Today there are many court cases in the United States that occur all the time. There are a number of topics that go to court, whether its education, religion, crime, freedom of speech, or search and seizure. The court case I have chosen is a case based on education. In this essay, I will discuss the major parts of the court case, its impact on education and why future teachers need to be aware of the legal decision of this case.
My court case I picked is the Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Citizens versus Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (1971). According to the Court Case Complaint, the topic was the right to education for all children with disabilities. The people involved were the Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Citizens, thirteen parents of children with disabilities such as Horace Bowman and his daughter Nancy Beth Bowman (1-20). There were other people involved in the case. The attorney representing all of the parents was Thomas K. Gilhool. The party also had an expert witness who was a former National ARC Executive Director, Gunner Dybwad (Tucker and Cobbs 8). The people on the defense side contained the other party, which included David H. Kurtzman, Secretary of Education of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The State Board of Education of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Joseph Adlestein, the Acting Secretary of Public Welfare of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and all of the Pennsylvania school districts. The issue of the case was
The argument of public safety versus civil rights has always been at the forefront of many major political issues in the United States. Civil rights are the foundation of this country, and they protect it’s citizens. But with that, comes the protection of criminals, terrorists, and enemies of the state, and the freedom for these people to move and operate against American ideals. The slightest restrictions on civil rights increases the safety of the general public, enables law enforcement agencies to operate more fluidly, and increases the rate for crushing the opposition.
What is the age that a person should be able to claim rights under the first amendment? The first thing would come to most people's mind is eighteen. However, upon examination, someone could easily justify that a sixteen year old who is in his or her second year of college would have the ability to form an opinion and should be allowed to express it. What makes this student different from another student who, at sixteen, drops out of school and gets a job, or a student who decides to wear a shirt that says "PRO-CHOICE" on it? While these students differ in many aspects such as education level, their opinion can equally be silenced under the first amendment. One of the most blatant abuses of the first amendment right to free speech is
In the development process of America, its sound that legislative system has a very solid foundation for the construction of American society. The Bill of Rights as one of the successful act in America, its importance position has never been ignored. The Bill of Rights was introduced by James Madison and came into effect on December 15, 1791. It has given the powerful support for the improvements of American society. The Bill of Rights has become an essential part in guaranteeing the further development of culture. The influence of The Bill of Rights can be easily found in its cultural revolutionizing. It can not only guarantee the harmonious relationship among all the walk of society, but can also promote the construction of harmonious
From the beginning, the United States Constitution has guaranteed the American people civil liberties. These liberties have given citizens rights to speak, believe, and act freely. The Constitution grants citizens the courage to express their mind about something they believe is immoral or unjust. The question is, how far are citizens willing to extend the meanings of these liberties? Some people believe that American citizens take advantage of their civil liberties, harming those around them. On the contrary, many other people feel that civil liberties are necessary tools to fight for their Constitutional rights.
"If the fires of freedom and civil liberties burn low in other lands, they must be made brighter in our own. If in other lands the press and books and literature of all kinds are censored, we must redouble our efforts here to keep them free. If in other lands the eternal truths of the past are threatened by intolerance, we must provide a safe place for their perpetuation." Franklin Delano Roosevelt, 1938 (Isaacs 66)
In the first amendment, it is stated that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the exercise thereof.”. From this, it made clear that the founding fathers’ original intent was for the Government to take a neutral position with respect to religion; the Government was not to favor any one religion over another. “Almighty God we acknowledge our independence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parent, our teachers and our Country. Amen.” In 1951, that prayer was conducted in class every morning in all New York public schools as ordered by New York State Board of Regents; it was called a “nondenominational prayer”. The short prayer was created with the intent of developing students’ moral
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people to assemble peacefully, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Mayerson, G. (2012). Analysis of Zachary Deal v. Hamilton County Department of Education . Retrieved from http://www.wrightslaw.com/advoc/articles/autism.deal.mayerson.analysis.htm
The First Amendment one that is watered down, serves as example of the freedom we as Americans have. It is best known as the amendment that lets us say what we want when we want. There is more to it that gets overlooked. It blocks government from establishing a theocracy, grants the people the right to peacefully assemble and protest the government for a redress of grievances. Our press is independent and is given freedom to publish at will. Our freedoms embolden us to speak out and organize for progress and against society's wrongs. Sometimes groups will organize to speak out but will sink to extreme measures as a means of expression. The first amendment has seen challenges in recent months. “Donald Trump referred to the press, and I'm quoting his exact words, as "dishonest, disgusting, and scum."Just ten days ago, you might have heard in a press conference, President Donald Trump said that the "press is out of control."(Chemerinsky, 553). To clashes between different ideologies on college campuses with some initiating riots. The first amendment grants many freedoms, however it does not grant protection from consequence.
After the Revolution, the States adopted their own constitutions, many of which contained a Bill of Rights. The Americans still faced the challenge of creating a central government for their new nation. In 1777 the Continental Congress adopted the Articles of Confederation, which were ratified in 1781. Under the Articles, the states retained their “sovereignty, freedom and independence,” while the national government was kept weak and inferior. Over the next few years it became evident that the system of government that had been chosen was not strong enough to completely settle and defend the frontier, regulating trade, currency and commerce, and organizing thirteen states into one union.
To fully understand the role and related responsibilities of search and seizure in the public schools, the Constitutional rights of the students and case law must be examined.
A paradox has always exists between the issue of civil liberties and national security. Democracy creates civil liberties that allow the freedom of association, expression, as well as movement, but there are some people use such liberal democracy to plan and execute violence, to destabilize State structures. It illustrates the delicate balance existing between reducing civil liberties to enhance security in a state. States have detained suspects for years and have also conducted extensive privacy incursions as strategies to combat terror, however it risks violation of civil liberties. This essay discusses the extent to which a state should be allowed to restrict civil liberties for the enhancement of national security and not abandon democratic values. It looks at aspects of the legal response to terrorism in the United States after the 9/11 attack.
Although people in the United States are entitled to privacy and freedom there is a limit to that privacy. State or federal officers are allowed where justified to search your car, house, property in order to seize illegal items such as drugs, illegal weapons, stolen goods just to name a few. When the police do searches it can be for various reasons it depends on the situation. They can have a search warrant to go into a premises and confiscate illegal paraphernalia or when doing a routine traffic stop an officer might become suspicious of activity that is not normal and conduct a search of the vehicle to see why the driver is not acting normal. When conducting searches it is required sometimes to get a warrant which is a document
Benjamin Franklin, one of the founding fathers of the United States, once said “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” In America’s society today, some are willing to sacrifice their civil liberties in order to gain protection and security over some potential threat. Especially after the events of September 11th and several attempted bombings in U.S. cities. This sacrifice of individual freedoms such as the freedom of speech, expression, the right to information, to new technologies, and so forth, for additional protection is more of a loss than a gain. Citizens of the United States deserve equal liberty and safety overall, as someone should not have to give up
lets us be and act how we are and want to be. The reason why the