The Decision Struck Down A Statute

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

Arousing the Civil Rights Act instated in 1964, Judge Lee Rosenthal of Southern District of Texas ruled that Title VII forbids discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, supplementing the traditional instated prohibition of prejudice based on one’s color, race, religion, sex, and national origin in the workplace. Concluding that biased notions towards one’s sexuality and transgender status are forms of discriminant towards one’s sex, Judge Rosenthal decreed the inclusion for protections of non-heteronormative individuals.

In 1921, women were granted suffrage, but suffragists were still hungry for more. Knowing that the right to vote would not eliminate sex discrimination in America, Alice Paul wrote the Equal Rights Amendment to step closer to equality. After half a century of struggle, women in America are still fighting for rights that men were given to when they were born. Even though women are just as intelligent, capable and hardworking as men, if not more, they are not considered an equal under the U.S. Constitution. Can you believe that today, in the 21st century, we still degrade women and treat them as inferiors to men? Can you believe that just because you are a woman, you are less than equal to the male population? Look around you, all those boys and girls are not equal to each other under our “just” country’s laws. As it is long overdue, the Equal Rights Amendment should be ratified because there is no other amendment that talks about sex discrimination, it would eliminate any inequality in regards to sex, and it would make the judicial stance on sex discrimination cases much clearer.

The significance of Lorena Week’s sex discrimination case was that women can use the legal system to achieve for equality. Week’s case led the National Origination for Women to challenge discriminatory laws. Lorena weeks was a single mother of three children living in Wadley, Georgia. She worked as a telephone operator for many years at the Southern Bell Company. As a single mother, Weeks struggled to provide for her family on her low wages. When the position of Switchman opened, Weeks applied for the position. The switchman job had higher wages and since weeks had been with the company for many years she had seniority rights for the position. When Weeks confronted the company, they said the position was reserved for men and didn’t consider

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.

The passing and application of Title IX has caused a conflict between men and women throughout history; it has brought up questions like, is Title IX actually fair? Many men argue that enforcing Title IX would cut back on male

A landmark Supreme Court case is one in which a precedence is set and there is an impact on society. There are many reasons for the importance of landmark cases and the studying of such cases. Some of these reasons are to study how the judicial branch works, try to understand how decisions made in the judicial branch affects laws and everyday life, and predict how current issues and cases will be affected by past decisions (The Judicial Learning Center, 2012). There are many examples of Supreme Court cases that are considered to be a landmark, but one example is Texas vs. Johnson.

“Portia’s Progress”, a speech given by Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor demonstrates the numerous trials and tribulations throughout the years that women have faced during the struggle to not only practice law but to be considered an equal member in any position in the work force.

Frontiero v. Richardson case occurred in 1973, putting it in the middle of the second wave of feminism. This was a time of women’s marches and advocates for equal rights. Opposed to the first wave of feminism the second wave was more inclusive to women of color. Most likely because it was happening at the same time as the Civil rights and Chinco movements. Along with this, the second wave focused more on equality in the workplace and reproductive rights, whereas the first wave was more focused on voting rights. During this time period, the Feminine Mystique by Betty Friedan was popularized encouraging women the challenge the “homemaking rules” and the National Organization for Women (N.O.W.) was formed. Along with this, the Equal Rights Act (ERA) was passed just one year before in 1972. Overall the 1960s and 70s were a time of great progression for equal rights.

The Bradwell v Illinois took place in 1872. This was a case in which a women named Myra Bradwell applied to a law school in Illinois and was denied acceptance. Myra Bradwell had everything she needed to get accepted to the school of law she applied to, she had everything except one thing, Myra was not a male. The law school to which Myra applied to denied her acceptance simply because she was a woman! They denied Bradwell an education in law simply because practicing law wasn’t considered ladylike. They told her that law belonged to men and not women. Regardless, Myra didn’t want to be a stay home, she didn’t want to settle for just the role of a mother and a wife so she went for it. Myra appealed the court She argued that it was her God-given

To reiterate, the Supreme Court majority in the case, properly and professionally interpreted the Bill of Rights regarding the right to privacy. It is logical and imperative that the citizens are given a sense of liberty when it comes to their personal lives and this does not affect another citizen directly. If there was no sense of privacy, then we would live in a country where the government would hold all the power and eventually control our lives. This is most definitely not what the Founding Fathers had in mind when they wrote both the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. The purpose of those documents was to limit the government from having all the power over its citizens which is why the colonies decided to break from the tyranny of the British. Had the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Connecticut law, the government would have had the power to now

Craig v. Boren- In this 1976 ruling, the Supreme Court established the “intermediate scrutiny” standard for determining gender discrimination.

In this paper, I will discuss a number of topics regarding woman and the Supreme Court from historical precedents to objective research to the importance of female judges and Justices and finally to the possibilities of the future. Each of these steps is vital to fully understanding how we got to our country’s current place in female jurisprudence and creating future opportunities for women both on the Supreme Court and in all other levels of the judicial system across the United States.

The need for the new law to be established began with the conflicting outcomes coming from the various levels of the court system. The courts disagreed on what constituted sex discrimination. Six different United States Courts of Appeals had ruled in favor of pregnant women saying that any employment act that would adversely affect a pregnant woman was sex discrimination as outlined by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. Supporting this position was the view of the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission who also agreed that discrimination based on a pregnancy would be considered sex discrimination. However, the United States Supreme Court would change all of that with its ruling in two separate court

In Oklahoma, beer described as nonintoxicating because of its very low level of alcohol content was outlawed only if sold to men under the age of 21. However, the sale was outlawed to women under the age of 18. Plaintiff sued, claiming that the law discriminated on the basis of gender and therefore violated his equal protection rights under the 14th