Law, Like Human Beings, Can Be A Fickle Thing? Essay

Laws are enforced to provide our society with safety, boundaries, protection of rights, and overall justice. The United States Constitution and Bill of Rights were established years ago to reduce the tensions and conflicts of our newly founded nation. It sought out to accomplish this by providing justice through an equal voice for all citizens. However, this equal voice for justice more often times than not is squandered and diminished. Things such as race, religion, and culture often times blur the lines of the law and fair outcomes in a court. Individuals feel that their beliefs are more important than the protection of rights and the deliverance of law or the law itself cannot go outside of its limitations to provide justice. This is apparent in the court cases of Marbury v Madison, Plessy v Ferguson, and the book To Kill a Mocking Bird by Harper Lee. These cases clearly exemplify that the law does not always provide justice, although it endeavors to do so.

Three models portraying our criminal justice system are the Wedding Cake Model, Criminalization Model, and the President’s Commission Model. The Wedding Cake Model “emphasizes that the system handles different kinds of cases differently; it depicts four layers or tiers of cases”. While the Wedding Model offers an accurate typology of cases processed through the system, its primary focus is on the decisions of prosecutors, defense attorneys, and judges. There is a glimpse the role of power and status in such decisions, but the factors of race, class, and gender are not explicit. But, this model does not address the lawmaking process and the social inequalities in the economic and political systems in which laws are forged. Now the second model, the Criminalization model explores the role of social class in the criminal justice system. It shows that the system is used to control certain groups of people by criminalizing their behaviors and targeting them for arrest and incarceration. The third model, the President’s Commission Model provides the most famous portrayal of the criminal justice system by summarizing the stages of the system. In comparison, the Wedding Cake Model and the Criminalization Model are similar because they both show the recognition of power and status in the criminal justice system. These two models are the opposite of the President’s Commission Model due to the fact that this model does not show the roles played by race, gender, and social class at the

The (Plaintiff) Johnny Singstealer is seeking the sum of $1 million from the (Defendant) Bobby Bandleader, for alleged copyright abuse of the song “Happy Birthday to You”. The (Plaintiff) Johnny Singstealer is the copyright holder to the said song. The (Defendant) Bobby Bandleader is a Bistro owner who performs the song in an altered version (his own words are used) to his customers on their birthdays and have been doing so for the past twenty years without obtaining any licensing or permission from the copyright holder (Plaintiff) Johnny Singstealer.

To be sure, modern laws are made to express the general will, a will that aims at the common good. This means that laws in most cases intend to protect every social member’s rights under the principle of justice and fairness. For telling examples one need to look no further than American judicial system. The access to the two courts systems, one federal court and one state court, provides citizens with the greatest potential to have their legal problems

Our modern day society in the United State of America is considered to be a “land of laws, not men…” This means that in order for everyone to live happily and have freedoms, there must be strict rules and regulations to guide us in our daily actions. Along with these, a government is constituted to form the laws for the people. As mentioned before, the society in Night and our modern one both have a

The United States of America is a country that was founded on the idea that all citizens would have equal rights and freedoms. For the protection of the people, and to maintain order, law has been developed over time. Rights advocates are constantly pushing the boundaries of what the law should, or should not be. Individual-rights and public-order advocates are in a battle of balance, leaving the justice system to decide what the best solution is for all.

Laws are necessary part of a government. Government serves as system that can provide services and order which the people can pick their respentace. Now imagine a law that help protect you, your race, ideas, sexual orientation and so forth. Now imagine a group of people or even organization who are against you views. To a certain point to even hurt or murder your ideas. Like any government laws are place to protect the people and that’s what hate crime laws are. Too protect citizens no matter their race and choices. But that doesn’t seem to be the case always. In article by .

In the case of Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 (1962), the Supreme Court ruled that a law may not punish a status; i.e., one may not be punished to being an alcoholic or for being addicted to drugs. However, of course, one may be punished for actions such as abusing drugs. The question becomes; What if the status “forces” the action? What if a person, because of his/her addiction to drugs, is “forced” by the addiction to purchase and abuse the illegal drugs? Would punishing that person be unfairly punishing a status?

Criminal law is a construct of the government, enforced through tangible measures. In a democratic society, the government is elected by the citizens, and as such, laws are generally conceived with the aim to reflect whatever ethical or moral standards are presently acceptable. However, in order to be truly effective, some legislation must circumvent current sociological viewpoints in order to create laws that are genuinely in the best interests of society. This results in a delicate balancing act, as lawmakers attempt to weigh the views of the majority against the need for laws to be both reasoned and objective.

From banning alcohol for a certain amount of time to making women's rights a possibility, our country has grown for the positive, and even in the negative. Our laws were created to keep structure and safety for all. Black or white, minor or adult, tall or short, each amendment affects us to be a structured human in our very free society. We assume that law enforcement that we see today has no sense of heart or even justice towards the freedom of others. Throughout the many media outlets and even our many history textbooks, we assume that law enforcement has no sense of dignity, neither the sense of what is right or wrong when it comes to enforcing the laws and regulations of what this country has upheld for many ages. The laws that was created by man and approved by society is there for the safety and control of our country. But, because a man with power becomes drunk from it all, that shouldn’t reflect the ideology behind our rules and regulations of our country, but should show that not every human is perfect when it comes to following the laws, which will help them to grow as a better human and

     In his book on ?The Behavior of Law? Donald Black attempts to describe and explain the conduct of law as a social phenomenon. His theory of law does not consider the purpose, value, impact of law, neither proposes any kind of solutions, guidance or judgment; it plainly ponders on the behavior of law. The author grounds his theory purely on sociology and excludes the psychology of the individual from his assumptions on the behavior of law (Black 7). The theory of law comes to the same outcome as other theories scrutinizing the legal environment, such as deprivation theory or criminal theory; however, the former concentrates on the patterns of behavior of law, not involving the

The term justice is used in some of America's most treasured and valued documents, from the Pledge of Allegiance, to the Constitution, and the Declaration of Independence. Everyone wants to be treated justly whether it's in the courtroom or the local bar. Most people would feel confident giving a definition for justice, but would it be a definition we could universally agree to? Given that justice is a very common term, and something we all want, it's important to have a precise definition. For hundreds of years philosophers have argued, debated, and fought over this topic. Justice can clearly be defined as the intention to conform to truth and fairness. This is true justice.

Sociologists have many perspectives when it comes to the examination of our laws. Three out of many theories of lawmaking processes are the Rationalistic model, Functionalistic view, and Conflict perspective. Rationalistic models view laws as a rational way of increasing protection for members of society from crimes which are “socially injurious” (Vago 2012). Functionalist view look at where the ideas behind the laws come from and describes laws as “re-institutionalized customs”, where lawmaking is a reiteration of customs (Vago 2012). Conflict perspective describe laws as value the opinions of the elite, instill unequal access to economic goods which upkeep the social economical groups, basically keeps the elite on top (Vago 2012). The three theories are all similar but different at the same time. In my opinion, conflict theories captures the reality of law making process.

Throughout the United States there are many different laws among the fifty states that make up this union. The laws are different throughout the states because of the need of the laws. Living in one state and not having the advantages or disadvantages of a law in another state would not be that unfair or unequal. This is true because if you don’t like a law in your state you could always fight it and try to change it or you could always move out of that state and go to one that has the laws that you like.

Rule of law in simplest terms means law rules, that is, law is supreme. The term “Rule of law‟ is derived from the French phrase “la principle de legalite” (the principle of legality) which means a government on principle of law and not of men. Rule of Law is a viable and dynamic concept and, like many other concepts, is not capable of any exact definition. It is used in contradistinction to rule of man. Sir Edward Coke, the Chief Justice in King James I‟s reign is said to be the originator of this principle. However, concrete shape was given to it by Professor A.V. Dicey, for the first time in his book “Law of the Constitution” (1885) in the form of three principles.