Classifications In Supreme Court Cases

Classifications In Supreme Court Cases
When the Supreme Court is making decisions in cases involving discrimination, there are three
classifications and tests that are used to dictate whether such classification of a person is, in fact,
Constitutional. These three classifications and tests help in cases involving race, ethnicity, and
religion, gender, and economic status and age. They include the Suspect Classification and the Strict
Scrutiny Test, the Quasi–Suspect Classifications and the Heightened Scrutiny Test, and the Rational
Basis Test. To begin with, the suspect classification works alongside the strict scrutiny test. The
suspect classification falls into play when a law is possibly considered unconstitutional because it
categorizes a person based upon their race, ethnicity,
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

Supreme Court Cases In The Harlowell Case
The United States Supreme Court's decision in Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45 required that state
courts permit the defendant to seek the counsel of an attorney. The court's decision in the Powell
case required that free counsel be given to indigent defendants faced with serious federal offenses. It
did not mandate that all indigent persons be given free counsel, only if it was thought that the trial
verdict would be unfair without representation. It was not until Argersinger v. Hamlin, 407 U.S. 25
(1972) that the Supreme Court held indigent persons could not be imprisoned without the right to
representative counsel. The Powell case enabled the Supreme Court's decision to be used

Supreme Court Case Study
According to the Constitution, how do Congress and the President balance the power of the
Supreme Court?
The U.S. Congress in relation to the president and Supreme Court has the role of chief legislative
body of the United States. The Constitution's Framers built a system in which three powerful
branches of the government, using a series of checks and balances, could limit each other's power.
1803 – Marbury v. Madison Federalist William Marbury and many others were appointed to
positions by outgoing President John Adams.James Madison took office, and Madison chose not to
honor them, Marbury and the others invoked an Act of Congress and sued to get their appointed
positions.Chief Justice John Marshall wrote, An act of the legislature repugnant to the constitution is
void. It was the first time the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional a law that had been passed by
Congress.
1857 – Dred Scott v. Sandford This decision established that slaves were not citizens of the United
States and were not protected under the US Constitution. Dred Scott and his wife Harriet sued for
their freedom in Missouri, a slave state, after having lived ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net
...
The Court decided against Plessy 7–1 and Justice Henry Billings Brown wrote, "The argument also
assumes that social prejudice may be overcome by legislation and that equal rights cannot be
secured except by an enforced commingling of the two races... if the civil and political rights of both
races be equal, one cannot be inferior to the other civilly or politically. If one race be inferior to the
other socially, the Constitution of the United States cannot put them upon the same plane." Plessy
was overturned by the Brown v. Board of Education

Supreme Court Case Analysis
Aroosa Noor Question 1 : The supreme court of the United States is a court of last resort, it's the
highest court in the USA, and there is no other court with higher authority. All cases that reach the
Supreme Court have been heard from the decisions of lower courts across the nation. Once a case
works its way through lower courts, a party can petition if they want to have their case heard by the
Supreme Court, but Supreme Court is extremely picky regarding cases. In order for a supreme court
to hear the case, 4 of the 9 justices of the court must agree to hear the case. If judicial writ is
granted, the time frame for the parties is set. The petitioner has 45 days to file their brief on the
merits, which explains their argument to the court. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Geographic jurisdiction is court's authority over a specific area, or a state. Contrast geographic is
like at a certain level of court's a law can be either legal or illegal where at federal states it could be
opposite. . Subject matter jurisdiction included courts of general justification and courts of limited
jurisdiction. Limited jurisdiction is responsible for the early stage of felonies. General jurisdiction is
without any restrictions. Yes, cases can be tried in multiple jurisdictions, as explained in defense
lawyer federal crime, an example of that is, a victim of the crime might live in another state from
where the crime taken place, a defendant can be tied in the same case at different courts. if convicted
state and federally, a prison sentence is served in the state prison and then federal

Supreme Court Case Summary
William Marbury was one of President Adams' "midnight appointments." All of the required
paperwork, and procedures were completed in time to secure his appointment as a justice of the
peace for Washington, D.C. However, secretary of state John Marshall, a midnight appointee to a
judicial position as well. Failed to deliver his commission. Upon becoming president, Jefferson
ordered his Secretary of State James Madison not to deliver the commission. Under authority of the
Judiciary Act of 1789, Marbury sued to ask the Supreme Court to issue a writ of mandamus to force
Madison to deliver the commission.
ISSUES: Does Marbury have a right to this commission? If he has a right, is there a solution in the
law to realize it?
HOLDING:
1) Yes ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The Constitution is the "supreme law of the land". It establishes "certain limits" on the power of the
government it creates. This includes the Congress. "a legislative act contrary to the Constitution is
not law." When a case comes to the Supreme Court, the Court must decide that case according to the
law. If "ordinary" legislation conflicts with the limits imposed on government by the Constitution,
the fundamental law must govern the ordinary Otherwise; the Constitution would not limit
government. Courts have this power because they decide cases under law; judges take an oath to
uphold the Constitution, and this is part of that function. Following these principles, Marbury cannot
receive a mandamus from the Court. The Constitution creates two categories of jurisdiction for the
Supreme Court, original and appellate. Congress, under Article III, has the power to regulate
appellate jurisdiction; however, no power is given for the regulation of original jurisdiction. The
provision of the Judiciary Act of 1789 that added matters of mandamus to the original jurisdiction of
the Court, therefore, is beyond the power given to Congress by the people in the Constitution.
Having no legitimate jurisdiction over this matter, the Court cannot provide Marbury with the
remedy he

Supreme Court Cases Essay
Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. vs. Sawyer Also commonly referred to as The Steel Seizure Case, it
was a United States Supreme Court decision that limited the power of the President of the United
States to seize private property in the absence of either specifically enumerated authority under
Article Two of the US Constitution or statutory authority conferred on him by Congress. The
Majority decision was that the President had no power to act except in those cases expressly or
implicitly authorized by the Constitution or an act of Congress. Marbury vs. Madison: A landmark
case in United States Law and the basis for the exercise of judicial review in the United States, ...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Plessey boarded a car of the East Louisiana Railroad that was designated by whites for use by white
patrons only. Although Plessey was one–eighth black and seven–eighths white, under Louisiana
state law he was classified as an African–American, and thus required to sit in the "colored" car.
When Plessey refused to leave the white car and move to the colored car, he was arrested and jailed.
The Court rejected Plessey's arguments based on the Thirteenth Amendment, seeing no way in
which the Louisiana statute violated it. In addition, the majority of the Court rejected the view that
the Louisiana law implied any inferiority of blacks, in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Instead, it contended that the law separated the two races as a matter of public policy. Smith v.
Allwright: An important decision of the United States Supreme Court with regard to voting rights
and, by extension, racial desegregation. Lonnie E. Smith, a black voter in Texas, sued for the right to
vote in a primary election being conducted by the Democratic Party. The law he challenged allowed
the party to enforce a rule requiring all voters in its primary to be white. At this point in history, the
Republican Party was so weak in the South that most Southern elections were decided by the
outcome of the Democratic primary. Southern States claimed that the Democratic Party was a
private organization, while Smith said that the law in question essentially disenfranchised him by

Reflection On Supreme Court Cases
Supreme Court Cases there are many in the world and most of them are boring and some are
interesting and some are very interesting. This one I think is very interesting it caught my eyes and I
got into it really good. I am here to explain Vernonia School District v. Acton. Then what
constitutional amendment it challenges, and some quotes from the case from James Acton. Finally I
will share the result of the case and how it ended, then my opinion of the court case and what i think
and how I think the ruling should have went down. So before I get into it, I will giver you a
summary of the case so you can understand what I am saying before I start mumbling on about the
court case and what I think about it and how I think it should have turned out. In 1991 at Vernonia's
Washington Grade School, a boy named James Acton was starting seventh grade and like most kids,
he wanted to do sports and have fun with other kids and get active. So that's what James did, he
went home and asked his parents for permission to play football and have fun, his parents liked the
thought of him getting into sports and having fun with a team and learning about teamwork and in
general meeting new people and having more friends. So they took James to the doctors to get his
physical, so that they knew he was capable of playing. When then suddenly the doctor wanted to
take a drug test and then that's when it starts but I'm not going to spoil it all right now. As I said I
will first explain the court

Supreme Court Majority Case
To reiterate, the Supreme Court majority in the case, properly and professionally interpreted the Bill
of Rights regarding the right to privacy. It is logical and imperative that the citizens are given a
sense of liberty when it comes to their personal lives and this does not affect another citizen directly.
If there was no sense of privacy, then we would live in a country where the government would hold
all the power and eventually control our lives. This is most definitely not what the Founding Fathers
had in mind when they wrote both the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. The
purpose of those documents was to limit the government from having all the power over its citizens
which is why the colonies decided to break from the tyranny of the British. Had the Supreme Court
ruled in favor of the Connecticut law, the government would have had the power to now ... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
At the time, many states had laws for the use of contraceptives by unmarried women but the fact this
was a married couple I feel helped the majority to rule in their favor and thus provide a basis for
future cases governing any clause on privacy to the citizens. This plus the fact by the 1950's,
Connecticut and Massachusetts were the only two states which still had such statues and eventually
the laws would have changed the way those states were governing their citizens. The Constitution
does propose a process by which it may be amended and yes the process should be followed because
it's what's written and this is the law of the land. The Supreme Court did not make a change to the
Constitution but merely interpreted it, to the best of

The Legal Cases Of The Supreme Court
The Supreme Court is the courtroom where all the legal cases dealing with congress or the
constitution go to get a final decision. The Court is currently composed of a chief justice, eight
associate justices, and nine officers. Their main goal as members of the Supreme Court is to make
sure everything and anything abides by the constitution. It has many powers when it comes to law
and especially the constitution, but it is not overly powerful due to the other two branches of the
government. Checks and balances helps keep their powers level and just as important as the
executive and legislative branch powers. The Court has the ability to remove a law or refute
anything that violates the United States Constitution. The Supreme Court, on average, receives
around 7,000–8,000 petitions for a writ of certiorari every term. The Court grants and hears oral
arguments for eighty cases. One case specifically was Printz v. United States. This case focused on
dealing with background checks when purchasing a firearm. Jay Printz deemed the provisions to the
Brady Bill unconstitutional, decided to take it to the District Courts and eventually the case ended
up in the Supreme Court, where Stephen P. Halbrook fought and won the case based on a five to
four ruling in favor of Printz. Before the Jay Printz case on the constitutionality of the provisions of
the Brady Bill went to the Supreme Court, the case went to the District Courts and the Court of
Appeals. The case won in the District

Many students believe that they have unlimited rights, however this isn't true. In school settings,
school policies can limit the rights of the students to make a safer and more orderly learning
environment. These policies don't completely take away the rights, they merely limit these rights,
even if students feel differently. These are some examples of limited rights in school systems.
"Students don't lose their constitutional rights at school." This was said in the court case of Tinker vs
Des Moines. This Supreme Court case dealt with freedom of speech. In this case, students wore
armbands to protest the Vietnam War. The students were then suspended. The parents of these
students then sued the school for violating the students and the case went to the Supreme Court. The
Supreme Court ruled in favor of the students saying that their free speech rights were violated.
(http://www.uscourts.gov/about–federal–courts/educational–resources/supreme–court–
landmarks/tinker–v–des–moines–podcast) ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
In this case, Matthew Fraser was suspended from Bethel High School for three days. He had made
made a very inappropriate speech while nominating a classmate for student elected office. Now
switching gears, we go into the Fourth Amendment in the Court Case of Board of Education of
Independent School District of Pottawatomie County vs Earls. In this court case, the school district
was giving random drug tests to student athletes. The students believed that this violated their
Fourth Amendment rights of no unreasonable searches and seizures. Sounds reasonable right?
Wrong. The Supreme Court said that this did not violate the rights of these

United States Supreme Court: WHITMAN vs. AM. TRUCKING ASS'NS, 531 U.S. 457 This
specific court case revolves around the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS),
specifically regarding particulate matter in the ozone layer. Within the CAA, it states that the
Environmental Protection Agency must set a standard on the quality of ambient air so that public
health is protected. This section 109 (b) (1) of the act was challenged in the D.C. Circuit Court of
Appeals and declared it unconstitutional to delegate Congress to the EPA so that they can officially
set a quality of air standard. They stated that it violated the Constitution in Article 1 Section 1 due to
it delegating congressional actions to the EPA, which it cannot do under law. ... Show more content
on Helpwriting.net ...
Subsequently to this, carbon dioxide emissions were set to be regulated under the EPA as well due to
its effect on the surrounding biota and abiota, primarily concerning motor vehicle gas emissions and
other industrial generators. Many power companies disputed the EPA's regulation and question the
legality of them. Once brought to the attention of the D.C. Circuit Court, the power company's
claims against the EPA were rejected by all the present judges, yet it still was accepted by the
Supreme Court for review. Scalia's opinion on this case deems the most interesting. He stated that
the CAA has requirements specified for any such pollutant sources that can emit up to 250 tons per
year; however, because the pollutant sources were previously specified in the past to encompass
only air pollutants that were regulated, greenhouse gases were not affiliated with this. The EPA was
able to navigate around this, but their proposed plan was still objected against. Overall, the court did
gave right to the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases, but they were to be regulated as a pollution
source that is subject to regulation. Consequently to Scalia, Breyer, Ginsburg, and others stated that
the EPA should hone the ability to broadly define any air pollutant; this would allow them to

I chose this topic for this week's forum: Supreme court of the United States Randy White, Warden v.
Roger L. Wheeler on petition for Writ off Certiorari to the United States Court of appeals for the
sixth circuit, , No. 14–1372. Decided December 14, 2015
The Kentucky trial court and the Kentucky Supreme Court imposed by the trial court and sentenced
to death is the sixth positive Circuit Court of Appeals, habeas corpus review, have been overturned.
Asked by the prosecutor about his ability to consider all available penalties when, "I've faced that
situation in a real sense should determine the type of decision." 638 He noted the juries make that
kind of determination." Briefly, on October 1997, police in Louisville, Kentucky, found Nigel
Malone in the body and Nairobi Warfield in their apartment. Malone was stabbed nine times.
Warfield was strangled to death in the DNA taken from the crime scene. It matched blood of the
respondents. The applicant was charged with murders. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The defense opposed this move and, despite the murder of two men and a few reservations about
receiving a sentence of death, 638 is the response of the jury argued that show their ability to
consider the entire options penalty. Both confirmed the murder and sentenced to death. The
Kentucky trial court with the Kentucky Supreme Court have conviction and sentence. State objected
to the decision of the court ", or clearly including the unreasonable application of established federal
law decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1996 ( Depending on terrorism and
effective death penalty law AEDPA), habeas relief is granted. "The Court of Appeals was necessary
to analyze the applicant's state court to enforce standards Honor Judges ruled out

Supreme Court Case Simulation
On June 26th, 2013, a Supreme Court case occurred dealing with a same–sex couple, Mrs. Edith
Windsor and Thea Spyer. It was until they both got married in Ontario, Canada in 2007 and returned
to the U.S to a home they had in New York City. Later in their years, Thea had passed away in 2009.
Thea left the home estate to Windsor. The estate tax exemption was freely opened to Windsor to
claim from the surviving spouses. Although, Windsor was not entitled to the estate tax discharge,
because by federal law, was sought as the Defense of Marriage Act, bypasses the definition of a
same–sex partner and 'spouse'. Even after hearing that, Windsor paid her taxes for it, but eventually
filed a suit to battle the constitutionality of the endowment. To the situation occurring, the United
States District Courts as well as the Court of Appeals has reigned that the federal law to ... Show
The argument was toward the challenge of the Defense of Marriage Act, which was an issue
between the states Federal sales tax. The argument throughout the representatives, in a sense, was
questionable and logical. During the argument, Paul Clement, an Attorney for Bipartisan, and Justice
Sotomayor, a Supreme Court of Justice Lawyer, were fighting to what local states define same–sex
marriage and how the federal laws pertaining to the taxes define whom the client of a spouse should
pay the sales & property taxes. It was until more of the representatives and lawyers to comment into
this argument about this situation.
The executive branch agreed upon the DOMA being unconstitutional about how they took this
situation of same–sex partnership & spouses. Although the Court has considered whether it has
jurisdiction to hear the case, it is important to certify the federal laws to other states on same–sex
spouses as the constitutional decisions of the citizens of the United States have, relating to our civil

The United States Constitution creates the judicial branch of the government that led to establishing
the Supreme Court. American legal system has a significant part in shaping, preserving freedom and
equality (ushistory.org p, 9a). According to the United States Court, the Judiciary Act of 1789 was
used for the first time, it started with six justices (2015). Currently, the Supreme Court has eight
federal associate justices and one chief justice, all serves for life. Congress creates the Federal Court
and has the power to reorganize the court system. The court has the authority to protect the freedom
of speech unjust or to express an opinion. Supreme Court makes the last decision about all cases that
deals with the federal laws and treaties. As part of the judicial branch of the government the
Supreme Court, reviews and explains laws, resolves dispute and decides if a law goes against the
United States Constitution. These cases are under the "appellate jurisdiction." The judiciary chooses
which case to hear, justices never ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Court case reaches the Supreme Court in 2 ways the Appeal and "Appellate" Jurisdiction. Appeals
cases are 95% coming into the Supreme Court. For justices to consider the case, they check for
quality of the case with a constitutional question from the hearing. Also, a summary of the
disagreement between states and federal courts. Some cases can directly arrive at the tribunal, and it
is not common.
The process of the court system is the chief justice is in–charge of the meeting, sets goals by seats
by seniority. The system of a vote is by hand to consider cases and petition; the vote has to be even.
There are deals, debates, and compromising.
Hearing are set up as oral disagreement for the lawyers to argue their case. Justices also have time to
ask questions about the case. Half an hour is allowed to argue the case; colors indicate timing. White
5 minutes left and red, time

Supreme Court Case
Supreme Court Case
Happy Villa
May 19, 2014
Loanan Ase
In the case of Robert Tolan and Marian Tolan vs. Jeffrey Wayne Cotton, I will be discussing what
interest me about this case. I will also deliberating on the liability and criminal liability of this case.
The Tolan vs. Cotton case interests me because the United States have so many police that are
brutalizing citizens. In some cases the police officers are getting away with it. After reading,
reviewing, and studying this case I have learn a lot about the criminal system and laws that men and
women should obey. I will explain how the nine judges on the Supreme courts all came to a verdict
against the police officer Jeffrey Cotton after he shot an innocent suspect. This people ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
Accomplice Liability and Criminal Liability Accomplice liability consents the court to find a person
or persons criminally liable for actions committed by another person. Criminal liability is when a
person is commits the crime or act and that he or she intent to commit the crime at that moment.
Sergeant Cotton was acquitted of all criminal charges against him in the criminal side. However, the
Robert and Marian Tolan felt that the lower court's decision was not fair. I do agree with the Tolans.
I believe that courts did not take the evidence that was present to them inconsideration that Cotton
was guilty. Cotton carelessly made an error on typing in the car tag number that Robert Tolan and
his cousin was driving. Since, he made that mistake he is responsible criminal and civil. He should
have been since to prison time and he should be responsible of the wellbeing of Robert Tolan. On
the other hand Cotton was found not criminal liability for the charges in criminal court but Tolan
took his case to the Supreme Court. Cotton then was found responsible in civil court.
Difference between the various elements of crime including actus reus, mens rea, and concurrence
Mens rea, actus reus, and concurrence are all elements to a crime. These elements must be present to
charge a person with a crime. The guilty mind is known as the mens rea being that a person has the
intent to commit the crime with the mental capacity. The "actus reus" of an

Supreme Court Case Brief
QADEER, MAHUM, Opinion of the Court SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Utah v
Strieff Argued: February 22, 2016 ––– Decided: TBD In Utah a Detective by the name of Douglas
Fackrell received a tip of the whereabouts of drug activity taking place. Fackrell over a course of
some days watched the house, where he concluded that there was in fact suspicious drug activity
taking place. The man who exited the house went by the name of Strieff, who the detective decided
to stop and question. By taking Streiff's I.D., Fackrell discovered a traffic warrant meant for Strieff.
Under this warrant, the detective then arrested Strieff, and then conducted a search on Strieff due to
the arrest. Due to this search, Fackrell found meth and a drug pipe inside ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
United States (1963) the Supreme Court found that the "evidence obtained following unlawful
police conduct may still be admissible," unless the evidence was not come about in a way of poor
conduct. However, this was found excusable if the evidence acquired post the rest was irrelevant to
the police conduct. In this case, Wong Sun wrote an unsigned confession, which was established to
not be the "fruit of the arrest." Therefore, the confession then was eligible to be used in trial. Toy,
another man under the suspicion of narcotics, was arrested under an unlawful warrant. The man was
searched by an unlawful warrant, this action becomes the "fruit of the arrest." Hence, this was not
permitted to be used in court as incriminating evidence. Similarly, in Utah v. Strieff, Strieff was
arrested for a traffic warrant, which was found through an unlawful stop. Subsequently, this issued
the search of Strieff's person. The precedent case demonstrates that the original arrest was for the
traffic warrant, this causes the warrant to be the "fruit of the arrest." The search proceeding the
arrest, found evidence that is not the "fruit of the arrest," and the exclusionary rule would be
exempted. Strieff argued that the unlawful stop was flagrant conduct, due to the Detective not
having reasonable suspicion. However, due to the fact that this was a high–crime neighborhood,
nearly seventy–five percent of those who resided in the area, had an outstanding warrant. With the
knowledge of this fact, Fackrell had a motive to make unlawful stops. Were most likely there would
be evidence to support his reason for the stop. Which leads to whether or not the exclusionary rule
would even

Procedural History. Alabama redrew its districts in 2012, and the Alabama Legislative Black Caucus
as well as the Alabama Democratic Conference challenged the map. The cases were consolidated
and brought before a three judge federal district panel for trial. The District Court ruled in favor of
the State with four critical determinations listed below. The case was appealed directly to the
Supreme Court. Facts.. Alabama redrew its districts in 2012 following the 2010 census, and had two
very important goals besides traditional redistricting principles. First, it sought to minimize the
deviation from equal population to 1%, and second, avoiding retrogression under Section 5 of the
Voting Rights Act by keeping similar percentages of blacks in ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
The decision of the District Court was vacated and remanded. Analysis. In his analysis of the first
issue, Justice Breyer began by noting that the Court has always viewed racial gerrymandering as
district by district claim. The harm of being selected on the basis of race is personal which justifies
the district by district analysis. Furthermore, the plaintiffs did not waive any right to scrutiny of
individual districts. While they did present evidence that looked at statewide motivations, these only
serve to strengthen their claim for each district, not altering the lawsuit to only be one on the
statewide level. The District Court cannot look at the state as an undifferentiated whole. On the
second issue, the Court found that there was enough evidence to establish standing. Testimony by
officials that they had members in many counties and districts supported a reasonable inference that
they would have plaintiffs or members harmed. If the District Court wanted more evidence, it should
not have improperly decided that they lacked standing. Instead, it should have requested more
evidence or permit the plaintiffs to file member lists if needed and give them an opportunity to
demonstrate standing. As to the issue of predomination, Alabama argued that equal population was
the overriding factor in all their decisions. If that was the main cause for what they did, then there is
no possibility that race predominated. The Court corrected

Pretextuality In Supreme Court Cases
Given the times in which we live, one could reasonably presume that agencies like the NSA, and
legislation like 2001's Patriot Act have a monopoly on usurping the Fourth Amendment – but, he or
she would be wrong. In fact, the most urgently infringement of Americans' constitutional
indemnities against unlawful searches and seizures, is a policing practice known as "pretextuality."
It is a doctrine of law enforcement that has been upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court on multiple
occasions, but none more so than in the 1996 case Whren vs. United States. It is my position that
what is done by the Supreme Court, is most effectively undone by the Supreme Court; and so I
advocate that the Whren decision be definitively overturned, and its underlying doctrine ... Show
United States represents the most recent step the Supreme Court has taken in placing the kind of
stringent constraints upon probable cause that I am advocating for. In a 6–3 decision, the Court
declared it unconstitutional for officers to extend the time span of a traffic stop in order to allow a
police drug dog to smell the car for drugs, and search the car thereafter. The true question at hand in
this case was whether or not an officer's "reasonable suspicion" is sufficient to fulfill the
requirement of probable cause, and therefore constitutionally justifies a search. As the official
opinion, written by Justice Ruth Ginsburg, states, "An officer, in other words, may conduct certain
unrelated checks during an otherwise lawful traffic stop. But contrary to Justice Alito's suggestion,
... he may not do so in a way that prolongs the stop, absent the reasonable suspicion ordinarily
demanded to justify detaining an individual" (Rodriguez vs. United States). Expounding further,
Ginsburg writes, "Because addressing the infraction is the purpose of the stop, [the stop] may last no
longer than is necessary to effectuate that purpose" (Rodriguez vs. United States). Now, that's an
interesting standard to set on Ginsburg's and the Court's part. If we apply that orthodoxy to
pretextual stops, then even if an officer pulls someone over for traffic offense X, the stop itself
(absent any other avenue of immediately apparent probable cause) can only last as long

Introduction In the summer of 2015, history was made in the hallowed halls of the Supreme Court of
the United States. The Court had made, with a 5–4 majority, a controversial ruling decreeing that
denying equal recognition to same–sex couples was in violation of the Equal Protections Clause of
the Fourteenth Amendment. Those on the minority cited concerns of judicial restraint, the
connection between marriage and procreation, and whether or not marriage is a Constitutional issue
in the first place. Nevertheless, equal recognition for same–sex couples became the law of the land.
History
James Obergefell and his partner John Arthur were legally married in the state of Maryland in 2013.
Nevertheless, not all states recognized same–sex ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The director of the Ohio Department of Health, Theodore Wymyslo, appealed to the Sixth Circuit
Court of Appeals, which reversed the decision. Obergefell subsequently filed a Petition for the Writ
of Certiorari with the Supreme Court (ACLU Ohio).
Philosophy and Jurisprudence: The Writ of Certiorari On January 16, 2014, the Supreme Court
granted certiorari, and hence agreed to hear the case, issuing the following statement:
The cases are consolidated and the petitions for writs of certiorari are granted limited to the
following questions: Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to license a marriage between
two people of the same sex? Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to recognize a marriage
between two people of the same sex when their marriage was lawfully licensed and performed out–
of–state? (Supreme Court of the United States, 2015 Jan.)
Thus, the case would revolve around the Equal Protections Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Obergefell v. Hodges would focus on answering the second question: whether or not the Fourteenth
Amendment requires a state to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex when the
marriage was performed in a different state.
Oral Argumentation Mary Bonauto, winner of the MacArthur Genius Grant and a well–versed civil
rights lawyer represented Obergefell (Spangler 2015). The plaintiffs argued that to deny the right

Supreme Court Case Essay
1. What is the role of the Supreme Court?
Echoing my forum statement of week 2, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) was
created by, and receives its authority from Article III of the United States (U.S.) Constitution in
1787 and ratified in 1789 [1]. As head of the U.S. Governments judicial branch, the role of
SCOTUS is to enforce the Rule of Law of the U.S. Constitution, seeing that the lower courts do not
undermine the Constitution and the freedoms and liberties it provides to the citizenry; they are the
ultimate arbiters in judicial cases. SCOTUS is comprised of a Chief Justice and eight Associate
Justices, who are all appointed by the President of the United States, but must be confirmed by
Congress, and serve a life term until they choose to retire, resign or are removed due to gross neglect
or legal misconduct. The SCOTUS also acts a check and balance to the President and Congress,
ensuring they do not abuse their authority by exercising their ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
The authority of judicial review by SCOTUS is not actually defined by the U.S. Constitution, but
rather inferred by the Constitution's framework, design and the history of case law heard by
SCOTUS. Judicial Review doctrine was solidified by comprehensive consent across all legal
spheres after the case of Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803) [2]. This case became a landmark
verdict, establishing the definite separation between the branches of government, not just in theory,
but in practical application when SCOTUS ruled an act of Congress unconstitutional [2]. 3. Explain
the two theories of constitutional interpretation, the "living constitution" and "originalist". Which
theory do you believe is the correct theory to

A Landmark Supreme Court Case
A landmark Supreme Court case is one in which a precedence is set and there is an impact on
society. There are many reasons for the importance of landmark cases and the studying of such
cases. Some of these reasons are to study how the judicial branch works, try to understand how
decisions made in the judicial branch affects laws and everyday life, and predict how current issues
and cases will be affected by past decisions (The Judicial Learning Center, 2012). There are many
examples of Supreme Court cases that are considered to be a landmark, but one example is Texas vs.
Johnson. Outside of the 1984 Republican National Convention in Dallas, Texas, many people
protested President Ronald Reagan's policies. Among the protestors was one man named Gregory
Lee Johnson. This man was so upset by the policies of the President that he burned an American flag
in protest. By doing this, a statute in Texas was violated. This statute prevented the desecration of an
American flag if it could possibly anger other people amongst the protest. Johnson was arrested and
charged with this violation. He was later tried in court and convicted, but he made an appeal stating
that by burning the flag he was expressing his rights of "symbolic speech" which are protected by
the first amendment (uscourts.gov). The definition of symbolic speech is the same as a term called
"speech plus". This is a form of expression in which behavior is used by itself or in coordination
with written or spoken

Texas Supreme Court Case Study
Texas is unusual in its judiciary systems because there are two supreme courts; one handles criminal
cases, while the other handles civil cases (Liberal Arts Instructional Technology Services, 2016).
These courts are known as the Court of Criminal Appeals, and The Supreme Court of Texas; the first
handling appeals from criminal cases throughout the state, and the latter having final jurisdiction in
all civil cases and cases involving juveniles (Liberal Arts Instructional Technology Services, 2016).
The only other state with a similar judiciary system is Oklahoma (Robison, 2008). The separate
Supreme Courts were established over 100 years ago to lessen caseloads and the burden on the
Supreme Court, and theoretically speed up the court process ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
While they still have too many cases and get backed up, I think it would be much worse if it were
one court having to hear all the cases, or the court would refuse to hear as many criminal appeals
due to time constraints. If it assists the process even a little bit, then the separate courts meet their
goal and can ultimately be considered a success. If I were to change anything, I would probably try
to make a couple more branches of both courts in order to lessen the number of cases seen, even if
it's only a little. More criminal cases could be reviewed that way, and more civil cases could be
heard in a timely fashion. I think if there was one court that would see more controversial cases, two
criminal appeals courts, and two civil cases courts, the workload could be lowered. Anything that
allows more cases to be heard is important to our legal

With Article III, the founding fathers established the Supreme Court, also called SCOTUS, to
interpret the Constitution. Over time, and after reviewing multiple decisions, SCOTUS increased
their powers and authority. From cases such as Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803) and
Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965), SCOTUS assumed the privilege of judicial review
and jurisdiction over penumbral state rights. Supreme Court skeptics claim that the justices are
undemocratic, and the Framers recognized their dissent. In response, they developed measures to
limit judicial expansion and preserve their political independence. Because of the additions, the
Supreme Court should retain their power to overturn state laws. To start, the ... Show more content
on Helpwriting.net ...
On the contrary, historically, in McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316 (1819), the Court used their
power to determine Maryland's constitutionality of taxing a national bank. Prior to the case, the
creation of a bank was not a power directly stated in the Constitution, but a penumbra right drawn
from the Constitution. Likewise, the state believed they held the implied right to tax a national
institution when addressing the right to tax businesses within their borders. In the end, after
considering both sides of the argument, the Court unanimously ruled in favor of McCulloch and
found that Maryland could not tax a federal institution (pbs.org). The result gave SCOTUS the right
to "control the constitution and laws of the respective states," (pbs.org) including implied rights.
Since previous rulings allowed the Court to review state laws not explicitly mentioned in the
Constitution, the modern–day Court should follow. Ultimately, the United States' Supreme Court is
"the highest court in the land" and "plays an essential role" in upholding the Constitution
(uscourts.gov). Nonetheless, the Court and judges face flaws for "if men were angels, no
government would be necessary" (James Madison), but the founding fathers carefully crafted the
system to allow "life, liberty, and justice for

Segeration In Supreme Court Cases
Segeration was a big thing and was very controversial throughout the United States.They were many
court cases and debates about the segreation.Segeration was when the blacks and white were
seperated and were based of their color which limited most of the tings that they could do.But in the
Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896 the United States Supreme Court ruled that the whites and blacks could
be sepreated but equal if it didnt violate the Constuition.This was the start to ending segreation in
United States.This lead up to the Brown vs Board supreme court case on segraton in schools.
Another thing that did to help end segeration is they started boycotting on public buses.On the bus
whites sat in the front and black sat in the back so they could

The United States Supreme Court Cases
The United States Supreme Court consists of the Chief Justice of the United States and eight
associate justices. At its discretion, and within certain guidelines established by Congress, the
Supreme Court each year hears a limited number of the cases it is asked to decide. Those cases may
begin in the federal or state courts, and they usually involve important questions about the
Constitution or federal law. Established by the Constitution within Article III, the Supreme Court
was declared the highest federal court in the United States as well as the highest body within the
judicial branch of government. With these prestigious titles, the Supreme Court possesses final
appellate jurisdiction. They also have the power to exercise supervisory jurisdiction over the lower
courts. The Justices of the Supreme Court are chosen and then nominated by the President. After
that, they must be approved by the majority vote of the members within the Senate. When
appointed, the Justices serve until death, retirement, or impeachment. The average term of a
Supreme Court Justice, however, is most commonly 15 years. The Supreme Court assumed the
responsibility of having a new role as guardian of the rights and liberties of the individual in the
twentieth century. The history surrounding the Supreme Court helps to identify the country's
economic development, alteration in political views, and evolution of federal structure. The
Supreme Court deals with a significant number of cases each year

Well first of all, the supreme court is the highest judicial court in a country or state. "The highest
federal court in the US, consisting of nine justices and taking judicial precedence over all other
courts in the nation" (wikipedia.com). The supreme courts job is simply the final judge. In all cases
involving laws of congress, or the constitution, the supreme court gets to make the final judgement.
However, it is not all–powerful. The power of the supreme court is limited by two other branches of
government. (scholastic.com). Now how do people get a job as a justice of the supreme court? Well
the president gets to appoint each justice. How do the justices decide to hear a case or not? Not just
any case can be heard by the supreme court so what makes the cases the supreme court does hear
special? The cases that the supreme court hears are ones that deal with issues with the federal law. or
if they fall within the limits of the federal government the supreme court might decide to hear them.
If a case only has to do with county or state laws than this case will most likely stay within the states
jurisdiction, or the states court system. The supreme court is the very last step to most cases.

On June 26, 2015 the United States Supreme Court case Obergefell v. Hodges was decided. The
Court held in a 5–4 decision that the "fundamental right to marry is guaranteed to same–sex couples
by both the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to
the United States Constitution." In making this decision, the Court overturned its decision in Baker
v. Nelson which had been invoked as precedent (28). The fight to legalize same–sex marriage has
been a long, dramatic fight that has taken place over the past several decades. It is believed to have
emerged during the 1960's counterculture movement. Since then Americans have used the right to
petition (216) and the right to assemble (216) as well as more serious methods to push for equality
for persons identifying as homosexuals. In 1972, in the case of Richard John Baker v. Gerald ...
Hodges Justice Anthony Kennedy authored the majority opinion. He was joined by Justices Ruth
Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan. The majority held the stance
stating that "state same–sex marriage bans are a violation of both the Fourteenth Amendment's Due
Process Clause and Equal Protection Clause." The Court listed four reasons why the fundamental
right to marry applies to same–sex couples. The first reason was "the right to personal choice
regarding marriage is inherent in the concept of individual autonomy." The second reason stated that
"the right to marry is fundamental because it supports a two–person union unlike any other in its
importance to the committed individuals." The third reason states that the basic right (pg. 29.) to
marry "safeguards children and families and thus draws meaning from related rights of childrearing,
procreation, and education." The fourth and last reason stated that "marriage is a keystone of our
social order," and that "there is no difference between same–sex and opposite–sex couples with
respect to this

Case Study: The Supreme Court Decision
The Supreme Court, located in Brisbane, was the original court which heard this matter. This was
due to that it was a civil matter that dealt with an inheritance over $750,000. This $750,000 was
made up of the deceased estate as well as passbook and shares.
[1 mark]
(a) The issue of costs was dealt with by the Queensland Court of Appeal in a later hearing. Provide
the citation for this later judgment and explain who ended up bearing the cost of the appeal. Explain
why the Court made the costs order that it did.
CHECK THAT IT SOUNDS DIF FROM ORGINAL
Lindsay V McGrath [2015] QCA 249 is the later judgment, which deals with the costs of the appeal.
This later hearing determines whether the appellant should incur all the respondent's fees of the
appeal, or that they would or that they be covered by the deceased estate.
The court decided that there is no reasonable means of why the estate should incur the costs of a
failed appeal. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
This is essential due to that it views how other cases interpreted and adjudicate the law, therefore
allowing like cases to be treated alike.The particular court this case was heard in is Supreme Court,
located in Brisbane City and can be found at 415 George Street, near Roma Street Station. The
parliament or also referred to as the the Legislature also contributed in this case, with the case
largely surrounding, The Succession Act 1981, was created by The Queensland Parliament. The
Queensland Parliament in this instance, had a direct impact to this case as it appointed a laws, which
the courts will interpreted. The current parliament house for Queensland is situated, at the start of
George street, near the Botanic Gardens. This is very close to the Old Parliament house which is
located within the Queensland University of

The United States Supreme Court case Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association (2011), full
case name: Edmund Brown; Governor of the State of California and Kamala Harris; Attorney
General of the State of California v. Entertainment Merchants Association and Entertainment
Software Association, was a landmark Supreme Court case dealing with the constitutionality and
technicality of California's Assembly Bill 1179 (2005).
California Assembly Bill 1179, approved by state legislature and signed into law by Governor
Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2005, sought to regulate and prohibit the sale or rental of violent videos
games to minors as well as requiring labeling in advance of the existing Entertainment Software
Rating Board (ESRB) rating system ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
It is interesting to keep in mind that before Schwarzenegger became governor he was an actor in
generally violent movies, which made top box offices and did not receive any government
intervention, what a hypocrite, but can't that be said about most politicians anyway? The next level
of the Federal court process is the United States Court of Appeals which has appellate jurisdiction,
meaning they can only hear appeal cases, review the decisions of the lower courts and check for
errors. Appellate courts do not offer a new trial but deal with constitutionality or technicality of the
case at hand. For most the US Court of Appeals is their final option since the US Supreme Court on
average takes seventy–five cases out of the ten–thousand they receive per term. The Ninth Circuit
Court of Appeals affirmed the lower courts decision declaring that "invalid content based restriction
on speech is subject to strict scrutiny and not variable obscenity"
(http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/9th/0716620P.pdf). Strict scrutiny is the idea that laws
must be narrowly tailored to promote a compelling government interest. Since California had not
validated a compelling interest, it infringed upon rights granted by the First Amendment. The US
Appellate court also declared that the labeling requirement violates the First Amendment as
unconstitutionally compelled speech since the law could not "clearly nor legally provide a way to
determine if a video game is violent, as a result the labeling does not convey factual information"

SUVs and limousines arrived at the federal courthouse to a sea of reporters. Each family was
escorted to the building with the help of Federal Marshals. The courtroom was blocked off for the
general public and reporters. There was an outcry for information and their request for cameras was
denied. Because both families had threatened a federal judge was cited, the media didn't have a leg
to stand on. However, to settle matters before they got out of hand, senators or their representatives
were allowed to sit in the proceedings. Only one senator showed up. Things got started quickly once
the judge sat down and struck his gavel three times. "The following names of attorneys are disbarred
as reported to each state's board through the Supreme Court. Each of you is charged with threatening
a federal judge and directing the actions of the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
"The divorce has yet to be finalized due to the pending decision of breach of the matrimonial
agreement and each criminal allegation. As the attorney for Mrs. Lora Hansen–Durham, we have
also just sent in a violation of trust. Mr. Sabastian Durham has committed adultery." "What!"
Sabastian choked. "Your father had clearly lied about that woman you were sowing your wild oats
with. He insured me that your relationship was never serious and was totally over. If that was true,
then how is it possible for you and her to have a child?" "I think you should speak less and grant this
divorce. I don't want people to think I was fooled into marrying a mad woman." "I was mad to trust
you and your father. Both of you knew even if we were to have a child, they would never be the sole
heir of the Durham Family. I'm only surprise that you and that woman didn't have more children to
embarrass me more then you already have. Oh, that's right. You wanted to be doubly sure we would
never have the chance to have a child by giving yourself a

Examples Of Supreme Court Cases
Disclosures, Lies and Liabilities: A Case to Tell the Truth
Integrity is one thing that must remain unscathed throughout the career of a law enforcement officer.
It means being morally upright and having the quality of being honest (integrity, 2016).
Trustworthiness, virtue, righteousness, honor, and honesty describe what it is to be a law
enforcement officer. These are the attributes communities expect of the men and women who take
an oath to protect them. Three United States Supreme Court cases deal with lying and the liability it
presents for law enforcement agencies. These cases are Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963),
Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972), and United States v. Agurs, 427 U.S. 97 (1976). The
decisions in these ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
All three cases presented here deal with the disclosure of evidence by the prosecution. A court trial
is the pursuit of truth that results in a verdict of guilt or innocence depending on the evidence the
prosecution and defense present to the Court. When the prosecution fails to disclose evidence that is
exculpatory, then where is the whole truth? Revealing all evidence is necessary to see the whole
picture of what really happened. In Brady v. Maryland, the prosecution purposely omitted evidence.
In Giglio v. United States, the prosecution failed to disclose an arrangement where there were
concerns about the reliability of the witness. In United States v. Agurs, the prosecution again failed
to disclose exculpatory evidence. The Court held that all three cases resulted in the violation of the
Due Process Clause from the failure of such disclosures. Law enforcement officers are part of the
prosecutorial process. They submit the evidence they gather to the prosecuting attorneys for
presentation at a trial. If a law enforcement officer fails to submit all evidence, destroys evidence, or
lies about evidence, then he or she is lying about the case they investigate. Defense attorneys will
question the credibility and intent of the officer and prosecution if the intentionally exclude evidence
or lie about the evidence that gathered. If any court finds an officer untruthful in the presentation of
evidence, then their credibility and integrity is lost. Cases following

These clips have even gone as far as to include a briefing before the court session, the day before a
verdict is made disclosed and twenty–four hours before what are considered important hearings
(MacFarlane, 2009, p. 17). While the Supreme Court must remain transparent there is a line where
they must often respect those being put on trial as not to allow the media into the courtroom itself. In
this case, there would be too many of their resources being funnelled into maintaining the privacy of
those involved (MacFarlane, 2009, p. 14). Within reason, the documents that the Court decides to
make unavailable to the public are withheld due to individual privacy in mind and are made
available and therefore limiting the public's right of availability of information with the Charter
rights they serve to protect, privacy. The judges must feel that they have reached the decision
without the fear of pressure coming from outside of the court room hence a allowing their ow ...
This new approach where every movement the Court makes is accounted for is seen in their backlog
where the justices must have written proof of many processes that were once done orally. They must
fill out a written application to ask for leave from the Court, as of 1988, which served to replace the
not as transparent technique of an oral process before three justices (McFarlane, 2009, p. 8). This
paper trail was met with a pile up of demands of offers that must be looked over that was soon fixed
in the McLachlin era through the rewriting of the Court's rules from 2000 to 2002 and now serves as
an more effective means of administration and the transparency process (MacFarlane, 2009, p.

U7A1 Supreme Court Cases
U7A1 Supreme Court Cases Supreme Court Case #1: Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School
District (1969) Background: 1965 three students from Des Moines, Iowa (15 year old John Tinker;
his sister, 13 year Mary Beth Tinker; and a friend, 16 year old Christopher Eckhardt), opposing the
Vietnam War came up with a plan to wear black arm bands to their respective schools. The arm
bands were to serve the purposes of symbolizing a protest against the Vietnam War. School officials
got wind of the children's protest plans and created a policy that if student showed up at school
wearing black bands would be suspended and unable to return to school until they agreed to follow
the "no black arm band" policy. All three children still chose to wear the black arm bands to school
and all three were suspended from school. Issue(s): First Amendment (Freedom of Speech),
Fourteenth Amendment (Due Process) Court Decision(s): The Court ruled in favor of the students.
In accordance with the First Amendment, their actions were constitutional. It was not disruptive, nor
did it invade other's rights. However, this did not give unlimited freedom of speech to the students.
As long as they continued the "peaceful" protesting without causing distractions, they could
continue. Chief Justice: WARREN Legal Impact of the Decision: The new "no black arm bands"
policy at the schools did not prohibit all political symbols, but rather just singled out the black arm
bands used to support no involvement in

Notable Supreme Court Cases
Throughout the history of the Supreme Court, there have been numerous notable court cases.
However, none of these would have been possible without Maybury v. Madison. It occurred in 1803,
when John Adams decided to appoint several justices at the last minute. Not all of these letters were
delivered, and one of the judges, Maybury decided to sue Madison. Madison won, and this court
case creates Judicial Review. In 1819, McCullogh v. Maryland took place. McCullogh, a business
manager, is taxed twice, once at a state level, and once at a federal level. Thinking this is unjust,
McCullogh sues Maryland and McCullogh wins. This court case declares national supremacy over
banking. Another important court case, Gibbons v. Ogden, happened in 1824. Ogden controls a ferry
business in New York. However, because of the Eerie Canal, Ogden can travel to other states, which
would be interstate trade. Gibbons, a person also wanting to create an industry in transportation,
decides to sue Ogden. Gibbons wins, and this case creates national supremacy over interstate trade.
In 1854, Scott v. Sanford took place. Scott, a slave to the Emerson family, traveled to Minnesota
with John Emerson. While there, his owner died and the court declared him free. However, at the
Circuit of Appeals, it was ruled Scott was still property of the Emersons'. This decision stood, which
declared that slaves are property. This was one infuriating cause of the Civil War. Plessy v. Ferguson
occurred in 1896.

Marshall Supreme Court Case
Legislation passed under former Chief Justice John Marshall would continue the Federalists agenda
to define a strong central government while diminishing state level powers. Arguably the most
important Supreme Court case in history, Marbury v. Madison's (1803) presided over the
commissions of several judges appointed in the final hours of the Adams administration. Chief
Justice Marshall would deny the petition and writ, claiming the court did not have the power to issue
them however; he awarded the plaintiffs their commissions. As result Marshall's decision
established judicial review allowing federal courts to nullify acts of Congress that violate the
Constitution. Despite the immediate limitations Marshall place on the court his actions would ...
The case of Dartmouth College v. Woodward (1819), questioned what under the contract clause was
preserved by the Constitution and additionally disputed states assemblies jurisdiction to alter a
charter. In 1769, the King of England charted Dartmouth College as a private university in 1816 the
state of New Hampshire passed several laws to revise the charter to a public university.
Furthermore, the change in charter would modify the board of trustees; as a result, the trustees filed
a lawsuit claiming the newly passed New Hampshire laws were in breech of the Constitution. The
court ruled in agreement with Dartmouth; the laws violated the Constitution, which prohibited a
state from changing a contract. Marshall delivered the opinion writing,"...that the legislative of a
State shall pass no 'law impairing the obligation of contract." The courts verdict limited the power of
states rights including the power to obstruct charters while simultaneously boosting the powers of
the contract clause. In conclusion, the decision asserted the Supreme Court could nullify any laws
they found unconstitutional increasing the powers of the executive

"Under the Supreme Court's appellate jurisdiction, the Court hears cases appealed from federal
courts of appeals, or it may hear appeals from federal district courts in certain circumstances in
which an act of Congress has been held unconstitutional" (Bohm & Haley, pp. 278, 2011). The
appellate powers also extend to cases from states higher courts as long as the appeals are limited to
violations of federal law or constitutional rights. In fact, the Supreme Court is primarily an appellate
court, however, "the Supreme Court also has original jurisdiction... to two types of cases: (1) cases
involving representatives of foreign governments; and (2) certain cases in which a state is a party"
(Bohm & Haley, pp. 279, 2011). While the topic of judicial ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
First, strict constructionists believe "that the Constitution should be implemented as written, and if
any changes are to take place in rights, responsibilities, or liberties, the changes should take place
through the political system (Congress)" (Pollock, pp. 320, 2017). Conversely, Interpretationists
view the Constitution is as an ever–evolving document that encompasses issues that should have
been addressed during its creation. As such, the differences in how the Constitution is viewed result
in conflicting views that directly correlate to various understandings of the law. The Third District
Court of Appeals made note, "that it is well settled that judge can form "mental impressions" but it is
prohibited from prejudging the case, i.e. "making up their mind"" (Pankauski & Hauser, 2015).
Moreover, to prejudge was defined as deciding before having heard all of the evidence. The
Supreme Court is indeed biased, as it is unavoidable because all human beings are fallible.
However, it cannot be considered prejudgment solely because their path of reasoning is understood
beforehand. As long as all aspects of the case are considered before a decision is reached the case is
not

Essay on Supreme Court Cases
Supreme Court Cases
Engle vs. Vitale
Case: In the late 1950's the New York State Board of Regents wrote and adopted a prayer, which
was supposed to be nondenominational. The board recommended that students in public schools say
the prayer on a voluntary basis every morning. In New Hyde Park Long Island a parent sued the
school claiming that the prayer violated the first amendment of the constitution. The school argued
that the prayer was nondenominational and did not attempt to "establish or endorse" a
religion and thus that it did not violate the establishment clause.
Constitutional issue it relates to: Freedom of Religion
Decision: The court ruled against the school district and upheld the establishment clause of the first
... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
In reversing the District Court's entry of judgment for petitioners, the Court of Appeals held that the
Act applied to forbid discrimination against respondents' proposed club on the basis of its religious
content, and that the Act did not violate the Establishment Clause.
Constitutional issue it relates to: Freedom of Religion
Decision: In 1985, the principal and superintendent of Westside High School (a secondary school in
Omaha, Nebraska) cited the Establishment Clause as a reason for denying the request of Bridget
Mergens to form a Christian club that would have the same privileges and meet on the same terms
and conditions as other Westside student groups, except that it would have no faculty sponsor. Ms.
Mergens took the case to court, and won at first. She lost on appeal at the 8th Circuit Court, and then
later won in a 8–1 decision from the Supreme Court
Johnson vs. U.S.
Case: During the 1984 Republican National Convention in Dallas, Texas, respondent Johnson
participated in a political demonstration to protest the policies of the Reagan administration and
some Dallas–based corporations. After a march through the city streets, Johnson burned an
American flag while

Supreme Court Case Paper
Let me start off by saying that this case in my opinion, was particularly difficult for me to
understand and decipher what I was actually reading. That being said, I think the main issue in this
case is whether the parties intended that a construction and repurchase clause should constitute as a
covenant. A covenant is a formal written agreement between two parties for the performance of
some action, that runs with the land. These actions were to be enforceable by a specific
performance, or a future interest. In this case the construction of an office building on a condition
subsequent, which is later enforceable only under the Real Property and Procedure Law ("RPAPL")
§ 1953. The court case was on an appeal about whether the parties had intended that a construction
with a repurchase clause should be enforceable by a specific performance or a future interest on a
condition subsequent. The court held that the parties intentions was that the obligation found on the
deed sale constitutes for a covenant that ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Without the re–entry authorization Suffolk Business Center did not have the grounds based on the
loose wording of the deed of sale to reconvene the property. The court denied the purchasers cross
motion and remitted the case for further resolution to the Supreme Court. In my opinion the court
case went exactly as it should have. The things I would have done differently would have been that I
would have had an attorney double check the wording of the deed. With any deed the right to
repurchase land from grantee on the grantor's behalf takes proper wording in order for the proper
course of action to be taken. If Suffolk Business Center had a re–entry authorization with a
repurchase clause that was properly worded they would have been able to purchase the property
back for original purchase

Supreme Court Cases In Schools
Ever since it was ratified the constitution was said to be the supreme law of the land. It has been the
deciding factor for court cases ever since it was written. The constitution also contains certain rights
we are guaranteed. Ever since the constitution was written there has been problems interpreting
what exactly these rights allow us to do. But one question that really hasn't even really been
answered is whether students are allowed to all these rights in a school building. The Supreme Court
has been working with cases that concern student's rights in school for a long time most profoundly
in the 20th century. I'm now going to talk about some of the better known cases and explain them.
This first case is the first case that was a big deal across the nation and perhaps the most profound ...
New Jersey vs TLO is another landmark Supreme Court case that deals with certain rights students
can have at the school building. Terry (TLO) was found smoking in the school bathroom. School
officials then searched her clothes and belongings for marijuana and other tobacco products. When
they found marijuana and other illegal drugs the school called the police and she was arrested. She
then went to court and the courts found her guilty of possessing and selling marijuana. She then
appealed her case saying the school violated her 4th amendment right. The 4th amendment
guarantees the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against
unreasonable searches and seizures. The Supreme Court ruled against TLO and in favor of the
school. The court said students have the right to privacy but that must be balanced with the schools
job to maintain a place where students can come to learn. The bottom line of this Supreme Court
case is that your belongings can be searched in the school building but not arbitrarily or without
good

Classifications In Supreme Court Cases

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Ashley Lovato

More from Ashley Lovato (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Classifications In Supreme Court Cases