Supreme Court Sides with Walmart Essay

What was the court’s decision in the case? What reason did they give? What landmark case did they cite?

First, the majority opinion by justice Fortas in Tinker v. Des Moines uses a lot of precedents. Precedent arguments make his argument more convincing because precedents are thing that have been proven to be justice in the similar situation. It is reasonable for the court to follow these precedents. For example, justice Fortas states that the student in public school may not be compelled to salute the flag by using in West Virginia v. Barmette. This case states that students are entitled by the First Amendment. And a piece of speaking through Mr. Justice Jackson is even quoted. Especially contradicted to the dissent in this case, much more precedent used successfully to improve the reasonableness of the majority opinion.

No. The ruling was 6-3 in favor of the United States. The ruling was 7-2 in favor of California.

A federal court's power to hear any case where the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 and no plaintiff shares a state of citizenship with any defendant. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). Diversity jurisdiction is one of the two main types of subject-matter jurisdiction in federal court.

1) What were the legal issues in this case? What did the appeals court decide?

The Federal Court System is one of the most essential and significant functions to help settle a matter. Much work is involved in the application of a body of rules and principals of rulings. The path the Federal Courts have to take in order to be heard by the Supreme Court is a lengthy process. Given millions of disputes every year, it becomes impossible for the Federal Courts to be heard by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has jurisdictions that limit the variety of cases that are clearly defined in the Constitution. The Supreme Court has developed specific rules that within the jurisdictions will and will not hear. The Federal Court must show they have extreme and substantial evidence in the outcome of the case. In mootness, the Federal

A landmark case in United States Law and the basis for the exercise of judicial review in the United States,

Before I can appropriately discuss the opinion given by the US Supreme Court Justices; I feel that at first I must explain the background of what happened and the question that was brought before the justices of the US Supreme Court and the facts of the case. During this paper I will try to give some background information as well as the various opinions related to this issue. I will attempt to analyze and discuss the overall final outcome as issued by the courts in 1995.

The Court asked the question, was the closing of the state pools an action that denies “equal protection of the laws” to Blacks. They felt the answer was no since both races received the same treatment. The Courts also felt that neither the 14th amendment nor any Act of Congress purports to impose a duty on a State to begin to operate or to continue to operate public swimming pools. They felt that since this was not a case where whites are permitted to use public facilities while blacks were denied, nor a case where a city is maintaining different sets of facilities for blacks and whites and enforcing them to remain separate that there was no reason to force the city to reopen the swimming pools. They felt that it was constitutional because the city showed that integrated pools could not be maintained safely and economically.

The Supreme Court, which is often referred to as the Court of last resort,” is the highest court within our court system. Only an original ruling by the Supreme Court can change a pre-existing one. They have the authority to decide appeals on all cases taken to federal court or those that have been brought to a state court that handles federal law. Once one of the circuit courts have made a decision on a case, all parties involved in the case can choose to appeal their case to the US Supreme Court. The Supreme Court can decide whether or not to hear a case as where the circuit courts can not . The parties involved in the case are required to petition the court. If the petition is granted, the circuit courts will take briefings and hear arguments. If the petition is not granted, the lower court's judgment stands. The Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in a case. The Supreme Court oversees many types of cases such as most cases involving federal laws or regulations, international and interstate commerce, and cases involving commodaties and securities, to name a few. Where a case was filed depends on the avennue it would take in order to reach the Supreme Court. A Case can start in either the Superior Court or District Court. Cases wouls start in the district court if they involve

Cases heard by the Supreme Court are generally on appeal from one of the state's three appellate courts. The Court has limited original jurisdiction and very few such cases are heard by the Court in any calendar year. Such original jurisdiction cases are related to actions taken by a state official and are either requesting that the Court prohibit or force a state official to act. The majority of the Supreme Court's docket is related to appeals from the Appellate Courts but the hearing of such cases is entirely

A potential issue could be if all justices on a majority write a concurrence. On this note, Carrubba indicates that it is only the median justice who can choose to switch sides as their ideology is not as extreme as their co-justices. However, those on the left and right of the court may choose to do the same. It is not uncommon for multiple justices to co-sign on a concurrence. If a plurality vote is reached and every justice besides the median writes or co-signs a concurrence, does that mean that the median justice on the majority is the most influential? Carrubba and his co-authors would say yes, but an argument lies within that claim. Those concurring could very easily create their own opinion with more support, indicating that they were the most influential members of the

Each justice will have differ interpretation of the case and that is fine because differ opinions is embraced. Each case may have more than three opinions of different reason and logic for the lawyers to read and understand. Every lawyer will have to sit down and live like a college student again, studying each of the justice's opinions and figure out what each justice prefers or hate. The amount of work each lawyer must do after every case is nothing compared to how happy the justices feel instead of having to confine to one opinion. The court system will appear to be more humane; like a humane it has a lot of differ opinions and each session can be affected by the mood of the court (specifically the justices) and the atmosphere of the court. Whether a similar case will result the same as a previous case is questionable as the justices may reinterpret the case differently instead of having to solely vote the same way if they were only allowed to give one opinion. It is now a battle of what is more important, the happiness of the justices or the happiness of the lawyers and their

The court system has various jurisdictions to hear different cases. Depending on the case will determine which jurisdiction has the authority to hear that specific case. The difference between original and appellate jurisdiction is that original jurisdiction will be the first to hear the case including in any local or state courts. Courts such as criminal court, juvenile court, civil court, family court, state court and other courts are all original jurisdiction because they are the first the hear the case. Appellate jurisdiction will only hear the facts of a case if a mistake (error) was made by the original jurisdiction (lower) court and if the right law was not applied when making the decision. “Appellate courts are legal institutions as

Judicial opinions serve three functions. First, written opinions commu~ nicate a court 's conclusions and the reasons for them to the parties and their lawyers. Second, when published, opinions announce the law to other lawyers, judges, academics, and the interested public. Finally, the prepara~ tion of a written opinion imposes intellectual discipline on the author, requiring the judge to clarify his or her reasoning and assess the sufficiency of precedential support. The opinion should fairly, clearly, and accurately state the significant facts and relevant rules of law and demonstrate by its analysis the reason~ ableness of its conclusions. Misstating significant facts or authorities is a mark of carelessness or worse and undermines the