Reno V ACLU Case Study

On November 25, 1999, The Coast Guard rescued 5 year old Elian Gonzalez from the Atlantic Ocean. Elian was found on an inner tube clinging to life with dehydration and hypothermia. His mother, Elisabeth Brotons, along with several others drowned on their trip from Cuba. The INS placed Plaintiff with his uncle, Lazaro Gonzalez, who lives in Miami, Florida. On November 27, 1999, Plaintiff's father, Juan Gonzalez, sent a letter to the Cuban government requesting that his son be in Cuba. The letter stated that the Plaintiff was taken out of Cuba without his father’s consent. On November 29, 1999, Lazaro Gonzalez signed and submitted an application for asylum to the INS on behalf of Elian. Shortly after, another application was submitted with Elian’s signature.

I support the idea that women should not be forced to wear any foreign substance on their face. Research even suggests some makeup can be toxic, cause pregnancy problems and even cancer. States like California have a strict rule that demand companies to report cosmetics products sold within the state that contain ingredients known or suspected to cause cancer, birth defects, or other reproductive harm. The court decision would probably be different if the claim alleges that Harrah’s grooming policy would cause health hazards specific to women employees.

As children, we have all stepped that “boundary” between right and wrong. From stealing money to shoplifting to fighting, we have all made our parents frustrated, made poor decisions, and perhaps, even made a egregious mistake. However, when does stepping that “boundary” become irremediable? Can the government punish minors under the same criteria they do with adults? And most importantly, what does the United States Constitution say? These are all questions that both the Missouri Supreme Court and the United States Supreme Court had to consider when they dived into the case of Roper v. Simmons. To provide a little historical

The result from Gideon. V Wainwright court case affected the decision of the betts. Bradley which eventually was overruled. Also that justice black associated who wrote the pinion for the court called this an “obvious truth” where that a fair trial for a poor defendant could not be guaranteed without the assistance of counsel.

Title: Ginsburg v. City of Ithaca and Cornell University et al., 839 F. Supp. 2d. 537 (N.D.N.Y. 2012).

Throughout an 18-hour period on October 26, 1989, the appellant Marc Creighton, a companion Frank Caddedu and the deceased Kimberley Ann Martin consumed a large quantity of alcohol and cocaine. The afternoon of the following day on October 27, the three planned to share a quantity of cocaine at Ms. Martin’s apartment. The evidence and later testimony indicates that all of the members involved are experienced cocaine users. The appellant acquired 3.5 grams (“an eight-ball”) of cocaine; he did not try to determine the quality or potency of the cocaine before injecting it into himself and Frank Caddedu.

When it comes to court cases, every case that is heard in court is heard for one reason or another.

In the court case Worcester v. Georgia, the U.S. Supreme Court held in 1832 that the Cherokee Indians and Samuel Worcester created a nation holding distinct sovereign powers. This decision did not protect the Cherokees from being removed from their tribal birthplace in the Southeast.

Furman v. Georgia was a murder was committed at August 11, 1967. Mr. William Henry Furman was a poor man that dropped out of school at the sixth grade. He was a 26 year old man without a job living on the streets with the intent of commenting theft. The suspect came into the home of and William Micke in Savanah, Georgia, and started to break everything looking for valuables to steal. While rummaging through the house William Micke surprised Furman and he took off running. While attempting to escape the house he accidently (according to him) dropped the gun and killed the unknown house owner.

The United States government changed the face of computer and internet use when it signed the USA Patriot Act on October 26, 2001. This act was created in the wake of the terrorist attacks in New York City on September 11 that same year. Many people believe that this act is a good thing and will help in defense against any future attacks. What most people do not know, however, is the effect of this act on the more general public. This includes individual people, public libraries, colleges and universities, and even trucking or hauling companies.

One would assume that a conservative would approve of the CDA because it would really limit exposure of sexually explicit material to minors, and that liberals would not because they are not as socially conservative. Justice Rehnquist is a conservative and is known for sticking to these values. In this decision, he stayed in part with his ideology because he was only part dissenting. Justice Scalia is a conservative who consistently votes in favor of free speech, which is what he did in this case. Justice Kennedy and Thomas are conservative. O'Connor is known for treating each case differently and trying to find a practical solution. Justice Stevens is known for being a "wildcard" he does not stick to a particular ideology. Justice Souter does not always vote with a particular ideology. Justice Ginsburg and Breyer are both liberals. With these ideologies taken into consideration, it does not seem that the justices voted

In 1984, the CFAA began as a criminal statute to protect classified information in government computer systems. The statute, initially, was restricted to “federal interest computers,” which included only computers of governmental and financial institutions. Throughout the years, Congress progressively expanded its reach, both in terms of who may file suit and what computers are protected. In 1994, Congress added, for the first time, a private right of action to allow “[a]ny person who suffers damage or loss by reason of a violation of [the statute]” to “maintain a civil action against the violator to obtain compensatory damages and injunctive relief or other equitable relief.” Further amendments in 1996 extended the range of the CFAA from “federal interest computers” to “protected computers” used in interstate commerce.

The first part of the CDA states if you display "indecent" or "patently offensive" information on the Internet, "in a manner available to a person under eighteen years of age," you are a criminal and have broken the law. The second part of the CDA reads you have a defense against prosecution if you take "reasonable, effective, and appropriate action" by restricting access to minors by needing a credit card (verified), debit account, adult access code, or adult personal identification number. This act is to be thought of as a way to legally zone porn behind and electric gate that can only be accessed by those who have adult identification. To receive full access to pornographic materials, one can pay a one-time fee of $9.95 to an "Adult Check" service (Levy 54). Also the Child Pornography Protection Act has been passed. It is to combat the use of computer technology that enables a pornographer to alter a picture of a child to make it seem as though the child engaged in an explicit sex act (Quittner 74). Rulings about child pornography have existed for years and will always enacted whether it is in the cyber universe or in magazine and movies. State laws are also being made against smut found on the inter net. New York passed a law making information found on the Internet that would be illegal if published in a book or magazine, illegal. People who violate the law could receive up to four years in jail (Rosen

After the devastating attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001, this country scrambled to take action to provide future protection. New techniques had to be developed to protect the nation from the menace of terrorism. Along with the new techniques came the decision to enact laws that some believed crossed the threshold of violating civil liberties this county and those living in it were guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States. “On October 26, 2001, the Public Law 107-56, Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism, also known as the USA Patriot Act, was signed into effect” (Stern, 2004, p. 1112). While speaking to Congress,

Since there has not been a ruling in this case, the supporters of the censorship laws had to try and find a way to get the internet censored to children. So in the year 2000, Congress passed the Children's Internet Protection Act, which is aimed at the computers in the schools and libraries that the children would have access to. This law was limited to "only the schools and libraries that participated in certain federal programs such as, receiving federal money for technology". The schools and libraries that received this money were required to "install filtering software on all internet terminals to block access to sites with child pornography, obscene material, and material that is harmful to minors". My opinion on this law is that it is even better than the firs one. They are very similar, as you can tell from their names, there is very little changed in the names of the laws. I think that the sites that a minor can look at should be filtered. This way they cannot look at things that can be harmful to them.