Both articles deal with contemporary issues that are subject to much controversy in our era. The supreme court ruling of both cases show just how a constitutional government works and how judicial review is practiced. Although all parties may not agree with the outcomes of the cases, it is safe to say that the final verdict serves to protect the interest of the people; the main principle for our distant, yet recent revolution, and the creation of a nation destined to serve as a model for the rest of the world. In Supreme Court rules in favor of same-sex marriage nationwide we are able to see the slow progression of one of the most debated issues ever presented. The topic of gay marriage seemed to linger in every United States court room, …show more content…
With the insight of many highly respected court officials, such as justice Antonin Scalia, who defended his claim by looking at the roots of the Fourth amendment, and its protection against government intrusions, as stated by the article. The debate whether the Fourth amendment even protects people from being tracked by satellite GPS was tackled by various perspectives, to the allusion of George Orwell’s 1984 and to the infamous court case United States v. Jones. The reversion of a cocaine-trafficking conviction, where it was deemed, “unlawful” to use our modern surveillance technologies to “search” without a warrant. In the end, the decision serves as another example on how 18th century ideology is interpreted and practiced in our contemporary …show more content…
It also allowed the Court to review and interpret the Fourth amendment as a means of protection, even from technology. In addition to judicial review, comes the principle of a Constitutional government, and through it, same-sex marriage is protected by the constitution as well as the right to privacy. Same-sex couples are now guaranteed the same rights that hetero couples enjoy, such as insurance status, inheritance, visitation right, and adoption/custody. Knowing that a warrant is needed to be tracked, one can now be more at ease with the worries that are consequential to the advance technology of the 21st century. With progress, new problems arise, and although the document that supports our country was written centuries ago, it is malleable, and through ambiguity, is able to ensure that our worries are dealt with, and our protection and right to pursuit happiness will always be
In summary of these, the Obergefell V Hodges has received opposition as well as propositions at different degrees, but the majority of the debaters’ are the proposing side. The main idea here was to legalize the Same-sex marriage which had been prohibited in the previous court rulings (Siegel, 2015). The proposing team was emphasizing on the following factors; the right to personal choices as clarified in the human dignity, the right to intimate association, marriage as a foundation of the American social order and the ability to sustain and safeguard children and families (Siegel, 2015).
The outcome of cases that have gone through the United States Supreme Court judicial branch have each had a major impact on how the laws and amendments of the United States Constitution are interpreted. Two cases in particular that expanded constitutional liberties is the case of Engel vs. Vitale (1962) and the case of Tinker vs. Des Moines School District (1969). Not only did both of these cases expand constitutional liberties in general, they more specifically, expanded rights within the school system.
In recent years, the debate over same-sex marriage has grown into a nationwide controversy, reverberating into the halls of congress, at the white house, in dozens of state and legislature and courtrooms, and in the rhetoric of election campaigns at both the national and state levels. As the debate rages on, the American religious community remains deeply divided over the issue, and over the morality of homosexuality. The debate has grown from an issue that occasionally arose in a few states to a national and even worldwide controversy.
On June 26, 2015, the US Supreme Court ruled that the US Constitution guarantees the right for same-sex couples to marry. Many conservative groups do NOT agree with this decision. The gay marriage debate has been simmering for as long as I can remember. The four articles I have selected give information from four different perspectives including that of liberals, conservatives, homosexuals, and orthodox Jews. With so many differing opinions, one can understand why it's been so hard for the nation to come to agree on this issue.
The Supreme Court is the courtroom where all the legal cases dealing with congress or the constitution go to get a final decision. The Court is currently composed of a chief justice, eight associate justices, and nine officers. Their main goal as members of the Supreme Court is to make sure everything and anything abides by the constitution. It has many powers when it comes to law and especially the constitution, but it is not overly powerful due to the other two branches of the government. Checks and balances helps keep their powers level and just as important as the executive and legislative branch powers. The Court has the ability to remove a law or refute anything that violates the United States Constitution. The Supreme Court, on average, receives around 7,000-8,000 petitions for a writ of certiorari every term. The Court grants and hears oral arguments for eighty cases. One case specifically was Printz v. United States. This case focused on dealing with background checks when purchasing a firearm. Jay Printz deemed the provisions to the Brady Bill unconstitutional, decided to take it to the District Courts and eventually the case ended up in the Supreme Court, where Stephen P. Halbrook fought and won the case based on a five to four ruling in favor of Printz.
On June 26, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court removed the ban on same-sex marriage nationwide. On July 15, 2015, Kenneth Jost published an article named “Will there be more gains after marriage ruling?” In this article, Jost discusses the viewpoints of the general public and argues that there may still be a struggle to gain full rights and respect for lesbian, gay, bi-sexual, and transgender (LGBT) people. The article covers the reaction of the public on June 26, along with politicians stand-points on the subject, and the Caitlyn Jenner controversy. Jost’s main argument is that LGBT people are not being protected by the government, even though they have gained the right to marry.
The supreme court also appealed the Sixth Circuit reversed and had all states to be able to recognised same-sex marriage in all states. So, based on this information I will do a research on why the 14th Amendment guarantees equal protection under the law should include same sex marriage. In order for me to thoroughly accomplish this paper, I will be examining more detailed all the facts and the final decisions of the case as well as the amendment(14th) to be able to get really valuable information and to be able to use it to prove my point of view and make it very clear to the audience.I will also be explaining how this issue is very important to society and how the ruling is now affecting many cases out there especially over gay rights.
In the historic ruling of Obergefell v. Hodges declaring same-sex marriage legal in all 50 states, four justices voted against the majority, each giving his or her own reason for dissenting. This momentous decision arose many controversial questions, many believing our justice system was faulty in the decision making process for an issue of such gravity and lasting implications.
The case Obergefell vs. Hodges reached the United States Supreme Court in 2015 (Oyez). This case dealt with the rights of same-sex marriages and became important case in our nation’s young history and in our society in general. The problem was groups of same-sex couples were being told that their marriage licenses were not being upheld to the same legal standards as those of heterogeneous couples. Therefore same-sex couples in Ohio, Tennessee , Kentucky, and Michigan went and sued these agencies in challenge of their constitutional rights (Oyez).They took their issue to court because they believed that the states were denying them their 14th amendment rights without due process. They couldn’t understand why their marriages license were not
The decisions of justices have "altered behavior of political and governmental officials as well as a man walking down the street"(Miller 4). To understand
When a closer look is taken at the five Supreme Court cases and their outcomes, some people may think that under John Marshall's leadership, the Supreme Court may have gone too far. On the other hand, some think that they were in their perimeters to make those heavy decisions. The second opinion is what this essay will agree with. The Supreme Court was within their boundaries to place their federal power on these cases.
The Supreme Court rules on many major issues of our society today. It is the highest federal court in the U.S. It has 9 justices, the chief justice and the associate judges. They choose which cases they would like to hear by a rule of 4. Some cases may begin in lower courts, while cases where they have original jurisdiction will begin in Supreme Court. The cases they hear usually involve federal questions or questions about the Constitution. There are many major issues today. Many people wonder how the Supreme Court will consider these issues in the next ten years.
The political aspects of whether same-sex couples should be allowed to federal and government recognized marriages are a very complex issue. There are basically two sides to the political argument of whether same-sex couples should be allowed to marry. On one side are the liberals who feel that marriage is a civil right that should be denied based on the basis of a person's sexual orientation. On the other side you have conservatives who feel that marriage is an institution in which should only constitute one man and one woman. In this report we are going to examine how the issue of same-sex marriages are affecting our current political environment, how politics is affecting the movement for
The proposed legalization of same-sex marriage is one of the most significant issues in contemporary American family law. As a heavily campaigned development currently discussed in law assessment; these extremely confrontational and debatable political questions are facing present day American courts. If same-sex marriage is legalized, its affect on the parents, children, same sex couples, families, and the social and political world will be astronomical. The arguments surrounding the issue though confrontational nonetheless are easily seen from a wide array of perspectives. One of the perspectives states that marriage is a promise to a spouse to stay loyal and faithful in all
Same sex- marriage is still the topic of many peoples conversation across the country. Citizens, divided by politic party, are very passionate about how they feel about it. The president didn’t approve of it at first, but now he finally accepts same- sex marriage, the Judicial System uses its power to dictate to the States, forcing them to accept same- sex marriage. Both houses of Congress continue to debate what marriage means.