Abstract This paper will seek to understand the idea of just exercise of political power in the ancient Greek, Roman, Aristotelian, and English constitutionalism. By revealing these traits of 'republican' constitutions, we can see clear examples of this form of law.
Abstract This paper refers to democratic theory in showing the British heritage of American constitutionalism, along with different respective developments. The argument is made that the rule of law is more important in the American case en route to explaining the role and symbolism of the Crown or the monarchy within British constitutionalism. Reference is made to contrasting influences of Liberalism and the individual premise and in relation to the more social views of the British case. Discussion ends with the suggestion of further studies involving other countries whose constitutional approaches descend from the British model to differing extents.
Abstract In this article the writer examines the constitutionality of bans on same-sex marriage. The writer reports on the analytic framework at issue in a case litigating constitutionality of an issue of this nature, and reports on decisions in recent cases from courts in Vermont, Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, and California. The writer concludes that there have been differing interpretations on this issue, but the majority of courts have ruled that there is no fundamental right to same-sex marriage, so that the ban on same-sex marriage is not unconstitutional.
From the Paper "On the other hand, if the right does not affect a fundamental right, and is based on a non-suspect classification, it will be upheld so long as it reflects a "rational classification." Fundamental rights include those in the bill of rights. Suspect class is generally limited to race."
"Thus: is the right to marry a same-sex partner fundamental? The Supreme Court, in Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967), called marriage a fundamental right -- for a heterosexual couple.
"State courts to date have reached different conclusions. Massachusetts ruled marriage is a fundamental right, upholding same-sex marriage under the state constitution in Goodridge v. Department of Public Health (2003). (Grossman; Burge) In that case, a trial court ruled that the purpose of marriage was procreation."
Abstract .Involved Levels of the Judiciary
The Constitutionality of the Line Item veto was decided on a federal level. U.S. District Judge Thomas F. Hogan said the law, centering on its violation of Article 1, Section 7 of the Constitution, violates the Constitution's requirement that the president sign or veto bills in their entirety. Judge Hogan said that the line item veto bill also gave the President part of Congress' lawmaking role (Biskupic and Barr, 1998).
Judge Hogan pointed out two sets of challengers with
standing. In New York City, two hospital associations and other
related groups objected to Clinton's cancellation of a budget provision. This brought objections at the state and federal level. At the trial and appellate level The other case, Idaho potato..."
From the Paper "Discussion of Clinton v. State of New York
1.Involved Levels of the Judiciary
The Constitutionality of the Line Item veto was decided on a federal level. U.S. District Judge Thomas F. Hogan said the law, centering on its violation of Article 1, Section 7 of the Constitution, violates the Constitution's requirement that the president sign or veto bills in their entirety. Judge Hogan said that the line item veto bill also gave the President part of Congress' lawmaking role (Biskupic and Barr, 1998).
Judge Hogan pointed out two sets of challengers with
standing. In New York City, two hospital associations and other
related groups objected to Clinton's cancellation of a budget provision. This brought objections at the state and federal level. At the trial and appellate level The other case, Idaho potato..."
This paper examines the constitutionality of the Red Light Camera Program. Although the Supreme Court found the program constitutional, the controversy continues.
Abstract Red Light Cameras snap photos of speeders and red-light runners but they are also used to check and monitor traffic on selected roadways. The writer shows that the use of these cameras is growing as are motorists' fears of being watched. The paper traces the controversy showing both sides of the case that is reminiscent of a futuristic novel.
From the Paper "Red Light Cameras are new additions to a range of tools, which law enforcement officers use to catch motorists who run red lights at will. They snap photos of speeders and red light runners but they are also used to check and monitor traffic on selected roadways. Although they are fast becoming a favorite of traffic safety advocates, these techniques, if not conducted within set guidelines and communicated about effectively, can prompt strong negative reactions among a small but vocal minority who see them as "big brother" techniques designed to trample citizens' rights."
Abstract This essay provides a thorough discussion of the history of Colorado's rape shield legislation, as well as related federal rules of evidence, and how it has held up to multiple challenges throughout the years. The paper also includes references to case law that has played a substantial role in maintaining this very important piece of legislation. Lastly, the paper describes the legal battle that ensued when Kobe Bryant's attorneys attempted to challenge the constitutionality of the statute and, ultimately, lost.
From the Paper "Most Americans acknowledge the shame and embarrassment felt by rape victims who must testify against their accusers in court. It is already known that a substantial majority of rape cases go unreported in America each year, presumably due to the risk of humiliation of sexual assault victims. Nearly every state in the country, under pressure from feminist groups, attorneys, and legislators, has enacted rape shield legislation to ease the emotional suffering of rape victims and encourage more victims to come forward in the absence of having their sexual past exposed."
This paper discusses the Prison Litigation Reform Act, passed in 1996, which has dramatically changed the way litigation by inmates is allowed to proceed.
Abstract This paper explains that the intention of the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) was to limit the number of frivolous lawsuits that could be filed by prisoners in federal courts; however, the constitutionality of this law has been strongly debated. The author points out that a primary provision of PLRA is the exhaustion requirement, which fundamentally was designed to give prison officials time and opportunity to address any grievances that could be brought by prisoners before a federal court, even if those internal systems are slow and ineffective and may subject the prisoner to possible retaliation by prison staff. The paper relates that the PLRA places a cap on attorney fees and restricts the number of billable hours; thus, since they will have difficulty obtaining compensation for their work, attorneys are discouraged from representing prisoners even if they have a strong case.
From the Paper "When the administrative grievance process is followed in the manner prescribed in the PLRA, that process is able to fully identify details of the prisoner's case and determine its merits before it reaches a federal court. Once in court, there is a much greater likelihood that the case would be more well defined and presented in a concise manner. The court would then be able to focus solely on issues at hand instead of being forced to spend time attempting to interpret a potentially muddled argument. Under these circumstances, it would appear that federal courts would have more time available to address legitimate cases brought under the PLRA."
Abstract This paper discusses how at first glance the Mexican and American constitutions, at least as they pertain to items like the distribution of legislative judicial and executive power or constitutionally entrenched federalism, are strikingly similar. However there are practical divergences between the two that need to be explored. Most notably this paper examines the differences between Mexican federalism and American federalism. Specifically while both countries explicitly provide for a federalist framework in their constitutional documents, Mexico's federalism has been historically a theoretical construct rather than a practical reality.
Abstract This paper analyzes the "good faith exception" to the exclusionary rule as addressed by Federal and Connecticut governments under the American system of dual constitutionalism. It examines the Leon and Marsala cases and focuses on how both courts presiding over similar cases, using similar laws and historical analysis ended up with contradicting rulings. This paper goes deeply into the rationale of both courts, the specific language that they used (from their individual constitutions), the historical analysis taken by both courts to determine the meaning of the language they were interpreting and the major criticism that followed the Supreme Court because of their ruling in Leon.
From the Paper "As in Leon, State of Connecticut v. Michael Joseph Marsala, deals with an appeal that requests the court to address whether a good faith exception to the Exclusionary Rule exists under their State Constitution. Marsala was convicted of two counts of violating state dependency producing law, General Statutes Section 21a-278(b). The Appellate Court affirmed Marsala's conviction in State v. Marsala, 19 Conn. App. 478, 563 A.2d 730 (1989). At trial, Marsala filed a motion to suppress the evidence seized from both his person and his home and the court found in his favor with regards to the latter claim but upheld the evidence seized from his person. "
Abstract This paper explains that the original Pledge of Allegiance, written in 1882 by a Christian Socialist Baptist minister, Francis Bellamy, stated, ?I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.? The author points out that the phrase, "under God", which was added in 1954, has raised questions of its constitutionality because it may violate the concept of separation of church and state. The paper relates that the argument for the pledge revolves around the points that God is not bad for the American people or that supporters do fully concur with the idea of the separation of church and state. Color picture and annotated bibliography included.
Table of Contents
Introduction
Origins
Under God
Constitutionality Those in Favor
Those Against
Conclusion
Annotated Bibliography
From the Paper "The original pledge has changed over the years. For example, in 1923 and 1924, against Bellamy's wishes, the American Legion and the Daughters of the American Revolution changed the words 'my Flag,' to 'the Flag of the United States of America.' In 1954, the United States Congress added the words 'under God' to the Pledge because of a controversial campaign by the Knights of Columbus better known as the KKK. ?In June of 1954, at the height of the McCarthy hysteria, and at the urging of the Knights of Columbus, an amendment was made to add the words "under God." Then-President Dwight D. Eisenhower said of the pledge, "From this day forward, the millions of our school children will daily proclaim in every city and town, every village and every rural school house, the dedication of our nation and our people to the Almighty."?
This paper discusses what it will mean for people living in the Baltic States to become a part of EU population, including the advantages and disadvantages.
23,000 words (approx. 92 pages), 27 sources, 2000, $ 249.95
Abstract Discusses what it will mean for people living in the Baltic States to become a part of EU population. After the accession some people will benefit, some will be put in a disadvantageous position, national parliaments will lose considerably important powers in the field of migration and eastern external borders will become a hot spot of the country where now EU rules will be applied.
From the Paper "Furthermore, Maastricht and Amsterdam treaties are compared and the changes that have been made examined. After immigration and asylum matters, external border controls, measures to combat financial fraud against the EU and customs cooperation have been moved out of the Third Pillar of the EU and the intergovernmental cooperation and transferred to the Community level, the national parliaments gave up some of their powers. That basically means that after the accession of the Baltic States to the EU, they will have to accept that some of their parliaments? competence will be transferred to the EU level. Still, not all the powers in the field of migration will be taken from national competence and so in my thesis it is also noted what issues will be left exclusively for states. "
Abstract This paper examines the issue of racial gerrymandering in the U.S. The author provides examples of cases in which Democrats lost seats because of racial gerrymandering. Then, the author discusses the Voting Rights Act as amended by the Supreme Court.
From the paper:
"The Voting Rights Act allowed the U.S. attorney general (who was Nicholas Katzenbach at the time) to review voting practices and determine which states, counties, and political subdivisions were discriminating against nonwhite voters. Using rules set out in the act, the attorney general could identify those places that had a "test or device" (McWhirter, 1994) that limited voter registration as well as those places in which less than 50 percent of the voting-age residents were registered to vote in the 1964 presidential election. The act also allowed the attorney general to appoint voting examiners to go into these states, counties, or political subdivisions (which were mainly in the South) and register voters who met all requirements for registration other than the illegal test. The act also required that any changes in voting requirements in the areas that were affected by the act had to be approved by the attorney general. Chief Justice Warren found this to be within the power of Congress as well.
In 1970 the Voting Rights Act was amended. The Supreme Court reviewed the constitutionality of the act in the 1970 decision of Oregon v. Mitchell. As different sections of the act were being considered, the Court divided into different voting blocks. A unanimous Court ruled that Congress had the power to end literacy tests across the country. With a vote of eight to one, the Court accepted the idea that Congress could establish uniform standards for voter registration and absentee balloting. By a vote of five to four, the Court upheld the power of Congress to lower the voting age to 18 in all federal elections. By a vote of five to four, however, the Court ruled that Congress did not have the power under the Fifteenth Amendment to lower the voting age to 18 for state and local elections."
From the Paper "Drug testing in the workplace is an issue because of the fact that drug abuse by American workers endangers their coworkers. Drug abuse also reduces productivity, costs the company and eventually the consumer money, and contributes to health problems which are then paid for either by the company or the public in some fashion. Many employers have introduced some form of drug testing program in order to reduce costs and offer help to drug abusing employees. There are concerns that such testing violates privacy rights and could lead to employees being disciplined or even fired. There are also concerns that the testing is not adequate or accurate and that innocent employees will suffer as a consequence. The courts have been called in to adjudicate these matters."
Asseses Senate Bill 1219 and obstacles to its passage. Discusses background, need for, politics, constitutionality, provisions, goals, bipartisan support and interest groups.
2,250 words (approx. 9 pages), 7 sources, 1997, $ 79.95
From the Paper "Campaign finance reform continues to be a current policy issue of concern to President Clinton, and one that is on his public agenda. Congress has spoken out in favor of the need for reform, but little has been accomplished legislatively. Public opinion appears to be in favor of campaign finance reform, but the issue has failed to generate the kind of enthusiasm needed to push a reform bill through Congress.
Senate Bill 1219, a tough bipartisan campaign finance reform bill, was introduced in the Senate by Senators John McCain (R-Arizona), Russell Feingold (D-Wisconsin), and Fred Thompson (R-Tennessee). Although it represents a critically important breakthrough in the fight to clean up the corrupt campaign finance system in Washington, it has not seen much success.
The issue of campaign finance reform (and its corollary ..."
From the Paper "Police have increasingly been called into the public educational setting to insure the safety of high school campuses. Many school districts have their own police departments, or "school police," who head security departments on campus. Their credibility as police officers helps to insure a safe environment in which learning can take place. Drugs, weapons, on-campus brawls, and traffic problems are less likely when students see that the full force of the law is at hand. Background information on school police in some communities will provide an introduction to what many believe is the best solution to crime in today's high schools. At the same time, however, issues of search/seizure, random drug testing, locker searches, and strip searching have been brought to the forefront by the advent of tightened security measures and an increase in crime. The..."
