Supreme Court Case: US V. Park

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

During the supreme court case U.S v. Lopez, the United States Federal Government’s argument was that carrying a firearm inside an educational environment would lead to a violent crime. A violent crime ultimately affects the population of a school. Due to this, the federal government believed that the commerce clause should be practiced in this case. The Supreme Court backed the previous decision offered by the Five Court of Appeals. In United States v. Lopez, the U.S Supreme Court stated that Congress actually has the ability to make laws under the Clause, but these powers were limited and could not affect the Lopez case.

Dred Scott (c. 1799 – September 17, 1858) was an enslaved African American man in the United States who unsuccessfully sued for his freedom and that of his wife and their two daughters in the Dred Scott v. Sandford case of 1857, popularly known as the "Dred Scott Decision". Scott claimed that he and his wife should be granted their freedom because they had lived in Illinois and the Wisconsin Territory for four years, where slavery was illegal. The United States Supreme Court decided 7–2 against Scott, finding that neither he nor any other person of African ancestry could claim citizenship in the United States, and therefore Scott could not bring suit in federal court under diversity of citizenship rules. Moreover, Scott 's temporary

In 1886 the US Supreme Court declared that states could not regulate commerce that went beyond their boundaries in the Wabash, St. Louis and Pacific R.R. versus Illinois case. The decision provided the basis for the formation of the Interstate Commerce Commission in 1887. The Interstate Commerce Commission was a regulatory agency in the united states. Its purpose was to regulate railroads to ensure fair rates, to regulate rate discrimination and to regulate other aspects of common carriers, including interstate bus lines and telephone companies.

New Jersey v. T.L.O, a supreme court case that took the stands in 1985, involved a fourteen year old freshman in highschool and a New Jersey public high school in which the minor attended. The minor by which public record only shows her by her initials T.L.O, was caught smoking cigarettes with another student in her high school’s bathroom during the school day. This act of smoking in the bathroom was against school policy as it was only seen fit to smoke in the school’s designated smoking areas. This court case was used to argue students rights in searches in public schools.

Dred Scott was a slave who had lived with his master in Missouri. He lived in Illinois, a free state, and the Wisconsin Territory for five years. He went to court for his freedom on the basis of his long residence on free soil. Two state courts made two opposing decisions, so Scott went to the Supreme Court in 1857. The Supreme Court ruled that since a slave was private property, he could be taken into any territory and legally held there. The judge appointed to Scott's case, Justice Roger Brooke Taney, decided that Scott couldn't bring a case to court because he wasn't a US citizen, the law declared slaves as property and owners could move their property anywhere, the Missouri Compromise was unlawful, and Congress didn't have enough power to decide where slavery could be permitted. This decision meant that all territories were able to have slavery and northern lawmakers wouldn't be able to keep it out of the territories.

In the infamous Dred Scott V. Sandford case, in 1857, the Supreme Court upheld that no one of the African American race has the ability to sue any United States federal court. Chief Justice Taney ruled that African Americans were "chattel" and had no rights under a "white man's government". Furthermore, the Missouri Compromise was affirmed unconstitutional, because the Congress does not have the power to ban slavery in the Western Territories. Sandford was favored by the Supreme Court, which gave slave owners the right of property, in the Fifth Amendment, including slaves who were bought and sold like property.

The main event that led to the civil war was slavery.This can be seen in the Dred Scott vs. Sandford case in 1857.Also in bleeding Kansas in 1856.all of these events had everything to do with slavery in the North or South

In the Supreme Court case, “The Dred Scott Decision of 1857”, Dred Scott, a Missouri slave, brought to Illinois by his owner, fought for him and his families freedom in the northern states where slavery was forbidden. While in Illinois Scott fought for his independance on the terms that him and his family now resided in a free state which declared him a free man. On March 6,1857, in a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court denied Scott’s freedom. The Supreme Court stated that any African American was denied the right to have American citizenship. Due to the fact that Scott wasn’t considered an American citizen he did not have the right to sue in federal court. After the case had been finalized many African Americans and abolitionists were enraged

In Mt. Veron Park Association v Chantelle Clark, Michigan Court of Appeals Docket No. 323445 (December 29, 2015) (Unpublished), the Michigan Court of Appeals held that a Condominium Association could not create rules and regulations that were inconsistent with the maintenance responsibilities set forth in the Master Deed and Bylaws. Specifically, the Mt. Veron Park Association adopted a rule and regulation that indicated that all co-owners must paint must have their front doors painted dark brown. The Association requested that the co-owner paint her door dark brown. The co-owner argued that the Master Deed and Bylaws placed the responsibility for the cost of maintenance, repair and replacement of the door on the Association, even though

Defendant Hankins filed a motion to correct an illegal sentence on appeal after pleading guilty to felony charges because he argued a Kansas trial court wrongfully considered a deferred judgment from Oklahoma in his sentencing calculation. The State argued that Kansas law required such deferred judgments from other states to be included in sentencing determinations. The Supreme Court of Kansas disagreed with the Court of Appeals’ dismissal of Hankins’ motion, finding that there was a discrepancy between Kansas and Oklahoma’s statutory standards for an entry of a judgment of guilt. Under Kansas law, the Court concluded, a conviction requires a judgment of guilt. However, under Oklahoma law, “an entry of judgment will not be entered for an offender who successfully completes a deferred judgment. The initial conditions are to be imposed ‘without entering a judgment of guilt.’” Therefore, the Court found that no

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.

Prior to the Child Protection Act of 1984, which made the purchase of child pornography illegal, Keith Jacobson of Nebraska, ordered child pornography from a bookstore. At the time of the transaction, the purchase was legal under both state and federal laws. Following the establishment of the Child Protection Act, Jacobson’s name was noted on a mailing list form the bookstore where he made the purchase. The discovery of his name led to Government agencies and “pen pals” mailing Jacobson as a way to explore if he would break the law. The efforts began in 1985 and persisted for two and a half years. The mailings consisted of various questionnaires, and literature on the legalization of child pornography. One of the letters supplied Jacobson with a list of “pen pals” that had similar responses to the questionnaires; however, Jacobson did not initiate any contact with them. Following his failure to contact any of the names provided, the Government began to commence communication. Jacobson began to receive letters from these fictitious pen pals but stopped responding after only a couple of them. Government agencies also supplied Jacobson with various brochures advertising pornography of young males. After repeated efforts, Jacobson made the decision to make a purchase. He was arrested upon its delivery.

Throughout the United States history, there have been many decisions that could have both made and broken the establishment as we know it. One such case that hinges on that statement would be that of the United States V. Jones. The Government is your friend, if you haven’t done anything wrong then you have nothing to hide. Respondent Jones committed a crime that is a known fact. The police had a warrant and they acted on that warrant, although it had expired which was there own fault, they attached a GPS onto his wife’s car because he was smart when using his own car and his own cell phone. Talking in code and only driving from his house to work in his personal car.

To combat possible attacks from within, a Presidential Executive Order was established with the support of Congress. This Order called for the immediate segregation of all people of Japanese ancestry into camps. Fred Korematsu, a Japanese man whose parents emigrated here from Japan, decided to remain in San Leandro, California, and thus was convicted of violating the exclusion order. His case made it to the Supreme Court after Korematsu’s defense questioned the constitutionality of the