic majoritarianism of great political value may see this aspect of judicial review as challenging. However, in the days when civil rights were nonexistent and people were having their personal rights violated, this aspect of judicial review provided the push to change laws, and inevitably, change society. Therefore, a majority of…… [Read More]
Thus, the availability of handguns not only results in a surprisingly large amount of deaths each year, but also those deaths disproportionately affect juveniles and the mentally ill. If hand guns were unavailable to the population, juvenile murders would be less likely to occur, as would accidental discharges resulting in death and suicide. Because of these statistics and the lives that were lost or severely altered due to gun violence and gun accidents, a federal gun ban is necessary.
In addition to death and injury, public access to firearms results in an increased rate of crime. Although this problem is of a serious nature, it has been around, and left unaddressed, since the Civil ar (Deconde 117). This is especially true in regards to juvenile crime. As already mentioned, the increase and decrease in juvenile homicides was linked to an increase and decrease in gun-related deaths ("Juveniles and Guns"). Besides…… [Read More]
Contracting and Construction
The case of White-Spunner Constr., Inc. v. Constr. Completion Co., 103 So. 3D 781; 2012 Ala. was about a general contractor's right to challenge an illegal subcontract. In this case, the Supreme Court saw fit to reverse the decision of the lower courts, which had previously awarded the subcontractor $1.2 million by ruling against the general contractor. With the Supreme Court's decision, the general contractor's argument was validated and the lower court's decision reversed in the general contractor's favor. Essentially, the illegal subcontract was deemed invalid due to its illegality and therefore had no standing and the subcontractor was not entitled to any payment. The Court also stated that licenses are needed by construction labor brokers -- otherwise they are not allowed to represent clients or perform construction work. The Court had to define what was meant by labor brokers in this instance and it even pointed…… [Read More]
From the study of treatment for mothers on crack, 50 experts in drug dependency as well as 150 addicted women identify components which they believe are important in the treatment of women effectively. Some of the features that they had identified that are always not present within the current programs are: comprehensive health care such as family planning, prenatal as well as prevention of HIV; service for children such as play therapy, day care, parental training and developmental monitoring of a child; an advocacy role such as contact with protective services of a child as well as welfare; and appropriate staffing such as non-confrontational, female staffing as well as cultural and racial sensitive.
As evident in the finding of the study, there is preference within experts and women for a program that combines medical, drug treatment and therapeutic services for the child and the mother, job training and education, long-term…… [Read More]
In the landmark decision Brown v. Board of Education in 1954, the United States Supreme Court overturned the "separate but equal" standard adopted by the 1892 Plessy v. Ferguson. Until Brown v. Board of Education passed, American public schools were segregated. Brown v. Board of Education transformed American society by outlawing racial segregation. Now that American schools are integrated, the Brown v. Board of Education decision seems immutable. However, the decision potentially represents an overstepping of the Judicial Branch's power. While most people would agree that the decision of Brown v. Board of Education was absolutely mandatory, others would note that from a purely rational standpoint, the Supreme Court overstepped its role as an interpretive body.
In its reasoning, the Court relies on the research conclusion of psychologists as one of the bases of its decision. Although psychology may be considered to be a "soft" science, it is…… [Read More]
The plaintiffs were disabled Tennesseans who could not access the upper floors in state courthouses. They sued in Federal Court, arguing that since Tennessee was disallowing them public services for the reason that their disabilities, it was infringing Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Tennessee argued that the Eleventh Amendment banned the suit, and filed a motion to dismiss the case. It relied chiefly on Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama v. Garrett (2001), in which the Supreme Court held that Congress had, in endorsing certain provisions of the ADA, unconstitutionally repealed the supreme immunity of the States by letting people sue the States for discrimination on the foundation of disability. Garrett had held that Congress had not met the congruent-and-proportional test, in that it had not collected enough proof of discrimination on the basis of disability to give good reason for the repeal of…… [Read More]
However, this Court also recognizes that mental illness oftentimes differs from other immutable characteristics, such as mental retardation and age, in that a defendant oftentimes has the ability to control mental illness through medical interventions. hile there is tremendous evidence of Panetti's deteriorated mental state, there is very little evidence to support Panetti's assertions that he was insane at the time of the murders. Though there are serious questions regarding Panetti's competency to stand trial, much less his competency to represent himself in that trial, there simply does not appear to be any evidence that he was insane at the time of the murders. Panetti engaged in preparations that were rationally aimed at accomplishing the murder of his in-laws, but was able to refrain from killing his wife and child. In addition, he engaged in a stand-off with police that resulted in him escaping the stand-off without being killed and…… [Read More]
S. Supreme Court might have held the status of this particular land and the resulting court decision to different standards and might have even reversed decisions of law however, the failure of this point to be addressed in the previous petition barred this point from being addressed by the court in the latter decision.
City of Sherrill, New York v. Oneida Indian Nation of New York et al. Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. NO. 03-855. Argued January 11, 2005 - Decided March 29, 2005. Online available at http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/29mar20051045/www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/04pdf/03-855.pdf.
Grant, Alexis (2006) Indian Sovereign: Taxation Without Reservation. Medill News Journalism Service. On the Docket 2004-2005 Term. Northwestern University. Online available at http://docket.medill.northwestern.edu/archives/001406.php.
Labor Law Talk (2007) City of Sherrill, New York v. Oneida Indian Nation. Legal Information Institute. Law ulletin. Cornell University. Online available at http://www.laborlawtalk.com/showthread.php?t=111900.
Sherrill, NY V. Oneida Indian Nation of…… [Read More]
S.C.O.T.U.S. The Supreme Court of the United States
There are currently nine Justices on the Supreme Court of the United States, one Chief Justice and Eight Associate Justices; although in the past the number has varied and recent attempts to change this number have been rejected. (ehnquist 2001) Since Supreme Court Justices serve for life, or until they retire, many of the current members of the Court have served for many years. The longest Associate Justice currently serving in the Court is Justice Anton Scalia, who was appointed by President eagan and has been on the Court since 1986, more than 24 years. Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy, also appointed by eagan, is the second longest serving Justice on the current court, and has served for a little over 23 years. Next is Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, who was appointed by President George H.W. Bush in 1991 and has served for…… [Read More]
Clause 2 of the United States Constitution outlines the process whereby the President of the United States is entrusted with the responsibility of selecting the Supreme Court Justices: "The President...shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States." Because unlike other public servants, Supreme Court Justices serve for life, their appointments need to be considered carefully. The general public cannot be trusted to make decisions this important with proper care and consideration. The most recent election of Donald Trump further proves this to be the case. Even though presidential appointments are problematic in their own way, they still remain the best solution to protect the system of checks and balances.
The recent fiasco with the opposition government stymying the President's Supreme Court nominees shows that…… [Read More]
Although that case involved jury selection, the Court established a standard for alleging racial discrimination in prosecution. The Court held that the defendant has to show that he is a member of a cognizable racial group, that the prosecutor has acted in a manner having a discriminatory effect, and that the procedure in place allows those who choose to discriminate the leeway to do so. Once a defendant has established a prima facie showing of discrimination, the State then has the burden of proving race-neutrality. (Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 96-98 (1986)). The clear reasoning of the Batson decision would suggest that since Bass could show that he is an African-American, that African-Americans are disproportionately subject to the death penalty, and that the decision whether to charge a defendant with the death penalty is left to the discretion of the prosecutor, that he has established a prima facie case…… [Read More]
Let such programs fund themselves through private charitable contributions. If they're justified they'll survive.
Laws and policies should be reformed so they protect all the rights and due process for both men and women equally.
In concluding, justice and fairness can only be attained and preserved where we rely on the judgment of people as jurors. hen we subtly suggest that they defer to expertise in human behavior for a judgment we're in for trouble.
A great deal of propaganda can be created these days to force people to think in a way they normally - and healthfully -- wouldn't. The abuse syndrome defense has gone beyond fairness. It's acceptance has triggered an enormous amount of unfairness in society -- aside from what the propanganda would have you know.
Bartholomew, K., Regan, K.V., Oram, D., & hite, M.A. (2008). Correlates of Partner Abuse in Male Same-sex Relationships. Violence…… [Read More]
U.S. v. Alvarez-Machain (1992) Supreme Court Decision
Supreme Court decision in U.S. v. Alvarez-Machain (1992) that "forcible abduction of a foreign national does not prohibit his trial in a U.S. Court" dealt a body blow to international law, the implications of which are still being felt. Small wonder, therefore, that the Court's majority (6-3) decision was considered unjust by international human rights organizations and even by three of Supreme Court's own judges, led by Justice Stevens, who dissented strongly. I agree with Judge Steven's dissenting opinion for the reasons explained in this essay.
As pointed out by Justice Stevens in his dissenting opinion, allowing kidnapping of people from the territory of a foreign country, just because there is no express provision disallowing such an act in a treaty, is strange logic. By an extension of this logic every act, whether legal or illegal, moral or immoral, not mentioned…… [Read More]
During the trail, the prosecution is liable to produce sufficient evidence against the culprit, and it has to be proven that misrepresentation was false, but that the thief knew of the falsity. The opinions and puffing are not included in false pretense. False Pretense also includes the shift of title. In the case of larceny by trick, the culprit deceives to deprive the owner of possession, not title. Therefore false pretense is taken much different from larceny by trick, and the implication is taken separately.
False Pretense is basically treated as an act of Theft. The act of false pretense is applied to the defendant, who obtained any chattel, money or valuable security from any other person with intent to defraud.
QUESTION # 3
The act of trespass is legal offence with an intention to spy, rob or cause damage. Trespass is going beyond the limit of what is considered…… [Read More]
Michigan vs. Tyler, the Supreme Court decided that "fire fighters, and/or police and arson investigators, may seize arson evidence at a fire without warrant or consent, on the basis of exigent circumstances and/or plain view"
This may only occur during the extinguishing operations or immediately after, otherwise a warrant or the owner's consent is necessary. This came as a response to an accusation of "conspiracy to burn real property," where the prosecutors had collected and used evidence of numerous days after the firefighting operations. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the defendant, as evidence was collected without warrant in the subsequent days.
I think the process used by a gas chromatograph (heating, etc.) is not appropriate for separating sand granules and the gas chromatograph cannot identify sand grains as a substance. In my opinion, something like filtration should have been used to separate sand from the rest of the…… [Read More]
heard in the U.S. Supreme Court -- ashington v. Harper -- will be the focus of the first part of this paper. The second part reviews prison conditions in Texas.
ashington v. Harper -- Part One
This was a case resulting from the unstable mental condition of alter Harper, who has been incarcerated in the ashington state prison system since a robbery conviction in 1976. Harper has been administered antipsychotic drugs for years because of his psychiatric condition; when he does not take his medication his condition worsens, and he becomes violent, according to Justia.com, the U.S. Supreme Court Center for public information. On occasion Harper has become violently out of control in prison and as a result has been transferred to the Special Offender Center (SOC).
hile at the SOC (a facility for inmates with "serious mental illness") Harper was required to take the drugs "against his will." He…… [Read More]
ATLANTA MOTEL v. UNITED STATES, 379 U.S. 241 (1964)
379 U.S. 241
In the Court of: U.S. Supreme Court
Argued on: October 5, 1964
Decided on: December 14, 1964.
Reasons for the Lawsuit:
The appellant is the owner of a large motel (Heart of Atlanta Motel Inc.) in Atlanta, Georgia who restricts his clientele to white people, 75% of whom are inter-state travelers. He has filed a suit to perpetuate his policy of refusing rooms to Negroes. The defendants or appellees are the United States et al.
Arguments of the Appellant
The appellant contends that in passing and enforcing the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the congress has exceeded its power to regulate commerce under Art. I, 8, cl. 3, of the U.S. constitution.
The Act violates the Fifth Amendment as the appellant is deprived of the right to choose its customers and operate its business as it wishes,…… [Read More]
death penalty and minors - recent Supreme Court finding
Death Penalty was extensively applied in the olden times across the world. The modern crusade for banning of capital punishment started in the 18th century with the writings of Montesquieu and also Voltaire. Some of the nations which took a lead in abolishing capital punishment are Venezuela in 1863, San Marino in 1865 and Costa ica in 1877. Presently, more than 50% of the countries of the world have abolished the death penalty either by way of legal enactment or practice. The U.S. Supreme Court quashed state death penalty laws. But again in 1976, the Court restored the death penalty following the espousal of new procedures. Since 1982 till 1999, 250 to 350 persons were sentenced to death every year, however, in the last three years; the number of death sentences has come down remarkably. Among the 50 states, 13 states…… [Read More]
Supreme Court Chief Justices Warren and ehnquist
Compare and contrast approaches to criminal procedures by U.S. Supreme Courts:
The Warren vs. The ehnquist 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 interpreters of the Constitution were 'winning the war' in regards to this issue, thanks to the presiding intelligence of Chief Justice Earl Warren. "Following his appointment in 1953 Chief Justice Earl Warren led the Court into a series of decisions that drastically affected sexual freedom, the rights of criminals, the practice of religion, civil rights, and the structure of political representation. The decisions of the Warren Court reflected its deep concern for the individual, no matter how lowly"…… [Read More]
omen on the Supreme Court: Do They Matter?
At present, there have only ever been four women to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court. If women and men are capable of coming to the same conclusions, the question emerges concerning whether it matters that there have been so few. To determine the facts, this paper discusses the gender composition of the Supreme Court and the extent to which, if any, that the meager female representation on the Court has mattered. Finally, a summary of the research and important findings concerning these issues are presented in the conclusion.
To date, four women, Sandra Day O'Connor (who is now retired from the Court), Sonia Sotomayor, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Elena Kagan have served as justices of the U.S. Supreme Court (oodruff 1). There are more women than men in the nation's population, though, at 50.8% versus 49.2%, respectively (U.S. population 1), so…… [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]
Supreme Court Justices as regards their lifetime appointment status.
Life tenure by Supreme Court judges has numerous significances as well as drawbacks. However, the advantages outweigh the disadvantages and, as such it should be taken into consideration. Furthermore, the federal judges should receive significant pay as result of the importance of their job.
This article includes the advantages and disadvantages of being a federal judge, as well as their tenure and salaries.
Unquestionably, life occupation of office by federal judges has an extremely vital purpose: It protects the judges against the pressure which comes from politics as a result of sporadic accountability to voters. In contrast to numerous state judges, the federal judges do not need to get worried about coming up with funds for vote hunting campaigns or coming up with unpopular rulings that are legally correct but displeasing to the electorates. An important job of the…… [Read More]
Same Sex Marriage
Clearly explain the SCOTUS's ruling on same-sex marriage. Make sure to discuss the constitutional issues on this ruling.
In Obergefell v. Hodges, the U.S. Supreme Court is focusing on if same sex couples have the right to marry. This is because a number of states had bans on issuing marriage licenses for these kinds of relationships. Instead, all applicants must be a male and female versus two of the same sex. In response, several U.S. District courts had conflicting rulings about the constitutionality and legality of these proceedings. In some cases, they relied on the case precedent established under Baker v. Nelson. This is a 1972 decision, where the Montana Supreme Court ruled that states have the right to create laws that determine the conditions for issues marriage licenses. The Supreme Court declined not to hear the decision and by default upheld the ruling. This resulted in…… [Read More]
During the 70's and 80's some of these opportunities were eliminated by the actions of the Burger and Rehnquist courts but habeas corpus actions remain a major problem for both systems and our a source of much acrimony. In 1996, Congress amended the federal habeas corpus statute in order to provide some clarification as to how habeas corpus was to be applied and interpreted nationwide.
XI. The Eleventh Amendment and State Sovereign Immunity
Litigation occurring under the 11th Amendment attempts to reconcile two competing ideas: 1) state sovereign immunity which assumes that a state is immune from suit unless it consents to be sued, and 2) the power of the federal government that assumes that the states are subsidiary sovereigns to the federal system. Interpretations of the 11th Amendment have varied throughout the history of decisions on said issue but, presently, are a bar to unconsented suits by private citizens…… [Read More]
BULINGTON INDUSTIES, INC. V. ELLETH
Supreme Court of the United States, 1998
524 U.S. 742
Vicarious liability of employer in a sexual harassment case
Sexual harassment, hostile work environment, vicarious liability, Title VII, affirmative defenses, job-related consequences
Kimberly Ellerth worked at Burlington Industries for 15 months under Ted Slowik, a vice president at Burlington. During that time, she alleged that Slowik created a hostile work environment by making unwanted sexual advances. On three occasions, comments were made that appeared to be a threat to deny Ellerth job-related benefits. However, the threats were not carried out and, on the contrary, Ellerth was promoted once. At no point during her employment did Ellerth notify anyone above Slowik of the alleged misconduct. Ellerth received a right-to-sue from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and commenced suit against Burlington for creation of a hostile work environment. The District Court granted summary judgment in favor…… [Read More]
Legal Decisions for Fire and Emergency Services
The American legal system is based upon case precedent and the way the courts are interpreting the law. The result is that there will be shifts in how these concepts are applied with each other. In the case of fire and emergency services, the issue is further complicated from the municipality's policies, procedures and relevant laws. To determine the overall scope of these activities requires focusing on various court cases and the impact of these decisions. Together, these elements will illustrate the effect they are having on fire and emergency services. (Painter, 2012) (Tworney, 2009)
The Impact of recent Legal Decisions on Fire and Emergency Services
There will be a total of 11 different court cases analyzed. The most notable include: Dedham v. Labor elations Committee, IAFF Local 2010 v. City of Homestead International, Association of Fire Fighters Local 2905 v. Town of…… [Read More]
Between 1777 and 1786, the Articles of Confederation determined what the federal government could and could not do (School of Law, n.d.). The Articles provided no authority for tax collection or regulation of commerce, a situation that left the states to fend for themselves amidst the often chaotic efforts to compete against one another. Without tax revenues, the federal government had no way to pay soldiers fighting in the evolutionary War and many states ignored requests for financial contributions to the war effort. To resolve this issue, state representatives convened in Philadelphia to hammer out the U.S. Constitution, establish an executive and legislative branch for the federal government, and confer coercive power in order to enforce tax codes and interstate commerce regulations.
A third branch of the government, a federal judiciary, was also created during the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia (Federal Judicial Center, n.d.). The Founding Fathers were…… [Read More]
Robertson illustrated his point about the dangers of the Supreme Court's power anecdotally, such as when, later in the book he talks about the McCain-Feingold Bill which was designed to restrict campaign finance and reform the ways political campaigns were funded both privately and via government assistance. Although the Republicans in neither the Legislative or Executive branch supported the bill, they agreed to pass it in order to end the debate, believing that the bill would be ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in that it violated first amendment laws, among other things (Robertson 2004,-page 234). hen the voted for or signed the bill as the case may have been, they believed that the court would ultimately overrule the other branches by finding the proposed legislation unconstitutional based on the text of the law itself. The Supreme Court, however, did not agree with this perspective and ruled the law legal.…… [Read More]
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…… [Read More]
S. No. 04-1739 (2006)
wo examples of where rights are limited in the ownership of land or property:
Servitudes and easements are put into place...
Servitudes and easements can be protected by...
It is vital to protect Servitudes and easements because...
III. Intellectual Properties
Eric Eldred, Et Al., Petitioners V. John D. Ashcroft, Attorney General
U.S. 01 -- 618 (2003)
he differences between copyrights, trademarks, and patents include:
he title to real property is permanent, whereas some intellectual property is limited in the time that it is protected due to...
IV. Business and the Bill of Rights
Humana Inc., Et Al., Petitioners V. Mary Forsyth Et Al.
U.S. 97 -- 303 (1999)
he major difference between business speech and political speech is that...
Whether or not "Closely regulated industries…… [Read More]
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…… [Read More]
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…… [Read More]
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…… [Read More]
One of the pending cases involved a dispute between France and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Like the dispute with Belgium, this involved France's attempt to hold one of the Congo's ministers responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity. France sought to compel the President of the Democratic Republic of the Congo to appear as a witness, which the Congo claimed was a violation of its sovereignty.
nternational Court of Justice. (2008). Certain Criminal Proceedings in France (Republic of the Congo v. France). Retrieved April 10, 2008, from nternational Court of Justice
Web site: http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?p1=3&p2=1&code=cof&case=129&k=d2
nternational Court of Justice. (2008). Judge Kenneth Keith. Retrieved April 10, 2008, from nternational Court of Justice.
Web site: http://www.icj-cij.org/court/index.php?p1=1&p2=2&p3=1&judge=157
nternational Court of Justice. (2008). Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. Retrieved April 10, 2008, from nternational Court of Justice.
Web site: http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?p1=3&p2=4&k=5a&case=131&code=mwp&p3=6
nternational Court…… [Read More]