Substantive Due Process Case

When including a bill of right, James Madison, consciously added the Ninth Amendment to assure individuals that the listed rights in Constitution were nowhere near exhaustive. Concerns about too much power from a federal government, Madison wrote the Bill of Rights as a restriction against federal since states had their own bill of rights. However, this left states to act as they wished without checks from the federal government. Through the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendment, congress had hoped to safeguard individual rights from states as well. Its vague language, though, left too much room for interpretation and ushered in what many saw as a blatant disregard for textual understanding the Constitution.

Today I was able to have a quick interview with the honorable Mrs.Salvarez. I asked her a few questions about what she does in the government and if she could clarify some things.

Mayerson, G. (2012). Analysis of Zachary Deal v. Hamilton County Department of Education . Retrieved from http://www.wrightslaw.com/advoc/articles/autism.deal.mayerson.analysis.htm

The United States has a unique criminal justice system that stems from the unique rights granted to its citizens by the Constitution. The United States Constitution grants the most basic rights of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” and no citizen can be denied these rights without due process of law. Due process is the way in which the criminal justice system ensures that the right person is punished for the right crime. This process includes certain rights of the accused and specific procedures that must be followed to the letter or the accused could be released without having punished for a crime he or she could have

Jurisdiction refers to a courts power over property within its geographical boundaries. The court cannot use jurisdiction unless the defendant has minimum contacts within the state where the court is located. Minimum contacts is legal term for a defendant from one state that can be taken to court in another state for a civil case due to the defendant's unlawful actions, which was committed in the state where the court exist. Minimum contact requirements are associated with the Fourteenth Amendment right of due process. Most case are resolved on a case by case basis after a consideration of all the facts. A decision on jurisdiction may depend on one or more different factors not present on other cases.

A mere violation of Defendant’s own policies, procedures, rules, regulations or State law, does not provide a basis for a due process violation.

Indeed, as with previous iterations of guidance, the legal policies of investigative practice can be difficult to implement outside of the formal judicial system: a lack of proper evidentiary handling and a fundamental misunderstanding of the process whereby facts are determined can prove impediments to a fair and impartial investigation. Moreover, the hearing process itself and the limitations imposed on the ability of both the Complainant and the Respondent to directly question and cross-examine one another make it difficult for an institution to adhere to the fundamental due process rights implied in the Letter under certain conditions: “Public and state-supported schools must provide due process to the alleged perpetrator.” Herein, another difficulty arises with respect to the ambiguity

The plaintiff Neil Roncker, at the time was a nine-year old boy with an intellectual disability that suffered from seizures. He had an IQ of less than 50 and his developmental age was between the ages of between two to three years of age. He also required constant supervision because he was unable to recognize dangerous situations. The school District decided that the proper placement for Neil was in a school that was exclusively for intellectual disabled students. Neil’s parents refused the placement and appealed the decision to a hearing officer. The hearing officer ordered the District to place Neil in a special education class in the regular elementary school setting. He found that the school District had not satisfied its burden

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

The two basic types of courts in the United States are trial courts and appellate courts. These two types of courts have two entirely different functions. The job of a trial courts is to determine questions of fact. Appeals courts, on the other hand, must determine questions of law. Appellate courts have the right to overrule jury verdicts and judges decisions due to the fact that an appellate court typically concerns itself solely with issues of law. An appeal is not the time to retry the case or to reargue the facts. In civil matters, either party can appeal the decision of the trial court. Usually in criminal matters, however, only the defendant may appeal a criminal conviction and the state is not

inherent in the concept of individual autonomy. This abiding connection between marriage and liberty is why Loving invalidated interracial marriage bans under the Due Process Clause.” 576 U.S.__(2015). The Due Process Clause, in the 14th amendment states that no American should ever be deprived of Life, Liberty, or the Pursuit of Happiness without fair procedures of the law (Monk). In order to demonstrate this, these rights must first be defined. Liberty, by dictionary definition can be defined as, “The state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one’s way of life, behavior, or political views,” (Liberty). According to this definition, when a State government (authority) places an oppressive restriction

The next thing I want to address is the injuries the Plaintiff sustained in this wreck. We are not surprised by the injuries he suffered. We believe that the Plaintiff is blessed to simply walk away with only a few broken ribs, a broken collarbone, and a severely sprained ankle. We do not in any way argue the existence or treatment of these injuries. However, we simply do not agree with the Plaintiff’s assessment on the long term impact that these injuries will have on the Plaintiff’s quality of life. During this trial, we expect you to hear that the Plaintiff works as an aircraft technician. We expect you to hear how the Plaintiff’s job requires him to lift heavy machinery weighing over 100 pounds from one area to the next. We expect you will

The majority opinion was announced by Justice Matthews, who affirmed the judgment of the supreme court of California. The Court maintains that the phrase “due process of law” is corresponding to “law of the land”, as it is found in the twenty-ninth chapter of Magna Charta. Justice Matthews, notes that the plaintiff in error supports his argument based on a decision made by the Supreme Court in Murray’s Lessee v. Hoboken Land & Imp. Co. [18 How. (59 U.S.) 272 (1856)], where Justice Curtis, who delivered the opinion of the court, argued that due process of law “must mean something more than the actual existing law of the land, for otherwise it would be no restraint upon legislative power.”

In September 2008, the Australian Competition Consumer Commission (ACCC) instituted proceedings against Cement Pty Ltd, Pozzolanic Enterprises Pty Ltd and two other companies (Respondents via subsidiaries including Pozzolanic) in the Federal Court of Australia in Brisbane. The ACCC alleged that four exclusive contracts related to the Respondents entering into contracts to acquire ‘flyash’ from four power stations in South East Queensland, between 2001 and 2006. Flyash is a by-product of burning black coal at electricity generating power stations, when of a suitable quality; flyash can be used as a cheap partial substitute for cement in ready-mix concrete.

The court must be satisfied that there is proper question to be tried – Waterford Turkish Baths Co v Baxter (1909) 17 Ir LTR 61;