Supreme Court Essays


Abortion Pros and Cons Essay

Abstract Abortion refers to the termination of the pregnancy and most members of society tend to feel strongly and often myopically about their opinions of abortion. This paper will examine the complex and multi-faceted history that the United States has had with abortion as well as the pros and cons of this procedure. This essay will take a long look at the reasons that motivate those who support abortion and those who do not. It is hoped that this deep analysis will not only strengthen one’s ability to think critically, but allow compassion and common understanding to thrive in society. Continue Reading...

Miranda vs. Arizona Case Brief Essay

Case Facts: Ernesto Miranda was arrested and locked up in a Phoenix police station on March 13, 1963 where he was identified by a complaining witness (Samaha, 2012).  Law enforcement officers took him to an Investigation Room where he was questioned before the two officers came out with a written confession that he signed.  During the questioning, Miranda was not notified that he had a right to an attorney and was notified of the need for voluntary confession after making his oral confession.  The written confession was then admitted into evidence at his trial before a jury despite objections from Continue Reading...

Congress Vs the Public Library

Library Association, 539 U.S. 194 (2003) saw the U.S. supreme court rule that libraries as well as public schools are subject to the authority of U.S. Congress concerning installation of web filtering software as a result of receiving E-Rate discounts. These discounts are part of federal funding. Any public school or library receiving such funds must install this type of software. The ruling demonstrated installation of such filtering software is not unconstitutional as it does not violate the First Amendment. This ruling provided the groundwork for the Children's Internet Protection Act to take full effect. In 2000, Congress passed… Continue Reading...

Court Process, Judicial Process, and Constitutional Issues

priorities of law enforcement instead of generating fundamental changes in law. Week 5: Discussion In the American judicial system, the supreme court reviews very few cases most of whom are appeals from lower courts. It should not be mandatory for the supreme court to review more cases despite having appellate jurisdiction. The best legal standard to determine whether the supreme court should review a case includes the national significance of the case, its precedential value, and the need to create harmony between conflicting decisions. Week 6: Discussion 1 The U.S. supreme court is an important element of the nation's criminal justice… Continue Reading...

Criminal Process from Arraignment to Pre Trial

raise it. Plea bargains are also done at this stage (Tanner et al., 2007; American Bar Association, 2007). U.S. supreme court's Philosophy on the Criminal Process The philosophy of the U.S. supreme court on the rights of the defendant dates back to the time of Earl Warren as the Chief Justice. At the time, the supreme court of the United States was referred to as the Warren Court, which is a common practice in various judicial systems to refer to the country's judicial system with the name of the chief justice. At the time, from 1953 to 1969 -- the… Continue Reading...

Impact Of Brown Vs Board Of Education

that shift will involve work from all corners of the country. Analysis Brown vs. Board of Education is the supreme court of the United States decision that truly called "separate but equal" what it truly is and that is government-sanctioned racism. Indeed, separate schools for blacks and whites were encouraged and active even after the abolition of slavery and throughout the Jim Crow days. This continued on and until the supreme court had their say in the Brown decision. However, there was not an immediate "night and day" difference when that decision came down. First, the order came from the Brown… Continue Reading...

Exclusionary Rule in Terry Vs Ohio

supreme court Bill of Rights Case Terry v. Ohio introduce the Terry frisk into police procedure, allowing officers to have the right to stop and frisk or do a surface search of individuals on the street even without probable cause. All the officer would need would be to have a reasonable suspicion that the person being searched had committed, was about to commit or was in the act of committing a crime. The supreme court stated that the officer's suspicion had… Continue Reading...

Gender Equality

different definitions of sex and gender and so forth. The recent supreme court of the United States decision that ensconced gay marriage as being an equal right that people in the LGBT community should enjoy as a civil right was a milestone moment. While this is an encouraging event and people in the workplace should not allow sexual behavior or gender/sexual identity to become an issue, there is still a lot of ignorance and prejudice out there towards women and other people that remain persecuted for gender or sexual issues. Analysis There is no doubt that what makes people… Continue Reading...

Liberal and Conservative Beliefs Of Justices

(American Bar Association, 2015). ASHFORD 4: - WEEK 3 - DISCUSSION 1 supreme court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was born in 1933 in Brooklyn to Jewish parents. She attended Cornell, Columbia Law and was a professor at Rutgers and Columbia. She worked in the Women's Rights Movement with the ACLU and was that organization's General Counsel for much of the 1970s as well as on the organization's Board of Directors. She was appointed judge of U.S. Court of Appeals in DC in 1980. Clinton nominated her to the supreme court which she joined in 1993 at 60 years of age. She… Continue Reading...

Obesity and Fatness in America Body Image

full employment in the United States. In 2002, the supreme court in New Jersey reached a different conclusion by pointing out that obese people of 5-foot-9 with 400 pounds were disabled in the New Jersey Discrimination law because this category of people may suffer a metabolic disorder. Despite the assertion of this rule, the Federal code has not yet categorized the obese people as people with disability. So with laws not going in to effect these people are still discriminated against. Jones in her research article titled "The Framing of Fat: Narratives of Health and Disability in Fat Discrimination… Continue Reading...

Katz Vs United States

would effectively achieve this. Through clever wording, it has been found plausible by the U.S. supreme court to contend that language expressly aiming at search and confiscation of articles that may be both searched and confiscated is, perhaps, for the protection of citizens' privacy, applicable to eavesdropped proof from conversations between people. Holdings/Rationale Justice Potter Stewart, when penning the view of the majority, rejected the claim presented by both parties in the case regarding whether or not phone booths constitute "constitutionally safeguarded" areas. He drew a forceful distinction when claiming Amendment IV only protects people and not places. If… Continue Reading...

Court Case Review in Re Winship

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 particularly influenced by this decision. The decision particularly applies to acts that would be considered crimes if the defendant were an adult. Although juveniles are the principle recipients of the outcome, In Re Winship generally strengthens the concept of… Continue Reading...

Police Vehicle Pursuits

liability exposure, liability standards, or general applicability to police pursuits. Court Case In the Jones v. Philadelphia case, the supreme court of Pennsylvania State rescinded settled standard, ruling that the police may be held just as liable as the bolting driver. A police pursuit ended in a police car crashing into the complainant's automobile, injuring him and claiming his wife's life. Deriving from the Dickens v. Horner case, the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court (trial court) ruled that the case's defendants weren't liable for the escaping driver's acts. Upon appeal, the complainant claimed their pursuers were careless in their pursuit, the police siren… Continue Reading...

Obtaining Informed Consent in Ontario

protecting QA-type records at common law" levels and this is evident in the supreme court case Slavutych v. Baker (1976) in which it was decided that the confidentiality is essential in all communications. However, as the Ontario Superior Court decided in Steep v. Scott (2002), "the goal of improving the quality of health care and health services ahead of any litigation advantage that may accrue to a party by the use of QA-type records" is given precedent (Cranston, Rozmus, 2015, p. 2). Thus, while laws and court rulings do exist, the basic concept of balancing health assurance with privacy… Continue Reading...

Illinois V Rodriguez Case

Fourth Amendment and later affirmed by the Appellate Court. The Illinois supreme court denied a petition for leave to appeal by the state and granted a writ of certiorari (Samaha, 2012). Issue: The issue was whether the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution prohibits warrantless search since police officers did not actually obtain valid consent from an individual who legally had common authority over the residence. Arguments or Objectives of the Parties: Rodriguez argued that the warrantless search violated the Fourth Amendment since Fischer had no authority to consent to the entry because she had left the apartment and… Continue Reading...

Book Review Of Bethany Moreton’s “to Serve God and Walmart

calling. Of late, the company has witnessed much negative media scrutiny with the U.S. supreme court's decision of female workers' right to pursue a class action gender discrimination suit against the retail chain. Despite Walmart's status on the global scene, one must not forget the fact that it is essentially a product of rural Ozark. It is worth noting that the retailer is considered synonymous with Americanism's religious fundamentalist and traditionalist version, which advocates free enterprise whilst simultaneously rejecting labor laws and unions. Although the retail chain might have, arguably, been the birthplace of the concept of 'big box'… Continue Reading...

Todays Strategic Human Resource Management

in the definition of discrimination. These definitions have been arrived at on the basis of supreme court rulings, and on subsequent laws that were passed to address gaps that have been identified in the text of the original laws. For example, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act was signed into law by President Obama as a means of addressing gaps in the laws against gender-based pay discrimination. Discrimination based on religion is also prohibited in the work environment according to Title VII of the Civil Right Act of 1964. It is prohibited for a company to discriminate against an… Continue Reading...

Self Incrimination and Right to Counsel Approach

it was tied to a complicated and controversial history. The supreme court has applied three tenets in the constitution to evolve rules that govern police interrogation and the confession process. These three include the Sixth Amendment on the Right to Counsel, the Fourteenth Amendment clause on due process and the Fifth Amendment on Self-incrimination clauses. Each of these provisions has led the police to handle interrogation and confessions in varying ways (Samaha, 2012). Although it is argued that the self-incrimination concept is rooted in Talmudic law and the thinking of the early Christians, the current state was inspired by… Continue Reading...

Terry Vs Ohio

official (i.e., Mcfadden) lacked both a probable cause for detention and a search warrant. However, their motion was denied. Holdings The supreme court held that, in spite of a lack of probable cause for apprehension, the complainant's frisking, which gleaned a concealed gun, satisfied Amendment IV conditions. Drawing from experience, Mcfadden had a logical and legitimate suspicion regarding Terry and team's nefarious plans, and believed the complainant threatened society; this justifies the official's decision of stopping and patting down the men and consequently makes the evidence generated "admissible" at trial (Samaha, 2012). The court essentially maintained that, in the event law… Continue Reading...

Should the Government Ban Assault Rifles

the violence. It's important to note that research findings are more than theoretical. supreme court Justice, Stephen Brever, and America Court of Appeals Judge, Richard Posner, are leading jurists in the country, who recently made a review of relevant academic work and combined it into their own opinion on rifle restriction connected cases. As stated in New York Times, the jurists concluded that the grassroots' findings is not conclusive to back certain types of gun restrictions, particularly resulting to ban on carrying guns in public (Weigel, 2013). The differing arguments which have substantial social and legal point of mind… Continue Reading...

How Supreme Court Justices Are Appointed

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.… Continue Reading...

Navajo Leadership in Antiquity

history. sixth-ninth grade Navajo bilingual-bicultural social studies curriculum. http://files.eric.ed.gov/ Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED235973.pdf Navajo Nation supreme court. (2010). Navajo roles and responsibility as a leader. http://nahmus.org/ Retrieved from http://nahmus.org/navajonationsurpremecourt.pdf Continue Reading...

Hobby Lobby and First Amendment

a picketing in a funeral and was found guilty of saying outrageous comments in a funeral. However, the supreme court of United States in an 8-1 decision argued that the church was constitutionally protected to say whatever they wanted as far as they did not affect the ceremony. It was established that they had avoided the ceremony and had not been involved directly in stopping the ceremony (Zipursky, 473). The supreme court of the United States favored Hobby Lobby in its ruling asserting that under the First Amendment, religious beliefs were protected and it was the right of the… Continue Reading...

Marbury V Madison Case

could this sort of writ be issued by the US supreme court? With respect to the very first issue raised, the Chief Justice held that the petitioner had been appointed appropriately according to legally-set down procedures, thus being entitled to this writ. Furthermore, owing to the petitioner's legal entitlement to the commission, he should be offered a remedy by the law. Marshall further stated that the courts were especially duty-bound to safeguard citizens' rights -- even if it was against the nation's president himself. At that time, his ill-disguised reprimanding of President Thomas Jefferson regarding the rule of law… Continue Reading...

United States Vs Jones

Case Briefs.2013. Web. 25 Feb 2017. http://www.casebriefsummary.com/united-states-v-jones/ "United States v. Jones: 565 U.S. ___ (2012): Justia U.S. supreme court Center." Justia U.S. supreme court Center.Web. 25 Feb 2017. http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/565/10-1259/ Continue Reading...

California Vs Greenwood

More detectives went on to look for evidence in this fashion. The California versus Greenwood case made by the supreme court was frequently used as a guide on searches of trash that did not require a warrant. The supreme court in North Carolina in State versus Hauser also held in 1976 that searching the garbage of a defendant did not violate the fourth Amendment although the garbage was collected from the defendant's backyard (Uviller). Since the trash was collected during normal time for garbage collection, his expectation of privacy could not be reasonably sustained. The court pointed out that… Continue Reading...

Katz V United States

evidence perfectly admissible, and granted certiorari. Court Decision The majority judgment was filed by Potter Stewart, supreme court Associate Justice. Katz vehemently argued that payphones were constitutionally protected spots. But Amendment IV only safeguards individuals from unwarranted intrusion, and not places (Katz v. United States). Citizens can reasonably expect the protection of personal privacy even in public settings. While Katz wasn’t overtly attempting to stay out of sight of the public when going to make his betting-related phone calls, he expected no unwelcome ear to eavesdrop. Just because he had no issues with being seen making his calls didn’t mean he… Continue Reading...

Juvenile Offenders in St Louis

without parole was his only option. But in June 2012, the U.S. supreme court ruled in Miller v. Alabama that an automatic life sentence for a juvenile was unconstitutional." (Mann) Nathan underwent a resentencing after Miller v. Alabama along with another juvenile offender certified as an adult, Javon Adair. While Adair received a reduced sentence, Nathan's case involved careful consideration of whether his sentence was fair and suitable for the nature of his crime. The jury considered Nathan's state of mind when he committed the crime and his background. Three hours into deliberation, they could not reach a unanimous… Continue Reading...

Mapp Vs Ohio Case

detention by Cleveland’s Police Department, is counted among the most popular twentieth-century supreme court-handled cases. Amendment IV forbids unauthorized searches and seizures in American citizens’ homes, in addition to delineating citizens’ privacy rights. The chief issue in this case dealt with whether or not proof gathered in the course of a search operation that breached the constitutional Amendment IV could be admitted in state courts. Attorney Kearns lodged an appeal notice and forwarded the case to Ohio’s supreme court, to reconsider the ruling made by the Court of Appeals (Mapp v. Ohio - supreme court of Ohio (Case No.… Continue Reading...

Supreme Court Second Amendment Case

District of Columbia Circuit on the premise that the Second Amendment protects individual's right to bear arms. The U.S. supreme court later granted certiorari (U.S. supreme court, 2007). Issue: The issue in this case is whether the provisions of the District of Columbia Code violate the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. In essence, the question is this case is, "Do the provisions of District of Columbia Code violate the Second Amendment through restricting handguns licensure and requiring trigger-locks for firearms kept in the home? Rule: The rule of law here is that the Second Amendment to the U.S.… Continue Reading...

Supreme Court

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… Continue Reading...

Norway, England, Wales, and the United States

For example, both Norway and the United States have a supreme court. This is the highest tier in its court system. Here the justices decide what laws will be upheld by the country. However, unlike the United States, Norway has conciliation boards or an Interlocutory Appeals Committee that allows for examination of the information before it reaches the court. Furthermore, decisions made in the Norwegian supreme court are upheld with no chance for appeal or complaint. The only exception is the Court for Human Rights (Sriramesh & Vercic, 2009). The United States supreme court rulings can be overturned by… Continue Reading...

The History Of American Social Welfare

to an erosion of civil rights. The only groups that stand to benefit from a conservative supreme court are bigots, and the NASW Policy Statement on Civil Liberties and Justice would also agree. 15. The United States lags behind other developed countries on a lot of measures, especially health care and education. The reasons for its lagging behind center on the privatized model of healthcare and a refusal to frame healthcare as a human right. References Social Work Speaks. 16. The Lichter & Jensen (2001) and the Moffitt (1999) articles both reflect on the positive and negative outcomes of… Continue Reading...

Film Culture and Its Impact on Civil and Social Rights

However, the black population lacked financial resources to fight for their rights. With the " supreme court victory of Brown v. Board of Education of 1954 that rejected separation of white and black school systems (11)"[footnoteRef:6] marked the beginning of civil and social right movements. However, this supreme court decision did not have immediate effects, nevertheless, it assisted in producing effects such as boycotts, and marches that marked the era of civil rights movements, and civil disobedience in the United States. For example, the bus boycott that happened in 1955 was designed to oppose the city's policy of segregation in… Continue Reading...

Miscarriage Of Justice in Gideon V Wainwright

Injustice in the supreme court Gideon v. Wainwright This was a case where Gideon was a defendant and was denied the right to have a counsel defending him because he was not charged with a capital offense. The Florida court argued that the court was only obliged to provide him with a counsel if he was charged with a capital offense. However, upon taking the case to the supreme court, it was determined that every citizen was entitled to a counsel who would defend him against prosecution. The argument is… Continue Reading...

Personal Thought on Three Articles

Handing juveniles long sentences is equivalent to sentencing to them life, and this has been curtailed by the supreme court. However, judges have skirted the law, and instead of offering life sentences, they are now offering long sentences without a chance of parole, which in a real sense is similar to a life sentence. This is quite unfair to juveniles because it denies them the opportunity to reform and lead normal lives after serving their sentence. Jails are meant to reform individuals and not house them till they are aged. Juveniles should be given priority and encouraged to amend… Continue Reading...

Biological Theories Of Crime

properly trained bio-criminologists do not believe that biological factors do not apply (Beaver, James and Brian 431 -445). The infamous supreme court case, Buck v. Bell, was held in April 1927 and was presided over by Chief Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes. One of the testifiers at this trial was Carrie Buck, who was branded a "moral imbecile" while she was just seventeen, and she later got sent to the Virginia State Colony for Epileptics and Feebleminded Persons. The motion wasn't aimed at changing the process which classified Carrie but rather, opposed the law peculiar to Virginia which restricted these "special"… Continue Reading...

Philosophical Influences on the American Constitution

interpretation of the cases and constitution. While Congress establishes the supreme court and lower court in the United States, however, the President appoints the judges based on the consent and advise of the Senate. (Kilman,. & Costello 2000). More than one and a half century after Montesquieu formulated the theory of separation of power, his work continued to guide jurist and politicians in the United States. Analysis of the supreme court reading reveals that Montesquieu is still having influence in the U.S. judicial decisions. For example, the supreme court invoked Montesquieu doctrine under Bowsher v. Synar "that struck down… Continue Reading...

Federal Policy on Afordable Care Act

for the Medicaid under the ACA but their states opted not to accept the expansion after the supreme court ruled that the expansion was optional for each state. There are various measures that need to be taken in order to have the ACA more effective particularly among the veterans. One of the biggest impediments to enrolment of the willing veterans into the ACA Medicare is the unwillingness of their states to join in the membership. There is need therefore to provide block grants to states for Medicaid and empowering the states to take control of managing the population. These… Continue Reading...

Recent American History and Pedagogy

v. Board of Education ruling to show how the landmark supreme court case has been systematically taken out of context. A more accurate understanding of Brown v. Board of Education situates the decision within the broader historical, cultural, and even international context. As Dudziak points out, the international community had long been suspicious of American values given the rank hypocrisy evident in Jim Crow. Brown was not just about the triumph of the justice system in securing equal rights; it was about protecting the reputation of America abroad during the critical Cold War era. Segregation was re-branded as being… Continue Reading...

Marbury V Madison Impact

supreme law, affirming the authority of the Court over judicial review. The U.S. supreme court concluded that the federal courts are allowed to overturn the decisions of the other arms of government in the event that they act contrary to the Constitution (GROSSMAN). This is one of those "checks and balances" that are the core of the national government's function. In 1800, Thomas Jefferson, a Democratic-Republican, beat John Adams, a Federalist in becoming America's third president. Right before Adam's retirement, he introduced new positions in the judiciary, which he gave to his political partners. After Jefferson became president, James… Continue Reading...

Concept Of Judicial Philosophy, Social Security, and Political Realism in the U.s.

Judicial Philosophy of the supreme court Judicial philosophy is a concept that refers to the way judges understand and interpret the law in relation to the specific cases they are handling. This concept emerges from the fact that while laws are universal and broad, they need to be applied to specific cases based on the judge's understanding and interpretation of the law as well as the unique circumstances surrounding the case. The two most common judicial philosophies of the supreme court are judicial activism and judicial restraint, which have influenced various cases including… Continue Reading...

First Amendment and Broadcasting Content

if it is not intended that they purchase the product. In the past, the U.S. supreme court has allowed censorship of certain types of language with the explicit purposes of protecting children. In the Federal Communications Commission v. Pacifica Foundation, "deliberate and repetitive use of words referring to excretory or sexual activities during an afternoon broadcast could be heard by children" ("First Amendment and Censorship," 2017, par.15). But the proposed advertisement for our company's new Scantily Clad line of clothing does not contain explicit language or images, merely innuendo: "So Light You Won't Know You are Wearing a Thing!" The… Continue Reading...

Campaigns and Super Pacs

Gore administration would dent the budget surplus. (Baker) 2. Has the US supreme court case of Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission (2010) changed the landscape of interest group influence or is it largely the same as it was before? The Citizens United ruling was released early in 2010 (January), and removed the union and corporate ban on producing financing electioneering and independent expenditures (Dunbar). It allowed unions and corporations to spend an unrestricted sum on ads as well as other political tools, making it easier to defeat individual candidates based on money and exposure. The decision was a 5-4… Continue Reading...

Discrimination and Social Justice Issues Today

significant societal benefits. Yours truly, X UNIT 5 DISCUSSION Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) was one of the most significant US supreme court cases of the post-Reconstruction era. The case involved Plessy, who refused to occupy a railway car designated for people of color alone and instead sat in a car deemed to be for whites only. The supreme court at the time held that it was constitutionally permissible to mandate racial segregation as long as the separate facilities were equivalent to one another. The Brown v. Board of Education (1954) decision, however, overturned Plessy, first noting the logistical impossibility of creating facilities which… Continue Reading...

Affordable Care Act and Marijuana

 When the Affordable Care Act was upheld by the supreme court, several people commended the Court for refusing to remove the only social protection they had which was established and improved by the New Deal as well as the Great Society. The House of Congress agreed to allow certain states have a significant level of command on the way federal programs such as Medicaid were implemented on the condition that it would be free to set up and enlarge its planned national entitlement schemes (Brown-Nagin, 2013). A huge disagreement… Continue Reading...

Guantanamo Bay Essay

at Guantanamo Bay is very long indeed.   To date, the U.S. supreme court has extended the writ of habeas corpus and Common Article 3 protections of the Geneva Conventions to the prisoners detained at Guantanamo Bay (Falk & Juergensmeyer, 2012). According to the editors of the Harvard Law Review (2014), “In Boumediene v. Bush, the supreme court established the constitutional privilege of habeas corpus review for detainees at Guantanamo Bay” (Constitutional Law - Guantanamo Habeas - D.C. Circuit Holds That Petitioner Was Properly Detained as "Part Of" Enemy Force, p. 2138). Pursuant to Boumediene, terrorism suspects that are detained… Continue Reading...

One Nation Under Walmart Essay

statistical evidence that confirmed that Walmart had corporate policies in place that disadvantage female employees, the supreme court unanimously held in Walmart v. Dukes (131 S. Ct. 2541 – 2011) that the plaintiffs had failed to present a complaint that was common to all members of the class and the case was dismissed (Reed & Harding, 2015). While Walmart succeeded in dodging this bullet, it has not been so fortunate in other cases. For instance, in 2013, tens of thousands of supporters responded to calls from Organization United for Respect at Walmart (OUR Walmart) to support the 500 Walmart… Continue Reading...

Student Loans Essay

waivers.27 According to Kantrowitz, though, “It should be noted that the US supreme court upheld the government's ability to collect defaulted student loans by offsetting Social Security disability and retirement benefits without a statute of limitations in Lockhart v US (04-881, December 2005).”28  In Lockhart v. US, a portion of Lockhart’s Social Security payments were withheld beginning in 2002 to repay his federally reinsured student loans that had become overdue in excess of 10 years.29 In response, the petitioner filed suit, maintaining that the Social Security withholdings were barred by the 10-year statute of limitations pursuant to the Debt… Continue Reading...

The Right to Privacy

the individual and whoever he or she chooses to notify should know anything about that person’s life. The supreme court has said as much about the right to privacy, which is why the author of this document agrees with that legal entity about this matter. The supreme court’s rulings on the subject have a significant amount to do with the distinction between privacy and legal transgressions. If the latter are not involved, then what one chooses to do with one’s life should be kept as private as one would have it be. 3. In retrospect, it certainly appears Edward Snowden… Continue Reading...

Reforms Needed for Three Strikes Law

of the intergenerational transmission of criminal behavior. Aggression And Violent Behavior, 37161-178. doi:10.1016/j.avb.2017.10.004 Boyd, R. (2014). Narratives of Sacrificial Expulsion in the supreme court's Affirmation of California's "Three Strikes and You're Out" Law. Legal Communication & Rhetoric: JALWD, 1183-108. Donald, B. (2013). Stanford Law's Three Strikes Project works for fair implementation of new statute. Stanford University. Retrieved 3 November 2017, from https://news.stanford.edu/news/2013/june/three-strikes-project-060613.html Ewing v. California 538 U.S. 11 (2003). (2017). Justia Law. Retrieved 3 November 2017, from https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/538/11/ Gocha, A. J. (2016). The sanitization of violence: exposing the plea bargain regime as a tool for mass injustice. Georgetown Journal of Law & Modern Critical Race Perspectives,… Continue Reading...

Judges Code Of Conduct Improvement Strategies

Judicial Impropriety in United States supreme court A judicial impropriety occurs when a judge disregards existing legal standards expected of him /her when they are discharging their roles during judicial proceedings. For instance, a judge who does not base his or her ruling on the evidence provided and the applicable laws but disregards a defendant while giving undue advantage to the prosecutor or the litigant commits judicial impropriety (Leyland & Anthony, 2016). Judicial impropriety has been reported Judiciary of the United States on several occasions.… Continue Reading...

Political Systems in Ireland and Britain

changed its political system to welcome some degree of judicial review. As of 2009, the United Kingdom has a supreme court, currently peopled by members of the House of Lords but thereafter via appointment. Its powers are weak, limited, and rarely exercised, unlike the Irish court system. The Irish judiciary’s power, role, and purpose in government is similar to the United States supreme court in that it provides a formal check on the power of the legislative and executive branches of government. Both Ireland and the United Kingdom favor a common law method of judicial proceedings, rather than relying… Continue Reading...

Unreasonable Searches and Seizures Article Reviews

an officer in a court of law. Greenhouse, L. (2014). The supreme court Justices have cellphones, too. The New York Times. Retrieved from: https://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/26/opinion/linda-greenhouse- the-supreme-court-justices-have-cellphones-too.html This article suggests that while the US supreme court justices are sworn to uphold the law, their own personal biases and experiences may influence them. Author Greenhouse (2014) notes that one reason the Court may have drawn the line permitting luggage to be squeezed without probable cause is that as passengers they may have found such practices personally distasteful and intrusive—and thus were motivated to see such actions as a violation against the prohibition against… Continue Reading...

Criminal Law Cases Examinations

v. Goetz, 68 N.Y.2d 96. 1986. Print. State v. Shelley. 929 P.2d 489 Wash. App. 1997. Print. State v. Stewart. supreme court of Kansas. 21 Oct. 1988. Print. Wiley, Krista. "Getting Away With Murder." Psychology Today, 12 Feb. 2013, www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-superhuman-mind/201302/getting-away- murder. Accessed 7 Oct. 2017. Continue Reading...

Criminal Law Cases Analysis

was denied. He proceeded to the court of Appeal which affirmed the decision of the trial court. The supreme court reversed the decision of the two courts. The majority opinion of six judges carried the day. Their decision was based on the legal concept of “causation”. According to the judges, the causation is met by proving two elements. One, actual or “but for” causation and secondly, proximate or legal causation. In an event that an intervening act occurs between some action and a later injury, the first no longer becomes the proximate or legal cause of the injury. To… Continue Reading...

Obama’s First Year in Office

supported new ethics and transparency policies and made the supreme court more diverse by appointing a left-leaning Hispanic female judge to the bench (Antle, Loewe). Finally, what shows the extent to which Obama was truly viewed as a proponent of change in the White House is the fact that he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize on October 9th, 2009. While many Americans thought that Obama had not done anything yet to deserve this award, its reception indicated that the Nobel Committee viewed Obama’s promises and pledges as good signs in and of themselves and the right course of… Continue Reading...

Physician Assisted Suicide and Ethics

the patient requests medical assistance in terminating his or her own life? Introduction In the U.S., the supreme court ruled in Washington v. Glucksberg (1997) that physician-assisted suicide is not protected by the Constitution. However, in other parts of the world, physician-assisted suicide is accepted socially and legally; and in the U.S., a patient who is terminally ill may engage in assisted-dying procedures, which are legal in six states and are legally differentiated from suicide (Buiting, Dieden et al., 2009). If one sets aside the legalistic parameters differentiating physician-assisted dying from physician-assisted suicide, can one say that the former is more… Continue Reading...

Secular Humanism

doctrine, ritual, social and institutional expression, experience, and ethics.”[footnoteRef:15] Indeed, some human secularists and even the U.S. supreme court maintain the secular humanist worldview rises to the multidimensional level of a religion.[footnoteRef:16] In this regard, Noebel emphasizes that, “Humanism is a philosophical, religious and moral point of view, humanism is “a religion to meet the psychological needs of our time” and “humanism in a naturalistic frame is validly a religion."[footnoteRef:17] Nevertheless, the argument can also be made that Christianity is a superior worldview from both an intellectual as well as existential perspective since the extant body of knowledge indicates… Continue Reading...

Death Penalty As a Deterrent for Murder

Over time, these rights have been interpreted and amended as well, and supreme court decisions have clarified their meaning, whether for better or for worse. The point is that none of this was done because of a dislike or antipathy towards the death penalty as a deterrent but rather as a way to ensure that justice was united to the moral framework of the nation’s forefathers. With this in mind, and though one may be tempted to embrace the arguments of the social activists like Angela Davis, who condemn the criminal justice system as corrupted by racist and elitist… Continue Reading...

The New Nation Jackson and Beyond

Indian nations was the desire of whites to become farmers of the desirable land. Jackson ignored a US supreme court decision to do so, once again underlining the increasing power of his political base. During the era, men who had once thus been disenfranchised gained in power but there were many losers, including slaves and Native Americans at whose expense these members of the white, working class gained their clout. America also became increasingly divided between Southern farmers and Northern industrialists who gained their wealth through industrialized production. Continue Reading...

Constitutional Law and the Rowan County V Lund Case

the First Amendment by “prohibiting the free exercise” of religion. Therefore, when the supreme court finally makes its deliberations in Rowan County v. Lund, it should rule in favor of Rowan County. The Rowan County practices have been grossly misunderstood and misrepresented. Thus far, federal courts have ruled against Rowan County, claiming for example, “the prayer practice served to identify the government with Christianity and risked conveying to citizens of minority faiths a message of exclusion,” (Lund v. Rowan County, North Carolina, No. 15-1591 (4th Cir. 2017)). The media has pounced on the case, particularly because “97 percent of… Continue Reading...

Crime and Security

and Robertson (2017), “on October 10, 2017, the U.S. supreme court denied a petition for writ of certiorari challenging the Ninth Circuit’s holding that Power Ventures, Inc. had violated the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) by accessing Facebook user accounts.” In recent times, there have been a number of prosecutions for the violation of the CFAA for authorized access. One such case was Brown Jordan Int’l Inc. v. Carmicle in 2017. In this particular case, it was held that an employee, Carmicle, who was until his termination a national manager at Brown Jordan, had during his employ violated… Continue Reading...

Hawaii Language Culture and Affirmative Action

(“Affirmative Action at the University of Hawaii,” 1991). Nine years after the “Island News” program aired, the supreme court heard Harold F Rice v Benjamin J Cayetano, 528 US 495, a landmark anti-affirmative action decision that was “front-page news in Hawaii” because of its implications for indigenous Hawaiian legal status (Rohrer, 2006, p. 1). With a more enlightened understanding of indigeneity and the social construction of race, officials at the University of Hawaii have opted for a path of inclusivity instead. Universities can help to change the discourse about indigeneity, alter public opinion, and thereby create a more enlightened… Continue Reading...

Legal Precedent Constitution Religion and Education

so entrenched in American judicial practices that it is sometimes taken for granted. Courts of final appeal, like the supreme court and the supreme courts of states, will tend towards upholding status quo unless there is a clear and decisive reason why a new precedent should be established. Their decisions will be based on several factors: the merits of the original case, the validity of the precedent law, and their own personal positions on the issue. Teachers would do well to understand Constitutional law better, as well as the laws governing educational practice in their own state. When in… Continue Reading...