Study Like a Boss
In 1990 the Supreme Court heard the argument of international Union UAW vs. Johnson Controls. The employer Johnson Controls which is a global company that specializes in improving the efficiency of buildings, automobiles and batteries denied female employees of childbearing ages from certain positions. The company argued that exposure to high amounts of lead in … Read more
There are many things that Ancient Greece gave to us, one of those things just happens to be our court system. That’s right the Jury and trial system we got from those weird naked people…aawwkkwwarrd. Anyways, here are some things about the one in ancient Greece. Size Matters By modern standards, ancient Athenian juries were … Read more
The sheer amount of data that is collected by billions of IoT devices could contain valuable evidence from crime scenes, this evidence could be used in court to improve that someone is guilty or not and its importance not less physical evidence, regardless of its importance, collecting and analyzing evidence from IoT environment face many … Read more
This was a consolidated case of David Leon Riley, Petitioner v. California; United States, Petitioner v. Brima Wurie, pertaining similar issues of warrantless cell phone searches incident to arrest. In the first case, the petitioner David Leon Riley had been stopped by police officers for a traffic violation. The police searched Riley’s incident to an … Read more
TENNESSEE v. GARNER, (1985) A Tennessee statute provides that if, after a police officer has given notice of an intent to arrest a criminal suspect, the suspect flees or forcibly resists, “the officer may use all the necessary means to effect the arrest.” Acting under the authority of this statute, a Memphis police officer shot … Read more
William Malloy was arrested on September 11th, 1959 by the Hartford Connecticut police at 600 Asylum Street due to gambling raid. He was placed in jail for one year and was fined $500 because he pleaded guilty to a criminal offence, pool selling. However, 90 days after Malloy was sentenced to jail, he was placed … Read more
Judicial History: William Marbury filed for a writ of mandamus with the United States Supreme Court to direct Secretary of State James Madison in delivering the commission of Marbury as Justice of the Peace for the District of Columbia in the county of Washington. Facts: In 1801 Congress passed an act separating the District of … Read more
In PRESTON v. FERRER, (2008) there is a conflict between two individuals that created a contract together. A contract between respondent Ferrer, who comes out as as “Judge Alex” on television, and petitioner Preston, an attorney in the entertainment industry, requires arbitration of “any dispute … relating to the contract’s terms … or the breach, … Read more
Unanimous judgment by the Supreme Court of India (SCI) in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd) vs Union of India is a resounding victory for privacy. The ruling is the outcome of a petition challenging the constitutional validity of the Indian biometric identity scheme Aadhaar. The judgment’s ringing endorsement of the right to privacy as a fundamental … Read more
Supreme Court Ruling in Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce In Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce, the Supreme Court held that governments may restrict the right of corporations to make independent expenditures on behalf of political candidates. The Austin Court articulated a new constitutional standard for evaluating campaign finance regulation. Such regulation, the Court … Read more
Judicial History: North Carolina inmates sued in federal district court. The inmates alleged that the state’s failure to accommodate them with legal research facilities revoked them access to the courts in infringement of the fourteenth amendment. The district courts admitted the inmates’ motion for summary judgment. This then ordered the state to set up a … Read more
The United States Supreme Court is made of eight Associate Justices and one Chief Justice. The Chief Justice is paid more than the Associate Justices but retains an equal vote to the Associate Justices. The eight associate justices earn a pay of $244,400, while current Chief Justice John Roberts receives $255,500 per year. As the … Read more
There are many things that Ancient Greece gave to us, one of those things just happens to be our court system. That’s right the Jury and trial system we got from those weird naked people…aawwkkwwarrd. Anyways, here are some things about the one in ancient Greece. Size Matters By modern standards, ancient Athenian juries were … Read more
This was a consolidated case of David Leon Riley, Petitioner v. California; United States, Petitioner v. Brima Wurie, pertaining similar issues of warrantless cell phone searches incident to arrest. In the first case, the petitioner David Leon Riley had been stopped by police officers for a traffic violation. The police searched Riley’s incident to an … Read more
The second amendment is the part of the 10 amendments made to the American constitution also known as the Bill of Rights. This amendment in the constitution has always fueled debate over the legislation about gun control and individual rights to bare their own arms. Before the constitution, the colonial Americans were British subjects and … Read more
The second amendment is the part of the 10 amendments made to the American constitution also known as the Bill of Rights. This amendment in the constitution has always fueled debate over the legislation about gun control and individual rights to bare their own arms. Before the constitution, the colonial Americans were British subjects and … Read more
Loving v. Virginia is a landmark civil rights Supreme Court case in which laws prohibiting interracial marriage was invalidated. The case arose when Mildred Loving, a black woman, and Richard Loving, a white man, were sentenced to a one-year prison sentence in Virginia, for marrying each other. According to state laws, at the time, their … Read more
Unit 2: P1 In this assignment I will be going into and explaining how precedent applies to the case study, I will also be going over all the precedents and explaining the differences between the different precedents. Judicial precedent: The process where judges use past decisions which have similar facts to the current case and … Read more
Justice as we know was a right fundamental to all, but it’s fallacy is evident, as money now results in its fall. Objectively analyzed the criminal jurisprudence adopted by India is a mere reflection of the Victorian legacy left behind by the Britishers. The passage of time has only seen a few amendments once in … Read more
Entertainment Merchants Association and other plaintiffs filed suit in federal court against California Governor Edmund G. Brown, Jr., and others challenging a state law that prohibited the sale or rental of “violent video games” to minors as a violation of the First Amendment. The law applied to games that allowed a player to kill, maim, … Read more
Despite the efforts of lawyers and judges to eliminate racial discrimination in the courts, does racial bias play a part in today’s jury selection? Positive steps have been taken in past court cases to ensure fair and unbiased juries. Unfortunately, a popular strategy among lawyers is to incorporate racial bias without directing attention to their … Read more
The Supreme Court has had many different places where it was located over the years. There has been a struggle to find a permanent home for the most powerful court of law. At first, the meetings were in the Merchant Exchange Building in New York City. The court then followed the nation’s capitol to Philadelphia … Read more
For several thousand years, the world’s wealthy and nobility used marriage as a contract, a method of binding two families together to increase power or money. Only in the last century has that sort of arranged marriage disappeared. During the Middle Ages, arranged marriages were common in every station of life. From princes to weavers … Read more
Democracy is a Greek word meaning rule by the people. The idea of a democratic government began in Greece in 700 B. C, about twenty-five hundred years ago. Rome was so large that not everyone could play a role in government so the Roman citizens elected representatives to speak and act for them. This form … Read more
On June 11, 1993, the United State Supreme Court upheld Wisconsins penalty enhancement law, which imposes harsher sentences on criminals who intentionally select the person against whom the crime… is committed.. because of the race, religion, color, disability, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry of that person. Chief Justice Rehnquist deliverd the opinion of the … Read more
The conflict began on February 8, 1996, when President Clinton signed the CDA law and ACLU, along with EPIC and eighteen other plaintiffs, immediately filed its legal challenge. ACLU v. Reno represents the first legal challenge to censorship provisions of the Communications Decency Act (CDA). The CDA makes it a crime, punishable by up to … Read more
The NYC court system was designed to ensure justice for all people. Its purpose is to provide a fair and just evaluation of each individual case and make an unbiased decission based on how the law applies to the facts given. Although, this is how the court system is suppose to be administered, it has … Read more
The Founders of our nation understood that no idea was more central to our Bill of Rights — indeed, to government of the people, by the people, and for the people — than the citizen jury. It was cherished not only as a bulwark against tyranny but also as an essential means of educating Americans … Read more
Should only the explicit commands of our nations Founding Fathers be referenced in courts of law, or can it be justified that an outside body should extrapolate from the specific text of the Constitution to define and defend additional fundamental rights? Further, if this body, namely the Supreme Court, bases its decisions of constitutional relevance … Read more
Justification and Weaknesses of the Non-Interpretive Model The question of Constitutional interpretation still has yet to be resolved. Should only the explicit commands of our nations Founding Fathers be referenced in courts of law, or can it be justified that an outside body should extrapolate from the specific text of the Constitution to define and … Read more
This Book was an outstanding depiction of how our court systems in the United States work. Gerald Stern, from the time he had accepted the case, in my opinion, was out for establishing justice. The Buffalo Creek Disaster left hundreds of people to suffer without homes, belongings, jobs, family, and friends. By the fault of … Read more
Batson was found guilty of second degree burgurly and receipt of stolen goods. During jury selection the prosecutor on the case decided to use his Peremptory Strikes to remove all four black jurors which left a jury of all white persons. The defense moved to srike the jury before the court swore them in on … Read more
On June 11, 1993, the United State Supreme Court upheld Wisconsin’s penalty enhancement law, which imposes harsher sentences on criminals who “intentionally select the person against whom the crime… is committed.. because of the race, religion, color, disability, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry of that person. ” Chief Justice Rehnquist deliverd the opinion of … Read more
Despite the efforts of lawyers and judges to eliminate racial discrimination in the courts, does racial bias play a part in todays jury selection? Positive steps have been taken in past court cases to ensure fair and unbiased juries. Unfortunately, a popular strategy among lawyers is to incorporate racial bias without directing attention to their … Read more
On June 11, 1993, the United State Supreme Court upheld Wisconsin’s penalty enhancement law, which imposes harsher sentences on criminals who “intentionally select the person against whom the crime… is committed.. because of the race, religion, color, disability, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry of that person. ” Chief Justice Rehnquist delivered the opinion of … Read more
The United Nations first recognized the need to establish an international criminal court over 50 years ago. An international criminal court would be just that. It would try criminals charged for international crimes such as genocide and other crimes of similar weight. The goal of the UN has always been to “secure universal respect for … Read more
