Abstract
This paper analyzes the Rule of Law. It review the concepts discussed in "The Problem of the Grudge Informer", by Lon Fuller. The paper discusses the hypothetical problem in the law that is clearly based on the real world experience of Germany under the Nazi regime. Fuller's problem essentially concerns the concept of the rule of law and how the law can be said to exist in a state in which a duly elected government willingly and successfully perverts justice for its own ends while all the while acting within the many of the technical parameters of the legal code of that specific state.

From the Paper
"The Rule of Law and the Problem of the Grudge Informer In "The Problem of the Grudge Informer" Lon Fuller presents a hypothetical problem in the law that is clearly based on the real-world experience of Germany under the Nazi regime. Fuller's problem essentially concerns the concept of the "rule of law" and how the law can be said to exist in a state in which a duly elected government willingly and successfully perverts justice for its own ends while, all the while, acting within the many of the technical parameters of the legal code of that specific state. "

Tags:law, rule, society

Abstract
The paper relates that rule utilitarianism has been seen by some as a more plausible form of utilitarianism than the latter, because it offers relief from some of the more preposterous moral situations that pure act utilitarianism can lead to. In this paper, the writer assesses whether rule utilitarianism is indeed a more plausible version of utilitarianism than act utilitarianism.

From the Paper
"Rule utilitarianism and act utilitarianism are two forms of utilitarianism. The latter has in fact been seen by some as a more plausible form of utilitarianism than the latter, because it offers relief from some of the more preposterous moral situations that pure act utilitarianism can lead to. In this paper, I will assess whether rule utilitarianism is indeed a more plausible version of utilitarianism than act utilitarianism. I will argue that rule utilitarianism is not a more plausible version of utilitarianism than act utilitarianism, for the..."

Tags:mill, utilitarianism, rule

Abstract
The paper relates that the Constitutional Amendments protect individuals' rights from many different violations, but there also exist rules and regulations that are required to enforce these rights. The paper looks at the exclusionary rule as one such enforcing principle that maintains that evidence gathered or analyzed illegally is inadmissible in a court of law and cannot be used to prove the guilt of a defendant.

From the Paper
"The Constitutional Amendments protect individuals' rights from many different violations; there also exist rules and regulations that are required to enforce these rights. The exclusionary rule is one such enforcing principle that maintains that evidence gathered or analyzed illegally is inadmissible in a court of law and cannot be used to prove the guilt of a defendant. Although the law seems to protect individuals from police misconduct it's enforcement is not frivolous and is often enforced based on the cost to society. Similarly, there are exceptions and limitations such as: attenuation, independent source, and the good-faith..."

Tags:exclusionary, rule, crime

Abstract
The paper supports the use of the exclusionary rule in criminal justice.

From the Paper
"The exclusionary rule is the name commonly given to the principle that evidence obtained by the government in violation of a defendant's constitutional right may not be used against him, was created in "Weeks v. U.S. Hall". Calvi and Coleman pointed out that for evidence to be admissible, it must be obtained in a proper manner. Evidence that emerges as an artifact of improper police procedures is no longer permissible or admissible. Calvi and Coleman have commented that courts..."

Tags:exclusionary rule, law

Abstract
A letter from a Senator to Congress defending the exclusionary rule while decrying the overly strict limits placed on police discretionary powers in obtaining evidence pursuant to an arrest and presenting evidence at trial.

From the Paper
"To The Congress of the United States, From Senator John Adams, Re: A Rejection of Strict Application of the Exclusionary Rule of Evidence.
"The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution with its ban on unreasonable searches and seizure is the constitutional provision that more directly than any other governs police operations and administrative investigations. The Amendment emerges as one element on the effort to clarify the rights of individuals vis-a-vis governmental powers by balancing these rights against the..."

Tags:Fourth Amendment, US Constitution, exclusionary rule, evidence, law enforcement

Abstract
An analysis of home rule in Ireland and its ramifications on Catholics and Protestants. The paper considers the history of English-Irish relations, the long Irish struggle for independence and the role of the IRA.

From the Paper
"The history of Irish-English relations is fraught with conflicts, misunderstandings and outright war. Irish Catholics sought independence from the British Crown for centuries. An early example of the vitriolic relations between the Catholic majority in Ireland and England was the Nine Years War, when the Ulster lords rebelled against the crown and fought a bloody conflict which menaced the very survival of English rule in Ireland. The English prevailed in this war but in reaction to the uprising, they imposed draconian measures..."

Tags:ireland, home rule, partition, unionists, nationalists, catholic, protestant, IRA

Abstract
This paper looks at the meaning of majority rule and minority rights, and how they were framed in the Constitution, It looks at examples of how they are used and instances in which they play a role in American government and policy.

From the Paper
"Majority rule is a means by which government can be organized and public issues can be decided in such a way that does not infringe on minority rights. No majority, even in a democracy, can take away the rights of the minority. Minorities can be defined by their ethnicity, religious beliefs, location, income level or may just be the losing side in an election. They are still guaranteed basic human rights and no government or majority, whether elected or not, can take away these rights. Minorities must..."

Tags:majority rule, minority rights, Constutution, government, policy

Abstract
This paper explains that the exclusionary rule falls under the province of the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution, which protects citizens against unreasonable searches and seizures from agents of the state; and upon which the Supreme Court ruled in 1914 that any evidence obtained in unlawfully or illegally was inadmissible as evidence during a trial. The author reviews important cases that have shaped the scope and spirit of the exclusionary rule, such as Leon v. United States and Vernonia v. Acton. The paper studies criticisms against the exclusionary rule, including arguments that by letting criminals get their cases dismissed on technicalities, the exclusionary rule subverts the justice system.

Table of Contents
Definitions of the Exclusionary Rule
History of the Exclusionary Rule
Boyd v. United States
Weeks v. United States
Wolf v. Colorado
Mapp v. Ohio
Exclusions to the Exclusionary Rule
Criticisms of the Exclusionary Rule
Arguments in Defense of the Exclusionary Rule
Alternatives to the Exclusionary rule
Conclusion

From the Paper
"One of Madison's proposals was based on the Virginia law against general search warrants. Thus, the proposed Bill of Rights included a provision to guarantee citizens protection against unreasonable searchers and seizures, a provision that eventually formed the foundation for the Fourth Amendment. Furthermore, Madison also pushed for a clause protecting people from becoming witnesses against themselves. Madison and his supporters were concerned over previous practices in Church tribunals, where confessions extracted through torture were then used against a defendant in Court. This clause in turn formed the basis of the modern Constitution's Fifth Amendment."

Tags:evidence, trail, technicality, rights, fourth

Abstract
The paper explains the history behind the business judgment rule that has protected executives from the consequences of bad business decisions that were made in good faith. The paper looks at how the business judgment rule impacts corporate decision-making and how it is perceived as an abstention doctrine. The paper then examines what went wrong in the corporate structure to help create the current economic crisis, and discusses how the main problem is with modern executive salary structuring that encouraged short-term thinking, creating a real incentive to cheat stockholders. The paper considers how the current financial crisis will impact the business judgment rule by looking at how the courts are treating lawsuits challenging the behavior that led to the current crisis.

Outline:
Introduction
Why the Business Judgment Rule Developed
How the Business Judgment Rule Impacts Corporate Decision-Making
The Business Judgment Rule as Abstention Doctrine
What Went Wrong
How the Financial Crisis Will Impact the Business Judgment Rule
Conclusion

From the Paper
"The business judgment rule is a rule that gives corporate executives the latitude to make business-related decisions without the ever-present specter of legal action if those decisions should prove wrong. The business judgment rule presumes the corporate directors are motivated to act in the best interests of the corporation and the stockholders. Because of this presumption, courts will generally refuse to review executive actions, without an allegation that those executives have violated their fiduciary responsibility to the company. The business judgment rule makes sense, given that even the best-informed executives are sometimes going to make bad decisions; leaving every decision open for judicial review would paralyze the corporate board system, by making them vulnerable to constant litigation. However, the business judgment rule does not free executives from all judicial oversight. In order for decisions to qualify under that rule, they must be made in good faith, with reasonable care, and be made to further the bests interests of the corporation. It is very difficult for a litigant to rebut the presumption that an executive decision qualifies for immunity from suit under the business judgment rule."

Tags:abstention, doctrine, executive, salaries, compensation, decision-making, lawsuits

Abstract
This paper explores situations based on several authorities in which a person may or may not be tried again for the same crime as determined under the double jeopardy clause of the Constitution. The bases its discussion on three Supreme Court cases regarding double jeopardy. The paper concludes that, although the double jeopardy clause was created to offer protection from three specific types of legal abuse; nevertheless, at various times, the federal government will retry an acquitted defendant simply because there is a strong level of dissatisfaction with the first verdict.

Table of Contents:
In Other Words
Words and More Words
Supreme Court Decisions
Jeffers v. United States
Garrett v. United States Garrett v. United States
United States v. Ursery

From the Paper
"At times, Blockburger's rule makes sense. Sometimes, however Blockburger's rule makes far less sense. For example, Amar posits, if a defendant is charged with attempted murder, receives a fair trial and is convicted, afterwards the victim dies from injuries proximately caused by the initial attack, Blockburger's rule would bar a murder trial here. The Supreme Court held in the Diaz case as early as 1912, however that a Blockburger-like test was not be taken seriously in this particular scenario; indicating a second trial should not be barred."

Tags:murder, fifth amendment, due process, blockburger's rule, abuse