Abstract
Friedrich Nietzsche submits that "morality is a reflection of the needs and circumstances of the dominant groups" and these changing needs have historically been reflected in the courts. Through an examination of four landmark Supreme Court cases, the paper examines how evolving perceptions of social morality, defined by economic and political factors, have shaped and altered the American experience over time. The paper examines the cases 'Scott v. Sanford', 'Plessy v. Ferguson', 'Brown v. Board of Education', and 'Bush v. Gore'.

From the Paper
"The court stipulated that the inclusion and certification of any late returns was up to the descretion of the Secretary of State, Katherine Harris. Harris subsequently determined that no extensions were justified, prompting Gore's appeal to the Florida Supreme Court. The court ruled in favor of Gore prompting Bush's appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court (FindLaw). Gore sued to compel the completion of the recount but lost, and Harris declared Bush the winner in Florida (FindLaw). The majority opinion of the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court was that the Florida recount was unconstitutional, noting inconsistencies in the ways in which votes were counted."

Tags:african, american, constitution, slavery, negros, 13th, Amendment

Abstract
The paper explains two landmark decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court: the Dred Scott v. Sandford, and Plessy v. Ferguson decisions. The paper examines how these decisions institutionalized racism by giving the white majority the power to marginalize and discriminate against Black Americans.

From the Paper
"Today's judicial atmosphere has never been more charged. As the Supreme Court ages and the Senate debates the use of filibusters to stall judicial nominees, it is important to understand the power that Supreme Court Justices wield in their lifetime appointments. There are perhaps no better examples of the Supreme Court's ability to make pernicious decisions than their landmark decisions to institutionalize racism in the Dred Scott vs Sanford and the Plessy vs Ferguson decisions."

Tags:dred scott, plessy, segregation, slavery, supreme court

Abstract
This paper discusses the history of the Supreme Court in its rullings on African-American topics. It specifically details three important cases listed below in the table of contents and their historical significance.

From the paper:

"The United States Supreme Court has made many landmark decisions over the course of its existence. The most critical of these decisions have almost always directly pertained to notions of what constitutes an American individual's liberties. Because of the history of enslavement and racism in the United States, African American lives have perhaps been more crucially impacted by these decisions than white American lives have been."

Table of Contents:
I. Introduction
II. 1857 Scott v. Sandford
III. 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson
IV. 1954 Brown v. The Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas

Tags:black, civil, law, cases

Abstract
This research paper examines and analyzes the landmark 1989 United States Supreme Court abortion case of Webster vs. Reproductive Health Services.

Tags:CRIMINAL JUSTICE, LEGAL ISSUES, CENSORSHIP, POLICY / JUSTICE (THEORIES, DECISIONS, POLICY), webster reproductive analysis

Abstract
This paper presents various arguments against the ethical nature of abortion. It discusses each of the perspectives and focuses its discussion on the landmark Supreme Court decision made in "Roe v Wade" and the implications of this decision for those who wish to abort. The paper also discusses the limitations of the decision, particularly with the advances in medical science from the time it was made until today.

Table of Contents:
Introduction
Conservative Religious Views
Fetal Viability
Issue Analysis
Conclusion

From the Paper
"Furthermore, as medical science continues to progress, modern techniques have pushed back the viability of the fetus far beyond what it was in 1973 when Roe was decided. On one hand, this fact, in conjunction with state laws linking legislation to fetal viability would seem to lessen any likelihood of harming a sentient fetus. On the other hand, Roe was decided on the arbitrary definition of "trimesters" and not on fetal viability. Non-religious objection to the viability standard central to the Roe decision point out that contemporary understanding of biological development in the fetus suggest that sentience, in fact, develops long before the third trimester; therefore, subjecting a fetus to certain abortion procedures is unnecessarily cruel for that reason alone. However, unlike religious objections, that concern is fully capable of resolution through the use of anesthesia, without contradicting the concept of viability, in so much as sentience may precede fetal viability outside the womb."

Tags:trimester, fetus, rights, viability, womb

Abstract
For more than 30 years, as a result of the 1966 landmark Supreme Court decision Miranda v. Arizona, police have been required to follow precise wording and timing in advising suspects of their right to remain silent and have an attorney present. The recent Dickerson v. United States case challenged Miranda as a prerequisite to allow a voluntary confession to be admitted as evidence in a federal court, based on a never-enforced 1968 statue nullifying Miranda. The Court ruled Miranda, a Constitutional decision of the Supreme Court, cannot be overruled by Congress. This paper traces the facts of the case and its path to the Supreme Court and identifies the litigants, the main Constitutional Question the Court is being asked to decide, values in conflict and interest groups involved. It also discusses the arguments made on each side, important previous cases in this issue area and the outcome.

Abstract
This paper examines how the United States Supreme Court made a radical decision in June of 1972 to ban capital punishment as unconstitutional. It looks at how the ban came at the close of 'Furman v. Georgia', a case that would landmark future capital punishment debates.

From the Paper
"The United States Supreme Court made a radical decision in June of 1972 to ban capital punishment as unconstitutional. The ban came at the close of Furman v. Georgia, a case that would landmark future capital punishment debates. Five of the nine Justices concurred with this decision. The Court decided that Furman v. Georgia, along with its partner cases Jackson v. Georgia and Branch v. Texas, indicated capital punishment was "cruel and unusual punishment in violation of [the] Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments" (Furman v. Georgia 1). The Supreme Court's ruling commuted the death sentences of 629 prisoners, effectively ending capital punishment in the United States (King 5). Although only two of the Justices thought capital punishment unconstitutional in all cases (Goldman), all five agreed on its discriminatory use (King 5). "

Tags:homicide, capital, punishment

From the Paper
"This introduction to law, legal institutions and the legal environment will focus on the landmark 1973 U.S. Supreme Court case of Roe versus Wade. After describing the case, the effect of the case on religions in the United States will be discussed. This will be followed by discussion of the effects of this case on the freedoms enjoyed by Americans, particularly the rights of privacy and freedom of choice for the individual.

Roe versus Wade was the outgrowth of an unmarried pregnant woman filing a class action suit in the Dallas, Texas, federal district court. Wade is the name of the District Attorney involved in the suit, while Roe is a pseudonym used by the plaintiff in filing suit. The suit sought a declaratory judgment that the Texas criminal abortion laws were unconstitutional. Texas enacted its law in 1854, and the laws stood unchanged since (...)"

Abstract
This paper chronicles and analyzes the career of Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackmun, stating that during Blackmun's 24-year career, his evolution from staunch conservative to bedrock liberal forever changed the US Supreme Court and the country. The paper explains that, while capital punishment was the clearest path in viewing the development of Justice Blackmun as a Supreme Court Associate Justice, there is no doubt his landmark opinion in Roe vs. Wade concerning abortion rights is the case that will always be linked to him. The paper goes on to discuss other landmark legislation, including Blackmun's majority decisions that overturned most state laws banning abortion, and essentially legalized abortion on demand as a basic right of a woman. The paper notes that Justice Blackmum was vilified and adored by many, but he always stayed true to what he believed was best for those that needed compassion. The paper concludes that Justice Blackmun's influence deeply changed the judicial landscape of the United States.

Outline:
Roe vs. Wade
The Opinion
The Most Liberal Justice
The Justice of the "Little People"
References

From the Paper
"Blackmun was targeted by untold death threats and became awash of a blizzard of letters for and against Roe. Blackmun, ever the stolid Midwesterner, diligently sat each week and read every letter sent to him, for and against. Perhaps it was part of his assimilation of these letters as well as the astonishingly emotional reaction to Roe that Blackmun solidified his position on abortion (Greenhouse, 2007). He became more firmly committed to legal abortion and expressed his position in more woman-centered terms as the years went by. He became convinced that abortion was an essential element to the effectual emancipation of women."

Tags:Roe, v, Wade, abortion, capital, punishment, legislation

Abstract
A discussion of why the decision set forth in Roe vs. Wade was unconstitutional. This paper is not a discussion of the author's personal views; it is instead an analysis of why the Supreme Court acted irresponsibly in its landmark decision that made abortion legal in the United States. The essay describes why the Supreme Court did not possess the judicial authority to decide the case and the flaws in their reasoning that this type of protection falls under the United States Constitution. This paper emphasizes the reasons that individual states should have the power to create abortion-related laws and protections without interference from the federal government. Also included in the essay is a discussion about how this challenge might be approached in future legal battles to overturn Roe v. Wade and a brief discussion of Norma McCorvey, aka Jane Roe, and her current opposition to the Supreme Court ruling that she helped create.

From the Paper
"The United States Constitution remains the oldest, written constitution and one of the most successful documents in history. This "supreme law of the land" also established the first federal form of government, as well as the first system of checks and balances to prevent any single branch of government from gaining too much power. Despite the ostensible simplicity of the Constitution, or perhaps because of it, the interpretation and application of this celebrated document are often the most fiercely debated topics of law. All constitutional decisions ultimately refer to the limited text of the Constitution and its amendments, rendering constitutional law the most challenging area of law due to the broad range of situations that the text is anticipated to encompass. The Supreme Court, the judicial body responsible for making such determinations, will occasionally err in its interpretation; however, history has shown that most critical errors will eventually be rectified. Both in theory and in application, I would deem the decision in Roe v. Wade to be an ideal example of the occurrence of such errors. In what was undoubtedly one of the Supreme Court's most controversial rulings, the Roe v. Wade decision declared that abortion was a right guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution under an implied right to privacy. The deficiencies of this landmark decision are not a question of morality. In my eyes, the Court's reasoning had a detrimental effect on the very structure of the Constitution and subsequently on individual rights."

Tags:termination, pregnancy, David, Souter