Jurisdiction And The Fourteenth Amendment Rights Of Due Process

A court can exercise personal jurisdiction over any person or business that abides within a certain geographic area, or any out of area defendant as long as there was minimum contact with the area to justify jurisdiction. Each state has its own long arm statue in place that defines minimum contact. Personal jurisdiction for federal courts is broad, extending to any persons within the United States, whereas personal jurisdiction for state courts is much more narrow. Different courts have the authority to hear different kinds of cases. Subject matter jurisdiction for federal courts is relatively narrow. There must be an issue of federal law, or there must be a dispute between citizens or businesses of different states and the amount in question must at least $75,000. States have a much more broad subject matter jurisdiction; they can hear pretty much any matter, whether involving state or federal law.

On a date that will be remembered forever as a step forward for our nation, July 28, 1868, the Fourteenth Amendment became part of the U.S. Constitution. The Fourteenth Amendment gave a new sense of hope and inspiration to a once oppressed people. It was conceived to be the foundation for restoring America to its great status and prosperity. The Amendment allowed “equal protection under the law”, no matter what race, religion, sex, sexual preference or social status. It was designed to protect the newly freed slaves. However, it only helped the white race.

The Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1868 and the amendment was put in place to protect former slaves and their rights in life. The most important part of the amendment reads, “No state shall ‘deprive a person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor deny to any person… the equal protection of the laws.’” This simple statement has one of the most profound and incredible parts of the United States today. The equal protection of the laws show that there must be equal treatment for all citizens regardless of race, class, or gender. Although there has been many racial events happening after this amendment was passed this clause still stands to today and has helped shape the United States for the better. Having this clause in the Fourteenth Amendment protects the ‘little guy’ and makes sure that everyone has the same ability to do whatever everyone else is doing.

Minimum contact establishes an appropriateness for one state to assert its jurisdiction on a person or business in another state. When evaluating the facts of the case presented, it

The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution was first introduced in 1789 by James Maddison, and was a part of the Bill of Rights which includes the first ten amendments. The Fourth Amendment was created and ultimately it was created to protect two things the right to privacy and the freedom against unlawful invasions. The exact wording of the Fourth Amendment is “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the person or things to be seized.”(“Fourth Amendment”). Now after reading

For centuries, the success of a democratic society has been measured by its commitment to equality, a resounding principle central to our nation’s founding. The Enlightenment-inspired language of the Declaration of Independence, namely the age-old axiom that “all men are created equal,” pervades our perception of the American creed. However, nearly a century passed before the Lockean principles espoused in the Declaration of Independence began to bear the force of law. Entitling American citizens to due process and equal protection of the law, the Fourteenth Amendment, perhaps the most transformative Amendment of all, has inspired the steady progression of American society. Nonetheless, while the Amendment serves as the chief legal force behind the democratic goal of equality, questions regarding its achievement of that goal

Appellant Brady was found guilty of first degree murder by the Maryland Court system. During his trial hearing Brady admitted to participating in the organization and forethought of the crime with a partner, although plead that he himself did not commit the crime. After disclosing his involvement, Brady’s lawyer admitted to his guilt but asked for a lesser penalty since Brady didn’t commit the murder. Before trial Brady’s council asked for all relevant information to the trial and were given most, but not all of it. The withholding of evidence was a violation of due process laws in which a new trial was requested. A new trial was granted but only for sentencing and not a retrial of fact.

Reasoning: Determining jurisdiction is critical because jurisdiction not only allows the party to know whether that court is entitled to adjudicate a dispute, but it can also help determine which laws are applicable, which can make a difference in a party's recovery. For example, Georgia and Delaware might have different laws regarding damages so that Elle may have an advantage in one court as compared to another court. In order for a court to be able to exercise jurisdiction, the court must have some connection to either the parties or to the event in question. Therefore, the possibilities for jurisdiction include: the district court for the state of Georgia, the district court for the state of Delaware, or one of the state courts for either Georgia or Delaware. In order for federal jurisdiction to apply, the circumstances of the case must meet the requirements for diversity jurisdiction. Diversity jurisdiction refers to that federal court jurisdiction involved when the parties involved are from two

Personal jurisdiction isn’t the only thing that the courts will look at it. They will also look at minimum contacts. Minimum contact is a nonresident defendant with the forum state that is sufficient for jurisdiction over the defendant to be proper. A lack of minimum contacts violates the nonresident defendant’s constitutional right to due process and “offends traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice” (Inm, 1992) (Min, 2001-2016).

The court decision on Roe Vs Wade violated the due process clause of 14th amendment. The 14th Amendment says that no states are allowed to take away the privacy rights of its citizens. The court said that the taxes law violated the due process clause of the 14th amendment.

The fourth amendment prohibits any search and seizures on a person without a warrant to give the right to privacy. No probable cause is needed for a search and frisk. In Hiibel v. 6th Judicial Circuit the defendant was arrested because he refused to give up his identity. The court found that it was necessary for the person to give up their identity because it can inform the police if that person has a mental illness, is wanted for something else, or can clear their name. In Illinois v. Wardlow the defendant ran away when he thought the police were trying to catch him for narcotics in a high crime area. The court believed that the officers had reasonable suspicion for the unprovoked flight. This case is similar because both the defendant ran

How hard should it be for the police to get hold of reams of data showing every place you’ve been for months?

In the case of Margolin v. Novelty Now the appropriate court for this lawsuit depends upon several factors. In personal jurisdiction the book states that the courts are given the power to provide a decision in affecting the rights of individuals (Kubasek). In this case, the court will give a decision giving rights to Mr. Margolin, and taking rights from Novelty Now. For subject matter jurisdiction, a certain specified court will be able to hear the case This means, that it must be decided which court hears the case, whether state or federal jurisdiction. Since this case contains three different states, the federal court system must be the one to hear the case. In this case, minimum contacts must be determined to decide if a certain state will have power to assert personal jurisdiction over a defendant from another state (Kubasek). In this case, it must be decided if New York will take personal jurisdiction of the defendants residing in California, or Novelty Now residing in Florida.

The power of judicial review says that judges or people of the court have jurisdiction to decide whether a law or any others acts by government is constitutional. Judicial review started back when John Adams was serving his term as president. It applied to the Marbury v. Madison case in 1803. This case came about because at the end of John Adams he appointed 42 new justices of peace, but the new President Thomas Jefferson overlooked the commissions and decided not to send out the letters to the appointed justices. This led to one of the Federalist appointees, William Marbury to file a lawsuit against Thomas Jefferson’s secretary of state. Jefferson’s secretary of state at the time was James Madison. Marbury wanted the documents delivered so

In our government today we have due process of law. Due process of law simply means that we have protection against a chance deprivation of life, liberty or property. Within the due process law, if you are to be accused of something it has to be under fair and reasonable circumstances. If we are ever to be arrested of something, under due process it commands that we are taken to court and showed a cause. It is very important that we have due process in the law for the people of the United States. Law enforcement always requires the balancing of two competing social concerns: on one hand, is the government's interest in protecting its citizens and prosecuting criminal conduct; on the other hand, is the right of