The United States V. Virginia Case Study

As technology advances, the world is forced to adapt as an increasingly quick pace. Specifically, our justice system must consider the constitutionality of surveillance and other information gathering techniques and how they coincide with current interpretations of the Fourth Amendment which protects citizens against unreasonable searches and seizures. The Supreme Court addressed this issue in the 2013 case of Maryland v King explicitly related to the legality of DNA collection of individuals early in the booking process for serious crimes. In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that pre-conviction DNA collection of those arrested for serious crimes is constitutional and does not violate the Fourth Amendment; a decision that will

On July 11, 1958 a couple of hours after midnight, Richard Loving a white man and Mildred Loving an African American woman were awakened to the presence of three officers in their bedroom. One of the three officers demanded from Richard to identify the woman next to him. Mildred, full of fear, told the officers that she was his wife, while Richard pointed to the marriage license on the wall. The couple was then charged and later found guilty in violation of the state's anti-miscegenation statute.

In a quick observation, it may be easy to observe that the Constitution of Virginia is much larger in length and detail than the United States Constitution. There are many differences between these two constitutions besides the authors or contributors being that James Madison contributed to both, however, he was not the complete author of the Constitution of Virginia (Constitutions of Virginia). Both Constitutions have the same idea in which it holds three separate branches of government, however, differences include the detail and content brought amongst the articles. Differences include, but are not limited to, division of the three branches, extra articles and policies, and the amendments. They

The Commonwealth of Virginia v. Allen (609 S.E.2d 4, Va. 2005) was a fascinating case. The case focused on two expert witness testifying for the state and the other for the defendant, and if they acted and behaved ethically during the proceedings. Successive information will be addressed to prove the thought process behind my opinion given in this case. The APA code of ethics and specialty guidelines will be used to support my reasoning. Furthermore, they will serve as a baseline of boundaries within the profession to determine the expert witness’ influences to the case as well as their behavior within the profession.

Virginia do all this, but it also had some many unforeseen impacts in the future, as well. For example, similar anti-miscegenation laws in about 15 other states were eventually overturned like Virginia’s marriage ban. In the case Goodridge v. Department of Public Health in the November of 2003, a similar case to Loving v. Virginia, the restrictions on marriage were argued yet again. However, instead of interracial marriage being the problem, it was same-sex partners who were unable to wed. Like the case for the Lovings, the Supreme Court eventually ruled against the ban on members of the LGBTQ community marrying, as it was also deemed

The Virginia’s Statutes illustrate the declining Status of African American slaves was written because the state of Virginia wanted to state several rules and laws for their slaves. This document was written by the State of Virginia legislatures, being they were the ones who wrote it and established it. The main rule applied was that black people could not be with white people. Any white person married to a black or mulatto would be banished and will be known as a systematic plan formed to capture outlying slaves. Black men and women were known as slaves.

In Israel on the Appomattox author Melvin Patrick Ely uses the case study of Prince Edward County, Virginia, to shift the historiography surrounding the treatment of free blacks in the Antebellum South. While the current historiography paints the Antebellum South as attempting to subjugate free blacks into a system “‘as near to slaver as possible’” (p. 437), Ely posits that because of the existence of black slavery “Southern whites felt secure enough to deal fairly and even respectfully with free African Americans” (p. x). And though Ely agrees that “laws and public statements about free blacks in the Old South constitute a sordid parade of mean-spiritedness” (p. 436), the actual behavior of white citizens of Prince Edward County rarely align with “the path their social ideology prescribed” (p. 440). In going against the previously well-established understanding of the relationship between free blacks and whites, Ely has placed upon himself the large onus of disproving so many who have come before him, and the approach he takes within Israel on the Appomattox is as fascinating as it is convincing.

Thomas Jefferson and James Madison both made the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions when the government started to gain power that they did not have constitutionally. They argued that the Constitution was a compact among the states. The federal government had no right to exercise powers not specifically delegated to it. If the federal government assumed such powers, its acts could be declared unconstitutional. Both Jefferson and Madison agreed that the states should not be succumbed to the abuse of power that the government was inflicting upon them. They agreed that the States should have an important decision in how the government is run, Jefferson and Madison did have some differences though; including, the power that the states had themselves.Jefferson declared that the states should have enough power to

The day was February 20,2003, in the city of Portsmouth where two Portsmouth police officers had pulled a vehicle over who was driven by David Lee Moore. While listening to police radio they had heard that the man they pulled over who went by the nickname “chubs” was driving on a suspended license. The officer’s soon determined that chubbs was indeed driving on a suspended license. The officers who made the stop arrested chubbs for the misdemeanor of driving on a suspended license. This violation could have lead to chubbs serving a 1-year in jail and a $25,000 fine, according to Va Code Ann 18.2-11. The officers then searched the vehicle in which chubbs was driving. During the search of the

On January, 23 1906 a white woman named Nevada Taylor was dropped off the bus station in Chattanooga, Tennessee at 6:30 p.m. only two and half blocks from her home. Little did she know she was being followed? A man grabbed her by the neck and drug her ten feet before throwing her over a fence. She screamed and struggled as he put a leather strap around her neck and threatened to cut her throat. Taylor accounts waking up about ten minutes later in torn and dirty clothes covered in bruises. Her doctor later confirmed she had been raped. She claimed to have never of saw the face of the attacker but he had a soft voice of a black man. During this time of prejudice, segregation and hatred towards Negros was just a way of life for the

The case of Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action was presented before the Supreme Court of the United States; the case questioned that whether a state violated the Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment by maintaining a ban on the racial and sex preferences on the admissions in the public universities in the constitution of the state (Bernstein). The arguments on these cases started on 15th October, 2013 on an appeal for the Sixth Circuit from the United States Court of Appeal, which had established the rule in 2012 regarding Michigan ban, which was approved by the voters of the state in the year 2006. The Sixth Circuit emphasized that the Michigan ban was unconstitutional. But, the ban on the state was upheld, the Sixth

This is because even though corporations are considered legal entities, this applies only to the state they were founded in and the states they do business in. Because they do no business in Virginia, Zelek is not considered a legal entity there. This means that Virginia's courts have no jurisdiction over Zelek and they can't be sued in that state. This is because even though corporations are considered legal entities, this applies only to the state they were founded in and the states they do business in. Because they do no business in Virginia, Zelek is not considered a legal entity there. This means that Virginia's courts have no jurisdiction over Zelek and they can't be sued in that state. This is because even though corporations are considered

The Supreme Court case, Atkins v. Virginia, argues the crime committed by Daryl Atkins. Atkins, with the help of William Jones, abducted Eric Nesbitt. Nesbitt is an airman from a nearby Air Force Base. The boys requested he give them his money. When they realized he only had $60, they brought him to an ATM and forced him to take out an additional $200. After receiving the money, they brought Nesbitt to an isolated area and shot him eight times. The ATM had picked up the robbery on camera, so both boys were quickly identified and arrested. They both came up with stories that the other had pulled the trigger, but it was Atkins whose stories didn’t match up the most. It was a little while after that Atkins’ cellmate reported that Atkins confessed to murdering Nesbitt. A deal was given to Jones so that he would only get life imprisonment if he testified against Atkins. Atkins was then later convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death even though the defense had presented school records showing that his low IQ score is evidence that he is mildly mentally retarded.

I think the VA Supreme Court’s were mainly formal concerns because they were upholding the laws and basing all of their decisions based on what the laws stated and how they were carried out (Sutton 2001). For example, the fact that they did not support Gov. McAuliffe passing the executive order because he did not legally have the power to do so. Then when Gov. McAuliffe starting individually signing orders to give back voting rights to individuals the VA Supreme Court did not stand in his way of doing so because his actions were within the law.

When it comes to the freedom of black men and women, the Virginia Statute laws between the 1620s and 1770s have enacted laws designed to limit their available freedoms along with the freedoms of already enslaved black men and women. One law that the Virginia Statue passed in 1668 stated that free black women were taxable, just as slaves were, and their freedom did not exempt them from this taxation. This law, from the sound of it, was enacted to place blacks on the same level as slaves, below the white people. Another law, the Virginia statute law of 1705, stated in one of its provisions that if a white man and a black woman resulted in pregnancy, the father would be fined and sent to jail. This law, which correlates with another example