Pia Miranda

Checks and Balances. Checks and balances is a system that is a part of out U.S. Constitution. This system was put in to place so that no part of government would have too much power. The three branches: judicial, legislative and executive are constantly granting and checking the other branches actions, this is to make sure no one person can gain an excessive amount of control in government. For example according to ," the legislative branch is in charge of making laws. The executive branch can veto

From the years of 1953 to 1969 the Supreme Court was historically known as the Warren Court. The Warren Court is named after the Supreme Court Justice Earl Warren who is famously known for cases such as Brown v. Board of Education, Fay v. Noia, Mapp v. Ohio, Sherbert v. Verner, and New York Times v. Sullivan. “Earl Warren 's name has become the shorthand for a jurisprudential shift from state toward federal authority; the Warren Court offered an expansive understanding of the role federal courts

Throughout history, society has pushed the envelope with civil liberties and civil rights by tackling Supreme Court decisions. The attempts to manipulate civil rights and civil liberties occurred without a clear understanding of neither of the two. While civil rights and civil liberties regulate collective action, they differ by providing freedoms from the government and by providing freedoms to act; their shift in history has been denoted by racial and gender discrimination, nationalization, and

The Bill of Rights Essay “Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others.I do not add ‘within the limits of the law because law is often but the tyrant's’ will,and always so when it violates the rights of the individual” -Thomas Jefferson. The Constitution was created because of the ineffectiveness of the Articles of Confederation did not simply protecting the rights of the people which the Founding Fathers was concerned

I chose to do my open-court observation on criminal cases. Criminal cases usually involve attorneys that try to prove their argument to the judge. I felt as though this setting would be more interesting to sit and observe versus a civil case where you have two people trying to settle a dispute. Its interesting to see how actual attorneys and judges act in a courtroom instead of what is portrayed on TV. My local courthouse which is in a police station holds preliminary hearings. A preliminary hearing

Abstract In the book Courting Disaster: How the Supreme Court is Usurping the Power of Congress and the People, it sets out to identify how our government has changed and how these changes affect us and our laws. Pat Robertson wants the people to see how the Supreme Court is abusing power. Robertson shows how the federal judges are not only abusing their power but reaching beyond the power they are given. Thomas Jefferson once cautioned that, “to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of

removed Jerrell’s handcuffs, and asked him some background questions. Jerrell stated that he was 14 years old and in the eighth grade. He also provided the names, addresses, and phone numbers of his parents and siblings. Jerrell was advised of his Miranda rights, and the detectives then began to question Jerrell about the armed robbery. Jerrell denied any involvement. The detectives challenged this denial and encouraged Jerrell to be "truthful and honest" and "start standing up for what he did." Jerrell

Trial & Terrorism: The Implications of Trying National Security Cases in Article III Courts, Lewis A. Kaplan, 8 J.NAT’L SECURITY L.&POL’Y___ (forthcoming 2015) http://jnslp.com/2015/10/14/the-implications-of-trying-national-security-cases-in-article-iii-courts/ Explanation: This paper summarizes the article written by The Honorable Lewis A. Kaplan, U.S. District Judge for the Southern District of New York, which addresses the controversy between trying suspected terrorists in military tribunals verses

Miranda V. Arizona has been a case that impacted our police officers and offenders and is still in place today. In 1996 Phoenix Arizona Ernesto Miranda a 18 year old school drop out with a 8th grade reading level was convicted of kidnaping and rapping a 18 year old girl.. He was a troubled teen growing up convicted of small offenses but this offense made the headlights. The women who was raped went home and told her family, one day her brother sees a car that matches the description and part of

Are criminals granted too many rights? Ever since the groundbreaking Supreme Court case of Gideon V. Wainwright in 1963, further rights have been admitted to felons. Now, criminals can conveniently surpass the harsh rulings of the court and not be found guilty. Even though criminals should be granted rights during trials, there have been unnecessary decisions passed giving more rights to the accused. Before it can be determined whether criminals are granted an excess number of rights, the rights