Criminal Justice Schilia Research Paper

This first week the assignment was to Define crime, its relationship to the law, and the two most common models of how society determines which acts are criminal, Describe the government structure as it applies to the criminal justice system, Identify choice theories and the their assumptions in regards to crime, Describe the components of the criminal justice system and the criminal justice process, Identify the goals of the criminal justice system.

The concept of power is a divisive matter in the American political system, as the actors holding it are sometimes unable to impose it as a result of their limited authority to do so. The legislative, executive, and judicial branches in the national government depend on each-others point of view. Part of the Constitution was designed with the purpose of making it impossible for either of these three to become more powerful than the others. Each of them has the ability to check and balance the way that the other two function. In spite of the fact that this system was created with the intention of preventing power from being shared unequally in the country, it sometimes serves as a tool for political gridlock, considering that the judicial branches can debate in regard to a particular topic for unlimited amounts of time before actually reaching a conclusion regarding the respective issue.

The United States judicial branch to the general American public can seem insulated from politics, because of their adversarial system, that does not allow judges to choose their cases. The judicial branch unlike, their two counterparts, the legislative and executive at large rely on the respect of the American people and the heads of the two other branches. In appointing members of the federal judiciary, Presidents appoint members who resemble their political ideologies and their likelihood of confirmation in the Senate, the Senate confirms these members based on their performance on the litmus test and Senatorial courtesy. Courts, specifically the Supreme Court, make decisions based on the Constitution, but the legislative branch has the

There is an open seat in the supreme court. Since the death of justice Antonin Scalia in February 2016, President Barack Obama has attempted to appoint judge Merrick Garland to fill this vacancy. However, the currently Republican U.S. Senate has refused to act on the nomination. This is not the first time the Senate has disagreed with the president's choice of nominee. The Senate confirms just around eighty percent of the president's nominations. There is a strong rationale behind this two-tiered appointment system. Seats in the Supreme Court are extremely important positions to hold; the Supreme Court has the role of interpreting the text of the Constitution and using that interpretation

In a recent event, one of Supreme Court Justices has passed away. Theoretically, the President would have to appoint a new justice and also have that nomination to be confirmed by the Senate. But recently Senate has declined to support Barack Obama approval on the new member of Justice. Now, statistically, the Senate is controlled by the Republicans by fifty four to forty six. This causes the Democrats to lose the majority in the Senate. Due to this Republicans are seeing this as a loophole to stop the nominations of a new Justice nominated in favor of a Democratic President. Instead of Congress members letting go of the rivalry in the two sets of parties, Republicans or known as the Senate has decided that it would be a good idea to leave only 8 Justices in the

This allows the executive branch to determine the makeup of the judiciary branch, and through it exercise power over the legislative branch. Because the men and women appointed to the Supreme Court remain there for life, with no public elections to possibly remove them, a president can affect politics through his choice of appointees for decades after his time in office has ended (Romance, July 29). But this, too, is limited by the Congress as the president’s judicial appointments are subject to the consent of the Senate (Landy and Milkis, 289).

President Obama publicly disagreed with the decision but could not change it. The President decides on nominations who are then put under scrutiny while he receives the ‘advise and consent’ of the Senate judiciary committee. There is therefore a small democratic link however it is very weak. Once a Justice is appointed they cannot be removed and are independent of the other political bodies this can be evidenced by Eisenhower’s appointments, a Republican conservative who appointed 2 liberal justices, something he regretted so much so that when asked if there were any regrets after his time in office he replied “I have made two mistakes, and they are both sitting on the Supreme Court”. As stated before the judiciary is independent and once Supreme Justices are appointed they cannot be fired or dismissed this leaves a huge deficit of accountability, a key factor of democracy.

We have come across an uncommon issue which is, congress, specifically senate, is not making any progress in advising or consenting the nominee U.S. Supreme Court Judge chosen by Obama. Through logic, senate’s lack of responsiveness is not okay. Obama should appoint Merrick Garland because the Senate has not even stated doing its job in holding hearings or voting. Further, it has not done its constitutional role of advice and consent. Structurally, the powers of Judge appointments are in the presidents’ section of the Constitution meaning they are shared powers, but more like shared obligations. The awareness of this is seen where FDR threatened to pack the court because that power was delegated to him. The Senate has this obligation, they have not started the process, yet they know they have to, they know they can vote no, but they just want to leave it to the next president. In Humphrey’s we see that Congress has intervention in the inferior offices, but only through statute, meaning that only through statute can congress be involved sometimes. This ties into how through legal matters they do advice and consent. In the prize cases, we see that Lincoln was allowed to take from an industry outside of the war exception, absent of congresses authorization, because they were unsure if there was even a war at the times of civil war. In Goldwater v. carter, the plurality find for carter senate’s role ends at ratification when it comes to ratifying treaties, yet they also find

I support replacing Scalia immediately. I say this because Barack Obama has the right as a President to decide what to do. The Republicans don’t want to replace Scalia immediately because Barack Obama, who is a Democrat, is in office. They believe that they should wait for the next election and hope that the next President will be a Republican so they can vote. However, Barack Obama is President until January 20th 2017 and he can do everything he wants until then.

Fred is drunk and driving his dad’s car. Fred is a 21 year old student at Columbia College. Fred rams into a parked car at 10th and Rogers. Thinking no one saw him; Fred moves his car and parks it on an adjacent lot. He sprints to his dorm room in Miller Hall. A neighbor saw the wreck and Fred running to the dorm. Police are called and they arrive ten minutes after the wreck. The officers see several empty beer cans and a bottle of tequila (half full) in the front seat. The tags are traced to Fred’s dad, who is called by police. Dad says that Fred is a student at Columbia College. Police run Fred's record and determine that he has two prior DWIs within the past five years. The third DWI in 10 years is a felony. Police contact

The first part of this essay will provide a brief insight into the history of the Supreme Court, the original intentions of the founding fathers and a discussion on how they idealized the relationship between politics and the law. The second section will explore how the contemporary process to which judges are appointed has become significantly influenced by politics. The third section will discuss how the Supreme Court overstepped its boundaries on constitutional interpretation in the Roe v. Wade case. The final section will unpack the importance of partisanship and ideological politics and discuss how it impacts the function of the Justices in their

NPR’s legal affairs correspondent, Nina Totenberg, described a “horrible political storm” brewing over the Supreme Court of the United States (“CNN,” 2016, p. 1). While reporting for CNN, Totenberg used these words to draw attention to the untimely death of Justice Antonin Scalia in an era of modern politics in which the court has become more polarized than ever. The Supreme Court, the highest court of the land, is not only being severely impacted by partisan ties, but is now also deciding cases according to these biased beliefs. The Democratic and Republican parties, after corrupting and encroaching upon the federal judiciary, have made court nominations and rulings into a game of party politics, inevitably destroying the impartiality of the

     It is nearly impossible to avoid politics during the appointments of high profile positions; therefore, the idea that Supreme Court is above politics when referring to its appointments is giving to much credit to that entity. The appointments of the Supreme Court, as with any political body, correlate no only to the media's portraying, but also to interest group the President wishes to appease.

This paper will argue why Chief Justice Rehnquist’s quote on the ever expanding authority of the Supreme Court of the United States is an accurate depiction of the social adoption of a third legislative branch. Through the power of judicial review, the Court has been granted legistoral authority that was not constitutionally delegated to the Court, and with this new authority the institutional practices of obtaining a seat will be examined. This questioning stems from the fact that a court of nine unelected citizens have similar legislative authority of those elected to seats of authority in the Executive and Legislative branch. Yet, while this may be deemed undemocratic, it will be made clear that the institution of an unelected Court is essential to preserving the Constitution in a way that a democratically elected court is not possible of doing. While the Court has been adapted in a way that varies from the founders’ intent, it is evident that the citizens of the country have adopted the idea of a more legislative court, and that the preservation of this new Court is essential.

1. One of the Supreme Court Justices, Antonin Scalia, has recently passed away. His absence in the court has fueled a battle between Republicans and President Obama. They believe that the next President should be the one to appoint the replacement justice. However, Obama counters that it his responsibility as president to do so in due time. In order for his nominee to follow through however, a majority of the Senate must vote upon it, but with 54 Republicans, this ruling may be blocked.