Case: US Vs. Virginia Military Institute

The case of Kent V. United States is a historical case in the United States. The Kent case helped lead the way in the development of a list of eight criteria and principles. This creation of these criteria and principle has helped protect the offender and public for more than forty-five years. Which as a reason has forever changed the process of waving a juvenile into the adult system (Find Law, 2014).

Patton v. United States of America Football Rugby USA was a Maryland court case brought forth by the relatives of Donald Patton in which they argue that the negligence of the defendants lead to Patton’s death. The incident in question occurred on June 17, 2000, when Patton was watching his son, Robert, play rugby in a tournament sanctioned by the defendants. The day of the incident was riddled with thunderstorms and most referees had chosen to postpone their matches. The referee of the plaintiff’s son’s game allowed the game to continue well after other’s had stopped. When the referee finally decided to postpone the game, the plaintiff and his son made way to their car to receive shelter from the storm. While traversing the field on the way

In a quick observation, it may be easy to observe that the Constitution of Virginia is much larger in length and detail than the United States Constitution. There are many differences between these two constitutions besides the authors or contributors being that James Madison contributed to both, however, he was not the complete author of the Constitution of Virginia (Constitutions of Virginia). Both Constitutions have the same idea in which it holds three separate branches of government, however, differences include the detail and content brought amongst the articles. Differences include, but are not limited to, division of the three branches, extra articles and policies, and the amendments. They

It has come to my attention that we are in a state uncertainty. First off, we have the United States defending the fact that U.S citizen Abel Fields has committed a crime for which he has falsely claimed for receiving a military award. Therefore, he was convicted of the Stolen Valor Act, and given a fine for which he must pay. Then we have the other party, Mr. Fields, who has claim that he is protected under the first amendment for his claim has not harmed anyone and he did not receive any valuables for his claim. Although the majority of my colleagues believe that Fields has committed a crime under the Stolen Valor Act, I still strongly believe that Fields should be convicted of his crimes however; his sentence should be changed or altered.

Sixty-two years ago, the Supreme Court ruled the “separate but equal” doctrine unconstitutional. The decision from the Plessy v. Ferguson case was lawfully denounced by the Brown v. Board of Education. The Brown case, which was initiated by the members of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), served as a stimulus for challenging segregation in all areas of society, especially in public educational institutions. Among the support for the desegregation in school systems, there was a young yet compelling voice who was heard by numerous ears in the rural city in Farmville, Alabama. The virtuous and determined Barbara Johns, who was only a high school student then led her tiny, hovel-like school’s student body and the Farmville community to file a lawsuit in the hope of terminating the inequality in regards to the educational system.

Title: Rose v. Council for better education. Supreme Court of Kentucky, 1989 790 S.W 2d 186.

The Charles C. Green v County School Board of New Kent County decision of 1968 was a pivotal point in the history of the civil rights movement. It was the court case that finally forced school boards across the country to desegregate their public schools. This did not happen until over a decade after Brown v. Board had deemed segregation unconstitutional and Brown II had sought to abolish it and overturn the “separate but equal” decision of Plessy v. Ferguson. The goal of this paper is to tell the story of how the state of Virginia moved through Brown I, Brown II, and Green v. New Kent County to put an end to segregation in schools.

The Commonwealth of Virginia v. Allen (609 S.E.2d 4, Va. 2005) was a fascinating case. The case focused on two expert witness testifying for the state and the other for the defendant, and if they acted and behaved ethically during the proceedings. Successive information will be addressed to prove the thought process behind my opinion given in this case. The APA code of ethics and specialty guidelines will be used to support my reasoning. Furthermore, they will serve as a baseline of boundaries within the profession to determine the expert witness’ influences to the case as well as their behavior within the profession.

The Equal Protection Clause derives from the Fourteenth Amendment, which specifies “no state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws…” As a part of the Reconstruction Amendments, the aforementioned clause was meant to ensure racial equality in the Reconstruction Period and has been applied successfully against the affirmative action. Introduced in United States v. Carolene Products Co., the strict scrutiny has been applied to the cases, in which a fundamental constitutional rights have been infringed or a government action applies to a suspect classification (i.e. race, religion, national background). Specifically, in regards to Bakke v. Regents of University of California, the Supreme Court (“the Court”) concluded that, considering that the University of California, Davis received several Caucasian applicants for its special admission program in 1973 and 1974 and that none of the applicants received the admission to the program since the start, the program unfairly administered in favor of minority races and, therefore, violated the rights of the white applicants under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Furthermore, from Hopwood v. State of Texas, the Fifth Circuit Court ruled under strict scrutiny that, the affirmative action imposed by the University of Texas School of Law (“the law school”) violates the Fourteenth Amendment since neither the law school nor the University of Texas system has proved a proof of

Then, in a 1984 decision, Grove City v. Bell, the U.S. Supreme Court gutted Title IX. In that ruling, the court said Title IX did not cover entire educational institutions - only those programs directly receiving federal funds. Other programs, such as athletics, that did not receive federal funds, were free to discriminate on the basis of gender.

In the court case Worcester v. Georgia, the U.S. Supreme Court held in 1832 that the Cherokee Indians and Samuel Worcester created a nation holding distinct sovereign powers. This decision did not protect the Cherokees from being removed from their tribal birthplace in the Southeast.

Members of the University of Illinois’s men’s swim team filed a lawsuit in 1993 claiming that the school was discriminating against them by cutting their team and not the women’s swim team. The members claimed that this decision was in violation of Title IX, a law that prohibited discrimination on the basis of gender, along with the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The University of Illinois made the decision to cut the men’s swim team due to budgetary limitations. Along with the men’s swim team, the men’s diving, men’s fencing, and women’s diving team were also cut for the same reason. There were many instances previous to this case where female athletes have filed lawsuits claiming that they were being discriminated against, and that the institution was in violation of

Legal Question: The legal issue presented in this case ultimately questioned the University of Michigan’s admission policy which sought a more diverse student body. The court addressed whether the University of Michigan’s use of racial preferences in the admission process violated

Answer: Yes, I do believe that gender bias is a problem in our nation’s courthouses because as a member of the army I know firsthand what it is and how it belittles the weaker sex. Society cannot actually handle true equal treatment without the natural drive to want to protect the weaker sex.From my research it is proven that 98 percent of most men admit that they feel a drive to protect woman, even if it is not asked of them. I’m sure this is taken into

At Virginia Tech, a professor is being accused of defrauding the university. This case involves over $1 million dollars in grant funding. Yiheng Percival Zhang was charged with wire fraud and making false statements. His lawyer told the Roanoke Times that he remains innocent and will fight the charges brought upon him. Yiheng is a biological systems engineering professor. A postdoctoral researcher and a graduate are also being charged for fraud with the university. All three of these people, but mainly Yiheng withheld grant funds. Zheng filed for grants when the work was previously done in China. The perpetrators are the three individuals who defrauded the university and the university is the