Adversarial Legalism

Today, in the United States, most citizens are able to appreciate the fair, balanced legal system that is in place. The country suffered many failures before establishing the United States Constitution, and later the Bill of Rights, which became the foundation of the country’s legal system and protection of the citizens’ rights (American Sentinel University). Citizens may take their right to trial or their right to due process for granted, without realizing how life was before these rights were recognized and established. Until the Constitution in 1787, the justice system was not permanent and not quite clear, causing unfair and unjust treatment. Of course, no system can be perfect, but it is possible to discover options that suit the wants

assistance of council, and procedural bars, venue, and jury selection, as well as potential racism by jurors. According to ( Tabak, 1999) “these reasons apply in cases in which the death penalty may be sought.” When illustrating the use of prosecutorial discretion two crime types that can be

Racial disparity in the sentencing process of the criminal justice system also exists because of racial jurors. To eliminate the suspensions of racial disparity of racial jurors the jury will select at least one African-American to serve for the jury. A percentage of African-Americans oppose capital punishment (Tabak, 1999, p. 6). Prosecutors commonly discriminate against African-Americans during challenges of discretions and blatantly abuse the powers of prosecutors. Juries predominantly use more Whites in every trial is inappropriate on the levels of the criminal justice system. Americans have rights to a trial by jury of peers and has the right not to exclude minorities in the selection of a jury. Excluding minorities in a jury of an individual’s peers is a violation of an objective and fair trial for a defendant.

The criminal justice system of America is deeply scarred with racial bias. Crimes are being committed and, in turn, are resulting with innocent people doing hard-time. Thankfully, newfound methods of appealing court rulings are finding justice for these minorities; however, the results are as shocking as the crimes being committed. When it was found that the majority of successful appeals were of minorities, the true defects of the system was apparent. The minority community is being critically judged for things they’re not doing.

When thinking of a jury, there is a belief that everyone is fair when it comes to making the decision of whether the person being accused of the crime is guilty or not guilty because of the person’s race. What if this belief is not necessarily correct? There have been many instances in whether race has been a factor when the jury makes a decision. According to Baskin, Goldstein, and Sommers (2014), there has been enough evidence to show that racial biases influences the decisions of a jury. In this paper, the articles will show how jury decision-making is influenced by the offender’s race.

The intersection of racial dynamics with the criminal justice system is one of longstanding duration. In earlier times, courtrooms in many jurisdictions were comprised of all white decision-makers. Today, there is more diversity of leadership in the court system, but race still plays a critical role in many

Despite the efforts of lawyers and judges to eliminate racial discrimination in the courts, does racial bias play a part in today’s jury selection? Positive steps have been taken in past court cases to ensure fair and unbiased juries. Unfortunately, a popular strategy among lawyers is to incorporate racial bias without directing attention to their actions. They are taught to look for the unseen and to notice the unnoticed. The Supreme Court in its precedent setting decision on the case of Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986), is the first step to limiting racial discrimination in the court room. The process of selecting jurors begins with prospective jurors being brought into the courtroom, then

In modern-day America the issue of racial discrimination in the criminal justice system is controversial because there is substantial evidence confirming both individual and systemic biases. While there is reason to believe that there are discriminatory elements at every step of the judicial process, this treatment will investigate and attempt to elucidate such elements in two of the most critical judicial junctures, criminal apprehension and prosecution.

In the book Just Mercy: A story of Justice and Redemption by Bryan Stevenson, there are several topics discussed regarding the American Justice system. One of those many topics discussed is regarding how a person’s race, social status and income, may influence the outcome of a court trail. In present day America, many years after the era of Jim crow and segregation the Justice system still seems to be more lenient towards white Americans, especially those with high income and a good standing in society. The American justice system has become unjust in the trials deemed to be fair, due to an evident prejudice against minorities, their social status and whether or not they receive a well off or poor income.

Few in this country would argue with the fact that the United States criminal justice system possesses discrepancies which adversely affect Blacks in this country. Numerous studies and articles have been composed on the many facets in which discrimination, or at least disparity, is obvious. Even whites are forced to admit that statistics indicate that the Black community is disproportionately affected by the American legal system. Controversy arises when the issue of possible causes of, and also solutions to, these variations are discussed. It’s not just black versus white, it is white versus white, and white versus oriental, whatever the case may be, and it is not justice. If we see patterns then the judges should have the authority to say something. Jury nullifications cannot be overturned regardless of the cause. Exclusionary rule, according to CULS (2010) – Prevents the government from using most evidence gathered in violation of U.S. Constitution; like unreasonable search and seizure (Fourth Amendment).

Sommers, S. (2009, January 1). On the Obstacles to Jury Diversity. In www.thejuryepert.com. Retrieved November 29, 2014, from

The author of this article is Cornelia Grumman won the Pulitzer Prize in 2003 and found the organization the First Five Years Fund where she advocated for stronger federal policies. The audience she could be targeting would be the government to create stricter guidelines when imposing capital punishment. The purpose of this article is to give awareness of how race can create bias factors in the justice system. It has been commonly seen

To Be Adversarial or Not to Be Adversarial There are many decisions at hand when advising Mr. Smith to file his lawsuit in the United States of America for his corporation OmiCorp. Within choosing to use the American legal system, there can be many advantages and disadvantages to litigating under this country. Not only do we as a firm need to outline the advantages and disadvantages of using the American Adversarial Legalist system, but also need to take into account all of Mr. Smith’s own concerns he brings to the drawing board. In addressing both of these, we can successfully advise our prospective client into making the right decision for him and his corporation. In order to further our explanations and reasoning’s we will be using the book Adversarial Legalism: The American Way of Law by Robert A. Kagan.

Having a diverse bench is critical to having a successful criminal justice system. The United States court system follows a presumption of innocence, meaning those who enter a courtroom are presumed innocent until proven guilty. This presumption of innocence is not always found in the courtroom. Every courtroom actor, whether consciously or unconsciously, has a bias towards the defendant and may even presume guilt before the case begins. This is especially true when there is a white judge acting on cases involving a defendant who is a part of the minority. Judges who represent the minority are not only unbiased towards defendants of their own race, but they also bring new perspectives to the bench (Haire & Moyer, 2015). They present ideas, understandings, and

xOmniCorp being a large multinational corporation has the opportunity to choose what court they would like to utilize for their case since both Neverland and the United States Court have jurisdiction to trial their case. in the case of the United States court, there is a likelihood that the Supreme Court can hear the case. That being said, we have to point out that there are two different legal systems in play and those legal systems are civil code-based legal system and the common law. With the Civil code- based system, the process is more transparent and up to date because the civil law is always and continuously evolving and in a way spelled out and specified for each scenario, case laws etc. On the other hand, the adversarial is more complex and rooted in the common code." That means that the legal system is precedent and customs based. According to Barkley law, they state that “there is no comprehensive compilation of legal rules and statutes like in the civil system. Furthermore, the common law does rely on scattered statutes, which are legislative decisions, it is primarily based on precedent, meaning the judicial decisions that have already been made in similar cases.”