According to Mean (2015) Section 1983 is essentially a statute that allows anyone to sue another person whom they feel is going against the state law. Anyone of these laws could potentially include what he or she deems against the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. These said violations, could be against a person’s freedom of speech, possibly unlawful use of force; the illegal use of a confession under duress, over a person’s plea for his or her right to counsel; cruel and unusual punishment during and including arrest, questioning and during incarceration, as well as any claim violations during the due process. The door to the Federal Courthouse was left open with the Monroe case, which lead to the development
The Fourteenth Amendment states "...nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, and property, without due process of law, nor deny any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law.'" (Davidson, J., & Stoff, M. (2007). America, history of our nation: Independence through 1914 (California ed., p. 118) Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson Prentice Hall). This Amendment is stating that all people have the right to life, liberty, and property under the protection of the states. This case relates to the Fourteenth Amendment, Section 1, because they questioning if it is within Nancy Cruzan's rights to keep on living even if she cannot say what she does or
which stated that when the accused is being tried in a state court, he or she does not have the protection of the exclusionary rule, which protects against illegal search
Prior to this case there were two forms of gun control acts the first was that of 1968 which forbids gun sells to sell guns to people that have a felony charge that are mentally unstable and other things this was amended with the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act which included the need to have a background check. While working to make a system that could make the check fast it had to be done by state law enforcement. People however started to claim that this act was unconstitutional and it violated their rights given to them under the Constitution. The Petitioners filed separate actions challenging the constitutionality of the Brady Act’s interim provisions and in each case the District
A case challenging a statute as violating a person's rights under the U. S. Constitution.
The plaintiff, Plessy was criminally liable under the separate but equal statute for using facilities designated for a different race. He was thus found guilty under the fact that the statute reasonably exercised the state police powers with regard to the state’s tradition, usage, and custom. Plessy, thus filed a petition against Justice Ferguson for writs of prohibition and certiorari in the Louisiana Supreme Court on the
United States was decided by the Supreme Court in 1945. The case involved police brutality were the victim was killed. The federal government prosecuted the police officers after the State of Georgia refused to do so. M. Claude Screws was Sheriff of Baker County, Georgia. Screws knew the victim well, they had been in confrontation over a pistol seized from the victim Robert Hall. On January 29, 1943 Screws had two officers arrest Hall on charges of stealing a tire. The three men drove Hall to the town square and beat him with their fists and a two pound blackjack in front of the courthouse. They did it in plain sight, as residents watched from their homes. The State of Georgia failed to bring charges on the three men, Screws and the other two officers even though repeated suits by the federal government were placed, “a jury in Albany, Georgia, convicted all three defendants of violating Section 242, rejecting the officers’ claim that the beating had been justified in self-defense.”(Watford, 2014) Section 242 was too vague and could not be used to trial because the defendants argued they were not sure which rights it protected. There was a debate between the Supreme Court Justices if the vagueness of Section 242 would lead to a mistrial. The Court’s formation of Section 242 had introduced a “radical revolution” in the balance of power between the National Government and the States. Justice Frankfurter argued that, “because the defendants violated Georgia law by committing murder, this was a purely local crime-enforcement matter that had always been left to the domain of the States”(Watford, 2014) The federal government were now going to be able to make all lawless acts by any police officer a federal crime and Section 242 had survived. The survival of Section 242 meant that the federal government would have a part in fighting the well-known problem of police brutality to African Americans and other minorities, mainly in the South. It was
Jimmy Maddox was convicted of rape in a Georgia state court and sentenced to life imprisonment. Having unsuccessfully pursued his direct appeal and the state post-conviction remedy, Maddox filed a federal habeas corpus petition alleging prosecutorial suppression of exculpatory evidence in violation of the
Fletcher v. Peck, considered one of the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark decisions, is the first time the Court declared a state law unconstitutional. It also founded the idea that both public and private contracts are protected by the contract clause. The case concerned the question of whether Georgia's legislature had the authority to pass a law repealing a previous land grant made by the state. The Marshall Court would eventually find the 1796 act to be unconstitutional because the legislature was employing the judicial power of deciding a question of title.
Barron V. Baltimore (1833) is a significant case in history because it concluded that the fundamental rights provided by the Bill of Rights were not guaranteed by the state. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Baltimore, concluding hat the 5th amendment was limited and should be followed by the Federal government. Through this case, Supreme Court Justice John Marshall declared that the Bill of Rights applied to the federal government, not including the states. According to Section 1 of the 14th Amendment, “government laws must not abridge upon the life, liberty, or property on an individual without just cause”. Because of the Due Process Clause in the 14th amendment, the decision in Barron V. Baltimore had been
Individual states do not need to follow all interpretations of the U.S. Supreme Court in the area of criminal procedure. The states must only abide by what the Supreme Court sets as minimum thresholds for constitutional guarantees. The states are not precluded from developing workable rules governing arrest, searches and seizures to meet “the practical demands of effective criminal investigation and law enforcement.”
During the period of 600 BCE to 600 CE there was much political unrest throughout the world. This essay will analyze the reason for collapse of once powerful ancient empires by scrutinizing the rulers who led them. By looking at the circumstances of a fallen empire, a person can asses that the neglect of government officials, stressed with vast war expenses, who levy high taxes that lead to peasant uprisings, is the circular chain of events that will always eventually crumble a weak empire. And as specific as they may seem, these crises developed many a time.
The originally Bill of Rights protected the rights of citizens from infringement by the federal government, but made no mention of the states. The Fourteen Amendment, adopted shortly after the Civil War, protected citizenship and individual rights from infringement by state governments. Under the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause, the United States Supreme Court began to apply the most important rights guaranteed in the Bill of Rights against the states. This process began in the early 1900s and is known as the doctrine of selective incorporation. Duncan versus Louisiana was the landmark case in which the court incorporated the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial against the states.
It was not until after the Civil War that the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth amendments were enacted and began protecting individuals against the states. The Fourteenth Amendment has been the principal means by which this protection has been accomplished. It reads, in part, “No State shall...deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.” The Supreme Court had interpreted this guarantee of liberty to embrace the fundamental liberties in the Bill of Rights, meaning that the state governments must observe and protect them to the same extent as the federal government this is also known called incorporation. The amendments in the Bill of Rights are said to be incorporated against the states through the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. There has been an ongoing debate on the Supreme Court about the extent of incorporation, and whether the entire Bill of Rights, or only some of it’s guarantees, should be incorporated against the states.
In the article “ The fuel subsidy crisis has woken Nigerians up”, by Tolun Orgunlesi was profoundly characterised by the alarming issue that the citizens from Nigeria are confronting with the withdraw of fuel price subsidy which subsequently has led fuel price to increase more than double, consequently, provoking the price of goods and commodities to rise dramatically. In addition, the author focused immensely in the sentiment of corruption and mismanagement that Nigerians are feeling with this awaken call which proclaims for every Nigerian to pay particular attention to the government entities and their fictitious promises. Furthermore, several rationale points were addressed by the author in respect to the negative impact of such
The legalization of Marijuana, both medicinally and recreationally, has been a hot topic in American culture for some time now. Some states have begun adopting much more liberal laws on Marijuana, although many states still have not done so. Overall, for the states that have legalized the use of Marijuana, things have gone rather well to this point. Due to the benefits of Marijuana legalization, Marijuana should be legalized both medicinally and recreationally in all 50 states in the USA.