Use our essay title generator to get ideas and recommendations instantly
While the decision has hung over states as one national standard, it infringes the essential principles of federalism and separation of powers that are rooted in the country's constitutional system (Silversten, 2011).
During the time that the Supreme Court made this ruling, the state of Georgia basically had the same position on punishment for the crime of rape with many states. Actually, very few states permitted the executions or enforcement of capital punishment for convicted rapists. Similar to many of the states, Georgia did not permit the execution of individuals convicted of rape mainly because of the constitutional requirement of proportionality. However, the Supreme Court made its ruling and conclusion through considering the objective indicia of the country's attitude toward capital punishment in rape cases. Nonetheless, this cannot be justified under the Constitution because the Supreme Court could have simply left the decision in place and restricted itself to analyzing…… [Read More]
Supreme Court Case
Supreme Court Decision in e Waterman, 910 2D (N.H. 2006)
The case addressed in this section of the report is that of Supreme Court case In e Waterman, 910 A.2d 1175 (N.H. 2006). In this case, Tracy Waterman, working as a trooper for the New Hampshire State Policy was informed on August 29, 3003 that Vicky Lemere, the wife of one of Waterman's fellow troopers, informed Lieutenant Nedeau, one of Waterman's supervisors, that Waterman made threatening remarks about her supervising officers. Lamere alleged that Waterman stated she would 'like to put a bullet in Lieutenant Nedeau's head' and would 'like to deck Sergeant McCormack' if they yelled at her." (Webster, 2007, p.1)
Facts of the Case
Webster's report on this case states that an internal investigation was initiated by the State Police (Division) in which a number of witnesses were interviewed "including Lamere and Waterman."…… [Read More]
Supreme Court cases (Muller V. Oregon) women's right
hy it was an issue of national importance
The Muller v. Oregon case was among the most crucial Supreme Court cases in the U.S. during the progressive regime. The case held an Oregon law that limited the working days for female wage employees to a maximum of ten hours. In 1908, this case created a precedent to expand access of national activities into the frameworks of the protective labor legislation (Hartman, Roy, and Cindy 74). In the Brandeis Court Brief, the defense circumvented previous decisions by the Supreme Court, which had emphasized the freedom of workers to contracts free from state regulations. The defense stressed formal legal logic through medical information and social science to argue that overworking female workers were detrimental to their health. The argument proceeded that the state was interested in counteracting this. The court won because the society…… [Read More]
Supreme Court of Mississippi. CASH DISTRIUTING COMPANY, INC. v. James NEELY.
In 1973, James Neely started working for Cash Distributing Co., a company that distributed Anheuser-usch products in several parts of the United States. The company had offices in Columbus, Starkville and Tupelo. During the 1990s, James Neely was heading the Columbus office. y this time, Anheuser-usch started to look more closely at the way some of its rules were enforced, something that was not traditionally the practice in the past, when the company was more informal about these procedures. The company's new CEO, Danny Cash, also aimed to properly enforce these new rules and regulations.
However, James Neely refused to abide by all these new regulations, particularly since, throughout his career with the company, these had never been required. As a consequence, in March 2000, Neely was dismissed and replaced as the head of the Columbus office by…… [Read More]
Supreme Court Case
The Supreme Court decision in Plessy v. Ferguson was an extremely important one, and one which set a significant precedent in the United States that would not be overturned until the Brown v. Board of Education decision in the middle of the 20th century. The former case set the precedent for what was known as the separate but equal doctrine. The principle question considered in this case was whether or not segregation -- a distinction between facilities, services and treatment of people -- could be lawfully determined based on race. Prior to the Supreme Court's ruling on this case, the state of Louisiana passed a law known as the Separate Car Act which mandated that African-American and Caucasian passengers in the railroad system had to sit in different cars based on their race. There was no federal consensus on this law, which had merely operated at the…… [Read More]
Supreme Court Summary
Case: Snyder v. Phelps
Docket Number: 09-751
Petitioner: Albert Snyder
Respondent: Fred W. Phelps, Sr.
Facts of the Case:
The family members of Marine Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder filed a lawsuit against the members of the Westboro Baptist Church of Louisiana. The members of the church had picketed at Snyder's funeral. The family alleged that the church members were guilty of defamation, invasion of privacy, and intentionally inflicting emotional distress to the Snyders. The U.S. District Court Judge Richard Bennett awarded the family $5 million. The U.S. Court of Appeals said that the ruling violated the 1st Amendment right to religious expression.
Constitutional Issues in the Case:
The case was a discussion of the First Amendment rights to free speech and freedom of religious expression, even in cases where the speech is perhaps distasteful.
The Decision of the Case:
The Supreme Court voted 8 to 1 in…… [Read More]
Supreme Court Justices
Chief Justice John G. Roberts
John Glover Roberts Jr. was born on January 27, 1955, in Buffalo, New York. Roberts grew up with three sisters, Kathy, Peggy, and Barbara and his mother Rosemary. His father, John Sr., a plant manager at Bethlehem Steel, moved the family to Long Beach, Indiana, when Roberts was in fourth grade. After grade school Roberts attended La Lumiere School, a Roman Catholic boarding school in La Porte, Indiana, where he was, by all accounts, an excellent student and athlete ("John G. Roberts, Jr., Chief Justice of the United States").
Upon completion of high school Roberts attended Harvard College, receiving his A.B. In 1976 and a J.D. from Harvard Law School in 1979. Roberts began his career as a law clerk for Judge Henry J. Friendly of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Court from 1979-1980 and as…… [Read More]
Three decades following the original Court decision, many Americans continued to believe that the oe v. Wade decision was morally wrong and strongly believed that it should, and could, be overturned. Other Americans, however, continued to just as strongly support the oe v. Wade original decision. They had a deep moral belief that a woman should not be coerced by the country's law to bear a child if, for what she believes the reason, to do so. Having a child is a private or family decision as the U.S. Supreme Court's noted in its decision in1973
Thus, in 1992, both sides of the issue were concerned when the ruling once again went to the Supreme Court in Planned Parenthood V Casey, this time with a new justice makeup. Sandra Day O'Connor and David Souter were retired. The Court circulated an opinion upholding what was called the core of oe but…… [Read More]
In another case, New Jersey v TLO (1985), it was decided that teachers and administrators actually have somewhat expansive rights when it comes to determining if a student is in violation of school policy or the law. Specifically, when a student was accuse y a teacher of having been smoking in the bathroom and the student denied it, her belongings were searched by the principal. This search revealed cigarettes and marijuana, but the search itself was challenged, and this challenge made it all the way to the Supreme Court. There, the justices decided that students had a reduced expectations of privacy at public schools, and that therefore the search had not violated the student's Fourth Amendment freedom from unreasonable searches. This has led to many search initiatives primarily geared towards eradicating drug, alcohol, and tobacco use in schools but has also been applied in searches for weapons and other potentially…… [Read More]
7. Sester v. United States - Docket No., 10-7387 -- The question is whether a district court has authority to order a federal sentence to run consecutive to an anticipated, but not-yet-imposed, state sentence ?
8. Williams v. Illinois - Docket No., 10-8505 -- The question is whether a state rule of evidence allowing an expert witness to testify about the results of DNA testing performed by non-testifying analysts, where the defendant has no opportunity to confront the actual analysts, violates the Confrontation Clause?
9. Missouri v. Frye - Docket No. 10-444 -- The question is can a defendant who validly pleads guilty successfully assert a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel by alleging instead that, but for counsel's error in failing to communicate a plea offer, he would have pleaded guilty with more favorable terms?
10. Howes, Warden v. Fields - Docket No., 10-680 -- The question is whether…… [Read More]
Tat's wy I am instructing my Administration to get to work immediately wit Congress on tis issue. We are going to talk wit bipartisan Congressional leaders to develop a forceful response to tis decision. Te public interest requires noting less.
Eigt justices did concur tat Congress as te responsibility to require corporations to disclose teir spending and to run disclaimers wit teir advertisements, for "disclosure permits citizens and sareolders to react to te speec of corporate entities in a proper way," Justice Kennedy wrote. Te majority referenced a myriad of past decisions tat recognize te First Amendment rigts of corporations. Justice Stevens conceded tat "we ave long since eld tat corporations are covered by te First Amendment."
In Justice Kennedy's view, "…Wen te government seeks to use its full power, including te criminal law, to command were a person may get is or er information or wat distrusted source e…… [Read More]
Johnson Controls, Inc. (886 F.2d 871 (7th Cir. 1989).
The Supreme Court heard this case because they were concerned with an employer's gender-based fetal-protection policy. The question was whether an employer could exclude a fertile female employee from certain jobs because of its concern for the health of the fetus the woman might conceive. In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court struck down the employer's fetal protection policy as violation of Title VII of the 1964 Civil ights Act. The Court held that this policy, which barred fertile women from jobs involving lead exposure or which could expose them to lead through the exercise of job bidding, bumping, transfer or promotion rights, constituted facial discrimination on the basis of sex. Moreover, the Court rejected the employer's argument that the policy was permitted under the bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ) exception to Title VII (International Union, UAW v. Johnson Controls, Inc.…… [Read More]
D. joined the Majority. Justices Blackmun, H.A. And Powell, L.F. wrote a special and regular concurrence respectively. In addition to voting with the majority, O'Connor S.D. joined Powel's concurrence.
Writing Dissenting Opinion(s): Stevens, J.P. filed a dissenting opinion in which Marshall, T. And Brennan, W.J joined. Brennan also filed a separate dissenting opinion in which Marshall T. joined.
Citation: Santa Fe Independent School District v. Jane Doe (2000)
Argued: March 29, 2000
Date Decided: June 19, 2000
Vote: 6-3: The policy adopted by the Santa Fe Independent School District with regard to allowing prayers that were led and initiated by students during sporting events went against the First Amendment's Establishment Clause.
Facts of Case: Students in Santa Fe Independent School District were allowed to offer prayers (mostly Christian) using PA systems before football games commenced. Two parents -- one a Catholic and the other a Mormon - filed…… [Read More]
Supreme Court vs. The First Amendment:
Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919)
While at war with Germany during World War I, the United States Congress passed the Espionage Act, outlawing any attempt to foster insubordination or obstruct the draft. The Espionage Act, which was passed in 1914, made it illegal to defame the government or do anything that might impede the war effort.
Charles Schenck, a general secretary of the Socialist Party who opposed the war, printed and distributed 15,000 copies of a pamphlet urging citizens to oppose the draft which he likened to slavery. Many of Schenck's pamphlets were mailed to draftees and he was later arrested for conspiring to print and circulate material that would obstruct and hinder the enlistment service of the United States. Schenck argued that the Espionage Act violated his rights to freedom of speech and press.
The case Schenck v. United States…… [Read More]
O'Brien and Burgess were armed during an attempted robbery. Count three of their condemnation charged them with using a weapon so as to commit a robbery with violence offence, which carries at least compulsory five-year jail term. The count four states using a machinegun to commit crime carries a thirty year compulsory minimum term. The government thenceforth challenged and disapproved the fourth count on the arguing that it could not set up the count beyond a realistic doubt. However it lamented that machinegun provision was a sentencing augmentation to be decided by the District Court upon a sentencing on count three. Subsequently, the court disapproaved count four. Further, it discarded the government's sentencing-augmentation position. O'Brien conceded that he had committed the crime and was sentenced to a one hundred and two-month jail term. Burgess too conceded and was sentenced to an eighty four-month jail term. Basically, the 1998 adjustment split…… [Read More]
For example, he voted to require that schools utilize resources to support religions activities if they designate resources to non-religious activities (Board of Education. v. Mergens, 1990). Further, Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (2002) called for vouchers to be given to families of low socioeconomic standing for both religious and secular educational institutions. This being said, ehnquist was not able to completely disrupt the social change that Warren had started in this area but he was able to utilize his conservative nature to take a few steps backward.
Where Warren set to emphasize the equal protection rights of the individual in the criminal justice system, ehnquist focused on the importance of the conviction of the guilty and absolution of the innocent (Davis, 1992). Police practices were believed to be necessary and appropriate if they were able to secure the conviction of a guilty party. In fact ehnquist attempted to overturn the ruling…… [Read More]
Brown v. Board of Education
In the opinion of this paper, there is no doubt at all that the U.S. Supreme Court decision in May, 1954 -- Brown v. Board of Education -- changed the nation in a very positive way. And it changed the nation not just in the sense of setting the wheels in motion to end school segregation, but by bringing justice to one segment of the American population that was ultimately a positive for the whole nation. Brown v. Board of Education was a confirmation that the U.S. Constitution was still the guiding democratic principle -- that it had not been permanently abandoned in the south by the cruel racist policies during the Jim Crow era. This paper reviews and critiques the Brown v. Board of Education (referred to in this paper as just "Brown") decision, the reactions to Brown, the resistance to Brown, and ultimately…… [Read More]
Immigration Political Issue
The United States have long battle immigration issues over the years with immigrants who take whatever measures necessary to make it to the United States. They take boats, hike across the border at night, are smuggled across the border in vehicles and are stow away on vessels and trains. This paper will present a discussion on the current laws regarding immigration with a particular focus on the role of the federal government, in light of Arizona appealing the Ninth Circuit's ruling on SB1070 to the Supreme Court. In addition, it will review the historical framework on this issue, the political context, the role of the media, the effect on the economy and labor force and management strategies to promote inclusion in the workplace.
Immigrants in America, always has been a hot debate. Many Americans believe they should not be allowed to live in the United States illegally.…… [Read More]
Cummings v. Board of Education (1899), Berea College v. Kentucky (1908), and Gong Lum v. Rice (1927) were three Supreme Court cases that followed Plessy v. Ferguson and that led to the segregation of schools and the establishment of the separate but equal doctrine that Plessy v. Ferguson set in motion. In Cummings v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court ruled that a Georgia county school board was perfectly within its rights to close a school for blacks but maintain the school for whites when the county had to make a decision about how to save on finances. In Berea College v. Kentucky (1908), the Supreme Court ruled that Kentucky was perfectly within its rights to require segregation within the private college Berea. In Gong Lum v. Rice (1927), the Supreme Court ruled that Mississippi could discriminate based on race and enforce segregation against Asians in its schools. All…… [Read More]
Marbury v. Madison
In 1801, outgoing president John Adams appointed William Marbury to the judiciary. The following day, the appointment was confirmed by the Senate. When Jefferson took command of the White House the day after that, he refused to send Marbury his commission, thus preventing that latter from assuming his appointment to the judiciary. Marbury sued Jefferson’s Secretary of State James Madison, thus establishing the case Marbury v. Madison, upon which the Supreme Court gave its decision in 1803. This paper will recount the background, major events sand effects that Marbury v. Madison (1803) had on American history.
Thomas Jefferson viewed Adams’ last minute appointments of 42 justices of the peace as an “outrage on decency” (Library of Congress, 2018). Considering that they were political enemies, Jefferson’s outrage was understandable: Adams had filled the new offices with justices he knew would be loyal to him and the Federalist Party.…… [Read More]
In the article “Taking DNA from All Criminals Should Be Standard Procedure” written by Cyrus R. Vance Jr, 2012, the author makes a claim that DNA evidence is a powerful crime solver. He also states that this method is a superb technique which can avert rapes, robberies and murders in the hundreds annually at a very low cost to citizens. DNA evidence does not just help catch criminals; it also helps absolve the guiltless ones. A major aim I have had in my position of district attorney is to ensure no one gets convicted wrongly. A tool like this all-crimes DNA archive will strongly aid us in achieving our most important goal which is avoiding erroneous convictions (Vance, 2012).
DNA collection is properly regulated and organized at the eight world-class and government-backed state laboratories where criminal forensic analysis is carried out. Strict rules guide the process of DNA…… [Read More]
In the case of Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow, Michael Newdow filed a suit on behalf of his daughter who was a student at the Elk Grove Unified School District in the state of California. Newdow objected to the requirement that his daughter be obliged to stand for the “Pledge of Allegiance” because it contained the words “under God,” which he believed was a violation of his daughter’s first amendment rights. While the case was adjourned by the Supreme Court without the actual substance of the case being addressed (Newdow was found to be a non-custodial parent and therefore legally unable to file a suit on behalf of his daughter), the case did set a precedent for others who would go on to successfully sue the school district (Kravetz, 2005). This paper will summarize the salient points of the Supreme Court case Elk Grove Unified School Distrct…… [Read More]
Discrimination Scenario Analysis
IDENTIFY AND DISCUSS pieces of evidence (facts) that supports the claimants’ allegations:
To support their allegations, the 32 former employees of ABC Delivery Company will have to prove that they were indeed treated in a discriminatory manner in comparison to their counterparts, on the basis of race. They would have to present a prima facie case. In this particular case, we do not have direct evidence of discrimination. With this in mind, the employees would have to rely on circumstantial evidence to the effect that the ten-year seniority mark was deliberately used as a cut-off for the VSP package with an intention of locking out black employees who had been hired ‘en masse’ only 9 years earlier after the company settled a claim whereby it had been accused of discrimination.
Next, they would be required to prove pretext after the response from the company indicating…… [Read More]
Components of this act that have been targeted towards advanced nursing practitioners include a lifting of the limits for how much money can be spent on doctoral programs for nurses (No author, 2011). Most advanced practice nurses have a master's degree; the removal of the cap for funding for doctoral programs will almost certainly allow these professionals to complete more doctoral degrees, increase their breadth of knowledge, and provide better service for patients and assistance to health care professionals.
The Affordable Care Act will indirectly affect physicians by providing them an influx of trained nursing professionals, many of whom will have increased responsibilities due to the aforementioned changes regarding loans and the pursuit of advanced degree. The uniformity of the health care coverage provided by this act will lower the burden of uncompensated care on the part of doctors (No author, 2012), who can rest assured that there will be…… [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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
hese could be considered mitigating psychological factors. It also supports the argument that extra efforts at remediation that might not be appropriate with hardened criminals might be appropriate for younger offenders.
While youthful offenders will no longer be sentenced to death, the courts have not had their hands completely tied. hey can still be tried as adults, and even a very young offender can be sentenced to life without possibility of parole (Fresno Bee, 2005). Meanwhile, it might help to keep juvenile crime in perspective. While the media sometimes make it sound as if juvenile crime is a major problem, 92% of all homicide arrests come from four major cities: Chicago, Detroit, Los Angeles, and New York. Juvenile homicide is not common in most parts of the country (Howard, 1998). In addition, overall, juvenile crime of all kinds has decreased between 1972 and 1995, during a period of time when…… [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]
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]
(United States Supreme Court, 2008). It is impossible to completely determine why a president choices a Supreme Court nominee. However, it seems likely that Ginsburg's feminist history had something to do with his choice. She was one of the first females to attend Harvard Law School, where she struggled for acceptance as a woman. She was instrumental in forwarding women's rights, not only when with the ACLU, but also in other aspects of her professional life. "hile leaning towards the liberal side of the Court's political spectrum, Ginsburg has not hesitated to vote with her conservative colleagues...There is little doubt that Ginsburg's position on women's rights, and civil liberties in general, will play an important role in many controversial issues to come." (Oyez, 2008).
Mount, S. (2006). Constitutional topic: checks and balances. Retrieved March 2, 2008, from the U.S. Constitution Online
eb site: http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_cnb.html
Oyez. (2008). Ruth Bader…… [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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
Appointment of Judges to Canada's Supreme Court
The current democratic governance system in Canada permits the federal Cabinet and the Prime Minister to appoint judges to the country's Supreme Court.[footnoteRef:2] As the appointments are formalized through the Governor General, the Supreme Court is the final and highest court in the Canadian justice system. ased on the current system, Canada's general parliament, provincial legislatures, and citizens do not participate in the process of appointment of judges to the Supreme Court. Actually, the Governor General makes final appointment of these judges on behalf of the cabinet and advice of the Prime Minister. This process of appointment of judges to Canada's highest court is based on the Supreme Court Act, which was enacted by the federal government in line with its constitutional authority. [2: Wendy Tso, "Judicial Appointments and Independence," Centre for Constitutional Studies -- University of Alberta, accessed February 24, 2016, http://ualawccsprod.srv.ualberta.ca/centres/ccs/issues/judicialappointmentsandindependence.php]…… [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 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]