Through an analysis of three SupremeCourtcases in Canada, this paper address legal issues that are termed "grey areas", or areas of law where the solutions are not always legally obvious.
900 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 3 sources, 2006, $ 35.95
Abstract This paper discusses how three SupremeCourtcases in Canada address "grey areas" in the law, meaning areas in the law where there is some uncertainty whether the specific language of the law refers to an issue. This is called a grey area because the answer is not readily obvious, not black or white. The paper examines such grey areas by examining a case on abortion, a case on stopping motorists, and a case on commercial speech.
From the Paper "The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, also known as the Constitution Act, 1982, provides certain protections for Canadian citizens and is used to clarify the law on certain issues. However, there are certain grey areas in the law that have to be decided by the Supreme Court, which may use the Charter of Rights and Freedoms for clarification. A grey area occurs when there is some uncertainty whether the specific language of the law refers to an issue, and this is called a grey area because the answer is not readily obvious, not black or white. Several cases illustrate this process."
Abstract This paper is written in response to the important decisions which were handed down by the SupremeCourt in Brewer v. Williams, regarding the disappearance of ten year old Pamela Powers in Des Moines, Iowa. It presents an overview of the case, including the question which the Court was prompted to answer, the facts of the case and the rational the Court used in deciding the way in which it did. The paper looks at prior cases involving the right to counsel, as well as cases following the Brewer decision, and an argument as to why this case is of a significant benefit to American Law.
From the Paper "In order to understand how the Court reached its ruling, it's important to understand some of the significant cases prior to Williams. In Massiah v. United States 377 U.S. 201 (1964) the Supreme Court ruled that once a suspect has been indicted and retains a lawyer, the police cannot (through any means) try to illicit incriminating statements from the suspect, in order to use at trial; thus, it was a direct violation of Massiah's Right to Counsel. In Miranda v. Arizona 384 U.S. 436 (1966) the Court held that if there is a determination that a suspect is deprived of movement in a significant way, and is also being interrogated, he must be informed of his rights prior to questioning."
This paper discusses the SupremeCourtcase "Barron v. Baltimore" which concerned the taking of private property and any protections against this afforded by the Fifth Amendment.
675 words (approx. 2.7 pages), 3 sources, 2006, $ 26.95
Abstract This paper discusses the SupremeCourtcase "Barron v. Baltimore" from 1833, decided by the Marshall Court, in which the issue was the applicability of the Fifth Amendment to the states as well as the federal government. The paper analyzes the SupremeCourt decision in the case which found that the Fifth Amendment did not apply to the states as well as the federal government. The paper notes that this decision served as precedent for a century before being abandoned in the 1930s and that some thought applied to the entire Bill of Rights.
From the Paper "An early decision regarding the taking of private property and any protections against this afforded by the Fifth Amendment was known as Barron v. Baltimore (32 U.S. 243, 1833). In this case, John Barron was part owner of a wharf in the city of Baltimore. The city was then expanding, and this caused the accumulation of large amounts of sand in the harbor, which deprived parts of the harbor of deep waters needed for certain types of shipping. The accumulation affected Barron and his business adversely, so he sued the city for part of his financial losses. The issue raised was not simply about the financial losses, however, for the case was based on the protections of the Fifth Amendment. According to that amendment, the federal government is prevented from taking private property for public use without just compensation for the owner of that property."
Abstract The paper starts by outlining the background to the Texas vs. Johnson court-case of flag-burning that occurred in the U.S.A. It explains the conviction in the light of the First Amendment. It looks at the court's determinants and the consequences of the decisions of the court for future flag-burning offences.
From the Paper "The phrase "Symbolic expression" is usually used to explain expressions that are mixed with elements of behavior. Symbolic expression (or expressive behavior) can be protected by the First Amendment, according to The Supreme Court that has made it clear in a series of cases. Many of these cases have been highly controversial, but none has probably been so, more than Texas v. Johnson (1990) overturning the conviction of a man who expressed his utter displeasure with United States policies by burning an American flag."
Tags: First, Amendment, USA, court, consequence, determinant, symbolic, expression
Abstract This paper focuses the effects of SupremeCourt decisions on public opinion as debated by Johnson and Martin in "The Public Conditional Responses to SupremeCourt Decisions," Mishler and Sheenan's "The SupremeCourt as a Countermajoritarian Institution? The Impact of Public Opinion on SupremeCourt Decisions" and Rosenberg in his book "The Hollow Hope". This paper argues that the SupremeCourt does have an effect on public opinion but that such effects are conditional.
From the Paper "It would be simple to conclude that the Supreme Court either has an effect on public opinion or that it has no effect whatsoever on public opinion. The correct conclusion would be to say that the Supreme Court has an effect on public opinion and that such effect is not always clearly determinable. In other words, "The Supreme Court can and does influence public attitudes toward highly salient issues, but its effect is conditional" (Johnson and Martin, 1998, 306). This is known as the Conditional Response Theory, as established by Johnson and Martin in their article The Public's Conditional Response to Supreme Court Decisions. Johnson and Martin assert that the Conditional Response Theory is based on three facts: First, the Supreme Court is viewed as a creditable institution and therefore a highly legitimate one. "
Abstract In this article, the writer provides the background to the U.S. SupremeCourt through a brief history of the Court. In addition, the writer presents an explanation as to how cases from trial court work their way up to the SupremeCourt for review. The writer notes that both topics are rich with layers of complexity and for the purposes of this paper, an overview of the history and process of the SupremeCourt is provided.
From the Paper "Additional restrictions on appeals to the Supreme Court include some of the general restrictions applied to all appellate review. For example, appeals are restricted to losing parties, questions of law to be addressed must have been raised during trial court, and time restrictions exist in permitting the filing of an appeal.
"Once a case successfully reaches the Supreme Court docket, a lengthy review process begins which can take as long as three years to complete. Once the process is completed, the Supreme Court issues a number of opinions representing the different views held by the justices following the review process. The opinion most widely shared amongst the majority (the majority opinion) represents the final decision of the Supreme Court. "
Abstract This paper examines the presence of the unconstitutional practices of the United States' government, citing several SupremeCourtcases as examples. The author argues that the government its overstepping its bounds by holding detainees without providing them with counsel or the opportunity to defend themselves. The paper illustrates this argument with the Korematsu case in which American citizens of Japanese descent were excluded from areas that were considered critical in terms of national defense and possible espionage, and the case of of "Rasul vs. the United States" in which four citizens from Britain and Australia were brought to the American military base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba during the War on Terror and denied access to attorneys while being held indefinitely. The paper discusses these cases and argues that the accused deserve the right to be heard in court and to contest any ruling against him or her, and without that, the Constitution of the United States will mean nothing.
From the Paper "The decision is therefore deemed as consistent with the rules under which such decisions are made. Although this is based upon a legal technicality, decisions that are made in this way provide evidence that the Supreme Court is concerned with protecting all petitioners appearing before it in an impartial and lawful manner. Regardless of how likely guilt is, and regardless of the crime, the accused deserves the right to be heard in court and to contest any ruling against him or her."
Tags: constitutional practices, supremecourt, law, case study
Abstract This paper discusses the issues in the SupremeCourt decisions relating to the First Amendment and other the Americans with Disabilities Act. The author relates the expansion of the scope of the First Amendment and free speech. The paper criticizes the Court's decision in the case involving the Americans with Disabilities Act.
From the Paper This essay analyzes two cases before the Supreme Court New YorkTimes v. Sullivan U. S. and Toyota Motor Manufacturing Kentucky Inc .v. Williams Case No. ... decided January... . New York Times v Sullivan Parties. L. B. Sullivan, an elected Commissioner ..."
Tags: New York Times v. Sullivan, SupremeCourt, First Amendment, Disabilities
Abstract This paper discusses the rulings of the SupremeCourt of the United States that have had long lasting affects on the juvenile justice system. The paper contends that each ruling by the justices has been centered around the 14th amendment to the constitution, and provides case evidence to support this thesis. The paper gives examples of long term effects.
From the Paper "The juvenile justice system was created in 1899 to protect youths who were convicted of crimes from being incarcerated with violent adults (Males and Macallair 1). From the beginning, however, judges had the right to transfer any juvenile they wished to adult courts, and jails, at the judges own discretion. Furthermore, as the increase in juvenile crime has taken place over the last few decades the juvenile justice system has been in a continuous battle with society over how juveniles should be tried, incarcerated, and punished. Many believe that the philosophy in handling juvenile crime in the United States should be one that centers on making punishments tougher, and thereby, deterring future juvenile criminals. "
Abstract In this article, the writer examines the influence of the U.S. SupremeCourt. The writer concludes that the SupremeCourt is not too political or too powerful.
From the Paper "Bradley C. Canon commented that the U.S. Supreme Court has a direct involvement in the nation's political-moral disputes and the Court sometimes injects itself into these disputes and through dicta and other activities can become a virtual cheerleader for one side in the dispute. Canon uses the examples of court rulings in Roe v Wade and Brown v Board of Education as evidence of how the Supreme Court effectively ended debate over important political and social issues by coming down respectively on ... "
Abstract The paper discusses the United States SupremeCourt and history of the justices that comprise it. The paper further examines the background of the justices and how the court became associated with the matter of the U.S. Constitution. The paper also discusses the requirements of office, the duties of the court, and the nomination and confirmation process that is associated with positions on the court. Finally, the paper examines current issues within the court and makes determinations based on the research.
From the Paper "The Supreme Court of the United States has been responsible for law that has altered the lives of every American. Cases such as Roe v. Wade, Plessey v. Ferguson, and Brown v Board of Education have spoken to significant issues within society, and have created the framework for how society will function throughout time. While it did not appear that the initial court would ever have such an impact on the country, the expertise of the judges that have served on the court altered that opinion, allowing the court to become the most dominant judicial force within the United States. The United States Constitution gave the duties of forming a court system in the country to the United States Congress through Article III, Section I. "
Abstract The paper explains two landmark decisions of the U.S. SupremeCourt: 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."
Abstract A book report and analysis of Thomas R. Marshall's "Public Opinion and the SupremeCourt". The book itself concerns the influence of public opinion, the media, and interest groups on the decisions handed down by the Court, and vice versa. The conclusion points out that the influence of the public has grown (or the Court's has diminished) in the wake of the OJ Simpson trial.
This paper discusses the use of the U.S. SupremeCourt, from the end of the Civil War through 1917, to support the beliefs that truly all men are created equal.
Abstract This paper discusses the use of the U.S. SupremeCourt by Blacks, Chinese and others to end discrimination, segregation and disenfranchisement by initiating and challenging regional legal decisions. The paper describes important U.S. Supremecourtcases of this period: Roberts vs. the City of Boston ("separate but equal" doctrine), Ho Ah Kow vs. Nunan (discrimination against Chinese), Plessy vs. Ferguson (state's rights to enact its own laws) and Buchanan vs. Warley ( states cannot officially segregate African Americans into residential districts).
From the Paper "For example, the Chinese, who comprised a critical element in building the fortunes of the West, were denied many of the rights whites freely enjoyed. The Chinese persevered in this hostile climate and succeeded in broadening the definition of "American." The Chinese achieved Constitutional rights and led the way for other immigrant groups yet to come. In Ho ah Kow vs. Nunan, Ho Ah Kow sued a San Francisco sheriff who followed a racially-motivated law that decreed all prisoners have their hair cut at the uniform length of one inch long upon entering jail."
Tags: Roberts, vs., the, City, of, Boston, disenfranchisement, separate but equal, doctrine, Plessy, vs., Ferguson, Buchanan, vs., Warley
Abstract This paper evaluates how H. L. A. Hart and P. Devlin would assess the 1992 Canadian SupremeCourt decision R. v. Butler. In so doing the paper clearly expresses an understanding of the debate between Hart and Devlin and applies the salient themes and or arguments of that debate to the Butler decision. Finally, the paper argues for one position or the other when determining whether or not the 1992 ruling was a just and equitable one. Specifically, the paper argues that Hart's position is more tenable than either Devlin's or the SupremeCourt decision.
