United States Supreme Court

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

Under the U.S. Constitution, this appointment is a lifelong position that will only be nullified if the judge resigns their post or dies in office. This creates serious contests within the partisan political environment found among federal representatives, for any candidate appointed to this post helps define the direction of the Supreme Court for the rest of their life. Thus, it is frequently believed that a president who appoints a judge to the Supreme Court is creating a legacy, helping to shape the direction of the laws for the country for a time long after their presidency has expired. This makes the selection of a judge a hotly contested process.

The current Supreme Court is the most powerful branch of government, and one that may shape the course of democracy for generations to come. The current Supreme Court is made up of nine justices. The four oldest justices are 79, 76, 75, and 73 years of age; Five of the nine justices are Conservative Republicans; Three of the justices are women: Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan; One of the justices is African-American: Clarence Thomas; and Sonia Sotomayor is the first Hispanic-American to serve on the Supreme Court. Eight of the justices come out of the appellate court system, and Elena Kagan was the solicitor general. The Court today is divided almost equally along partisan lines. On the corporate front, this is an extremist court, a court that has shifted extremely to the far right. In important cases decided 5-4, it is usually the Republican-chosen quintet that provides the victory. The Supreme Court is now a corporate court that by giving big business the advantage is shrinking access to justice for everyday citizens (Edwards, chapter 15 and Bill Moyer).

Numerous Americans are unaware that by next year, the average age of Supreme Court justices will be 75. Unlike other countries, the United States’ Supreme Court does not enforce the idea of term limits. Once a judge is selected, when they leave the Supreme Court is up to their decision. Supreme Court justices may choose to retire early or die. However, as the judges are getting older and older, their health may intervene with the decisions that are being made. Issues regarding the health of the justices’ would not be a reoccurring annoyance if they were to be swapped out with younger and healthier judges; therefore, term limits are a good idea because there would be more diversity in the Supreme Court, mental and health issues would be reduced, and term limits would be long enough for judges to master the job.

The life of every American citizen, whether they realize it or not, is influenced by one entity--the United States Supreme Court. This part of government ensures that the freedoms of the American people are protected by checking the laws that are passed by Congress and the actions taken by the President. While the judicial branch may have developed later than its counterparts, many of the powers the Supreme Court exercises required years of deliberation to perfect. In the early years of the Supreme Court, one man’s judgement influenced the powers of the court systems for years to come. John Marshall was the chief justice of the Supreme Court from 1801 to 1835, and as the only lasting Federalist influence in a newly Democratic-Republican

The U.S. Supreme Court is the ultimate authority in the American legal system and is the central institution that coordinates laws that affect the American society every day. The Supreme Court has issued verdicts on issues that involves the rights of citizens, including those of women, minorities, elderly, disabled, gays, young people, and many others. These changes have had both positive and adverse outcomes that ostensibly improve the status of the American people and defining the rights of lawbreakers. The Supreme Court rulings have had a profound influence on the actions of citizens and the political direction of this country.

The most political story of the year,as reporters call it, happened last thursday as the Neil Gorsuch appeared before the senators for a confirmation hearing. One of the reasons many Americans voted for Donald Trump was the fear of another Democrat appointing yet another liberal judge to the supreme court. In recent times the court has often ruled on politics, which has been disputed by many Americans, who have expressed their fear regarding the situation. Following this, Mr Trump nominated 49 year old Neil Gorsuch from Colorado, who has a very solid judicial record and an honourable reputation.

The Court established from Aguliar v. Texas (1964) and Spinelli v. United States (1969), the Aguilar-Spinelli test determined whether an informants’ tips or letters could be used as probable cause to obtain a search warrant. This two pronged test established that [1] the tip had to “reveal adequately” the informant’s “basis of knowledge”, [2] the tip had to “provide facts sufficiently establishing either the veracity of the affiant’s informant, or, alternatively the ‘reliability’ of the informant’s report. The anonymous tip did not meet the Aguilar-Spinelli test which was proved not credible for two reasons. [1] The Principal received an anonymous tip that ‘one of her students’ was distributing condoms to students during lunch break which was in violation of school policy. The anonymous person did not specifically state that Bradley was the person who was distributing the condoms and also did not provide any description of the person was provided to the

NPR’s legal affairs correspondent, Nina Totenberg, described a “horrible political storm” brewing over the Supreme Court of the United States (“CNN,” 2016, p. 1). While reporting for CNN, Totenberg used these words to draw attention to the untimely death of Justice Antonin Scalia in an era of modern politics in which the court has become more polarized than ever. The Supreme Court, the highest court of the land, is not only being severely impacted by partisan ties, but is now also deciding cases according to these biased beliefs. The Democratic and Republican parties, after corrupting and encroaching upon the federal judiciary, have made court nominations and rulings into a game of party politics, inevitably destroying the impartiality of the

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

While the Framers’ intent behind life appointments is to protect the Justices from political influences, it is assumed that when a President appoints a Supreme Court Justice that he will choose one with an agenda similar to his own. The Supreme Court should be an archetype of where the country is politically at a given time. However, with the irregularity of when Justices need to be replaced, the political composition of the court is affected. Jimmy Carter, for example, appointed zero Justices, while Eisenhower appointed five. This is extremely concerning because it has led to the political stacking of the court, as seen when there was a period of twenty six years when no Democratic Justice was appointed between Thurgood Marshall and Ruth Bade Ginsburg. Justices have even been known to time their retirement to coincide with the political party affiliation of the sitting President so as not to tilt the balance of the court. This could lead to the political stacking of the court, which again, goes against the Framers’ original intentions of having an unpartisan

Supreme Court justices have life-long terms. Because of this, there are few nominations for a new justice. In fact, for two hundred and thirty years, there have been only one hundred and twenty four justices. This means that from around 1787, there have been only 124 justices! Due to this, there is much debate over how to go about nominating a new justice, when the time does arise. It is ultimately up to the Senate to decide who the next Supreme Court justice will be.

JUSTICE SCALIA delivered the opinion of the Court. Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Thomas, Justice Alito, and Justice Kennedy concurred and Justice Ginsburg, Justice Sotomayor, Justice Breyer and Justice Kagan dissent with the majority opinion.

There are many different reasons a person can find themselves in a court as the defendant.

The authority of the Supreme Court negates valuable states rights, and assimilates them into their own office. What is worse is that these men and women serve indefinitely until death, barring bad behavior. The gene pool is never diversified so to speak. Just like a stagnate gene pool is prone to unwanted mutations, and abnormalities, so to is a Supreme Court that rarely experiences change.