Analysis Of The Amicus Curiae Is The National Coalition...

Analysis Of The Amicus Curiae Is The National Coalition...
I.Statement of Interest The amicus curiae is the National Coalition Against Racism in Sports and Media, a group dedicated to fighting racism in
athletics and broadcasting. NCARSM was created in response to racial stereotyping resulting from the commercialized usage of American Indian
identities in the form of sport mascots. In 2006, the NCAA ordered the University of North Dakota to change their mascot, the Fighting Sioux, in a
sanction that called for the removal of mascots with tribal logos that were deemed hostile and abusive. Since then, UND has fought this, arguing that it
is the right of the University to maintain their mascot. Amicus submits this brief in the hopes to convince the Court that the usage of Native Americans
as mascots perpetuates harmful stereotypes that distort the historical accuracy of Native peoples and creates a racially hostile environment, thus
violating Title VI. Mascots that portray Native Americans are harmful to these people because they promote a false collective history, diminish their
struggle over the past centuries, and constitute a Title VI violation. Some argue that schools should be allowed to persist usage of racially insensitive
mascots for monetary continuation and the sake of tradition; however, these lines of reasoning constitute feeble excuses for institutionalized racism.
Therefore, schools that use Native American mascots, such as the University of North Dakota, do not foster institutional tradition and financial donation
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

Landmark Decisions Of The Supreme Court
AMERICAN GOVERNMENT HONORS RESEARCH PROJECT Landmark Decisions of the Supreme Court Your Quarter II project will involve
research on a landmark Supreme Court decision. Your paper should include internal citations and a formal bibliography. At least one of your sources
needs to be non–Internet. Note: If you fail to do parenthetical citations in your paper, you will receive an automatic "F" on your paper. The paper
should be double spaced, 10 or 12 point, and follow the format found in the Media Handbook. It should be between 2000 – 2500 words in length
(approximately 6–8 pages). In addition, you will be required to submit your paper electronically via turnitin.com . When the Supreme Court is
deciding whether to hear a case or not, there are many things that it takes into account. First off, if the Case will resolve a conflict of law, then the
case will be heard. A conflict of law is basically when the state supreme courts and federal circuits reach different conclusions about an issue of
federal or constitutional law, and when that happens the supreme court can resolve the conflict of law by deciding the law. Second, The Supreme
Court will consider hearing a case that they deem important or that they say has high significance. Some of these important cases consist of U.S. v
Nixon, which was about the Watergate tapes, Bush v. Gore, which was about the insanely close election in 2000 and also Roe. v. Wade, which concerned

Do Judges Make The Right Decision Model
Supreme Court is the final court of appeal in the judicial system and also it is the top most system in the court's line in ascending order from the
smaller category of the courts to the higher category, in which the Supreme Court, in many jurisdictions is the highest hierarchy. The strategic
model It is a very complicated situation in that one wonders if he/she has made a right decision in deciding a certain dispute. Have you ever had an
opportunity to settle any dispute in your family or between your friends? Did you consider yourself right in the decision that you made? In case a
judge was to come, would he agree with your decision? These are the complications one faces while making judgment between two individuals or
groups of people. You can ask yourself this question, how do the judges deal with situation? How do they make the right decision? There are three
main models that judges use to come up with a resolution, in the judicial decision making. They include: strategic, attitudinal and legal. All of these
models are used in courts and are very useful in predicting the decision that a judge is required to use... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Basing on the foundation in the strategic making decisions models, there is the concept of work of C. Herman Pritchett who differentiated between
the judicial decisions and politics. Example: assuming in the Supreme Court that Fredrick is a judge there, he always supports the policy change. He
only has the option of either voting in the policy change or vote against it. During the decision making, Frederick usually does not consider direct
policy change results, but also how the other stakeholders involved would react to the decision that he will make. All the other courts in a jurisdiction
will be looking into the decision made by

Constitutional Restrictions On The Federal Government
Recently, the federal government has crossed the line in regards to its actual power. In passing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the
federal government is essentially ignoring many vital sections of the Constitution that help keep it in check. These fundamental restrictions help
prevent an abusive and tyrannical government. The fact that this law still remains in place today shows that these constitutional restrictions on the
federal government no longer apply, and that the federal government essentially has unlimited power. This act is unconstitutional due to its violation of
the Commerce Clause, the Tenth Amendment, and the Origination Clause. In order to completely understand the extent of its unconstitutionality, it is
important to look at its origins and its constitutional challenges. The first government endeavor into health care was when "Medicaid and Medicare
were created [by] President Lyndon B. Johnson... on July 30, 1965" ("What is Medicare"). These two programs were mostly used as a social safety
net, and didn't affect the general public. "On March 22, 2010, President Barack Obama signed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act"
(ABC–CLIO). With the Affordable Care Act came the controversial Individual Mandate. The Individual Mandate of the Affordable Care Act is the
portion of the bill that forces individuals to purchase health insurance, or face a penalty. This immediately triggered challenges to not only repeal the
law, but also to

Kyllo Case Summary
In Kyllo v. United States (2001), the Supreme Court upheld the sanctity of the home, even in the advent of new technology. In this case the government
believed Kyllo was growing marijuana in his home, agents tsed a thermal imaging device, not readily available to the public, and detected hot areas that
were consistent with growing lamps. A judge issued a warrant based on the thermal imaging results, informant information, and utility bills. In a 5–4
decision the Court determined that the government cannot mechanically measure the warmth in a home, with a device that is not in general public use,
unless it has probable cause for doing so. Before Kyllo, the lower courts generally held that the use of thermal imaging devices to detect... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
v Wurie were combined in an amicus curiae brief in 2014 by the Constitutional Accountability Center, in which the Court was urged to hold that the
warrantless searches of cellular phones , upon Riley and Wurie's arrests, were unconstitutional. In both of these cases the cellular phones of the men
arrested were searched by law enforcement without being authorized by a warrant. The Court determined that the data was protected, and that law
enforcement could have obtained a warrant before accessing the data stored on the smart phones. In Riley the Court identified a qualitative difference
between the digital records on cellular phones, data that includes information that is never found in a home in any form. This decision by the Court,
that data is different, will affect digital search cases in the future, but also the NSA's bulk record collection, access to data stored in the cloud, and the
third–party doctrine. In both the Riley and Wuire cases the Court unanimously held that the warrantless search and seizure of the digital contents of a
cell phone is unconstitutional. Officers are allowed to examine the physical aspects of the cell phone to ascertain if it can be used as a weapon, but
digital data poses no threat to law enforcement officers. In a statement very similar to that Justice Brandeis wrote in Olmstead, Chief Justice Roberts
went on to say in a sweeping and broad statement that, "Modern cell phones are not just another technological convenience. With all they contain and
all they may reveal, they hold for many Americans "the privacies of life". The fact that technology now allows an individual to carry such information
in his hand does not make the information any less worthy of the protection for which the Founders

Summary: Should Laws Regulate The Copyright Of The Genetic...
Should laws regulate the copyright of the genetic code?
Stephen Villard
Jose Marti MAST 6–12 Academy
A man by the name of John Locke once said "The end of law is not to abolish or restrain, but to preserve and enlarge freedom. For in all the states of
created beings capable of law, where there is no law, there is no freedom." These wise words may still and eternally be applied to our law system as a
basis for our human rights and improvement. As of relatively recent times these basic political ideals have been challenged through the arise of genetic
patents. These patents have stripped researchers from their ability to further investigate certain, often vital, sections of DNA. Additionally, these patents
have placed many small family owned farms at a particular disposition. Companies such as Myriad Genetics and Monsanto are challenging our
freedom, and rights to own property. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
There are many reasons for the scientific community as well as the citizens of America to be concerned and very opposed to the patenting of genes.
For example, on the American Medical Association Website it reads that " The AMA is opposed to gene patenting because it has the potential to
inhibit access to genetic testing for patients and hinder research on genetic disease." Another problem is that often enough people are harmed when
patent holders prevent laboratories from developing and offering competing tests. As a matter of fact, there are occasions in which people are left
falsely diagnosed due to limited testing, occurrences lacey refers to as "false negatives" and "false positives"; a false negative being a situation in
which medical tests come back negative due to errors in testing, and false positives being situations in which major often dangerous unnecessary
procedures are done due to errors in

Piere V. Society Of Sisters Case Summary
Title of Case: Pierce v. Society of Sisters
Date: 1922
Level or Type of Court: Oregon District Court, Supreme Court of the United States
Facts:
The Compulsory Education Act was instituted, which required Oregon children between 8 and 16 years of age to attend public school
The Society of Sisters argued that this was a violation of their first amendment rights, which included practicing freedom of religion.
The Society of Sisters, and Oregon Catholic corporation, won their case against Pierce (Governor of Oregon) and the state for the right to educate
children in a non–public school.
The Society of Sisters won their case in Oregon District Court, which granted an injunction against the Act.
The defendants appealed their case to the Supreme Court of the United States, which was heard on March 16th and 17th, 1925 ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Holding: Yes
Justice James Clark McReynolds said children were not "mere creatures of the state," and that the responsibility for students to accept instruction from
public schools belonged to the parents.
While the Society of Sisters argued that Compulsory Education Act interfered with their business, Clark said that laws are not meant to protect that.
However, Clark said that the Compulsory Education Act did interfere with freedom of both schools and families.
Legal Doctrine:
The First Amendment to The U.S Constitution, which states freedom of religion, in this case in the school setting
The Fourteenth Amendment, which recognizes the scope of liberties or rights which it protected for citizens
Significance: It is the right of the parents to choose whether to send their child to a public, private, or parochial school
Title of Case: Engel v.

Dr. Meserow Is A Mentally Competent Woman
On November 23, 1993, Doe was seen by an obstetrician, Dr. James Meserow, at the St. Joseph's Hospital in Chicago. This was the first time Doe was
seen by Dr. Meserow, but she had been receiving regular prenatal care throughout her pregnancy. Upon giving Doe the usual check–up, he determined
from a series of tests that the baby was under duress due to an issue with the placenta. At this point, it is important to recognize that Doe is a mentally
competent woman carrying her first child, and the fetus is currently around 35 weeks. It also important to recognize that Dr. Meserow is a
board–certified obstetrician/gynecologist. Dr. Meserow informs both Doe and her husband of the diagnosis and highly recommends either an
immediate cesarean section or to induce labor in order to prevent any further potential damage to the fetus due to the lack of oxygen from the
compromised placenta. Doe refuses both of the recommendations based on her religious convictions that God will heal her child and keep it safe from
any harm, and will, therefore, wait to have a natural childbirth.
On December 8, 1993, 14 days after the recommendation of a cesarean section or induced labor, Doe is examined again by Dr. Meserow, and he is
still holding fast to his diagnosis. Doe continues to state that she refuses on the grounds of religious reasons. However, Doe agrees to be seen by
another doctor the following day. That same day, December 8, 1993, Dr. Meserow and the St. Joseph's Hospital call the

Should Transgender Students Be Allowed To Equal Access To...
When Gavin Grimm started his sophomore year at Gloucester High School in the 2013–2014 school year, he and his mother informed the school
administrators that the student legally changed his name to Gavin, identifies as a male and is to be referred to by male pronouns. When Gavin was at
school he used the men's restrooms and this continued for seven weeks until parents of the students that attend Gloucester High School and residents of
Gloucester County started making complaints about it. As a result to the complains, the Gloucester County School Board was going to put more
privacy measures into the restrooms but after more complaints and with a vote of 6–1, adopted a policy that states transgender students be allowed to
only use unisex, single –stall restrooms or restrooms that correspond their gender assigned at birth. The American Civil Liberties Union warned them
about making this a policy and have stated, "For a transgender boy, living a boy in all respects– including bathroom use– is a critical of treatment for...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
It also comes with information about different transgender issues and how to go through day to day life being transgender. This Article relates to
my case because it explains transgender issues and gender dysmorphia,and how much of a threat it can be for transgender people to simple go to a
public restroom.They also explain the importance of transgender people of using the restroom they feel comfortable in and how it is a treatment of
gender dysmorphia. This Closely relates to the issue of the importance of Gavin using the restroom he feels most comfortable in as treatment to his
gender dysmorphia. In addition to this, the article has advice and FAQ's for transgender youth and this information backs up my views on why
transgender people should be able to use the restroom of the gender they

Disruption: The Purpose Of Interest Group Negotiations
The purpose of an interest group lobbying an executive agency is to attempt to get the agency to see their stance and decide to back up that stance
on their behalf. This allows for their positions to be heard more and by a wider audience. In most cases lobbying is used at hearings, while filing
friend of the court briefs or when interest groups get in touch with legislators. Interest groups also contribute to campaigns by forming PACs or Super
PACs. This allows for interest groups to financially support candidates who are promoting and pushing for policies the group wishes to be enforced.
Disruption is the idea that interest groups step in and physically disrupt political activities and policies from being put forth or taken back. This can be
through riots, strikes, sit–ins or other forms of public protest. These actions will possibly have a big influence on what policies are seen as important,
changed, or put in place. Litigation is the action of courts aiding when an interest group falls or filing amicus curiae. This allows for the court to hear
the side of the interest group and possibly make a change in the courts decision that will be in favor of the policies of that interest group.... Show more
Another provision to the Bill of Rights that protects special interest groups, also in the first amendment, is the right for American citizens to petition
their government which gives them the right to talk directly to their government and request changes they wish to be made to the government itself or its

Supreme Court Ruling Summary
What was the Supreme Court ruling?
The Supreme Court ruled announced their ruling on June 28, 1978 but there was not a majority opinion. Four major justices, Rehnquist, Stewart,
Burger, and Stevens, voted against the minority admission program for all school because it violated the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The other four
justices, Marshall, Brennan, White, and Blackmun, voted that the affirmative action is acceptable within certain areas. However, the plurality opinion
was given by Justice Powell. This gave the ruling a 5–4 in favor of Allan Bakke. Powell gave his opinion that the using racial quotas as the deciding
factor of one's admission was violating the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. However, affirmative action is permissible by
Universities but only if used alongside with other factors. This meant that Universities had to discontinue their quota system for minorities and that UC
Davis violated the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. Under these circumstances Allan Bakke was allowed to attend UC Davis.
The main arguments
UC Davis appealed and filed a petition for writ of certiorari in December 1976 because Superior Court of California ruled that UC Davis needed to
shut down their minority program due to equal rights for every race. In order for the Supreme Court to ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The Regents of the University of California v. Bakke case was based around race and how it violated the Fourteenth Amendment. This is a landmark
case because it did not only show that minorities are protected by the Fourteenth Amendment but majorities as well. The ruling on this case also
allowed institutions to use affirmative action in favor with other factors to a person's advantage. Any government funded institution can use affirmative
action such as employment or admission to a

Female Serial Killers: Statistics and Research
Female Serial Killers:
Serial killer is described as an example of a murderer who kills several individuals over a long period of time. While these people are usually male
motivated by various psychological motives such as power, the number of female serial killers has increased significantly in the recent past. Unlike
their male counterparts, female serial killers use less visible means of murder such as poisoning in order to keep under the radar and remain discrete
(Gilbert et. al., 2003). Since the less visible methods account for 80 percent of deaths caused by female serial killers, these criminals can be
considered as gentle killers.
Since there is limited research on female serial killers, identifying case laws and statutes related to the issue is relatively difficult. This process is also
complicated by the fact that female serial killers only account for nearly 8 percent of all serial killers in the United States ("A Murderous
Phenomenon", 2011). According to statistics by the United States Bureau of Justice, men were ten time more likely to commit murder than women
between 1976 and 2005.
Nonetheless, the history of female serial killers in the United States can be traced back to the time of Lavinia Fisher who is widely regarded as the
first female serial killer in the country. Lavinia used her characteristics of a beautiful and charming woman to help her husband rob and murder many
male travelers ("Lavinia Fisher", n.d.). Lavinia Fisher was executed in 1820

Unitarian Universalist Association (UUA) And The Mormons
Same–sax marriage; a debate that has been going on in the religious community for years, is one that will never cease to be important. Some religious
group views on this topic is to condone the acts of same–sex marriage, and some claim it is an act against gods will. I will discuss the difference in
views between the Unitarian Universalist Association (UUA) and the Mormons on the moral debate of Same–sex marriage. The Unitarian Universalist
Association (UUA) is actually the most openly accepting of all religious groups of same sex marriage. Based on their website they heavily respect
the dignity and worth of every person. This respect is not limited to those of Heterosexual orientations but applies equally to people of all gender ...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Through their teachings from the bible they believe and are taught that homosexual passions and acts are shameful and unnatural, that deny entrance to
the Kingdom of God. With this being the basis of their believe, same–sex marriage cannot be the foundation of a Christian marriage approved by God's
Church. They believe the Church main purpose is the saving of people, not to bless the means of their damnation. "No marriage can be sanctioned by
the Church if the very basis of the marriage involves acts that put the couple outside of eternal salvation. No matter what our society may legislate, the
law of God is clear–that a marriage is not a godly marriage if it is a same sex union." (What does the Bible say about same sex marriage?) But
Jehovah Witnesses believe that Jesus loves EVERYONE including homosexuals, lesbians, transvestites, and transgender. Jesus is the Great Healer and
offers freedom from the bondage of sin and unnatural sexual feelings only when you seek Him for His cleansing forgiveness. The Mormon Church has
made public attempts to combat same–sex marriage. They created a policy were Children living in a same–sex household may not be blessed as babies
or baptized until turn 18. The new policy states that the child once 18, the child may denounce the practices of same–sex marriage and cohabitation and
request to join the church. The church has opposed same–sex marriages for ages and respects the law and acknowledges the right of others to think and
act differently. But it does not accept same–sex marriage within its members. Their views on same–sex marriage are on par with their views on
polygamy. Over 1000 members of the Mormon Church have protested over the passing of this new

Finnerty Vs Board Of Registered Nursing Case
I am Myrna Montoya, a registered nurse from New Jersey and currently taking the RN–BSN online program at Notre Dame College, South Euclid,
Ohio. In our course on Health Care Policy in Complex Adaptive System, the students were given the opportunity to review the 2002 case of Finnerty
v. the Board of Registered Nursing. As was ruled by the Court of Appeal, Ellen Hughes Finnerty, a registerednurse, was found guilty of gross
negligence and incompetence. Although I have been a nurse for more than twenty years, I have never heard about the Finnerty v. the Board of
Registered Nursing case. However, I was surprised to note that the only main players mentioned in the case were Finnerty and the Board of Registered
Nursing. I thought that

Interest Groups Vs Political Parties
Paige Larson
Period 3
11/1/16
A.P. GOVERNMENT & POLITICS
CHAPTER 11
"INTEREST GROUPS"
Describe and explain in detail the two factors that distinguish interest groups from political parties.
Unlike interest groups, political parties run candidates. A group can support one's campaign, but they do not control an individual runner. Interest
groups go after specific policy rights they want to endorse. For example, certain businesses will attempt to raise their salaries. Or, environmentalists
target policies that relate to the environment. On the other hand, political parties are more generic. While they hope to meet the needs of individuals,
they make policy decisions for the public as a whole in order to meet a majority of the population's needs. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The act of lobbying can be beneficial to both the interest group and Congress, in some occasions. First, they provide important information on their
targeted policy, giving Congress an expertise on policy areas they have to concern themselves with. Second, the groups can actually help politicians
with strategies to get the legislation through. Members are able to confide in the interest group. Also, members of the group help a politician's
campaign by telling he or she about what typical working people want and they may volunteer in the campaigning process. Lastly, groups can be
influential in ideas and innovations.
Describe and explain in detail the five most common answers from PAC directors as to why they give money to certain candidates.
PAC directors give money to candidates through electioneering.
Describe and explain in detail the main purpose of the Taft–Hartley Act.
Describe and explain in detail three issues that trade and product associations seek when lobbying Capitol Hill.
Describe and explain in detail three items environmental groups have promoted and three items they have

Mendez vs Westminster
The Trial of the First desegregated school| By Marcos Moran| Even though forgotten, the stepping stone of Brown Vs. the Board of Education, Mendez
Vs. Westminster was the first step to desegregate the United States of America. | |
5/1/13
5/1/13
Marcos Moran
Professor Sullivan
History 301 5/1/13
We all know of the famous trial that happen on May 17, 1954, a trial that ended all segregation in school districts all over the United States of America.
With this law being enforce by the 14th amendment, it change the whole nation, colored people were now being allowed to enter into real academic
schools, and compete for a better future. Of course I am talking about the Oliver Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, better known as... Show more
. . . And since California law did not allow for separate Mexican schools, the requirement that children at tend such schools could be considered
arbitrary action taken without 'due process of law.'"(Charles Wollenberg, All Deliberate Speed, 1976, p. 127) This case could not have gone to the
Supreme Court because the law of the state said nothing about segregating Mexican Americans in the Constitution (http://www.cr.nps.gov/history
/online_books/5views/5views5h99.htm)". On Brown vs. the Board of Education it was a little different, because Black was considered a different
race; and according to the Plessey vs. Ferguson case of 1896, it states it could segregate a race, as long as it provides a separate but equal law (http:/
/www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/5views/5views5h99.htm).
Now that we know a little bit more information about the trial, lets learn why all the Mexican American parents got together in order for their kids to
get the same education as all the other Caucasian kids in the neighborhood. It all started in the late 1920s–1930s. As the Mexican and Mexican
American population started to increase in California, more white Americans started getting scared; this led to segregation in schools. Not only were
schools getting segregated but housing was also being segregated as well (Maria Blanco, The Lasting Impact of Mendez v. Westminster in the Struggle
for Desegregation, pg.

Roe V. Wade Summary
In Abuse of Discretion: The Inside Story of Roe v. Wade conclusion chapter, Mr. Forsythe ends his book with an evaluation of Roe's unwanted
outcomes for women's rights. He questions whether or not the decision made in Roe v. Wade has resolved any of the issues it was supposed to fix for
women. Then, he explains how it has not done anything to help women. He goes on to discuss how abortion has increased the intimidating power of
uninterested males in idealistic relationships. Forsythe mentions research from different people to make his point. These include, but are not limited to,
George Akerlof, Janet Yellen, and a collection of articles from the Washington Post. Overall, Abuse of Discretion: The Inside Story ofRoe v. Wade
proposes that ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Wade, a person can see that Mr. Forsythe's background dealing with the legal system is pretty noticeable. This is because the book reads more like
an amicus curiae brief or in other words like an independent counselor, who is normally a volunteer, to a certain case in a court of law. Forsythe's
writing will persuade the reader and for most, it will enthrall a person. Throughout the book, it seems as though Forsythe is mindful of his non–lawyer
audience. As mentioned in the above paragraph he is cautious when it comes to explaining the subtle differences in the English common law and the
many levels of the Federal court system into the normal everyday language. However, there are in certain parts of the book where the passages do
become a bit overloaded with jargon, but after that, it's back to easy reading. For example, in chapter five in the section that talks about why maternal
mortality and abortion mortality rates cannot be compared it throws in a lot of stats and equations. Such as the equations about the abortion mortality
rates which is the number of legal induced abortion deaths over 100,000 legal abortion equals the mortality rate for

Gun Control Laws: Friedman V. Highland Park
Hannah Overstreet
3AB
In light of many recent mass shootings, like the shooting in San Bernardino, the topic of gun control and gun violence have been highly debated in the
United States. Many state and local government have taken the responsibility into their own hands, placing bans on certain types of guns deemed most
dangerous. This has sparked controversy in the U.S. because of the fact that the right to ?bear arms? is a 2nd Amendment right found in the
constitution. The Supreme Court has only heard one case involving individual gun rights, District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), in which they ruled that
the state and local government could not take away the individual right to own a gun. Despite the contradicting laws barring guns in certain locations
and allowing guns in ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The case most recently turned down, Friedman v. Highland Park, deals with the ability of state and local government to ban semiautomatic,
high–capacity assault weapons. Similar bans like this one have been placed in 7 other states, so this case would address the bigger issues of gun
restriction not just the individual event in question. Every year, cases of gun restriction appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, and all but one have been
turned down. These cases have failed to receive a writ of certiorari from the Supreme Court, which accepts the case into the Supreme Court and
places it on the Supreme Court?s docket, or calendar of cases. In Friedman v. Highland Park, only two justices, Thomas and Scalia, suggested the case
to be reviewed. This does not meet the rule of 4, the requirement that a minimum of 4 justices have to request to hear a case

The Role Of Lawyers And Interest Of The Judicial Process
Student's Name:
Professor's Name:
Course Title:
Date submitted:
The role of lawyers and interest groups in the judicial process
A judicial process involves a series of rules undertaken to administer justice through a system of courts defined in a given constitutional law. The
lawyers and the interest groups are important actors in any judicial process, (The U.S. Department of State publication, 2008). In the United States, a
plaintiff or a defendant has a constitutional right to a fair hearing before judgement. The litigants would always need the lawyers to build their defence
or prosecutions cases before the judge or jury. The interest groups are known for influencing the judicial process. In the United States, the interest
groups have such as influenced the judges' appointment, just as a single form of influence. This paper describes in details the roles of the lawyers
and interest groups in the judicial process. In addition to the roles, the paper seeks to explain the reasons behind unpopularity of lawyers in the
United States since colonial years to present day; the impact of stratification in the legal profession on delivery and quality of legal services provision
and how an impartial and unbiased system can allow interest groups to take part in the judicial process.
The lawyer represents the clients in their cases in a court of law. The client could be from the general society or government. A judgment by the judge
or the jury is purely dependent on the

Nucleophilic Substitution Reaction Lab Report
Introduction:–. To natural science the substitution responses is the The greater part significant reactions, particularly Nucleophilic fragrant substitution
responses the place nucleophile strike sure charge alternately incompletely certain accuse Concerning illustration it can so, it replaces An weaker
nucleophile which after that gets to be An abandoning bunch. The remaining sure alternately incompletely certain particle gets a electrophile. The
general type of the response is:. Nuc: + R–LG в†’ R–Nuc + LG:. Those electron combine (:) starting with the nucleophile (Nuc :) strike the substrate
(R–LG) framing another covalent bond Nuc–R–LG. The former state about accuse will be restored The point when the abandoning aggregation (LG)
departs for ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Need simply one step. Those assault of the reagent and the removal of the abandoning bunch happen all the while. This system generally brings about
reversal from claiming setup. On the substrate that is under nucleophilic strike is chiral, those response will prompt a reversal from claiming its
stereochemistry called a Walden reversal. To a sample (chloromethane for bromide particle. ( SN2 ambush might happen Assuming that the posterior
course of ambush is not sterically hindered by substituents on the substrate. Subsequently this system generally happens during a unhindered essential
carbon focal point. Assuming that there may be steric swarming on the substrate close to those abandoning group, for example, such that at a tertiary
carbon center, those substitution will include a SN1 as opposed an SN2 mechanism, (an SN1 might Additionally make less averse in this the event in
light a sufficiently stable carbocation go–between Might a chance to be formed). At the substrate is a fragrant compound those response kind will be
nucleophilic fragrant substitution. Carboxylic corrosive subsidiaries respond for nucleophiles for nucleophilic acyl substitution. This sort of response
camwood a chance to be advantageous in get ready

Engel Vs Vitale Case Study
Engel v. Vitale was at the time a landmark United States Supreme Court case that was ruled it is unconstitutional for state officials to basically
compose an official school prayer and encourage it on public school grounds. The case of Engel v. Vitale was brought up by a group of families of
New Hyde Park school students, who in short complained that the U.S prayer written by the state board "Almighty God" challenged their religious
beliefs. They were greatly supported by groups who opposed the school prayer including Jewish organizations, Judaic Organizations, and Ethical
Culture. The parties were not members of a single religious group. The five were made up of 3 Jews and two suppose spiritual people who did not
belong to one single organized

Formation Of Interest Groups Essay
Which is most likely true of single–issue interest groups? 14. Which is an argument against interest groups? 13. Which was an attempt to address
dishonesty or questionable motivations by barring members of the executive branch from representing clients from their agency for at least two
years prior to leaving office? 12. How do lobbyists typically seek to influence members of Congress? 11. What might a large potential group do to
overcome the free rider problem? 10. In which area are modern labor unions most likely seeing high numbers of membership? 9. What distinguishes
political parties from interest groups? 8. Which is the most likely way in which pluralism enhances democracy? 7. In which time period did the U.S.
see an uptick in the rise... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
– free rider. Which constitutional provision guarantees the right of interest groups to organize? – first amendment The supreme court's decision in
citizens united v FEC created the possibility for unlimited spending in elections by ______. – labor unions. An appeal to membership in an interest
group based on passion or purpose would be most appropriate for a(n) ____ interest group or organization. В¬– religious or ideological. A leader of the
National Rifle Association (NRA) would be very unlikely to propose a policy position of highly restricted gun control because ____. – the strength of
single–issue groups is the intensity of members' beliefs, which are shared by their leaders. Which is the most likely cause for rapid increase in number
of interest groups in recent decades?– Developments in technology made interest group activities easier. Which best describes interest groups in the
early to mid–1800s? –they were mostly single–issue groups, seated in Christian revivalism, or focused on business

Copyright Law Extension Act And The Copyright Term...
BRIEF AMICUS CURIAE OF ELDRED V. ASHCROFT IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER
QUESTION PRESENTED
Does the Copyright Term Extension Act, which extends the term of a copyright to 70 years after the creator's death, violate the "limited Times"
prescription of the Copyright Clause and the free speech guarantee of the First Amendment?
IDENTITY AND INTEREST OF AMICUS CURIAE We respectfully submit this brief amicus curiae in support of the petitioners, Eldred et al. The
petitioners owned the copyrights of works now in the public domain. They challenged the 1998 Copyright Term Extension Act (CTEA) on the grounds
that the act allows copyrights to exist in perpetuity and restricts free speech, so the act violates the Copyright Clause and the First Amendment of the
United States Constitution. Justice Ginsburg denied Eldred's challenges, finding that the terms established by the CTEA are limited terms and that the
act accommodates for petitioner's First Amendment concerns. We submit this amicus curiae in dissent of the court opinion that upheld the CTEA.
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT TheCopyright Term Extension Actof 1998 established that copyright terms now expire 70 years after the creator's
death, which is a 20–year extension from the previous copyright law in 1976 that established term expiration 50 years after the creator's death. The Act
applies equally to future works and works with existing copyrights. The court in Eldred v. Ashcroft upheld the CTEA as a rational exercise of
congressional authority in that the copyright extension creates a significant benefit: encouraging copyright authors to produce more creative works.
However, the extension has little influence on the motivation of authors to create and it constructs roadblocks in the creation process. Overall, the
expected outcome of the 20–year copyright term extension is a reduction in the number of works being created and copyrighted in the future due to the
increased costs of production. Without works entering the public domain, the copyright owner monopolizes their work, creating social costs associated
with a monopoly market failure. The CTEA should be struck down as it is inconsistent with the ultimate goal of copyright law, which is to promote the

The Challenges Of Marriage Equality And Same-Sex Marriage
Marriage equality and same–sex marriage have been controversial topics throughout American history. The push for both of these saw a huge victory
with the decision of Obergefell v. Hodges, which made it illegal for states to have bans on same–sex marriage. The oddity about this was it was that
the judiciary, arguably the weakest branch, caused social change. The Supreme Court decided to take action because the social conditions for them to
do so were present, the inside and outside strategies of interest groups persuaded the court to do so , and Congress was incapable and partially
unwilling to take action.
Even though homosexuality has been practiced for a long time in our country, the movement for equality didn't start until 1969 with the Stonewall Inn
police raid. This incident occurred when police in New York entered an inn trying to arrest people partaking in homosexual acts . The people rioted and
fought back, and this sparked the gay rights movement. This movement challenged discrimination and pursued marriage equality through
demonstrations and legal challenges. The movement's efforts were considerably hurt by Congress and President Clinton when the Defense of Marriage
Act (DOMA) became law in 1996. This law defined marriage as between a man and a woman . The Supreme Court saw cases that revolved around
discrimination like Romer v. Evans and cases that revolved around marriage and sexual equality like Lawrence v. Texas . Cases like these would lay
the groundwork

The Safety And Dignity Of Detainees
The Safety and Dignity of Detainees
Does the policy of strip searching impede on the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights of individuals as outlined in the United States Constitution?
In Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholder of County of Burlington et al this question arises when the petitioner was stopped at a traffic stop, and upon
a database search it was discovered he had an outstanding warrant for his arrest to due to failure to pay a fine. The petitioner was sent to Burlington
County Correctional Facility and Essex County Correctional Facility, both of which he was strip searched upon arrival. Petitioner submits that
detainees held for minor offenses should not be subject to humiliating strip searches. Summary Judgement was ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Dworkinian's try to limit the indeterminacy by accounting for principles and would say that the rule that stands is the rule that fits the settled law of
the soundest theory. Realists counterargue that while there may be legal determinacy when applying rule to small aspects of the law, the law in
general needs to be cohesive in order to create what Dworkin calls, "the Soundest Theory of Law." In this case, it is not clear as to what the soundest
theory is, should the government decide because they make the broadest rule of the land, or do we let the prison itself decide since they routinely deal
with strip search regulations and policies and would have a deeper understanding of what the law should be. Altman would say that Justice Kennedy is
correct in making his decision because there can be no soundest theory of law due to the competing rules. Another argument posed by the CLSers is
the idea that there is no discoverable metaprinciple for determining the soundest theory of law. Dworkin's argument is that principles are weighted and
the principle with the greatest weight should be binding when there is not rule in place, but doesn't supply a mechanism for how they are weighted. In
the case of Florence, who's to say that the principle of human dignity is more important than the principle of keeping as many people in a population
safe? Kennedy contributes to the opinion of the court by listing the reasons for strip

Thernstrom's Argument Analysis
Robert D. Putnam et. al. and Abigail Thernstrom et. al. address affirmative action policies at colleges and universities as a broader social issue than just
an individual getting into the university in their amicus curiae briefs. Thernstrom submitted her amici brief in favor of the petitioner, Abigail N. Fisher
et. al., and Putnam submits his amici brief in favor of the respondents, The University of Texas et. al. The University of Texas chose not to admit Ms.
Fisher, who was then a high school student. Ms. Fisher then sued the University, arguing that the use of race in applications and admission decisions to
and of the University were discriminatory under the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. These amici briefs were submitted ... Show more
His experience in the classroom and his substantial research into both the positives and negatives of diversity make his clear, concise arguments are
incredibly convincing, especially in regards to his own university classroom.
Thernstrom, on the other hand, appears to be attempting to make a case for self–evidence. Her arguments, such as minority students getting into
universities because of "upward–ratcheting" appear unsubstantiated. Indeed, her claim that many minority students cannot "catch up" to other students
itself appears unsubstantiated. Further, because of she argues that many. Her omission of Dr. Putnam's research when it directly contradicted her
arguments further diminishes her amicus curiae brief.
Affirmative action, and race–based admissions standards, are the best way to increase (or maintain) diversity at institutions of higher learning. In spite
of its perceived flaws, it has increased the diversity at previously all–white institutions of higher learning, such as the University of Texas at Austin, and
that diversity has allowed friendships to be formed that otherwise would not have been, has allowed students to learn from professors they otherwise
would never have and allowed professors to learn from students from a wide variety of

The Supreme Court Of The United States
No.
In the
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
THE COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO Petitioner,
V.
LUIS M. SANCHEZ VALLE AND
JAIME GOMEZ VAZQUEZ Respondents.
On Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico
BRIEF AMICUS CURIAE OF NATASHA JOHNSON STATEMENT OF INTEREST
As someone in support of statehood for the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, this case holds special significance. I am a firm believer that Puerto Rico
has been treated unjustly as a territory by the United States, and this has resulted in poor living conditions for its citizens. To deny a sovereign power
to enforce laws within its territory is only one of the many issues the Commonwealth faces. For these reasons, I write this brief of amicus curiae in
support of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.
ISSUES PRESENTED
Under the United States Constitution Amendment V, do the United States Federal Government and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico have power to
enforce laws that stem from different entities, and thus considered two different sovereigns for the purpose of the Double Jeopardy Clause of the
United States Constitution?
APPLICABLE STATUTE
U.S. Const. amend. V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases
arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the
same offence to be twice put in

The World Trade Organization ( Wto ) Agreements
The World Trade Organization (WTO) deals with the global rules of trade between nations. It is mainly responsible for ensuring that the trade flows
smoothly, predictably and freely. The principal objective of WTO is upliftment of the standard of living internationally; it does activities surrounding
the same.
When Ministers had adopted the Marrakesh Agreement they had also decided to include a specific reference to Non–Governmental Organizations
(NGOs) in Article V: 2. The General Council additionally clarified the framework for relations with NGOs by adopting a set of guidelines (WT/L
/162) which "recognizes the role NGOs can play to increase the awareness of the public in respect of WTO activities". These guidelines are
instrumental for ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
NGOs had to demonstrate that their activities were "concerned with matters related to those of the WTO".
Symposia
Since 1996, a number of symposia have been arranged by the Secretariat for NGOs on particular issues of interest to civil society, namely, three on
trade and the environment, one on trade and development and one on trade facilitation. These symposia have provided, on a relaxed basis, the opening
for NGOs to discuss certain specific issues with representatives of WTO Member countries.
Day–to–day Contact
The WTO Secretariat receives a huge number of requests per day from NGOs, from all over the world and Secretariat staff meets with NGOs on a
habitual basis – both individually and as a part of NGO organized events.
The annual report of the World Trade Organizationcorroborates the growing official relationship between civil society and trade. Tucked away in a
silent corner of the report is the reason that the number of NGOs attending the WTO ministerial increased many times over, from 108 at the Singapore
ministerial in 1996 to 811 in the Hong Kong ministerial, nine years later.
The growth that occurred in the Seattle ministerial can be attributed to the mobilization of NGOs that were in fact against the WTO. Indeed, at several
points in that ministerial, including its abandoned inauguration, official NGO delegates attempted to disrupt proceedings.
The role of NGO's in the panel proceedings has been recognized recently but their potential on how

The United States versus Paramount Pictures, Inc. Essay
The United States v. Paramount Pictures, Inc. (1947) case deals with monopolies and antitrust laws. I chose the trusts/monopolies topic due to my
interest in finance and economics. Since elementary school, I have been fascinated by John D. Rockefeller's story about his oil monopoly. This
history has caused me to be interested in monopolies and trusts. I began enjoy reading about the elite who obtained their wealth illegally. After reading
and watching The Great Gatsby and watching the movie Catch Me If You Can, I have been fascinated with counterfeit wealth and how people may
have gotten away with breaking the law. My favorite thing about APUSH is learning how the economy has changed over time and how that has
affected the lifestyle of the... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
These "Big Five" created an alliance of theater chains that monopolies on the profits of movies' first–run and absolutely crushed other independent
production countries. The Paramount case went into Federal Court in New York in 1940. The was a consent decree; the compromise allowed the Big
Five to retain their chains in exchange for restriction on block–booking(selling multiple movies to a theater as a unit). This also outlawed blind bidding,
so all films were required to be shown to the buyers before selling them (SIMPP, 2002). The independent exhibitors were unhappy with this decision,
because it still gives a tremendous amount of power to the Big Five. Companies like Universal and Columbia didn't own theaters and relied heavily on
block–booking. The independent producers created the Society of Independent Motion Picture Producers (SIMPP). The case turned around when
SIMPP was created (SIMPP, 2002). There was an opposition to the Big Five, but the problem was the independent producers weren't united. The
Consent of Decree of 1940 expired and the Justice Department began the "New York Equity Suit" (SIMPP, 2002). This case now involved the
original Big Five producing companies and three smaller companies who were unhappy with the ruling of the consent of decree such as Universal and
Columbia. These three companies were known as the "Little Three" SIMPP spent $10,000 to unsuccessfully file an amicus curiae brief. They didn't
have enough time for the approval

Case Analysis of US v. Emerson Essay examples
Case Analysis of US v. Emerson
This case deals with the Defendant's possession of a firearm while under a restraining order, and the charges incurred by the Defendant for such
firearm possession. Under Texas law, the possession of a firearm by Mr. Emerson creates a perceivable threat to members of his family, thus creating a
violation of the restraining order against him. Apparently common practice in Texas, the restraining order was filed by Mr. Emerson's wife in
conjunction with the papers filed for divorce. The restraining order sought to enjoin Emerson from "engaging in various financial transactions to
maintain the financial status quo and from making threatening communications or actual attacks upon his wife during the pendency ... Show more
Emerson's possession of a firearm was construed as a perceivable threat to his family and, therefore, a direct violation of the restraining order. Mr.
Emerson argued that the Act is "an unconstitutional exercise of congressional power under the Commerce Clause and the Second, Fifth, and Tenth
Amendments to the United States Constitution" (United 2). The District Court addressed each claim separately, finding credibility in only Emerson's
Second and Fifth Amendment claims.
In Emerson's claim that the Commerce Clause was violated, he argued that the Act did not regulate commercial activity, and was therefore an
unconstitutional use of congressional power. In claiming this, Emerson looked to the Supreme Court's holding in United States v. Lopez, however, the
District Court dismissed this claim, citing a Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals decision which examined the validity of 18 U.S.C. В§ 922 (g)(8) under a
Commerce Clause challenge, in which it held that the Act was constitutional (United 3). Because of this ruling (in United States v. Pierson), the District
Court

What Is The Difference Between Marvin Gaye And Pharrell...
Marvin Gaye Estate v. Robin Thicke and Pharrell Williams
The 2013 Robin Thicke single "Blurred Lines," which featured Pharell Williams and T.I. (Clifford Joseph Harris Jr.), was no stranger to controversy.
In addition to lyrics that some felt promoted rape culture, the uncut version of the music video featuring three topless models had to be removed from
YouTube for violating the website's terms of service.
The mostly costly controversy, however, was the song's resemblance to the 1977Marvin Gaye hit "Got to Give It Up." In a May 2013 interview with
GQ, Thicke responded to a question about the song's origin by stating, "Pharrell and I were in the studio and I told him that one of my favorite songs
of all time was Marvin Gaye's 'Got to Give

An Effective Purpose For Special Interest Groups And...
1.) When there is a case that a particular interest group has interest in, comes before the court, a group has the option to file an amicus curiae brief to
better present the groups breakdown of the case. Now the impact that amicus curiae can have is that it brings policy perspective to the courts in a way
that a party's own individual brief may be unable to do so (White). The amicus curiae briefs serve an effective purpose of advocating for special
interest groups and in public business affairs. There are circumstances in which these types of briefs could be needed to represent a client more
effectively, such as when appearing before theUnited States Supreme Court (White). A group will utilize the amicus brief as a way to lobby the
courts. These briefs serve a purpose of advising the court in terms of policy ramifications and problems from a particular interest group's stance, all
while guiding the court to a fair and impartial decision. The amicus serves the role for an advocate, but it is more effective if not acting in
self–interest, but rather as means to serve others. Groups that try to sway the decision making of the Supreme Court have been utilizing amicus
briefs more often as a tool of the court (Witte). Winning in the courts can be seen as a game of chess. Interest groups know the game as well as
anybody in the system. The amicus curiae briefs allow for these special groups to play the game more effectively and is, in a sense, another tool at
their disposal

Case Study: Engel V Vitale
U.S. Government
Jacky Guo
Period 1
The case was about a group of students' families in New York state. They complained about the voluntary prayer written by the state about the Almighty
God. They stated that the prayers were contradicted their beliefs. The plaintiff led by Steven Engel, which is a Jewish, and the plaintiffs challenged the
constitutionality of the state's prayer in school policy. ("Engel v. Vitale." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 18 May 2017.) The parents were arguing
that the prayer violated the law of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, as made applicable to the states through the Due Process Clause
of the Fourteenth Amendment.("Facts and Case Summary – Engel v. Vitale."United States Courts. N.p., n.d.

Coca Cola Co : Case Analysis
Rebecca Doss
Dylan McLemore
MC 401
24 November 2014
POM Wonderful LLC v. Coca–Cola Co. (2014)
Supreme Court of the United States
Issue: POM Wonderful, producer and distributor of pomegranate juices, filed suit against the Coca–Cola Company regarding a juice product labeled
"pomegranate–blueberry" sold through its Minute Maid line. The phrase "flavored blend of five juices" appears in small print below the
"pomegranate–blueberry" label, and the juice product 's actual composition was 99% apple and grape juices. POM, under the Lanham Act, claimed that
the name, label, advertising, and marketing of the Coca–Cola product was misleading to customers and caused POM to lose revenue. (POM Wonderful
LLC v. the Coca–Cola Company). The case was originally heard by the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, which ruled that the
name and label claims for the product were protected under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and subject o regulation only by the FDA. The court
acted out of concern that the claim filed under the Lanham act would subvert the FDA 's exclusive right to file claims for violations of the FDCA. The
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the court 's decision that the claim was precluded by the FDCA and granted summary judgment to Coca–Cola
(POM). The Supreme Court granted certiorari to the question of whether a Lanham Act claim by a private party may challenge a product label subject
to regulation by the FDCA (Opinion of the Court). Rule:

The Bill Of Rights Of The United States
The Bill of Rights lists certain freedoms and liberties that are guaranteed to the people of the United States of America. Because these rights are in the
Constitution, they are federal laws that apply to everyone in America. To ensure there was no question as to who the Bill of Rights applied to, the
Fourteenth Amendment was passed in 1868 giving anyone born in, or a citizen of, the United States the rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. The
amendment left clauses giving some interpretation to the states and other local municipalities. The District of Columbia used one of these clauses
to ban all handguns within city limits. The District of Columbia's ban of handguns was a discrepancy in which the citizens of the city were not able
to rightfully exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms. After the law was looked at by the Supreme Court in DC vs. Heller, the court
ruled the law was unconstitutional and citizens living in the District of Columbia were being unjustly denied their constitutional rights. After hearing
the Supreme Court's decision in DC vs. Heller, a 76 year old Chicago resident named Otis McDonald looked to remove a City of Chicago ban on
handguns which was similar to that in the District of Columbia. Joined by three other Chicago residents, Adam Orlov, and Colleen and David
Lawson, McDonald and his colleges filed a suit against the citywide ban of handguns, and eventually became know as McDonald vs. City of Chicago.
McDonald vs. City of

Amicus Curiae Brief Summary
An Amicus Curiae brief literally means "friend of the court" in Latin. This is a brief written by a 3rd party, not involved in the case. The purpose of
the brief is to provide judges with information about legal arguments or to additional relevant data for consideration.
There are 3 types of Amicus Curiae briefs submitted by the American Psychological Association.
1.Advocacy issues – "takes a position on some legal or public policy update" ("Definition: Amicus curiae," n.d.).
a.Example: Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health. 462 U.S. 416. Filed 8/1982, decided 1983. The case was reference the City of Akron's
law that informed consent for an abortion had to come from a woman's attending physician as opposed to any other qualified ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
The APA's brief stated that the data gathered by social science studies concluded that death qualified juries are pro prosecution and do not provide a
representative sample of a typical criminal jury which would impair jury functioning.
c.The U.S. Supreme Court reversed the decision. They found that the studies were flawed. In addition, they stated that the Constitution did not prohibit
death qualified juries.
3.Guild issues – Brief written by the APA with the goal of "protecting it rights as a profession" (Fulero & Wrightsman, 2008, p. 383).
a.Example: Jenkins v U.S. 307 F2d 637. Filed 2/1962 decided 1962. This is the first brief sponsored by the APA. This case is in reference to the
ability of a psychologist to testify as an expert witness to the nature and the existence or nonexistence of mental disorders.
b.The APA's brief argued several points. Psychology is an established science based on knowledge and training, and that experience allows for a
psychologist's competence to give an expert opinion as to the existence or lack thereof of a mental condition or illness.
c.The Supreme Court reversed the decision and remanded the case for a new trial. The court also stated that the ability of a psychologist to testify as
an expert witness was based on knowledge and experience, not just the title of

Case Study On CLB And NCLT
COMPARATIVE STUDY ON CLB AND NCLT
INTRODUCTION
In the corporate field of our country, Judicial Forums started to play a very important role in the life of a company The Central Government started to
take initiative by bringing effecting changes in Corporate Laws so that they meet the required needs of the society from time to time.. Companies had
to change according to the growing needs of the society so as create value and enhance wealth for all their stakeholders which not only include the
equity shareholders and debenture holders but also the others (i.e.) fixed deposit holders, Banks, Term Lending Institutions, vendors, consumers and
public at large.
From the beginning when this Companies Bill, 1997 was placed before the Parliament, the Central Government started to bring significant changes in
the Companies Act, 1956 (Act). In fact the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
6) Jurisdiction of civil procedure code:
The CLB hasn't expressly mentioned its exclusion from the jurisdiction of civil procedure code but the companies Act 2013 expressly mentioned the
exclusion of the jurisdiction of civil procedure code under Sec 430.
7). Amicus curiae: The Draft National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2013 enable the NCLT to appoint Amicus Curiae for opinion on various
specialised legal issues which was lacking in CLB.
8) Jurisdiction:
Provisions relating to to mergers, restructuring and winding–up the NCLT, once fully functional, will consolidate the corporate jurisdiction of
The CLB;
The Board of Industrial and Financial Reconstruction;
The Appellate Authority for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction and;
The Jurisdiction and powers relating to winding up, restructuring and other such provisions, currently vested in the High Courts.
Once notified, the provisions relating to mergers, restructuring and winding up will no longer be under the jurisdiction of the High Court.
Position under companies Act

Case Study: The Search Incident To Arrest Exception
The Search Incident to Arrest Exception The Supreme Court first outlined the search–incident–to–arrest exception in Chimel v. California, 395 U.S.
752 (1969) and United States v. Robinson, 414 U.S. 218 (1973), holding that police may search a suspect's person and the immediate vicinity during a
lawful arrest. This exception serves two governmental interests: (1) the need to ensure officer safety and disarm the suspect and (2) the need to
prevent destruction of evidence. But, as the Court stressed in a recent case, when "there is no possibility" that the suspect could gain access to a
weapon or destroy evidence "both justifications for the search–incident–to–arrest exception are absent and the rule does not apply." Arizona v. Gant,
556 U.S. 332, 339 (2009). The basic rule under the Fourth Amendment is that "searches conducted outside the judicial process, without prior approval
by judge or magistrate, are per se unreasonable." Id. at 338. Petitioner Riley's Brief... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Specifically, the device did not threaten officer safety, and searching it after it had already been seized was not necessary to prevent the destruction of
evidence. Riley also argued that the search of his cell phone was unreasonably intrusive given the extraordinary amount of sensitive personal
information stored on the phone, and the First Amendment implications of the government's collection of those communications. Petitioner also
argued that it would not be sufficient for the Court to establish a rule limiting the cell phone search to situations where the officer believes the phone
contains evidence of the crime of arrest. Finally, Riley argued that the search of his cell phone at the police stationhouse was too remote from his arrest
to be justified under the

The Influence Of The NAACP
In addition, the NAACP also relies on help from the branches of government and attempts to influence public policy throughout this process. The
NAACP brings cases to the Supreme Court, submits Amicus Curiae Briefs, and litigation. The NAACP brings cases to court that involves a violation
of a citizens rights, in hopes that this violation will be resolved. The NAACP is infamous for the Brown v Board of Education case which addressed
segregated schools throughout the United States. This appeal to the Supreme Court, not only brought a solution to this issue, it also allowed the
NAACP to influence the public policy by adjusting this policy. In Litigation cases, the NAACP sues against a person, organization, or group of people
with the intention

Analysis Of The Amicus Curiae Is The National Coalition...

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Avis Malave

More from Avis Malave (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Analysis Of The Amicus Curiae Is The National Coalition...