Dr. Meserow Is A Mentally Competent Woman

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
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

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 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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 1977 Marvin 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

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.

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. ¬– 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

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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 registered nurse, 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

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

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 content on Helpwriting.net ...
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

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 of Roe v. Wade proposes that ... Show more content
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

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 the United 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

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
→ 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

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 content on Helpwriting.net ...
. . . 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.

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

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 content on
Helpwriting.net ...
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

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

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

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

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 Organization corroborates 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

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

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

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

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 content on Helpwriting.net ...
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. § 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

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
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

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

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 The Copyright Term Extension Act of 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

Dr. Meserow Is A Mentally Competent Woman

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Jan Champagne

More from Jan Champagne (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Dr. Meserow Is A Mentally Competent Woman