The Supreme Court in the American Government

“In 1847, Dred Scott first went to trial to sue for his freedom, (Dred Scott’s fight for freedom).” “While the immediate issue in this case was Dred Scott’s status, the court also had the opportunity to rule on the question of slavery in the territories, (Appleby et all, 446-447).” One of the main issues of this case was that the justices were trying to settle a political problem rather than being completely fair in their decisions. Dred lost the first trial but was granted a second trial. The next year the Missouri Supreme Court decided that the case should be retried, (Dred Scott’s fight for freedom). In 1850, the Circuit Court of St. Louis County

Originally, I had thought there was no way something so sacred should be allowed to be defaced, but I have quickly realized the constitution is much more powerful and sacred. As a nation, we must pick our fights and the hills we die on. It will not and never should be considered treason to burn the flag, however there is, like with most things a catch twenty-two. Publicly and privately the burning of the flag is accepted as freedom of speech, but once this simple gesture turns into a hazard we must act. President Trump and conservatives may view it as weak, but a system of penalties or citations would be the correct form of punishment. We should follow the lead of other progressive nations and fine those who attempt to burn the flag in

The Supreme Court of the United States did not apply sound reasoning in formulating their final opinion in Reed v. Reed. Even though, the Supreme Court’s decision was unanimous in ruling the Idaho statute unconstitutional because of violation to the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. The reason why I believe that they did not apply sound reasoning in Reed v. Reed is because the level of scrutiny applied. The Supreme Court applied the rational basis test instead of strict scrutiny. Commonly, when the Supreme Court applies the rational basis test to a law, the law passes because it can be proven that it is “rationally related to a legitimate government interest” . There was no precedent for this case because it was the first time that the Supreme Court heard a case on discrimination against women in violation of the Equal Protection Clause( 404 U.S. 71, 72 ).”

In Scotus blog, the United States Supreme Court judges against a familiar foe were at their best. It was very easy putting doctrinal clodhopping aside in trying out the amateur court team. Birchfield v. North Dakota a Wednesday court case involving laws imposing on motorist’s criminal penalties for being suspected of drunken driving (Birchfield v. North Dakota, 2016). Furthermore, when a chemical test, especially for breath or blood, was rejected. North Dakota with other eleven states passed measures avoiding annoying issues. These include how to obtain a warrant before you stick into the driver 's arm a needle or a tube in the driver 's mouth. Refusal to take a blood test led to the arrest of Danny Birchfield, who argued that this law was violating the Fourth Amendment typically requiring a police warrant to conduct a search. For North Dakota, motorists have to give their consent to chemical tests when they intend to drive in the state. Danny Birchfield challenged this saying that consent, which is legally mandated, does not permit at all. Birchfield’s problem was drunk driving since police had already arrested after he was driving into a ditch and forcefully attempting to turn out of it. He then emerged out of his car smelling alcohol. Fellow petitioners, in this case, were also losers after consolidating to his case. After almost hitting the stop sign, Steve Michael Bylund was also pulled over consequently holding his car on the road. An empty glass of wine is what was

Issue: Does the Supreme Court of the United States have the constitutional power to void any acts made by Congress? Does section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 give the Supreme Court the right to issue a writ of mandamus without violating the Constitution?

Many cases have been filed to the Supreme Court of the United States to legalize gay marriage, but the Supreme Court was reluctant to legalize it because it contradicts with most religions, including Christian religion. However, very recently the Supreme Court by 5-4 has legalized the same sex marriage. People also were divided into two groups. The first group were mostly conservative whom see this kind of marriage contradicts with their religious belief, opposed the decision. Second Group has welcomed the decision and consider it a landmark decision throughout the history of the United States. Thereby, people whom were deprived from getting marriage license due to their same sex statue began to go to courts to have their marriage license based on the law of the land of the Supreme Court. In one very complicated instance, the Kentucky Clark, Kimberly Jean Bailey Davis, refused to issue marriage license to four couples. She states that "To issue a marriage license which conflicts with God 's definition of marriage, with my name affixed to the certificate, would violate my conscience," Davis said in a prepared statement Tuesday. "It is not a light issue for me. It is a Heaven or Hell decision. For me it is a decision of obedience. I have no animosity toward anyone and harbor no ill will.

The United States supreme court is the head of the judicial branch of the American government and was created to balance out the powers of both the legislative and executive branches. Here in the U.S. the government is essentially owned and operated by a two party system that consistently votes against one another, even if the proposed idea is one that individual members of both parties could agree on. Given the way the system runs, it would make sense to maintain a supreme court made up of equal parts Republican and Democrat with a swing vote in the middle such that the balance of power may be preserved. Sadly; however, this not always the case. Supreme court Justices are picked by the President and voted on by the Senate. As dark as the thought may be, at least half of the supreme court Justices are on their death beds. It is almost a certainty that within the next four to eight years there will be a great deal of vacancies to fill in the Judicial branch. This will no doubt give the President and senate at that time an unfathomable amount of power. There is a plethora of negative, or positive depending on your point of view, consequences that will go along with this.

The supreme court plays a large role in government. The supreme court also known as the judicial branch of government is the highest court in all laws. The supreme court is made up of nine members appointed by the president and serve for life. As of right now there are only eight members. Many people say they should be appointed for life but I would disagree. As you get older you brain tends to forget things without you even noticing which could cause several problems in court. I believe that having supreme court justices that come from different generations will help with diversity and different opinions. Most of the supreme court justices are old in fact the youngest one is fifty-six as you get older most people want to spend more time with

The Supreme Court is considered the highest-ranking court the in the United States. It is composed of nine judges referred to as justices. The main purpose of having these justices is so that they can make rulings on cases that the junior court cannot settle. Supreme Court judges make the final decision on whether a law is consistent with the underlying constitution. All Supreme Court justices serve lifetime appointments, which means they serve until they either die or retire. According to the Constitution, as stated in Article II, it 's the president 's job to nominate another Supreme Court justice if the seat is declared vacant. The Senate must then go through the

Many people think that the only people that can make a decision for them through a court case is a regular judge, many people don’t realize that theres many cases that has been brought up all the way to the Supreme Court. The judges in the Supreme Court are the highest judges in United States, Basically whatever these judges say is what’s going to happen, they can speak something among each other and make a final decision as one. Not any person can just get the job as a Supreme Court judge, these judges are nominated by the President, and confirmed with the advice of consent from the senate. The cases and hearing go from 7 to 8000 a year. The Supreme Court goes way back to 1935, they were at many different places during the war. It was first made in the Old Senate Chamber from 1861 to 1935.

Although young Muslims endure an abundance of hardships at school, Muslims face a wider variety of issues in the real world. The Supreme Court has made many rulings that would allow the government to help Muslims. Supreme Court Justice Kagan said, “the Constitution permits more active involvement in accommodating minority members” (“First Amendment…”). This means that the highest court in the nation has ruled governmental aid as constitutional, which proves the government has the authority to help disadvantaged minorities. Justice Rehnquist connects to Justice Kagan’s idea by not only stating “the Establishment Clause [does] not require government neutrality,” but he also said, “it did not prohibit the government from providing...aid to religion”

The Supreme Court was made up by the Judiciary act of 1789. It was made up of six justices and they had to serve on the court until they died or retired. The Supreme Court was put on Article 3 of the Constitution, which states that the Supreme Court is jurisdiction on all laws and they overlook treaties of the United States. The first meeting of the Supreme Court was on February 1, 1790 in the Merchant's Exchange Building in New York. Since 1935, they have decided a lot of America’s issues. Some include eliminating race, separating the church from the states, decided life or death for capital punishments, and refined rights of criminal defendants.

The Supreme Court is the highest court in the country. It is an essential aspect of the united stated.

Democracy is a type of government where people participate by elections and other ways to elect their ruler. The power the government has, is based on the consent of the people being governed. The elections made by the citizens need to be free, fair and frequent. This means that they have to be honest, often and they need to let any adult vote and stand for office. The elections, other participations and equality for all citizens, are necessary for a democracy. Something fundamental for a democracy is the Popular sovereignty (idea that people are the ultimate authority and the source of authority for the government.)

Democracy is the form of government in which the ruling power of a state is legally vested not in any particular class or classes but in the members of the community as a whole. It is a government in which the will of the majority of citizens rules without overriding the rights of the minority. The ideal of democracy is about equality, freedom and welfare for all. It involves the abolition of varies form of