Judicial disqualification

Mandatory minimum sentencing in the United States needs to be reformed. Especially for the non violent offenses. For federal and state crimes there is a mandatory minimum sentencing law requiring Mandatory minimum sentencing laws requiring binding prison terms of a distinct length for people convicted. These sentencing laws are set in stone and prevent judges from fitting the punishment to the circumstances of the offense. Mandatory minimum sentences do not by any means override sentencing;…

their argument. The Supreme Court should have the power to overturn unconstitutional federal laws. Federalist No. 78, the Marbury v. Madison decision, Article III of the Constitution and the Judiciary Act of 1789 are prime examples to prove that the judicial branch has the authority to do so. First of all, in Federalist No. 78, written by Alexander Hamilton in 1788; declares that, “[The] courts were designed to be an intermediate body between the people and the legislature...”(Doc D). In other…

“Ain’t I a Woman?” by Sojourner Truth used rhetorical strategies very effectively. Truth used rhetorical strategies effectively because her tone, text structure, figurative language, and the rhetorical devices she used let the audience know what she was feeling and why she was fighting for was she was fighting for. Truth used many rhetorical strategies in her speech but pathos, logos, ethos, allusion, juxtaposition, and pinpointing really made her argument valid and strong. Sojourner Truth’s…

of a constitution such as the separation of powers. In the UK the constitutional reform act certainly tried to implement a separation of powers. The Supreme Court in the UK took over the existing role of the Law Lords as well as some powers of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, and removed the functions of Speaker of the House of Lords and Head of the Judiciary of England and Wales from the office of Lord Chancellor which applied a greater separation of powers. However in the U.S they…

standards of decency calls for evolvement of laws, the idea of rewriting the American Constitution every 19 years elicit many concerns. First, rewriting the Constitution is unnecessary and impractical given our use of precedents and the power of judicial review. Not only so, there are dangers of rewriting the law so often because there are social risks and consequences…

when everyone sees it differently. The issue of judicial restraint vs. judicial activism is that judicial activism* is generally refers to judges who allow their personal and political views to affect their interpretation of the law, and, consequently, their decisions in important cases. Judicial activists are often accused of ignoring stare decision when making their decisions. (American Psychological Assoc.) For Judicial restraint is a judicial interpretation that encourages judges to…

The second case was over religious businesses being forced to provide birth control to all employees. The Supreme Court voted down this specific mandate as it violated the freedom of religion. You may want to expand here? The third and most recent Obamacare case was in regards to the federal subsidies( money) being awarded to individuals from the federal government, even though the law specifically states that these subsidies should be, “Established by the State”. This case held an interesting…

others for the case to be valid. Marshall’s creation of judicial review can be held to the same standard of three questions. First, is judicial review constitutionally acceptable? Second, if judicial review is acceptable, does the Judiciary Act violate the Constitution by Marshall’s reading? And third, if the two previous questions hold up, did Marshall even interpret the Constitution correctly. On the question of the constitutionality of judicial review, there is a relative grey area as the…

In this report for a non-governmental organization, Mclemore uses personal stories and examples from the USA to portray mandatory minimum sentencing as a lousy policy that should not be enacted in Canada. Mclemore highlights the negative aspects of such a policy that would take Canada in the wrong direction with its policy on crime. Her examples of these ‘tough on crime’ policies failing in the USA are especially convincing as it sheds light on the practice contributing negatively in past…

The Supreme Court, under Article 3 of the constitution, only had original jurisdiction over certain cases. It was after the prominent Marbury vs Madison case that they gave themselves the power of Judicial Review (Judicial Process, Page 415). Judicial Review is the power granted by the Supreme Court itself to review and overturn any acts of Congress, and to declare laws unconstitutional. This gives the Supreme Court a certain degree of power over states and Congress and also gives them the…