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...
criminal activity. Judges who perpetrate judicial impropriety must face the full arm of the law. In the case of Scheuer v. Rhodes (1974), the US Supreme Court observed that when a judge violates the provisions of the Constitution, he or she puts himself or herself in a position that conflicts the superior power than what the constitution provides (Leyland & Anthony, 2016). Consequently, such a judge ought to be stripped off his or official power and face the legal consequences of their actions in their capacity.
Where a judge offers a dishonest ruling or abuses his or her discretion, the United States Constitution outlines a set of legal consequences. The constitution provides for the… Continue Reading...
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 unreasonable searches and seizures. Similarly, a ban against the warrantless search of cellphones was found to be overly intrusive, given that… Continue Reading...
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 President Thomas Jefferson regarding the rule of law… Continue Reading...
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 were truly separate but equal. As… Continue Reading...
favored the death penalty and fewer than two-in-ten were opposed (16%) (Oliphant 2016). Opposition to 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 warranted, versus the… Continue Reading...
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 and… Continue Reading...
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… Continue Reading...
