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

United States v. American 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… Continue Reading...

Court Process, Judicial Process, and Constitutional Issues

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 system given its original and appellate… Continue Reading...

Criminal Process from Arraignment to Pre Trial

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 time Warren served as the chief… Continue Reading...

Impact Of Brown Vs Board Of Education

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 case but it… 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 to be "specific" and able to be put… Continue Reading...

Gender Equality

United States, the very 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… Continue Reading...

Liberal and Conservative Beliefs Of Justices

from the process (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… 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

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 an… Continue Reading...

Court Case Review in Re Winship

a reasonable doubt," ("In Re Winship"). Winship appealed, and the appeal was rejected and later sent to the supreme court, which granted certiorari and deemed "preponderance of evidence" methods unconstitutional based primarily on the Fourteenth Amendment due process clause. The outcome of the case strengthens the burden of proof requirements for all criminal cases, juvenile or not. However, juvenile defendants are 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… Continue Reading...

Police Vehicle Pursuits

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 wasn't… Continue Reading...

Obtaining Informed Consent in Ontario

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 rights is… Continue Reading...

Illinois V Rodriguez Case

breached the 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… Continue Reading...

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

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' retailing… Continue Reading...

Todays Strategic Human Resource Management

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 employee for their… Continue Reading...

Self Incrimination and Right to Counsel Approach

Amendment of the U.S. constitution, 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… Continue Reading...

Terry Vs Ohio

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 enforcement officials notice behavior… Continue Reading...

Should the Government Ban Assault Rifles

reduce 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… Continue Reading...

How Supreme Court Justices Are Appointed

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… Continue Reading...

Navajo Leadership in Antiquity

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

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 business owner… Continue Reading...

Marbury V Madison Case

to the second question was in the affirmative, 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… Continue Reading...

United States Vs Jones

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

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 if the defendant expected privacy, he needed to take… Continue Reading...

Katz V United States

found the 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… 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

for her previous 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… Continue Reading...

Supreme Court Second Amendment Case

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. Constitution gives individuals the right to bear arms. The… 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 immensely superior and triumphant. I personally believe… 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

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 the PRWORA legislation and… Continue Reading...

Film Culture and Its Impact on Civil and Social Rights

whites and black were separated. 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… 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… Continue Reading...

Personal Thought on Three Articles

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 their… 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

also vest judiciary with power on judicial decision, and 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… Continue Reading...

Federal Policy on Afordable Care Act

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 stats will hence need to… Continue Reading...

Recent American History and Pedagogy

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 acceptable… Continue Reading...

Marbury V Madison Impact

made the US Constitution as the 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… 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… Continue Reading...

First Amendment and Broadcasting Content

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 innuendo… Continue Reading...

Campaigns and Super Pacs

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 and… Continue Reading...

Discrimination and Social Justice Issues Today

convey 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… 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 in the beliefs of federalism has been bared for all… Continue Reading...

Guantanamo Bay Essay

list of things wrong 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… Continue Reading...

One Nation Under Walmart Essay

provide overwhelming 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… Continue Reading...

Student Loans Essay

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 Collection… Continue Reading...

The Right to Privacy

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 is… Continue Reading...

Reforms Needed for Three Strikes Law

and meta-analysis 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… 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. For instance, Judge Sharon… Continue Reading...

Political Systems in Ireland and Britain

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 on statute-based… Continue Reading...

Unreasonable Searches and Seizures Article Reviews

demonstrates the difficulty of contesting the word of 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… Continue Reading...

Criminal Law Cases Examinations

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

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 apportion criminal blame… Continue Reading...

Obama’s First Year in Office

health. Obama 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… Continue Reading...

Physician Assisted Suicide and Ethics

physician-assisted suicide ethical if 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… Continue Reading...

Secular Humanism

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 that Christianity is more likely to be… Continue Reading...

Death Penalty As a Deterrent for Murder

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 doctrines,… Continue Reading...

The New Nation Jackson and Beyond

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

meetings violates 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… Continue Reading...

Crime and Security

this case, according to Romeo 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,… Continue Reading...

Hawaii Language Culture and Affirmative Action

discrimination,” (“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… Continue Reading...

Legal Precedent Constitution Religion and Education

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 doubt, a teacher can always seek… Continue Reading...

Immigration Essay

Judge Susan Bolton who approved such measures in a 2012 supreme court decision. The law was nicknamed ‘show me your papers’ provision and began as early as July 2010 with small changes to state immigrant smuggling laws. These small changes were negligible at first. People at the time were happy with the outcome, stopping their anti-immigration rhetoric and rallies. However, a couple of years passed and people began to take the anti-immigration position again. Many that opposed illegal immigration felt illegals took jobs from them, were engaging in criminal activity, and took valuable government resources. So, the stage was… Continue Reading...

Obamacare Essay

Affordable Care Act was passed by the U.S. Congress and the U.S. supreme court upheld the Act following a series of lawsuits challenging it by several state attorneys-general. The major provisions of the Act went into effect on January 1, 2014 but a number of significant changes were implemented prior to that date and most analysts foresee the need for a number of additional changes in the future. Although the election of Donald J. Trump to the U.S. presidency hastened the pace of change in the U.S. Congress, the recently proposed American Health Care Act does not achieve any… Continue Reading...

President Donald Trump Essay

the position to support at least one, if not more, members of the supreme court, but also acknowledges that Trump may not have Republican congressional support for all of his policies.                                                      Donald Trump Presidency: Will it Unite the Country or Destroy the Union? Introduction As of November 29, 2016, Donald Trump was the President-elect, though recount efforts in three swing states and allegations of Russian interference in the elections made it possible, if not probable, that… Continue Reading...

The American Dream Essay

provided for their children enough so they could become doctors, lawyers, and even a supreme court Justice of the United States. It is still a struggle for these immigrants and their children and many in the United States that see the progress they make, feel it is slow and almost nonexistent. That is because, the modern American Dream is measured by academic and financial success. However, one article notes, the real modern American Dream is about doing better than one’s parents. “Americans have been measuring the American Dream by the make of your car and the prestige of the… Continue Reading...

Abortion Pros and Cons Essay

Cons Pros One of the biggest pillars in support of abortion is the fact that the supreme court of the United States ruled in a landmark decision in 1973 in the case Roe v. Wade, that abortion was a “fundamental right” supported and protected by the United States Constitution (Faux, 2001). Some of the reasons behind this decision were that the justices concurred that the Constitution protected particular arenas of privacy for the individual, and that the decision to terminate a pregnancy did exist within a woman’s zone of privacy. Another point in favor of the abortion rights of women is… Continue Reading...

Miranda Vs. Arizona Case Brief Essay

in prison for each count, with these sentences running simultaneously.  This ruling was upheld by the supreme court of Arizona following Miranda’s appeal on the basis that his constitutional rights were not violated since he did not specifically request counsel. Issue: The issue was whether police officers should notify arrested defendants of their constitutional rights against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution before interrogation. Arguments or Objectives of the Parties: The defense counsel representing Ernesto Miranda objected the admission of the written confession into evidence on the basis that Miranda was not notified of his constitutional… Continue Reading...

Death Penalty Essay

the death penalty was also vocal in the 1970s, particularly after the US supreme court decision Furman v. Georgia (1972) which briefly declared all death penalty statutes unconstitutional, deeming them discriminatory in the ways in which they were enforced. The supreme court later found in Gregg v. Georgia (1976) that the death penalty itself was not cruel and unusual punishment, provided it was appropriately administrated and so long as its use was “judicious” and “careful” (“Gregg v. Georgia,” 1976 ). Post-Gregg, states with the death penalty have introduced safeguards, such as a separate process for determining if death is… Continue Reading...

Abortion Essay

Movement IV.  Conclusion Abstract: Despite becoming the law of the land in 1973 when the U.S. supreme court’s decision made abortion legal, pro-life advocates continue to hammer away at the laws concerning the status of human embryos and fetuses in an effort to eventually reverse this landmark decision. In response to the growth of pro-life organizations, a number of pro-choice groups have emerged to protect the fundamental right to abortion established in the Roe v. Wade case. Proponents on both sides of the abortion debate have used marketing techniques that are designed to evoke powerful responses from the American public in an… Continue Reading...

Federal Versus State Courts Authority

system is specifically derived from Article II which created the institution of the supreme court, the highest law in the land, and also permitted Congress to establish a system of lower courts. At present, there are 94 district level trial courts and 13 courts of appeal (“Court Role,” 2018). The state courts derive their power from the state constitutions directly, although state authority does not supersede that of federal authority. This was a major sticking-point between federalists and antifederalists and remained a point of contention during the early days of the republic. State courts possess what is referred to… Continue Reading...

School Bullying Plan

daughter of educational benefits granted by the law (Legal Information Institute, 2018). The supreme court ruled in favor of Davis by arguing that the school was guilty of indifference to LaShonda’s sexual harassment and ignored several complaints. This case highlights how schools are held accountable for preventing and dealing with bullying and other student safety issues. In Flores v. Morgan Hill Unified School District, 324 F.3d 1130 (9th Cir. 2003), six LGBT students filed a lawsuit against the school district on allegations that they experienced anti-gay harassment for a period of seven years. While these students reported incidents of… Continue Reading...

Gender and Culture in Crime

three prominent women in the field of criminal justice as they sit on the supreme court of Justices. Yet they are outnumbered (2-1) in fact by male Justices, which indicates that Fahmy and Young (2017) are correct in their assessment of the seeming sense that women must be dependent upon men in the field of criminal justice. To better represent the perspective of women in criminal justice, it is not enough the women investigators, lawyers, judges, researchers, academics and law enforcement officers be represented on television shows and in films. They also have to be represented in the real… Continue Reading...

Mass Incarceration in Arizona Social Cultural and Legislative History

a host of other dangers (Rizer & Haggerty, 2017). Luckily in Arizona, supreme court Chief Justice Scott Bales created the Task Force on Fair Justice for All (Rizer & Haggerty, 2017). One thing that this task force did that was so reputable was shine a light on how the increase in the pretrial population have been motivated by the cash bail system and hence ultimately recommended that “pre-trial detention should be avoided to the furthest extent possible” (Rizer & Haggerty, 2017). One of the major issues with the proliferation of prisons in Arizona is that it reeks of injustice.… Continue Reading...

Super Highway 8 Rogerian

years: “African Americans earned their way into schools through federal lawsuits that forced the state to comply with the supreme court's 1954 decision in Brown v. Board of Education (Topeka, Kansas), which made the desegregation of public schools the law” (Mandel). Hence, identifying this image as one that originates in Virginia is important as it loads the image with deeper meaning. Virginia is a state in the nation that has a history of pride and shame and of light and dark. It is in many ways a metaphor for the journey of life and for the human experience of… Continue Reading...

Court System

adds to the legal system’s integrity. As elucidated by the supreme court, stare decisis represents a basic judicial self-governing code assigned the challenging and sensitive responsibility of creating and maintaining a system of jurisprudence not grounded in arbitrary discretion (Kozel & Pojanowski, 2011). What kinds of management best practices would you, as a court administrator, implement to ensure appropriate levels of continuity, efficiency, effectiveness, and fairness when significant changes occur that impact the court system? Sound court governance necessitates a precise structure of governance relating to administration and policymaking. This structure ought to be clear when establishing relationships between… Continue Reading...

How Meek Mill Won His Freedom

Tuesday, April 24th, 2018, Mill was ordered to be released on bail by the Pennsylvania supreme court and for a new hearing to be granted the defendant. The 30-year old rapper, imprisoned for the past five months, immediately thanked God, family and friends for their love and support via a Twitter message. The sentence, now overturned, had been viewed by criminal justice reformers as an example of why the criminal justice system is in need of overhaul. Mill won support from a wide range of fans, including comedian-actor Kevin Hart, Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney, hip hop mogul Jay-Z, and… Continue Reading...

Mount Rushmore

area, to complement the symbolism of the presidents. The seizure of the lands was deemed unconstitutional by the U.S. supreme court in 1980, but the tribe has not been able to access the money it was awarded. Furthermore, “In 1948 a Lakota chief commissioned a vast carving of Crazy Horse, a famous Indian warrior” but that too has failed to have been realized (“Two Sides to Every Story”). Maybe it should be. Works Cited “Two Sides to Every Story.” The Economist. 2008. 7 May 2018. Web https://www.economist.com/node/11848993 Continue Reading...

Assessing the Benefits Of Marijuana

the last years of the 20th century, a series of supreme court cases and government actions specifically involving marijuana led to a substantial increase in the power of the government at the expense of the Bill of Rights. As a result of the war against cannabis, Americans are demonstrably less free today” (Pollan, p.126). The federal government maintains that marijuana must be subject to the very same thorough scientific examination and clinical trials applied by the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) to every other novel medication. This inclusive process aims at ensuring highest efficiency and safety standards (FOCUS). The… Continue Reading...

Supreme Court Sodomy Cases Rulings

earlier ruling regarding the individual’s right to privacy and intimate acts. In 1965 the supreme court had determined in the case Griswold v. Connecticut, that the state could not block married couples from employing birth control while in the seclusion of their own homes (Bazelon, 2012). To a modern audience, this seems obvious and almost ludicrous that something of this nature would have to go before the official court. However, this serves to demonstrate some of the issues of the era, and the lack of evolution of human thought, along with the general lack of empathy for others. This… Continue Reading...

The Impact Of Resource Management on Student Performance

in accordance with the recommendations of several state Supreme Courts over the years, including the California State supreme court, the Minnesota State supreme court and the New Jersey State supreme court—most notably in the Abbott v. Burke trials (1985-2011) (Stanford, 2018). Please help bring our state up to date in terms of what the rest of the nation has already mostly deduced—that equal opportunity for education is right that all students should have no matter where they live. Our district may not be the wealthiest when it comes to finances—but it is rich beyond all earthly measures when it… Continue Reading...

Boston Marathon Bombings

by the public safety exception contained in the case of New York v. Quarles wherein the U.S. supreme court held that under some extreme circumstances, the public’s safety outweigh suspects’ rights to be informed concerning their Fifth Amendment rights (Lonky, 2017). In other words, the investigators knew the law and used it to their best advantage in an effort to get the facts they needed to determine if there was a larger conspiracy involved, whether other terrorist attacks were imminent and the older brother’s role in perpetrating the Boston Marathon attacks. Moreover, it is to the credit of the… Continue Reading...

Civil Rights and Social Change

civil disobedience. There was a new upsurge of sympathetic legal thinking on the U.S. supreme court, cumulating in the Brown v. Board of Education decision, which finally declared the notion of separate versus equal to be invalid, a legal doctrine which had permitted Jim Crow laws to exist in the south for decades. On the other hand, the Cold War also empowered many branches of government, including the FBI, who were hostile to civil rights and African-American empowerment. The FBI’s J. Edgar Hoover famously spied on King. Additionally, there was great hostility in the 1950s to anyone who questioned… Continue Reading...

Muller V Oregon 1908

Muller v. Oregon In Muller v. Oregon (1908), the supreme court of the United States “upheld an Oregon law limiting the workday for female wage earners to ten hours” (The Oregon Encyclopedia, 2018). The issue under consideration was whether the passage of laws by states to protect workers was permitted by the Constitution. The evidence presented by Brandeis, a lawyer acting for the state, clearly demonstrated that women’s health was negatively affected by long hours of work. On this basis, “the court concurred on the grounds that society had an interest in protecting the… Continue Reading...

How Scientific Research Works

again and again, is more like a judicial decision that is uttered by the supreme court and used by later justices to apply meaning to an emergence of future facts or to be deepened by further explication. As Kuhn (1972) states, in science a paradigm “is an object for further articulation and specification under new or more stringent conditions” (p. 23). Science is, therefore, a field in which theory and enterprise are united in a kind of court of law—where facts are presented and scientists (like lawyers) argue on the meaning and proper interpretation of the facts. Is there… Continue Reading...

Berg Versus Allied Security Inc

both Allied Inc. and Podolsky against any criminal act from third parties in the premises (Gallagher 1).     The supreme court recognized that there was a voluntary undertaking in which one party unnecessarily assumed the duty of offering a service to the other party although the party failed in providing necessary care with skill and competence required (Gallagher 1). In this case, the duty of care arising in this situation was limited in that the supreme court recognized that even if the owner of the property voluntarily takes up the duty of protecting others from third party’s criminal acts the… Continue Reading...

Student Discipline and Bullying

Goss v. Lopez case as analyzed by Schimmel (2018) the supreme court quoted the 14th amendment highlighting the clause on due process. The clause, when interpreted on the bullying incident, meant that any school student faced with suspension have the right to be notified and to receive hearing. The Goss v. Lopez case entailed a student by the name Dwight Lopez who was accused alongside 8 other students schooling in various Columbus schools. The students were suspended for the allegation of misconduct. Prior to the suspension the students did not receive any hearing and for that reason they filed… Continue Reading...

Rousseau Social Contract Theory

became responsible for assuring equal opportunity to accumulate and own private property after the Civil War through amendments and supreme court cases.[footnoteRef:12] [11: Ryan Muldoon, Social Contract Theory for a Diverse World: Beyond Tolerance (London: Routledge, 2016)] [12: Aaron James, Fairness in Practice: A Social Contract for a Global Economy (Oxford [etc.]: Oxford University Press, 2013)] Conclusion In conclusion, contemporary political issues like taxation, mandatory vaccination, and universal healthcare can be addressed within the theoretical framework of social contract theory. Rousseau’s interpretation of social contract theory provides the best understanding of the obligations of both the government and the… Continue Reading...

Ratifying the U.s. Constitution

Constitution. Given his experience as a judge, his claim that the supreme court would become a source of almost unlimited federal over-reaching was particularly insightful.” This turned out to be true when President Jefferson challenged some appointments made by the outgoing President Adams. The supreme court took up the case and showed that it had the power of judicial review. Judicial review was defined as the power of the supreme court to determine whether a piece of legislation violated the Constitution, which the supreme court determined to be the law of the land and which the supreme court determined… Continue Reading...

A Brief History Of Medicare and Medicaid

were seen as dangers. The New Deal had a chunk of its content expunged by the supreme court because they were either seen as unconstitutional or simply not within the jurisdiction of the federal government. Some of the acts such as the National Industrial Recovery Act and the Agricultural Adjustment Act were ordered removed, by the supreme court. The medical insurance scheme that had been drawn by President Roosevelt and his team was also expunged by the supreme court. Later, President Truman made attempts to incorporate such a social health scheme in his government programs but also failed. Other… Continue Reading...

Criminal Law and Psychopathy

a diminished-capacity defense could be founded on a personality disorder, as per the New Jersey supreme court (43).[footnoteRef:27] One specific case that provided guidance on this front was State v. Gallaway (1993). In this particular case, the New Jersey supreme court pronounced itself on this matter, stating that: “the defendant’s borderline personality disorder should be considered as a mental disorder as defined in the law, and therefore should qualify as a pathological condition that rendered the defendant incapable of formulating the requisite mental state for the crime of murder” (182).[footnoteRef:28] In this case, Galloway, the defendant, caused the death… Continue Reading...

American History Civil War Slavery

Dred Scott decision. In the Dred Scott case, the supreme court hid its decision behind presumed legal arguments but in fact, the Court could easily have used it as an opportunity to evaluate the Constitutional legality of slavery itself. The decision meant that the federal government did not have the right to stop slavery from expanding into the new territories, but that the states did have this right. The idiocy of this decision and all the people that supported it inevitably led to war, and for good reason. Slavery was in fact worth fighting against, even if union with… Continue Reading...

Radical Negotiation Posturing and Political Strategies Trump and Alinsky

questionable actions such as confirming accused sexual predator Brett Cavanaugh to the US supreme court, Republican-represented states are some of the hardest hit in the nation, given that so many workers who reside in such states are employed by the federal government (Viser, 2019). As a result, some Republican members of Congress are pressuring Trump to compromise, despite their previous support for a border wall. Again, their lack of distance to the issue, combined with their close, personal interests in representing their constituents and being reelected, has an inevitable impact upon how they perceive the issue. Conversely, Trump, who… Continue Reading...

The Problem Of Tribalism in Politics

case in point is the recent hearing of Brett Kavanaugh for the supreme court. The Democrats displayed tribalism from the very beginning, promising to do whatever it took to oppose the nomination. Republicans for the most part struck back, vowing to do oppose the opposition of the Democrats. As Ornstein (2014) notes, the problem in Washington is, clearly and simply, tribalism. It is what prevents true bipartisanship and what prevents any real progress from actually taking place. This paper will show that the causes of tribalism in politics are rooted in a) identity politics, b) scorn for those who… Continue Reading...

Alternative Points Of View on the Abortion Debate

legal abortions per year (CDC, 2018). In spite of the landmark supreme court decision in Roe v. Wade, abortion remains a contentious public policy issue. The reason why this issue was selected for analysis is because it remains unresolved in public debate and reflects unfortunate schisms in American society. Rather than resort to vitriolic language, it would be more constructive to reach a consensus about abortion policy. History and Background Both from medical and legal perspectives the term abortion refers to different procedures used to voluntarily terminate a pregnancy (“Abortion Law and Legal Definition,” 2018, p. 1). Abortions can… Continue Reading...

The American Revolution and Enlightenment Thought

the laws of the Constitution—which proved true enough in the supreme court ruling on Marbury v. Madison in 1803, which established the principle of Judicial Review (Epstein). Jefferson lamented the decision and voiced his opposition to it—as he felt it went against the idea of liberty and the authority of the executive; however, the European Enlightenment was not without its own contradictions and instances of hypocrisy. Voltaire, for instance, promoted the idea of religious freedom via the separation of church and state even though the religious wars of the Reformation Era had more to do with political struggles and… Continue Reading...

Black Power and Black Feminism

Jim Crow laws were essentially upheld and justified by the supreme court in the 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson decision, which promoted the idea of “separate but equal”—that is, that African Americans could consider themselves “equal” to whites but that they could not dare to share a train car with them or sit side by side one in the same restaurant. The concept of “equality” that the white power structure in America sought to advance was but a ruse—what it really expressed was inequality through and through, and Collins drives right to this point as well. As Collins (1990) notes,… Continue Reading...

A Scene in Hitchcock S I Confess

also pick up this idea all throughout the latter half of the 20th century, culminating of course in the supreme court decision of Roe v. Wade in which the woman’s ultimate service (childbearing) was no longer deemed a duty but a right (aka the woman’s right to choose whether to bear a child or abort a child in the womb). The ideal image of womanhood presented by Hitchcock in the film was a presentation of an image that Feminists objected to in the years that immediately followed the film. The stylized camera-work of Hitchcock, in which the visual image… Continue Reading...

Use Of Force by Police

the police must consider whether the offender had the intention and ability to cause great harm (Roufa, 2018). The US supreme court has a number of times upheld the use of force. A good example is the 1989 Graham vs. Connor ruling. The judges ruled that the use of force is not bad if there’s a good reason to. And more so if another police officer in the same situation would react in similar manner. Clarence E. Cox III, the former president of the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives, holds the view that force is excessive if the… Continue Reading...

Racism in Birmingham Alabama

earlier declared it unconstitutional for a state to segregate schools by law. MLK wanted Birmingham to accept the supreme court decision and respect the civil liberties of blacks to attend the same schools as whites. The sit-ins and marches aimed at putting pressure on the government by drawing attention to the inherent racism in the system. Through public pressure, MLK aimed to force the hand of the government to correct the issue—just as Thoreau envisioned it should work (Garrow). However, the city soon showed that it was not going to take MLK’s protests sitting down. The city quickly acted… Continue Reading...

American History Civil Rights Era

de-segregation of the American armed forces in 1948. The 1954 supreme court decision in Brown v Board of Education was also a major event signaling a shift in civil rights law in America. Then throughout the 1950s, grassroots civil rights movements including those led by Dr. Martin Luther King placed increased pressure on society, leading to a series of meaningful events culminating in the Civil Rights Act of 1964. 3. Explain who took the initiative in pushing for these laws and events.  All Americans passionate about their nation and convinced that racism had no role to play in the… Continue Reading...

Trump Versus Hawaii

Trump v. Hawaii Constrained Court View and the influences on the supreme court Thesis: The main aim of this text is to highlight the misdeeds of the trump administration ruling on the immigration policy to the extent of the law. Legal precedence always follows facts and without that, the law is void and needs clarification. In the constrained view of the case, there is need to look at the implications on the economics, culture, outlook and psychology of the people involved. The law affects immigrants from all nations of Islam. The need to get the law right… Continue Reading...