Supreme Court of the United States

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 debate using a strategy known as an…

The state of Maryland voted to tax all bank businesses that were not done with the state banks as a means to tax people who lived in Maryland but did business with banks in other states. After congress had passed an act that allowed Federal banks to be located within the individual states, Maryland passed an act that placed these and all other banks/financial institutions operating within the state under the taxation model of Maryland. Giving Maryland the right to tax these financial…

On April 27, 2011, the Court ruled, by a 5–4 margin, that the Federal Arbitration Act of 1925 preempts state laws that prohibit contracts from disallowing class-wide arbitration, such as the law previously upheld by the California Supreme Court in the case of Discover Bank v. Thus, businesses that include arbitration agreements with class action waivers can require consumers to bring claims only in individual arbitrations, rather than in court as part of a class action. In the case of AT&T…

Prompt 2: The Supreme Court is not an effective, counter-majoritarian protector of the rights of oppressed minority populations in society when fundamental rights are at stake. However, rather than serving as an end-all-be-all and strict law of the land, the court’s decisions have often taken a considerable amount of time to enforce and come into place. Rather than being a protector of the rights, it is wiser to look at the court as an impetus for change. This is not to undermine the…

Juveniles and Capitol Punishment: Extending Eight Amendment protections Samuel Joseph Joest Arizona State University Abstract Introduction Is it cruel to sentence a minor to death? Is it right to end the life of a juvenile so early with no chance to rehabilitate and change into a better person? What about sentencing them to life without the chance of parole? Never getting the chance to be rehabilitated to more mature…

“A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” This of course is the second amendment in the United States constitution. As of the start of this research paper, the way I would interpret this amendment is that all citizens of the United States are guaranteed the right to own, carry, and use firearms. With this in mind, it is my opinion that any laws that would be put in place to keep citizens…

California (1958), and Cicenia v. LaGay (1958) (Hemmens, 2014, p. 22). In another case, Gallegos v. Colorado (1952) the United States Supreme Court ruled that the confection a violation of due process after Gallegos who was 14 years of age at the time was denied his right to have contact with his mother (p. 22). The concerns that the cases cause among the liberal United States Supreme Court Justices consisted of cases displaying tactics by policemen in using psychological methods in getting…

partially based on the English bill of rights of 1689. The right to bear arms does not mean there aren’t any restrictions to gun laws. The Supreme Court says that the federal government as well as the states can outlaw weapons they seem fit as long as a, "reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia.” The Supreme Court ruled that, “The right to bear arms is not granted by the Constitution; neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument…

commissions. One of those who should have received one of these positions took this to the Supreme Court in what would be known as Marbury vs. Madison. Chief Justice John Marshall ruled that Marbury was legally entitled to the position, and that the course of action to correct was through a mandamus by the court; although it is not stated in the constitution, but added in the Judiciary act of 1789, the Supreme Court deemed the act unconstitutional.…

strict procedure before obtaining search warrants. When obtaining evidence, it is important to follow proper legal procedure. If the police officer failed to follow the procedure, this can cause the evidence inadmissible in court. As a result, the evidence cannot be used in court. There are three main concerns when obtaining evidence: exclusionary rule, fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine, and debate whether exclusionary rule deter police misconduct. The exclusionary rules outline legitimate…