Landmark Cases
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
2 likes•1,099 views
an informative powerpoint about three landmark cases including, Marbury v. Madison, Miranda v. Phoenix and United States v. Nixon
Report
Share
Report
Share
Recommended
Landmark supreme court cases
Thank you for your letter regarding the impact of Brown v. Board of Education. The unanimous decision declaring segregation unconstitutional was a landmark victory for civil rights and equality. While discrimination still exists, this ruling helped establish that all people deserve equal treatment and opportunities under the law regardless of race. Progress continues to be made towards the vision of a just society where individuals are judged based on their character rather than the color of their skin. The ACLU remains committed to defending civil liberties and promoting racial justice.
United states v. nixon
This document summarizes the landmark United States Supreme Court case United States v. Nixon. It details how the case arose from the Watergate scandal, where President Nixon was linked to burglars who broke into the Democratic headquarters. Tapes were found that could incriminate Nixon, but he claimed the tapes were protected by executive privilege. The Supreme Court unanimously ruled that Nixon had to turn over the tapes to the ongoing criminal prosecution, establishing that the President is not immune from judicial process.
Famous Supreme Court Cases
This document summarizes several important Supreme Court cases related to slavery and civil rights in the US:
1) Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) ruled African Americans could not be citizens and that the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional, further entrenching slavery and sparking tensions before the Civil War.
2) Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) established the "separate but equal" doctrine allowing racial segregation if facilities were equal, legitimizing Jim Crow laws for 58 years.
3) Miranda v. Arizona (1966) established Miranda rights requiring police inform suspects of their rights to remain silent and have an attorney present during interrogations to prevent self-incrimination from
Landmark court cases
This document summarizes key Supreme Court cases, listing the constitutional amendment and issue addressed in each case, and providing a brief 1-2 sentence description of the precedent set or legal principle established. A total of 30 cases are summarized, spanning various amendments and addressing issues including freedom of speech, search and seizure, due process, and more.
Supreme court Landmark Cases
- Marbury v Madison (1803) established the principle of judicial review, allowing courts to invalidate laws that are unconstitutional.
- McCulloch v Maryland (1819) affirmed Congress's broad implied powers under the Necessary and Proper Clause.
- Gibbons v Ogden (1824) expanded Congress's power under the Commerce Clause to regulate interstate economic activity.
United States v Nixon
The Supreme Court case of United States v. Nixon involved President Nixon being accused of involvement in the Watergate break-in and refusing to turn over tape recordings of his conversations around the planning of the break-in. The Supreme Court ruled that executive privilege does not apply in criminal cases and ordered Nixon to turn over the tapes, establishing that no person, including the President, is above the law and criminal processes.
Landmark supreme court cases
This document summarizes several landmark US Supreme Court cases that established important constitutional precedents:
- Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988) established that school administrators can regulate student speech.
- Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) ruled that defendants who cannot afford an attorney cannot be deprived of their 6th Amendment right to counsel.
- West Virginia Education v. Barnette (1943) ruled that mandatory flag salutes violated the 1st Amendment's freedom of religion clause.
- Miranda v. Arizona (1966) ruled that questioning without informing defendants of their rights violated the 5th Amendment. This established the Miranda rights.
Important Supreme Court Cases
This document summarizes several important Supreme Court cases that impacted civil rights in the United States. It discusses the Brown v. Board of Education case in 1954 that ruled racial segregation in public schools was unconstitutional. It also describes the Dred Scott v. Sanford case in 1857 that ruled African Americans could not be citizens. Finally, it summarizes Roe v. Wade in 1973 that established a woman's right to an abortion as protected by the right to privacy.
Recommended
Landmark supreme court cases
Thank you for your letter regarding the impact of Brown v. Board of Education. The unanimous decision declaring segregation unconstitutional was a landmark victory for civil rights and equality. While discrimination still exists, this ruling helped establish that all people deserve equal treatment and opportunities under the law regardless of race. Progress continues to be made towards the vision of a just society where individuals are judged based on their character rather than the color of their skin. The ACLU remains committed to defending civil liberties and promoting racial justice.
United states v. nixon
This document summarizes the landmark United States Supreme Court case United States v. Nixon. It details how the case arose from the Watergate scandal, where President Nixon was linked to burglars who broke into the Democratic headquarters. Tapes were found that could incriminate Nixon, but he claimed the tapes were protected by executive privilege. The Supreme Court unanimously ruled that Nixon had to turn over the tapes to the ongoing criminal prosecution, establishing that the President is not immune from judicial process.
Famous Supreme Court Cases
This document summarizes several important Supreme Court cases related to slavery and civil rights in the US:
1) Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) ruled African Americans could not be citizens and that the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional, further entrenching slavery and sparking tensions before the Civil War.
2) Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) established the "separate but equal" doctrine allowing racial segregation if facilities were equal, legitimizing Jim Crow laws for 58 years.
3) Miranda v. Arizona (1966) established Miranda rights requiring police inform suspects of their rights to remain silent and have an attorney present during interrogations to prevent self-incrimination from
Landmark court cases
This document summarizes key Supreme Court cases, listing the constitutional amendment and issue addressed in each case, and providing a brief 1-2 sentence description of the precedent set or legal principle established. A total of 30 cases are summarized, spanning various amendments and addressing issues including freedom of speech, search and seizure, due process, and more.
Supreme court Landmark Cases
- Marbury v Madison (1803) established the principle of judicial review, allowing courts to invalidate laws that are unconstitutional.
- McCulloch v Maryland (1819) affirmed Congress's broad implied powers under the Necessary and Proper Clause.
- Gibbons v Ogden (1824) expanded Congress's power under the Commerce Clause to regulate interstate economic activity.
United States v Nixon
The Supreme Court case of United States v. Nixon involved President Nixon being accused of involvement in the Watergate break-in and refusing to turn over tape recordings of his conversations around the planning of the break-in. The Supreme Court ruled that executive privilege does not apply in criminal cases and ordered Nixon to turn over the tapes, establishing that no person, including the President, is above the law and criminal processes.
Landmark supreme court cases
This document summarizes several landmark US Supreme Court cases that established important constitutional precedents:
- Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988) established that school administrators can regulate student speech.
- Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) ruled that defendants who cannot afford an attorney cannot be deprived of their 6th Amendment right to counsel.
- West Virginia Education v. Barnette (1943) ruled that mandatory flag salutes violated the 1st Amendment's freedom of religion clause.
- Miranda v. Arizona (1966) ruled that questioning without informing defendants of their rights violated the 5th Amendment. This established the Miranda rights.
Important Supreme Court Cases
This document summarizes several important Supreme Court cases that impacted civil rights in the United States. It discusses the Brown v. Board of Education case in 1954 that ruled racial segregation in public schools was unconstitutional. It also describes the Dred Scott v. Sanford case in 1857 that ruled African Americans could not be citizens. Finally, it summarizes Roe v. Wade in 1973 that established a woman's right to an abortion as protected by the right to privacy.
Supreme court cases landmark
The document summarizes several important Supreme Court cases that established or clarified rights in US schools and society. Key cases included Tinker v. Des Moines which established students' free speech rights, New Jersey v. TLO which allowed student searches based on reasonable suspicion, and Brown v. Board of Education which overturned racial segregation in public schools.
36 supreme court-cases
The document discusses several important Supreme Court cases related to constitutional rights:
- Miranda v. Arizona established that suspects must be read their rights (known as the Miranda rights) upon arrest based on the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
- In re Gault ruled that juveniles have the same fundamental rights as adults, including the right to be notified of charges and to have private names and details.
- Tinker v. Des Moines Schools determined that students have limited free speech rights at school under the First Amendment's freedom of expression.
- Several other cases, such as Roe v. Wade, Texas v. Johnson, and Engel v. Vitale, established additional rights
UNITED STATES V. NIXON
The Supreme Court held that President Nixon did not have absolute privilege to withhold
evidence, such as audio tapes, from a criminal investigation into the Watergate scandal. While
the President has a general privilege of confidentiality, it cannot outweigh the need for relevant
evidence in a criminal proceeding. The Court found that the Constitution's requirements for a fair
trial and due process under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments were more important than the
President's interest in confidentiality in this case. This established an important limitation on
presidential privilege.
How Case Law has shaped our Rights
This document summarizes three Supreme Court cases:
1) United States v. Nixon ruled that President Nixon was required to release audio tapes related to the Watergate scandal due to executive privilege limitations.
2) Plessy v. Ferguson upheld racial segregation under the "separate but equal" doctrine.
3) Brown v. Board of Education overturned Plessy and ruled that racial segregation in public schools was unconstitutional, effectively ending segregation.
Landmark Supreme Court Cases and how they affected American society.
Students will examine important SCOTUS cases and analyze how they affected American society. Answer the questions on the handout that match the slide numbers.
Texas v johnson power point
Gregory Lee Johnson was convicted under Texas law for burning an American flag in protest of Reagan administration policies in 1984. The Supreme Court was tasked with determining if flag burning constituted protected speech under the First Amendment. In a 5-4 decision, the Court held that Johnson's flag burning was expressive conduct protected by freedom of speech. The Court found that the Texas law banning flag desecration was unconstitutional.
Plessy v ferguson
The document summarizes the key issues in the landmark US Supreme Court case Plessy v. Ferguson. It discusses that Homer Plessy, who was 7/8 Caucasian and 1/8 African, challenged a Louisiana law requiring racial segregation on railways. The case went to the Supreme Court in 1896 to determine if the "separate but equal" law was constitutional. The Court ultimately ruled in favor of the state, allowing racial segregation as long as facilities were equal for both races. This decision established the "separate but equal" doctrine and was later overturned by Brown v. Board of Education in 1954.
Case law
- Plessy v. Ferguson involved Homer Plessy being arrested for refusing to leave a "whites only" train car as required by Louisiana law. The Supreme Court ruled that the law requiring racial segregation was constitutional under the doctrine of "separate but equal."
- Tinker v. Des Moines established that students have free speech rights in school, but that speech can be regulated if it causes a substantial disruption to the learning environment. The case involved students suspended for wearing black armbands to protest the Vietnam War.
- Texas v. Johnson overturned a Texas law prohibiting flag desecration, ruling that burning the American flag as a form of political protest is a protected expressive act under the First
11&12.judicial branch
The Supreme Court ruled that African Americans, whether enslaved or free, could not claim citizenship and therefore had no standing to sue in federal court. The Court also ruled that Congress did not have the authority to prohibit slavery in federal territories, effectively nationalizing slavery. This landmark decision had wide-ranging legal and social consequences for decades.
Plessy vs ferguson
The Plessy v. Ferguson case involved Homer Plessy, a black man who was arrested for sitting in the whites-only car of a train in Louisiana in 1892. The case went to the Supreme Court to determine whether racial segregation of public facilities was constitutional. The Supreme Court ruled in a 7-1 decision that the doctrine of "separate but equal" was constitutional, allowing racial segregation if black and white facilities were equal. This decision had far-reaching negative impacts by legalizing racial segregation across many aspects of public life and encouraging the continuation of racism in America for decades.
Taylor king power point.
The Free Speech Coalition, a trade association for the adult entertainment industry, filed a lawsuit against Attorney General Ashcroft challenging the constitutionality of the Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996. The act banned any visual depiction, including computer generated images, that appeared to depict minors engaging in sexually explicit conduct. While the goal was to protect children, the Free Speech Coalition argued it infringed on free speech rights. The Supreme Court ultimately agreed, ruling the act prohibited speech that was not legally obscene.
Case of texas v. johnson
In 1984, Gregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag in front of Dallas City Hall as a protest. He was convicted of desecrating a respected object under Texas law and sentenced to prison. However, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals overturned the conviction, finding that burning the flag was protected speech under the First Amendment. The state of Texas appealed to the Supreme Court. In 1989, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that flag burning constituted expressive conduct protected by the First Amendment. This case established that flag burning is a form of protected free speech.
communications.williams.edu-Williams Welcomes Distinguished Group of Presidin...
Williams College will host a moot court argument on April 22nd where students will argue a case currently before the US Supreme Court regarding the constitutionality of civil commitment of sexually dangerous persons. Presiding over the student arguments will be a distinguished group of federal judges, including judges from the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals and US District Courts of Vermont and California. The moot court will examine issues related to Congress's authority to enact civil commitment laws and the burden of proof standards in civil commitment proceedings.
US Landmark Cases.
Brown v. Board of Education ruled that segregated schools were unconstitutional, violating the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. Plessy v. Ferguson upheld the doctrine of "separate but equal" and found that segregated rail cars were constitutional in Louisiana. Dred Scott v. Sanford determined that African Americans were not citizens under the Constitution and could not claim its protections.
Texas Vs Johnson
Gregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag during a political protest in 1984 and was convicted under a Texas law banning flag desecration. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled 5-4 that Johnson's flag burning was a protected form of free speech under the First Amendment. The Court determined that symbolic acts like flag burning can be a form of political expression, and that the government cannot ban certain symbols or messages just because some may find them offensive.
Plessy vs ferguson
1) Homer Plessy, who was 1/8 black, was arrested for sitting in the white section of a train in Louisiana in violation of state law.
2) The case went to the Supreme Court where Plessy argued the Separate Car Act violated the 13th and 14th Amendments.
3) The Supreme Court upheld the ruling against Plessy, finding that the state could regulate transportation within its borders and that "separate but equal" did not violate the Constitution.
11th Amendment
The document summarizes the history and implications of the 11th Amendment to the US Constitution. It began as a Supreme Court case in 1792, Georgia vs. Chisholm, where the court ruled that individuals could sue states. This upset states' rights advocates, and in response the 11th Amendment was adopted in 1795. It bars federal courts from hearing lawsuits brought against states by individuals. However, over time courts have found some exceptions, including allowing suits if approved by Congress or pertaining to 14th Amendment violations.
Texas v. Johnson (1989)
Gregory Johnson burned an American flag during a political protest and was convicted under Texas law of desecrating a flag. The Supreme Court ruled that flag burning is a form of symbolic speech protected by the First Amendment. While some found the flag burning offensive, causing offense is not enough to prohibit speech. The Court determined that Johnson's actions were a protected form of expression and symbolic speech under the freedom of speech clause of the First Amendment.
Texas v Johnson
Gregory Johnson was protesting nuclear weapons by burning an American flag at a political demonstration. He was convicted of desecrating a venerated object but appealed, citing freedom of speech. The Supreme Court ruled in Texas v. Johnson that symbolic speech like flag burning is protected by the First Amendment. The decision established that the government cannot outlaw expressions of political ideas simply because some find them offensive.
Three landmark court cases answers
Three landmark US Supreme Court cases established key principles of the American legal system. Marbury v. Madison in 1803 established the principle of judicial review by striking down a law as unconstitutional. McCulloch v. Maryland in 1819 asserted that Congress had broad powers under the Elastic Clause and that federal law supersedes state law. United States v. Nixon in 1974 reinforced the rule of law by ruling that executive privilege is not absolute and that presidents must comply with legal processes.
Constitution Scavenger Hunt
The document appears to be a set of flashcards about various powers and roles outlined in the US Constitution. It includes 20 cards with questions about things like qualifications for elected offices, the process of treaties and appointments, and the separation of powers between branches of government. The cards are meant to be paired with an answer key that provides the specific constitutional article, section, and text being referenced to answer each question. This would help students learn about the distribution of powers in the US system of government.
The New Frontier
This document discusses John F. Kennedy's presidency from 1960 to 1963. It covers his narrow election victory over Richard Nixon in 1960, which was influenced by their televised debates. As president, Kennedy advocated for expanding civil rights and launched initiatives like the Peace Corps. However, he also faced challenges like the failed Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba and the Cuban Missile Crisis. On November 22, 1963, Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas, Texas by Lee Harvey Oswald.
More Related Content
What's hot
Supreme court cases landmark
The document summarizes several important Supreme Court cases that established or clarified rights in US schools and society. Key cases included Tinker v. Des Moines which established students' free speech rights, New Jersey v. TLO which allowed student searches based on reasonable suspicion, and Brown v. Board of Education which overturned racial segregation in public schools.
36 supreme court-cases
The document discusses several important Supreme Court cases related to constitutional rights:
- Miranda v. Arizona established that suspects must be read their rights (known as the Miranda rights) upon arrest based on the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
- In re Gault ruled that juveniles have the same fundamental rights as adults, including the right to be notified of charges and to have private names and details.
- Tinker v. Des Moines Schools determined that students have limited free speech rights at school under the First Amendment's freedom of expression.
- Several other cases, such as Roe v. Wade, Texas v. Johnson, and Engel v. Vitale, established additional rights
UNITED STATES V. NIXON
The Supreme Court held that President Nixon did not have absolute privilege to withhold
evidence, such as audio tapes, from a criminal investigation into the Watergate scandal. While
the President has a general privilege of confidentiality, it cannot outweigh the need for relevant
evidence in a criminal proceeding. The Court found that the Constitution's requirements for a fair
trial and due process under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments were more important than the
President's interest in confidentiality in this case. This established an important limitation on
presidential privilege.
How Case Law has shaped our Rights
This document summarizes three Supreme Court cases:
1) United States v. Nixon ruled that President Nixon was required to release audio tapes related to the Watergate scandal due to executive privilege limitations.
2) Plessy v. Ferguson upheld racial segregation under the "separate but equal" doctrine.
3) Brown v. Board of Education overturned Plessy and ruled that racial segregation in public schools was unconstitutional, effectively ending segregation.
Landmark Supreme Court Cases and how they affected American society.
Students will examine important SCOTUS cases and analyze how they affected American society. Answer the questions on the handout that match the slide numbers.
Texas v johnson power point
Gregory Lee Johnson was convicted under Texas law for burning an American flag in protest of Reagan administration policies in 1984. The Supreme Court was tasked with determining if flag burning constituted protected speech under the First Amendment. In a 5-4 decision, the Court held that Johnson's flag burning was expressive conduct protected by freedom of speech. The Court found that the Texas law banning flag desecration was unconstitutional.
Plessy v ferguson
The document summarizes the key issues in the landmark US Supreme Court case Plessy v. Ferguson. It discusses that Homer Plessy, who was 7/8 Caucasian and 1/8 African, challenged a Louisiana law requiring racial segregation on railways. The case went to the Supreme Court in 1896 to determine if the "separate but equal" law was constitutional. The Court ultimately ruled in favor of the state, allowing racial segregation as long as facilities were equal for both races. This decision established the "separate but equal" doctrine and was later overturned by Brown v. Board of Education in 1954.
Case law
- Plessy v. Ferguson involved Homer Plessy being arrested for refusing to leave a "whites only" train car as required by Louisiana law. The Supreme Court ruled that the law requiring racial segregation was constitutional under the doctrine of "separate but equal."
- Tinker v. Des Moines established that students have free speech rights in school, but that speech can be regulated if it causes a substantial disruption to the learning environment. The case involved students suspended for wearing black armbands to protest the Vietnam War.
- Texas v. Johnson overturned a Texas law prohibiting flag desecration, ruling that burning the American flag as a form of political protest is a protected expressive act under the First
11&12.judicial branch
The Supreme Court ruled that African Americans, whether enslaved or free, could not claim citizenship and therefore had no standing to sue in federal court. The Court also ruled that Congress did not have the authority to prohibit slavery in federal territories, effectively nationalizing slavery. This landmark decision had wide-ranging legal and social consequences for decades.
Plessy vs ferguson
The Plessy v. Ferguson case involved Homer Plessy, a black man who was arrested for sitting in the whites-only car of a train in Louisiana in 1892. The case went to the Supreme Court to determine whether racial segregation of public facilities was constitutional. The Supreme Court ruled in a 7-1 decision that the doctrine of "separate but equal" was constitutional, allowing racial segregation if black and white facilities were equal. This decision had far-reaching negative impacts by legalizing racial segregation across many aspects of public life and encouraging the continuation of racism in America for decades.
Taylor king power point.
The Free Speech Coalition, a trade association for the adult entertainment industry, filed a lawsuit against Attorney General Ashcroft challenging the constitutionality of the Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996. The act banned any visual depiction, including computer generated images, that appeared to depict minors engaging in sexually explicit conduct. While the goal was to protect children, the Free Speech Coalition argued it infringed on free speech rights. The Supreme Court ultimately agreed, ruling the act prohibited speech that was not legally obscene.
Case of texas v. johnson
In 1984, Gregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag in front of Dallas City Hall as a protest. He was convicted of desecrating a respected object under Texas law and sentenced to prison. However, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals overturned the conviction, finding that burning the flag was protected speech under the First Amendment. The state of Texas appealed to the Supreme Court. In 1989, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that flag burning constituted expressive conduct protected by the First Amendment. This case established that flag burning is a form of protected free speech.
communications.williams.edu-Williams Welcomes Distinguished Group of Presidin...
Williams College will host a moot court argument on April 22nd where students will argue a case currently before the US Supreme Court regarding the constitutionality of civil commitment of sexually dangerous persons. Presiding over the student arguments will be a distinguished group of federal judges, including judges from the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals and US District Courts of Vermont and California. The moot court will examine issues related to Congress's authority to enact civil commitment laws and the burden of proof standards in civil commitment proceedings.
US Landmark Cases.
Brown v. Board of Education ruled that segregated schools were unconstitutional, violating the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. Plessy v. Ferguson upheld the doctrine of "separate but equal" and found that segregated rail cars were constitutional in Louisiana. Dred Scott v. Sanford determined that African Americans were not citizens under the Constitution and could not claim its protections.
Texas Vs Johnson
Gregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag during a political protest in 1984 and was convicted under a Texas law banning flag desecration. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled 5-4 that Johnson's flag burning was a protected form of free speech under the First Amendment. The Court determined that symbolic acts like flag burning can be a form of political expression, and that the government cannot ban certain symbols or messages just because some may find them offensive.
Plessy vs ferguson
1) Homer Plessy, who was 1/8 black, was arrested for sitting in the white section of a train in Louisiana in violation of state law.
2) The case went to the Supreme Court where Plessy argued the Separate Car Act violated the 13th and 14th Amendments.
3) The Supreme Court upheld the ruling against Plessy, finding that the state could regulate transportation within its borders and that "separate but equal" did not violate the Constitution.
11th Amendment
The document summarizes the history and implications of the 11th Amendment to the US Constitution. It began as a Supreme Court case in 1792, Georgia vs. Chisholm, where the court ruled that individuals could sue states. This upset states' rights advocates, and in response the 11th Amendment was adopted in 1795. It bars federal courts from hearing lawsuits brought against states by individuals. However, over time courts have found some exceptions, including allowing suits if approved by Congress or pertaining to 14th Amendment violations.
Texas v. Johnson (1989)
Gregory Johnson burned an American flag during a political protest and was convicted under Texas law of desecrating a flag. The Supreme Court ruled that flag burning is a form of symbolic speech protected by the First Amendment. While some found the flag burning offensive, causing offense is not enough to prohibit speech. The Court determined that Johnson's actions were a protected form of expression and symbolic speech under the freedom of speech clause of the First Amendment.
Texas v Johnson
Gregory Johnson was protesting nuclear weapons by burning an American flag at a political demonstration. He was convicted of desecrating a venerated object but appealed, citing freedom of speech. The Supreme Court ruled in Texas v. Johnson that symbolic speech like flag burning is protected by the First Amendment. The decision established that the government cannot outlaw expressions of political ideas simply because some find them offensive.
What's hot (19)
Landmark Supreme Court Cases and how they affected American society.
Landmark Supreme Court Cases and how they affected American society.
communications.williams.edu-Williams Welcomes Distinguished Group of Presidin...
communications.williams.edu-Williams Welcomes Distinguished Group of Presidin...
Viewers also liked
Three landmark court cases answers
Three landmark US Supreme Court cases established key principles of the American legal system. Marbury v. Madison in 1803 established the principle of judicial review by striking down a law as unconstitutional. McCulloch v. Maryland in 1819 asserted that Congress had broad powers under the Elastic Clause and that federal law supersedes state law. United States v. Nixon in 1974 reinforced the rule of law by ruling that executive privilege is not absolute and that presidents must comply with legal processes.
Constitution Scavenger Hunt
The document appears to be a set of flashcards about various powers and roles outlined in the US Constitution. It includes 20 cards with questions about things like qualifications for elected offices, the process of treaties and appointments, and the separation of powers between branches of government. The cards are meant to be paired with an answer key that provides the specific constitutional article, section, and text being referenced to answer each question. This would help students learn about the distribution of powers in the US system of government.
The New Frontier
This document discusses John F. Kennedy's presidency from 1960 to 1963. It covers his narrow election victory over Richard Nixon in 1960, which was influenced by their televised debates. As president, Kennedy advocated for expanding civil rights and launched initiatives like the Peace Corps. However, he also faced challenges like the failed Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba and the Cuban Missile Crisis. On November 22, 1963, Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas, Texas by Lee Harvey Oswald.
10 Landmark Supreme Court Cases (shared using http://VisualBee.com).
The document discusses 10 landmark Supreme Court cases. It provides an overview of some of the most influential and consequential cases ever decided by the United States Supreme Court. The cases covered impact many areas of American law and set important legal precedents that are still cited today.
(13) crisis and resurgence (1969 2000)
Richard Nixon expanded presidential power during his presidency, reaching the peak of the "imperial presidency". However, the Watergate scandal uncovered Nixon's involvement in a cover-up, leading to his resignation. Gerald Ford succeeded Nixon but struggled with a weak economy including stagflation and rising gas prices due to OPEC embargoes. Jimmy Carter was elected in 1976 but also faced economic woes. He brokered the Camp David Accords between Egypt and Israel but struggled to gain the release of American hostages in Iran, hurting his re-election bid.
2012 supreme court case project
The Supreme Court considered a case involving Edward Dorsey, who was sentenced under the old 100-1 sentencing ratio for crack versus powder cocaine despite being sentenced after the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 reduced the ratio. Dorsey argued he should have been sentenced under the new law instead of the old mandatory minimums. The Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether the FSA applied to defendants like Dorsey who were sentenced after the law went into effect, even if their crimes occurred beforehand.
Chapter 12 section 3 and 4 transportaion
The transportation revolution of the early 1800s saw new improvements like steamboats and railroads that dramatically increased the speed and lowered the cost of transporting goods and people. Steamboats enabled expanded trade along waterways, while railroads connected major cities across the eastern US by 1860. This revolutionized commerce by creating a national economy and encouraging population growth and resource extraction. It also accelerated other technological advances like the telegraph, farm equipment, and industrialization.
Landmark Supreme Court Desicions
The document summarizes 10 landmark Supreme Court decisions that established important precedents:
1. Marbury v. Madison established the Supreme Court's power of judicial review to determine the constitutionality of laws.
2. Dred Scott v. Sanford ruled that African Americans could not be citizens and Congress could not ban slavery in new territories, a decision later overturned by the 14th Amendment.
3. Brown v. Board of Education reversed Plessy v. Ferguson and outlawed segregation in public schools, overturning the "separate but equal" doctrine.
Viewers also liked (8)
10 Landmark Supreme Court Cases (shared using http://VisualBee.com).
10 Landmark Supreme Court Cases (shared using http://VisualBee.com).
Similar to Landmark Cases
Joe's Civics project
The document summarizes 6 significant rulings from the US Supreme Court. Case 1 was Miranda v Arizona in 1966, which established that suspects must be informed of their rights before being questioned. Case 2 was Brown v Board of Education in 1954, which ruled that public schools could not segregate students by race. Case 3 was Marbury v Madison in 1803, which established the principle of judicial review. Case 4 was Reed v Reed in 1971, which ruled that states could not discriminate based on sex. Case 5 was Gideon v Wainwright in 1963, which established the right to legal counsel. Case 6 was Escobido v Illinois in 1964, which extended Miranda rights to include access to an attorney during questioning.
Case law project
The document provides details and summaries of three important Supreme Court cases that have shaped constitutional rights:
1. Marbury v. Madison (1803) established the Supreme Court's power of judicial review, allowing it to determine the constitutionality of laws and strike down those deemed unconstitutional. This established an important check on the other branches of government.
2. Mapp v. Ohio (1961) extended the exclusionary rule resulting from the Fourth Amendment to state courts, requiring illegally obtained evidence to be excluded from trial. This was a significant expansion of due process protections.
3. New Jersey v. TLO (1985) determined that the exclusionary rule does not fully apply to searches by public school officials, establishing
11&12.judicial branch
The Supreme Court has the power and duty to interpret laws and decide what the law is when two laws conflict. If a lower court's decision conflicts with the Constitution or other laws, the Supreme Court can exercise appellate jurisdiction to review the case and make a final ruling. The Supreme Court is the highest court in the country and its rulings cannot be appealed.
Xavier woodson civil liberties project
In 1963, Ernesto Miranda was arrested by Phoenix police on suspicion of kidnapping and rape. He was interrogated for two hours without being informed of his right to remain silent or have an attorney present. Miranda confessed and was convicted solely based on this written confession. The Supreme Court later ruled Miranda's confession inadmissible because his constitutional rights were violated. This ruling established that suspects must be informed of their Miranda rights before custodial interrogation.
Us Case Law
The Map v. Ohio case ruled that evidence obtained from an illegal search and seizure without a warrant could be used in state courts. In Miranda v. Arizona, the Court overturned Miranda's conviction by ruling his confession obtained without being read his rights was illegally obtained. Marbury v. Madison established the Supreme Court's power of judicial review to declare laws and actions unconstitutional.
US Land Mark Cases- Michael Alfano
Three landmark US Supreme Court cases are summarized:
1. Marbury v. Madison established the principle of judicial review, giving the Supreme Court the power to review laws and determine their constitutionality. It also established the judiciary as a co-equal branch of government.
2. New Jersey v. T.L.O. lessened 4th Amendment protections on school grounds by allowing searches based on reasonable suspicion.
3. Gideon v. Wainwright guaranteed the 6th Amendment right to counsel, requiring states to provide lawyers for criminal defendants who cannot afford one.
Cbl landmark cases
The document summarizes three Supreme Court cases that shaped civil rights in the US:
- Mapp v Ohio (1961) ruled evidence obtained without a search warrant is inadmissible, establishing the exclusionary rule and upholding 4th Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure.
- Marbury v Madison (1803) established judicial review, ruling that courts can strike down laws and executive actions that are unconstitutional.
- Roe v Wade (1973) established that the right to privacy protected a woman's choice to have an abortion based on the 14th Amendment's due process clause.
Major Supreme Court Cases
1) The Supreme Court case of US v. Nixon established that executive privilege did not allow the President to withhold subpoenaed evidence and tapes from a criminal trial.
2) The case arose from the Watergate scandal where President Nixon's aides were found to have broken into the Democratic National Committee headquarters.
3) The Court ruled that the separation of powers and generalized need for confidentiality did not allow an absolute, unqualified presidential privilege and the tapes had to be turned over, leading to Nixon's resignation.
11&12.judicial branch
Dred Scott, an enslaved African American, sued for his freedom after living in free states with his owner. The Supreme Court ruled against Scott, finding that African Americans could not be citizens and that Congress did not have the power to ban slavery in U.S. territories, exacerbating national tensions over slavery ahead of the Civil War.
Miranada V Arizona(2)
1) The Supreme Court case Miranda v. Arizona addressed whether police must inform suspects of their rights before questioning.
2) The Court ruled that police must inform suspects that they have the right to remain silent and have an attorney present during questioning.
3) Failure of police to inform suspects of their Miranda rights could result in any confession being excluded from trial.
McRae-Capstone
This document provides an overview and analysis of the Miranda Warning and its history and issues. It discusses key Supreme Court cases that established Miranda rights, including Miranda v. Arizona (1966) which required police to inform suspects of their rights to remain silent and have an attorney present during questioning. The document examines criticisms of the Miranda Warning including concerns about comprehension, especially for non-native English speakers. It also explores police interrogation techniques and how Miranda aims to prevent coercive practices that could violate a suspect's Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights.
Marburyv
Marbury v. Madison was a landmark 1803 Supreme Court case between William Marbury and Secretary of State James Madison. Marbury had been appointed as a justice of the peace by President John Adams but did not receive his commission before Thomas Jefferson took office. Marbury sued, seeking to force Madison to deliver his commission. The Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice John Marshall, established the principle of judicial review by ruling that Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 was unconstitutional, denying Marbury his commission but affirming the Court's authority to strike down laws as unconstitutional. This case set the precedent that American courts have the power to review the constitutionality of laws and executive actions.
Miranda arizona
Miranda v. Arizona (1966) established that the prosecution may not use statements obtained from defendants during custodial interrogation unless it demonstrates the use of procedural safeguards to secure the privilege against self-incrimination. Ernesto Miranda was interrogated by police for two hours without being informed of his right to remain silent and have an attorney present. His confession was used to convict him, but the Supreme Court ultimately ruled 5-4 that his confession should have been excluded from trial because his rights were not properly protected during questioning. The ruling established that the police must inform individuals in custody of their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and Sixth Amendment right to an attorney before interrogation.
Plessy 1Plessy v. Ferguson and Miranda .docx
Plessy 1
Plessy v. Ferguson and Miranda v. Arizona
Name
Class
Date
Professor
Plessy v. Ferguson and Miranda v. Arizona
Two landmark rulings made by the Supreme Court involve the cases of Plessy v. Ferguson and Miranda v. Arizona. In both rulings the impact to society was great with one resulting in the segregation of African American citizen for the next fifty years while the other affected the way law enforcement officers’ question and interrogate criminal offenders. While both of these cases occurred in two different centuries the ruling of the court had a direct impact on functions in American society and the rights of the individual citizen. In Plessy the rights of the African American where limited but in the case of Miranda individual rights were broadened.
Plessy vs. Ferguson
In the case of Plessy v. Ferguson the case began when an African American male who was half white and appeared white went against a Louisiana law that requires separate accommodations for separate races. Homer Plessy was a member of a group in New Orleans known as the Citizens Committee that fought for the equal right of the African American citizen. The Citizens Committee decided to test a Louisiana Law known as the 1890 Louisiana Separate Car Act. When Homer Plessy entered the train and took accommodations in the white section of the railcars he was detained by a police officer and held in a separate car until he was arrested upon exiting the train. Plessy was charged with breaching Louisiana Law and was jailed and fined.
On appeal the Louisiana Appeals Court ruled declared forced segregation in railroad cars traveling between states to be unconstitutional (Wolf, 2011). The case was then appealed to the Louisiana Supreme Court that upheld the ruling of the district court and found the state had a right to establish laws that provide separate but equal accommodations. The case was then appealed for the last time when it went in front of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the state and the laws concerning the segregation of the White and African American citizen was not addressed for over sixty years when the Supreme Courts ruling was reversed in the case of Brown vs. Board of Education.
When the Plessy case was brought in front of the Supreme Court by the defendant and the members of the Citizens Committee the claim was the defendant was denied his Fourteenth and Thirteenth Amendment rights. Plessy claimed that the 1890 Louisiana Separate Car Act violated his Thirteenth Amendment right against involuntary servitude. In other Plessy was claiming that by being forced into separate accommodations he was being placed in involuntary servitude. The court ruled that the Thirteenth Amendment did not apply to segregation so the defendants Thirteenth Amendment right could not have been violated.
Under the Fourteenth Amendment the defendant, Plessy, claimed he was denied the right to equal protection.
Samarri and kenyatte powerpoint (2)
The document summarizes the 1803 Supreme Court case Marbury v. Madison. It outlines the key people involved - William Marbury, James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, and John Marshall. It describes how Marbury was denied a judicial commission by Jefferson and Madison and sued, leading Chief Justice Marshall to establish the principle of judicial review, granting the Supreme Court the power to declare laws unconstitutional. The document also includes opinions that the case was unnecessary and Marbury should have received his appointed position.
Similar to Landmark Cases (15)
Recently uploaded
V.-SENTHIL-BALAJI-SLP-C-8939-8940-2023-SC-Judgment-07-August-2023.pdf
सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने यह भी माना था कि मजिस्ट्रेट का यह कर्तव्य है कि वह सुनिश्चित करे कि अधिकारी पीएमएलए के तहत निर्धारित प्रक्रिया के साथ-साथ संवैधानिक सुरक्षा उपायों का भी उचित रूप से पालन करें।
What are the common challenges faced by women lawyers working in the legal pr...
The legal profession, which has historically been male-dominated, has experienced a significant increase in the number of women entering the field over the past few decades. Despite this progress, women lawyers continue to encounter various challenges as they strive for top positions.
原版制作(PSU毕业证书)宾州州立大学公园分校毕业证学历证书一模一样
学校原件一模一样【微信：741003700 】《(PSU毕业证书)宾州州立大学公园分校毕业证学历证书》【微信：741003700 】学位证，留信认证（真实可查，永久存档）原件一模一样纸张工艺/offer、雅思、外壳等材料/诚信可靠,可直接看成品样本，帮您解决无法毕业带来的各种难题！外壳，原版制作，诚信可靠，可直接看成品样本。行业标杆！精益求精，诚心合作，真诚制作！多年品质 ,按需精细制作，24小时接单,全套进口原装设备。十五年致力于帮助留学生解决难题，包您满意。
本公司拥有海外各大学样板无数，能完美还原。
1:1完美还原海外各大学毕业材料上的工艺：水印，阴影底纹，钢印LOGO烫金烫银，LOGO烫金烫银复合重叠。文字图案浮雕、激光镭射、紫外荧光、温感、复印防伪等防伪工艺。材料咨询办理、认证咨询办理请加学历顾问Q/微741003700
【主营项目】
一.毕业证【q微741003700】成绩单、使馆认证、教育部认证、雅思托福成绩单、学生卡等！
二.真实使馆公证(即留学回国人员证明,不成功不收费)
三.真实教育部学历学位认证（教育部存档！教育部留服网站永久可查）
四.办理各国各大学文凭(一对一专业服务,可全程监控跟踪进度)
如果您处于以下几种情况：
◇在校期间，因各种原因未能顺利毕业……拿不到官方毕业证【q/微741003700】
◇面对父母的压力，希望尽快拿到；
◇不清楚认证流程以及材料该如何准备；
◇回国时间很长，忘记办理；
◇回国马上就要找工作，办给用人单位看；
◇企事业单位必须要求办理的
◇需要报考公务员、购买免税车、落转户口
◇申请留学生创业基金
留信网认证的作用:
1:该专业认证可证明留学生真实身份
2:同时对留学生所学专业登记给予评定
3:国家专业人才认证中心颁发入库证书
4:这个认证书并且可以归档倒地方
5:凡事获得留信网入网的信息将会逐步更新到个人身份内，将在公安局网内查询个人身份证信息后，同步读取人才网入库信息
6:个人职称评审加20分
7:个人信誉贷款加10分
8:在国家人才网主办的国家网络招聘大会中纳入资料，供国家高端企业选择人才
一比一原版(Lincoln毕业证)新西兰林肯大学毕业证如何办理
Lincoln硕士毕业证成绩单【微信95270640】办理新西兰林肯大学毕业证原版一模一样、Lincoln毕业证制作【Q微信95270640】《新西兰林肯大学毕业证购买流程》《Lincoln成绩单制作》新西兰林肯大学毕业证书Lincoln毕业证文凭新西兰林肯大学
本科毕业证书,学历学位认证如何办理【留学国外学位学历认证、毕业证、成绩单、大学Offer、雅思托福代考、语言证书、学生卡、高仿教育部认证等一切高仿或者真实可查认证服务】代办国外（海外）英国、加拿大、美国、新西兰、澳大利亚、新西兰等国外各大学毕业证、文凭学历证书、成绩单、学历学位认证真实可查。
[留学文凭学历认证(留信认证使馆认证)新西兰林肯大学毕业证成绩单毕业证证书大学Offer请假条成绩单语言证书国际回国人员证明高仿教育部认证申请学校等一切高仿或者真实可查认证服务。
多年留学服务公司,拥有海外样板无数能完美1:1还原海外各国大学degreeDiplomaTranscripts等毕业材料。海外大学毕业材料都有哪些工艺呢？工艺难度主要由：烫金.钢印.底纹.水印.防伪光标.热敏防伪等等组成。而且我们每天都在更新海外文凭的样板以求所有同学都能享受到完美的品质服务。
国外毕业证学位证成绩单办理方法：
1客户提供办理新西兰林肯大学新西兰林肯大学毕业证学位证信息：姓名生日专业学位毕业时间等（如信息不确定可以咨询顾问：我们有专业老师帮你查询）；
2开始安排制作毕业证成绩单电子图；
3毕业证成绩单电子版做好以后发送给您确认；
4毕业证成绩单电子版您确认信息无误之后安排制作成品；
5成品做好拍照或者视频给您确认；
6快递给客户（国内顺丰国外DHLUPS等快读邮寄）
— — — — 我们是挂科和未毕业同学们的福音我们是实体公司精益求精的工艺！ — — — -
一真实留信认证的作用(私企外企荣誉的见证):
1：该专业认证可证明留学生真实留学身份同时对留学生所学专业等级给予评定。
2：国家专业人才认证中心颁发入库证书这个入网证书并且可以归档到地方。
3：凡是获得留信网入网的信息将会逐步更新到个人身份内将在公安部网内查询个人身份证信息后同步读取人才网入库信息。
4：个人职称评审加20分个人信誉贷款加10分。
5：在国家人才网主办的全国网络招聘大会中纳入资料供国家500强等高端企业选择人才。问山娃想买什么想吃什么山娃知道父亲赚钱很辛苦除了书籍和文具山娃啥也不要能牵着父亲的手满城闲逛他已心满意足了父亲连挑了三套童装叫山娃试穿山娃有点不想父亲说城里不比乡下要穿得漂漂亮亮爸怎么不穿得漂亮望着父亲山娃反问道父亲听了并不回答只是吃吃地笑山娃很精神越逛越起劲父亲却越逛越疲倦望着父亲呵欠连天的样子山娃也说困了累了回家吧小屋闷罐一般头顶上的三叶扇彻夜呜呜作响搅得满屋热气腾腾也搅得山娃心烦意乱父亲一的
Business Laws Sunita saha
Business law for the students of undergraduate level. The presentation contains the summary of all the chapters under the syllabus of State University, Contract Act, Sale of Goods Act, Negotiable Instrument Act, Partnership Act, Limited Liability Act, Consumer Protection Act.
Integrating Advocacy and Legal Tactics to Tackle Online Consumer Complaints
Our company bridges the gap between registered users and experienced advocates, offering a user-friendly online platform for seamless interaction. This platform empowers users to voice their grievances, particularly regarding online consumer issues. We streamline support by utilizing our team of expert advocates to provide consultancy services and initiate appropriate legal actions.
Our Online Consumer Legal Forum offers comprehensive guidance to individuals and businesses facing consumer complaints. With a dedicated team, round-the-clock support, and efficient complaint management, we are the preferred solution for addressing consumer grievances.
Our intuitive online interface allows individuals to register complaints, seek legal advice, and pursue justice conveniently. Users can submit complaints via mobile devices and send legal notices to companies directly through our portal.
Lifting the Corporate Veil. Power Point Presentation
"Lifting the Corporate Veil" is a legal concept that refers to the judicial act of disregarding the separate legal personality of a corporation or limited liability company (LLC). Normally, a corporation is considered a legal entity separate from its shareholders or members, meaning that the personal assets of shareholders or members are protected from the liabilities of the corporation. However, there are certain situations where courts may decide to "pierce" or "lift" the corporate veil, holding shareholders or members personally liable for the debts or actions of the corporation.
Here are some common scenarios in which courts might lift the corporate veil:
Fraud or Illegality: If shareholders or members use the corporate structure to perpetrate fraud, evade legal obligations, or engage in illegal activities, courts may disregard the corporate entity and hold those individuals personally liable.
Undercapitalization: If a corporation is formed with insufficient capital to conduct its intended business and meet its foreseeable liabilities, and this lack of capitalization results in harm to creditors or other parties, courts may lift the corporate veil to hold shareholders or members liable.
Failure to Observe Corporate Formalities: Corporations and LLCs are required to observe certain formalities, such as holding regular meetings, maintaining separate financial records, and avoiding commingling of personal and corporate assets. If these formalities are not observed and the corporate structure is used as a mere façade, courts may disregard the corporate entity.
Alter Ego: If there is such a unity of interest and ownership between the corporation and its shareholders or members that the separate personalities of the corporation and the individuals no longer exist, courts may treat the corporation as the alter ego of its owners and hold them personally liable.
Group Enterprises: In some cases, where multiple corporations are closely related or form part of a single economic unit, courts may pierce the corporate veil to achieve equity, particularly if one corporation's actions harm creditors or other stakeholders and the corporate structure is being used to shield culpable parties from liability.
The Work Permit for Self-Employed Persons in Italy
Learn more on how to obtain the work permit for self-employed persons in Italy at https://immigration-italy.com/selfemployment-work-permit-in-italy/.
It's the Law: Recent Court and Administrative Decisions of Interest
2024 Idaho Water Users Association, Sun Valley, Idaho - June 11, 2024. Presented by Payton Hampton and Garrett Kitamura
Search Warrants for NH Law Enforcement Officers
Training aid for law enforcement officers related to search warrants, the requirements needed, drafting, and execution of the search warrant.
Sangyun Lee, 'Why Korea's Merger Control Occasionally Fails: A Public Choice ...
Presentation slides for a session held on June 4, 2024, at Kyoto University. This presentation is based on the presenter’s recent paper, coauthored with Hwang Lee, Professor, Korea University, with the same title, published in the Journal of Business Administration & Law, Volume 34, No. 2 (April 2024). The paper, written in Korean, is available at <https://shorturl.at/GCWcI>.
Corporate Governance : Scope and Legal Framework
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
MEANING
Corporate Governance refers to the way in which companies are governed and to what purpose. It identifies who has power and accountability, and who makes decisions. It is, in essence, a toolkit that enables management and the board to deal more effectively with the challenges of running a company.
在线办理(UNE毕业证书)新英格兰大学毕业证成绩单一模一样
学校原件一模一样【微信：741003700 】《(UNE毕业证书)新英格兰大学毕业证成绩单》【微信：741003700 】学位证，留信认证（真实可查，永久存档）原件一模一样纸张工艺/offer、雅思、外壳等材料/诚信可靠,可直接看成品样本，帮您解决无法毕业带来的各种难题！外壳，原版制作，诚信可靠，可直接看成品样本。行业标杆！精益求精，诚心合作，真诚制作！多年品质 ,按需精细制作，24小时接单,全套进口原装设备。十五年致力于帮助留学生解决难题，包您满意。
本公司拥有海外各大学样板无数，能完美还原。
1:1完美还原海外各大学毕业材料上的工艺：水印，阴影底纹，钢印LOGO烫金烫银，LOGO烫金烫银复合重叠。文字图案浮雕、激光镭射、紫外荧光、温感、复印防伪等防伪工艺。材料咨询办理、认证咨询办理请加学历顾问Q/微741003700
【主营项目】
一.毕业证【q微741003700】成绩单、使馆认证、教育部认证、雅思托福成绩单、学生卡等！
二.真实使馆公证(即留学回国人员证明,不成功不收费)
三.真实教育部学历学位认证（教育部存档！教育部留服网站永久可查）
四.办理各国各大学文凭(一对一专业服务,可全程监控跟踪进度)
如果您处于以下几种情况：
◇在校期间，因各种原因未能顺利毕业……拿不到官方毕业证【q/微741003700】
◇面对父母的压力，希望尽快拿到；
◇不清楚认证流程以及材料该如何准备；
◇回国时间很长，忘记办理；
◇回国马上就要找工作，办给用人单位看；
◇企事业单位必须要求办理的
◇需要报考公务员、购买免税车、落转户口
◇申请留学生创业基金
留信网认证的作用:
1:该专业认证可证明留学生真实身份
2:同时对留学生所学专业登记给予评定
3:国家专业人才认证中心颁发入库证书
4:这个认证书并且可以归档倒地方
5:凡事获得留信网入网的信息将会逐步更新到个人身份内，将在公安局网内查询个人身份证信息后，同步读取人才网入库信息
6:个人职称评审加20分
7:个人信誉贷款加10分
8:在国家人才网主办的国家网络招聘大会中纳入资料，供国家高端企业选择人才
San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflict at Sea
Presentation by Justin Ordoyo
University of the Philippines College of Law
Guide on the use of Artificial Intelligence-based tools by lawyers and law fi...
This guide aims to provide information on how lawyers will be able to use the opportunities provided by AI tools and how such tools could help the business processes of small firms. Its objective is to provide lawyers with some background to understand what they can and cannot realistically expect from these products. This guide aims to give a reference point for small law practices in the EU
against which they can evaluate those classes of AI applications that are probably the most relevant for them.
Receivership and liquidation Accounts Prof. Oyedokun.pptx
Receivership and liquidation Accounts Prof. Oyedokun.pptxGodwin Emmanuel Oyedokun MBA MSc PhD FCA FCTI FCNA CFE FFAR
Receivership and liquidation Accounts
Being a Paper Presented at Business Recovery and Insolvency Practitioners Association of Nigeria (BRIPAN) on Friday, August 18, 2023.
Presentation (1).pptx Human rights of LGBTQ people in India, constitutional a...
Human rights of LGBTQ people in India, constitutional and judicial approach
From Promise to Practice. Implementing AI in Legal Environments
Pim Betist's presentation about generative AI in the legal sector at Lexpo.com '24
Recently uploaded (20)
V.-SENTHIL-BALAJI-SLP-C-8939-8940-2023-SC-Judgment-07-August-2023.pdf
V.-SENTHIL-BALAJI-SLP-C-8939-8940-2023-SC-Judgment-07-August-2023.pdf
What are the common challenges faced by women lawyers working in the legal pr...
What are the common challenges faced by women lawyers working in the legal pr...
Integrating Advocacy and Legal Tactics to Tackle Online Consumer Complaints
Integrating Advocacy and Legal Tactics to Tackle Online Consumer Complaints
Lifting the Corporate Veil. Power Point Presentation
Lifting the Corporate Veil. Power Point Presentation
The Work Permit for Self-Employed Persons in Italy
The Work Permit for Self-Employed Persons in Italy
It's the Law: Recent Court and Administrative Decisions of Interest
It's the Law: Recent Court and Administrative Decisions of Interest
Sangyun Lee, 'Why Korea's Merger Control Occasionally Fails: A Public Choice ...
Sangyun Lee, 'Why Korea's Merger Control Occasionally Fails: A Public Choice ...
San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflict at Sea
San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflict at Sea
Guide on the use of Artificial Intelligence-based tools by lawyers and law fi...
Guide on the use of Artificial Intelligence-based tools by lawyers and law fi...
Receivership and liquidation Accounts Prof. Oyedokun.pptx
Receivership and liquidation Accounts Prof. Oyedokun.pptx
Presentation (1).pptx Human rights of LGBTQ people in India, constitutional a...
Presentation (1).pptx Human rights of LGBTQ people in India, constitutional a...
From Promise to Practice. Implementing AI in Legal Environments
From Promise to Practice. Implementing AI in Legal Environments
Landmark Cases
- 1. U.S Supreme Court Law Cases
- 2. Table of Contents Marbury v. Madison • Overview 3 • Arguments 4 • Verdict 5 Miranda v. Phoenix • Overview 6 • Arguments 7 • Verdict 8 United States v. Nixon • Overview 9 • Arguments 10 • Verdict 11
- 3. Marbury v. Madison 1803- Overview Ending of a term • John Adams (a democrat) term was coming to an end. • He planned for a last minute arrangement to appoint 58 more democrats and give them government jobs. • Secretary of state, John Madison was in charge of delivering their commissions The new president • Thomas Jefferson (a republican)won election in 1800 • Jefferson ordered Madison to stop proceeding with Adams’s plan • 41 of the 58 were appointed Aftermath • One of those 17 people who didn’t receive their commission was William Marbury • Marbury was suppose to be appointed as justice of the peace of the District of Columbia • He sued Madison and asked the court to issue a writ of mandamus
- 4. Arguments Marbury • Marbury argued that it was not fair that the secretary of state did not approve of his new role as the justice of peace. Marbury declared this as unconstitutional Madison •Madison argued that he was not guilty to the charges and that his decision of not approving the new role for Marbury as the justice of peace was constitutional and not based on his own bias opinion
- 5. The Verdict To avoid direct political confrontation, Marshall dismissed the case on the grounds of unconstitutionality
- 6. Miranda v. Arizona- Overview Ernesto Miranda • Ernesto Miranda, a man living in Phoenix, was interrogated by policemen on the account of rape and kidnapping The Interrogation • The policemen did not inform him the rights of the accused • Miranda admitted to the crime
- 7. Arguments Phoenix • Policemen confessed to not explaining Miranda his rights • They argued that Miranda had been convicted before, so although they didn’t tell him his rights, he already knew them Miranda • He argued that his rights of being accused and rights to an attorney was not explained to him before the incrimination • Argued that his confession should be excluded from trial because of his rights not explained to him
- 8. The Verdict The supreme court denied Miranda’s appeal of the case, he was then sentenced to 20-30 years in imprisonment for each crime committed
- 9. United States v. Nixon- Overview Watergate • President Nixon and aides were accused of spying on the democrats in at the Watergate Hotel and office complex Hearing • During the hearing it had been discovered that Nixon had tapes recorded in the oval office Prosecutor • The prosecutor demanded Nixon to turn in those tapes
- 10. Arguments United States • Argued that Nixon should give away confidentiality to the demands of the legal system in a criminal case • Argued that although he was entitled to privacy, this right is not absolute. Nixon • Argued that the case couldn’t be heard in court because it involved the executive branch. • Agued that the president was entitled to privacy with his aides-executive immunity
- 11. The Verdict the Supreme Court decided that Nixon must hand over the tapes. The Court said that under the Constitution, the judiciary had the final voice, not the Executive branch. The Court were ware that the President had a right to privileged communication where certain areas of national security were concerned. However, the Court stated that this case did not meet those conditions. The Court declared that no president is above the law. Nixon handed over the tapes that revealed that he had personally engaged in the cover-up of the burglary.