discusses duty based theories versus consequential based theories. We did the Starving Seamen case write-up to analyze these theories of personal ethics. We found that the court acted on duty based ethics and the starving seamen acted on consequential based ethics. We also learned about the “Golden Rule” and Ethical Relativism. Chapter 3 discusses the legal system and jurisdiction of the courts. We discussed the three branches of government: the legislative branch, the executive branch, and the judicial branch. The doctrine of judicial review came up in this chapter which is an important part of our government. Judicial review was the power the courts had to check the constitutionality of a law that is being passed. Marbury v Madison established
…show more content…
The Supremacy clause said that if a state law conflicts with a federal law then the federal law trumps the state law. We learned the three levels of the court system: the trial court, the appellate court, and the Supreme Court. We learned about jurisdiction, which is the authority of a court to decide a case. There are two types of jurisdiction. One is subject matter jurisdiction and the other is personal jurisdiction. We did a case writing of Erie RR v Tompkins, which helped us understand both types of jurisdiction. Subject matter jurisdiction deals with whether it is a criminal or civil case, the level of the court in which the case will go to, and whether the federal or state court has jurisdiction. Personal jurisdiction means that the court has authority to decide the rights of a person within control of the court. We discussed the case of International Shoe Co v Washington, which established the long arm statute. The long arm statute allows a state court to pull an out-of-state defendant if the defendant has minimum contact with the state. The long arm …show more content…
The Commerce Clause is heavily talked about in this chapter. The Heart of Atlanta Hotel case dealt with the commerce clause. Since the commerce clause allowed Congress to regulate interstate commerce, Heart of Atlanta Hotel could technically not privately discriminate because it violated the Civil Rights Act. The chapter discusses various ways state law is preempted. The Equal Protection Clause is discussed as well in this chapter. The Equal Protection Clause is part of the 14th amendment. The case that we used to talk about the Equal Protection Clause was the Yick Wo v. Hopkins case. The courts use three levels of scrutiny to review a state law. In Yick Wo v. Hopkins, the law that was in effect failed the strict scrutiny test. It failed because it was ruled that a law that is neutral on its face, but is discriminatory in its application, violates the Equal Protection Clause. This case was used to discuss the Washington v. Trump case. In the Washington v. Trump case, the executive order was discriminatory in its application. This case related to most of the chapter because the chapter also talked about due process, which was a concern in this case. The 5th and 14th amendment both have the due process clause. We mainly focused on procedural due process. Procedural due process is basically a notice to the defendant and the defendant having an opportunity to be heard. In Washington v. Trump, due process was
The Supremacy clause said that if a state law conflicts with a federal law then the federal law trumps the state law. We learned the three levels of the court system: the trial court, the appellate court, and the Supreme Court. We learned about jurisdiction, which is the authority of a court to decide a case. There are two types of jurisdiction. One is subject matter jurisdiction and the other is personal jurisdiction. We did a case writing of Erie RR v Tompkins, which helped us understand both types of jurisdiction. Subject matter jurisdiction deals with whether it is a criminal or civil case, the level of the court in which the case will go to, and whether the federal or state court has jurisdiction. Personal jurisdiction means that the court has authority to decide the rights of a person within control of the court. We discussed the case of International Shoe Co v Washington, which established the long arm statute. The long arm statute allows a state court to pull an out-of-state defendant if the defendant has minimum contact with the state. The long arm …show more content…
The Commerce Clause is heavily talked about in this chapter. The Heart of Atlanta Hotel case dealt with the commerce clause. Since the commerce clause allowed Congress to regulate interstate commerce, Heart of Atlanta Hotel could technically not privately discriminate because it violated the Civil Rights Act. The chapter discusses various ways state law is preempted. The Equal Protection Clause is discussed as well in this chapter. The Equal Protection Clause is part of the 14th amendment. The case that we used to talk about the Equal Protection Clause was the Yick Wo v. Hopkins case. The courts use three levels of scrutiny to review a state law. In Yick Wo v. Hopkins, the law that was in effect failed the strict scrutiny test. It failed because it was ruled that a law that is neutral on its face, but is discriminatory in its application, violates the Equal Protection Clause. This case was used to discuss the Washington v. Trump case. In the Washington v. Trump case, the executive order was discriminatory in its application. This case related to most of the chapter because the chapter also talked about due process, which was a concern in this case. The 5th and 14th amendment both have the due process clause. We mainly focused on procedural due process. Procedural due process is basically a notice to the defendant and the defendant having an opportunity to be heard. In Washington v. Trump, due process was