Landmark Supreme Court Decisions Essay

A very controversial court case in American history was Texas vs. Johnson (1984). In 1984, a man named Gregory Lee Johnson followed a group of anti – Reagan protesters to oppose the American exploitation of third world countries. This act of rebellion resulted in the burning of the American flag. Out of a total of approximately one hundred demonstrators who were involved in this ordeal, Johnson was solely charged with a crime. Johnson was arrested under Texas law, which made the burning of the United States or Texas flags crimes. Johnson was convicted and sentenced to one year in jail and fined two thousand dollars for his crime in restitution. Texas reasoned that the police were preventing

Throughout the history of the Supreme Court, there have been numerous notable court cases. However, none of these would have been possible without Maybury v. Madison. It occurred in 1803, when John Adams decided to appoint several justices at the last minute. Not all of these letters were delivered, and one of the judges, Maybury decided to sue Madison. Madison won, and this court case creates Judicial Review.

Abstract — Religious influence on judiciary, especially when it comes to Supreme Court Justices, is a complicated issue, and it has been controversial in U.S.. Talking about judgement for the influence, it’s not all-inclusive by only dividing them into liberals and conservatives, instead, a comprehensive approach is to focus on specific cases.

The supreme court frequently began using the Tenth Amendment during the progressive era. In various literatures I found of supreme court cases, it is seen that often times state laws that established a maximum of work hours allow and/or to create working conditions. Various legislation that were created were often times declared unconstitutional by the supreme court. Legislation that were intended to help people were ruled unconstitutional because it supposedly actually “harmed” workers by taking away their freedom to work long hours for low wages in such conditions. Certain legal interpretation influenced Justices' reasoning, and they decided that the choice would affect the rights and liberties that the government should

The Dred Scott Case had a huge impact on the United States as it is today. The Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments have called it the worst Supreme Court decision ever rendered and was later overturned. The Dred Scott Decision was a key case regarding the issue of slavery; the case started as a slave seeking his rightful freedom and mushroomed into a whole lot more. 65

The current Supreme Court membership is comprised of nine Supreme Court Justices. One of which is the Chief Justice and the other eight are the Associate Justices. The Justices are Chief Justice John Roberts, Jr., and Associate Justices: John Paul Stevens, Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, David H. Souter, Clarence Thomas, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen G. Breyer and Samuel Anthony Alito, Jr.

Also commonly referred to as The Steel Seizure Case, it was a United States Supreme Court decision that limited the power of the President of the United States to seize private property in the absence of either specifically enumerated authority under Article Two of the US Constitution or statutory authority conferred on him by Congress. The Majority decision was that the President had no power to act except in those cases expressly or implicitly authorized by the Constitution or an act of Congress.

B) For the first time since 1971, the Supreme Court is likely going to be composed of a majority of liberal justices due to the vacancy caused by the resignation of Antonin Scalia. To fill this vacancy, President Obama nominated Merrick Garland, whose political leanings fall between moderate and liberal, but this nomination has not been approved by Congress due to Senate Republicans believing that the incoming president should fill this vacancy. In addition to Scalia’s vacancy, there are a number of potential vacancies in the upcoming years as three current justices are seventy-eight years of age or older; if these vacancies all occur while a Democrat, such as Hillary Clinton, serves as president, it is likely that all three would be filled by liberal justices, making the court split six to three in favor of liberals. This liberal Supreme Court could make many changes related to prison conditions, the death penalty, campaign financing, and abortion. First, the court would potentially eliminate the use of extended periods of solitary confinement on the grounds that this is in conflict with the Eighth Amendment. Likewise, the court would possibly get rid of the death penalty on the basis that it also violates the Eighth Amendment. Additionally, the court could perhaps work to limit the influence of wealthy

#2) Describe the role the Supreme Court plays in the policymaking process. Compare and contrast Judicial Activism and Judicial Restraint. Explain 5 Amendments in the Bill of Rights. How does a society balance possible contradictions and inconsistencies with respect to national security, and the rights of the individual? Discuss some of the conflicts, issues and problems that arose during the Civil Right 's movement in the 1950 's and 1960 's, as well as current Civil Rights issues.

2.) The case was brought to state court by Thomas Van Orden over a monument that had the Ten Commandments engraved upon it. The monument was given to the Texas government and governor Rick Perry. The monument was erected between the State Capitol and the State Supreme Court. Van Orden argues that the monument violates the 1st Amendment’s Establishment Clause. The Establishment Clause, which is the one of the first clauses in the 1st Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, states that the United States Congress should not enact any law in respect to any religion.

There have been many complaints and theories of how the Supreme Court has a tendency to act as a "supra-legislature" (Woll 153). It is proposed that the Supreme Court takes the

Judicial Activism- When judges deny legislators or the executive the power to do something unconstitutional.

The US Supreme Court has a number of powers. These include the power to declare acts of Congress, the executive or state legislatures unconstitutional through the power of judicial review. The supreme court justices are also given the power to interpret the constitution when making decisions, again, through their power of judicial review. It is arguable that it is essential for the supreme court to have such powers in order to allow the American democracy to flourish. However, there is much evidence to suggest that the supreme court holds too much power for an unelected body, thus hindering democracy.

The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states “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 persons or things to be seized (Fourth Amendment). The text of the Fourth Amendment does not define exactly what “unreasonable search” is. The framers of the constitution left the words “unreasonable search” open in order for the Supreme Court to interpret. Hence, by looking at

In 1789, the final draft of the constitution of the United States came into effect. In article three it calls for "[t]he judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish." In the article it neither says the duties, powers, or any organization of the supreme court. If left this up to congress and to the justices of the court itself for these details.