Essay on Roles of the European Court of Justice

policy issues, it is in fact changing or creating new policy itself. Now to say

The main role of the courts is to interpret and apply the law. In terms of a criminal justice process the court serves as the place in which a trial is heard and a sentence decided.

The development of a human rights policy in the EU has been a long and often undocumented journey. The sectoral approach of the Paris Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) in 1951 had an economic and functional intention, lacking a declaration of fundamental rights, as seen in national constitutions. It was not until the 2000 Nice Summit that the European Union first established a written charter, the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, explicitly stating and guaranteeing human rights in the European Union. Documented EU human rights policy before 2000 can be seen primarily in two ways:

A court is a judicial branch of government that consists of one or more judicial officers. It is authorized by statute to decide upon controversial cases and disputes (Siegel, Schmalleger, & Worrall, 2011). While a court’s primary purpose is

Facts: The respondent Jeffery Landrigan was convicted of murder, during his incarceration he stabbed and killed an inmate. Three years later, Mr. Landrigan escaped prison and killed Chester Dyer. Mr. Landrigan was found guilty of second degree murder, burglary, and felony murder. During the sentencing phase of the trial, Mr. Landrigan counsel attempted to present mitigating evidence to the judge. The mitigating evidence was Mr. Landrigan ex-wife, and birth mother, whom were not allowed to testify. Mr. Landrigan counsel explained to the judge, that his client did not want any testimony from his family. Mr. Landrigan counsel tried to explain the importance of both witness but Mr. Landrigan did not allow him to speak (counsel). The judge asked Mr. Landrigan if he had anything to add before he sentenced him. The defendant said to give him the death penalty. The trial judge sentenced Landrigan to death. After the trial, Landrigan filed a notion, claiming ineffective assistance of counsel. Mr. Landrigan petitioned for habeas corpus, challenging the state court for not allowing mitigating evidence to be presented under the death penalty act of 1996.

Court of Justice of the European Union is similar to the Federal Judiciary Union of the United States. Article III of the Constitution involves the creation of a Supreme Court and authorizations the Congress to form other federal courts, and place restrictions on their authority. Article III federal judges are chosen by the President with the permission of the Senate to serve until they quit, are indicted and imprisoned, retire, or decrease.

The textbook explains that courts of limited jurisdiction vary extensively. These specific courts hear cases involving minor offenses such as traffic disputes, collisions, and other civil matters. Additionally, courts of limited jurisdiction take up more than 80% of all of California’s courts. These courts also have the greatest caseloads in the entire nation. The District of Columbia, Iowa, South Dakota, Idaho and Illinois are the only states that lack courts with limited jurisdiction. Courts of limited jurisdiction are also known as municipal courts, county courts, or justice of the peace courts. These courts remain extremely full with heavy caseloads due to the fact that they hear many different types of cases.

Most likely not. The reasoning underlying the court’s choice in the case was, in part, that “the State’s prohibition of the labels does not materially advance its asserted pursuits in insulating youth from vulgarity and is not narrowly tailored to the pastime regarding children.”The court’s reasoning was supported in part through the truth that kids cannot purchase beer. If the label advertised toys, however, the court’s reasoning would possibly have been different.

have to agree on one issue. There is also a financial cost of being a

European Law is very complex law , within EU law there is various different treaties which are in place. Two most significant treaties which have importance to the legislative process are The Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union.

Many people think that the only people that can make a decision for them through a court case is a regular judge, many people don’t realize that theres many cases that has been brought up all the way to the Supreme Court. The judges in the Supreme Court are the highest judges in United States, Basically whatever these judges say is what’s going to happen, they can speak something among each other and make a final decision as one. Not any person can just get the job as a Supreme Court judge, these judges are nominated by the President, and confirmed with the advice of consent from the senate. The cases and hearing go from 7 to 8000 a year. The Supreme Court goes way back to 1935, they were at many different places during the war. It was first made in the Old Senate Chamber from 1861 to 1935.

The U.S. Constitution is the greatest source of law in the United States, and one may say this doctrine even dictates the relationships between American citizens and the American government. This supreme law of the land granted a great deal of necessary powers to all branches of government through articles one through three . According to the United States constitution,

Section II The document presents a scenario regarding two ostensible perpetrators named Slick Martin and Jim Lawbreaker. It appears that Marin entered a local grocery store, demanded cash from the clerk, and then fled in a car driven by Lawbreaker. Employees gave descriptions, fingerprints were taken, and photos of the tread print of the tire were taken by officers. Four hours after the robbery, police matched the automobile description of the car and arrested Lawbreaker due to an outstanding warrant. Police Mirandize Lawbreaker after finding a gun in the car. Lawbreaker admits he and Martin committed the robbery. A few weeks later, Martin is arrested, tells police he knows nothing and requests a lawyer. Police swab his inner cheek to obtain a DNA sample and show his photo to one of the witnesses. Joe Justice is the County Prosecutor, reviews the evidence, and receives a call from Lawbreaker's attorney, noting that Lawbreaker will plead guilty to a reduced charge of one count of robbery and agree to testify against Martin.

The principle of supremacy of European Union (EU) law has been established over the course of more than five decades. It is a principle that was established by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in 1964, and it has continued to have a rich history in the jurisprudence of the ECJ and national constitutional courts. As the ECJ and national courts attempt to define their respective realms of influence, a bright debate has sparked regarding constitutional pluralism. Moreover, the recent codification of primacy in the Constitutional Treaty has led to a new debate on the scope of the supremacy of EU law.

The rule of law is a difficult concept to grasp and proves elusive to substantive definition. However, the following work considers the attempts of various social and legal theorists to define the concept and pertinent authorities are considered. Attitudes and emphasis as to the exact shape, form and content of the rule of law differ quite widely depending on the socio-political perspective and views of respective commentators (Slapper and Kelly, 2009, p16), although there are common themes that are almost universally adopted. The conclusions to this work endeavour to consolidate thinking on the rule of law in order to address the question posed in the title, which is at first sight a deceptively simple one.