Supreme Court Case Analysis

In the case of Robert Tolan and Marian Tolan vs. Jeffrey Wayne Cotton, I will be discussing what interest me about this case. I will also deliberating on the liability and criminal liability of this case. The Tolan vs. Cotton case interests me because the United States have so many police that are brutalizing citizens. In some cases the police officers are getting away with it. After reading, reviewing, and studying this case I have learn a lot about the criminal system and laws that men and women should obey. I will explain how the nine judges on the Supreme courts all came to a verdict against the police officer Jeffrey Cotton after he shot an innocent suspect. This people

The Supreme Court often oversteps its perceived legal sovereignty when using judicial review. Article III of the Constitution solely vests the courts the “judicial power of the United States” never mentioning the power of judicial review. The judiciary’s duty, according to the law of the land, is “to interpret the laws, not scan the authority of the lawgiver” (Gibson, J.). The judiciary has not followed a strict interpretation of the constitution; rather, it has encroached on the power of the legislative branch and the sanctity of the separation of powers. If the Constitution “were to come into collision with an act of the legislature” (Gibson, J.), the Constitution would take precedent, but it is

United States Supreme Court cases are argued and decided on Constitutional grounds. All arguments and decisions are based on interpretations of the original Constitution and, more often, on Constitutional amendments.

This is not to say that they do not have the intent to try to rule neutrally, or that the oath of office taken is cast by the wayside like refuse. Rather, I purport that the very process under which they have risen to be considered for the bench is a political one, and indeed makes them a part

As part of their journalism class students produced a newspaper with a collection of student-written articles about teen pregnancy and the impact of divorce on kids. As a result, the principal made the decision to delete the two articles from that edition of the school’s newspaper. Consequently, three students sued the school district alleging violation of their First Amendment rights.

Ammar). It is clear from the Supreme Court's statements that the Sixth Amendment right to counsel, as enunciated in Massiah v. United States and United States v. Henry, does not extend to the pre-indictment period. The taped conversations at issue in defendant's motions all took place prior to defendant's January 24, 2006 federal indictment while defendant was incarcerated for state parole violations. Even though defendant faced charges in state court, because defendant had yet to be charged in a federal indictment, defendant's right to counsel had not yet attached with respect to the federal charges. The Court denies Henry’s argument for suppression based on the Sixth Amendment right to

The Constitution of the United States is a carefully thought and written document. It is designed to provide for a strong and flexible government, to meet the needs of the public, yet sufficiently limited and just to protect the rights of American citizens; it permits a balance between society's need for order and the individual's right to freedom. Article III of the Constitution establishes the federal judiciary. The section states that "The judicial Power of the United States”, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in other inferior courts as established by the Congress. Although the Constitution establishes the Supreme Court, Congress has the power to decide how to organize it, however the Supreme Court Justices decide the cases. There has been a recent controversy on whether or not Congress should hold the most power when it comes to interpreting the meaning of the

Texas consists of three branches of government; the executive, legislative, and judicial branch. Texas’ government is modeled very similarly to The United States’ three branches. Specifically within the judicial branch, there is a Supreme Court, which is the highest federal court of The United States [National]. There is also a Supreme Court in Texas; which is the highest court in the state. A 5-4 decision by The United States Supreme Court on June 26th, 2015 ended all state bans on same-sex marriage and requires all fifty states to recognize marriages legally performed in other states. Immediately after this historic decision was made, in disobedience of the Supreme Court, Texas’ attorney general said, “that county clerks can refuse to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples if they object on religious grounds.” This was Texas’ initial reaction to the ruling. Former Texas Gov. Rick Perry, a presidential contender, said he was "disappointed" with the ruling and "as president, I would appoint strict constitutional conservatives who will apply the law as written."

Kelsey, I follow your train of thought in that American’s should have health insurance because the health care system is a nationwide, comprehensive financial issue that impacts the individual premium holder, to the providers, hospitals, and medical supply and drug companies, the state and federal governments, and health insurance providers. The one thing I learned from these readings especially the 11th Circuit Court decision is that even if a person does not want or has insurance, it still impacts everyone else when they require unexpected care. It creates cost-shifting problems that everyone else has to pick up the tab for. In the reading, the Court identifies the perspective in which Congress was coming from by defining on page 15 that

The Supreme Court of the United States sets forth precedents that all courts must follow. There is not a single entity that can overturn a decision made by the Supreme Court, the highest court in the nation, making almost all decisions final. The court stands and acts upon interpreting the constitution, it is different than any other courts because decided fundamental social and political questions (12). This court serves as a markedly submissive tool that is only occasionally presented with lawsuits since its reach is limited by the Constitution. The Constitution defines and limits the judicial power of the U.S., taking only the most important cases (13). Any rulings the Supreme Court has made can only be overturned by the Supreme Court itself

"The Supreme Court is the guardian of its own integrity" (Boston Globe) As Americans, we desire for our Supreme Court Justices to distance themselves from emotional decisions and to not allow politics to influence their decisions. Realistically, when it comes to judicial decision making, the Supreme Court uses three different approaches to making their decisions, while hopefully staying true to their own integrity. The three models used when studying how decisions are made by the Supreme Court are the legal model, the attitudinal model, and the strategic model. Those interpreting the law refer to the Constitution, which provides well-guided direction, but is vague and much of the law making is left to the interpretation of our judges. We entrust that the best legal decisions will be made by our nine Supreme Court justices.

The source of many United States Supreme Court decisions, these often debated words seek to protect citizens against abuses of power by the government. Although the intent of these few words are clear, the debate stems from the attempts to interpret the intent of the framers. Three major interpretations have been developed from the debates surrounding the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. These interpretations are the warrant approach, the reasonableness approach and the special needs approach.

The issue at hand is whether Congress possesses power to modify the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction. Jurisdiction is the ability of courts to hear certain cases. Article III prescribes for which cases the Supreme Court possess original or appellate jurisdiction. A vital part of the governments is the branches ability to check the other branches power. Without it, one branch may obtain too much power. Congress’s jurisdiction restrictions on the Supreme Court is an example of one of the checks. Those in support of Congress’s ability to control the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction argue that it is necessary for the Congress to have some control to ensure a check over the Supreme Court’s power.

However, judicial review was not created in the very beginning of the United States’ history. In fact, there is no mention of the concept of judicial review anywhere in the United States’ Constitution. Traditionally, the Founding Fathers intended civil courts to be a very small enterprise where judges would base their beliefs on finding and applying existing laws (Wilson 431). In the Supremacy clause of the Constitution, the Framers of the Constitution only formally mentioned the powers of the state laws by saying , “This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof … shall be the supreme law of the land” and when they mentioned that “judges in every state shall be bound thereby.” Therefore, state laws and state courts must obey the national law and must adhere to the U.S. Constitution as it determines whether or not state laws are invalid or how the constitutionality of state laws are based under state constitutions. Additionally, state

With the passing of Justice Scalia in West Texas on February 13, 2016, at the age of seventy-nine, the Supreme Court now proceeds forward with its cases with eight justices (Liptak). These eight justices now represent the polarized state of American politics. The nomination process that now represents the foremost partisan conflict originally based itself more on qualifications and less on ideology, but with the failed appointment of Robert Bork in 1987, the process transformed its focus from the merits of a candidate to the interests of political parties. As such, when observing the confirmations of Scalia in 1986 and Kagan in 2010, Justice Scalia’s appointment process lacked politicization and controversy in comparison to the multitude of