Skokie Skokie v.s. Illinois was a court case in the 1970’s. Frank Collin and his men wanted to march in the town of Skokie. The town consist of Holocaust survivors and people of the jewish decent. In the lower courts they favored the town due to the fact they said that they would attack the nazis.
Ronald Watts, 48 years old, a District tactical sergeant, and a patrol officer named Kallatt Mohammed, 47 years old, were both parts of the 2nd District tactical team in the Chicago Police Department. On the eve of February 13, 2012, both officers were formally charged in the U.S. District Court of Chicago by the Northern District of Illinois United State Attorney, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, with government funds theft. Mr. Watts was an 18-year police veteran and Mr. Mohammed was with the Chicago PD for 14 years. Their arrest was due to unseal complaints of police criminal misconduct by two whistleblower officers, Shannon Spalding and Daniel Echeverria , followed by a thorough investigation of, special of the Chicago Office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Robert D. Grant and the police department’s Internal Affairs Division.
Lawrence v. Texas 539 US 558 (2003) Case Facts: In September 1998, a same-sex couple in Houston, Texas were arrested in their own apartment after police found them engaging in a consensual, intimate, sexual act. The two men, John Lawrence and Tyron Garner, were convicted of violating the Texas “Homosexual Conduct” Law, which made it a Class-C misdemeanor for same-sex adults to engage in sexual intercourse and considered it illegal sodonomy. The statute was created in 1973 after the state changed its criminal code to end the banning of heterosexual anal or oral sex. The sheriff deputies arrested and charged the couple for performing “deviate sexual intercourse” as listed in the mentioned in the Texas statute.
In 2012, the case of Miller v. Alabama was presented in front of the Supreme Court detailing the crimes that took place in 2003 by Evan Miller. In July 2003, Miller, who was only fourteen years old at the time, with companion Colby Smith killed neighbor Cole Cannon by beating him with his own baseball bat and burning down the trailer Mr. Cannon lived in, while he was still inside. In 2004, Miller was to be tried as an adult for his crimes for capital murder. In 2006, he was found guilty and charges with aggravated murder and sentenced to mandatory life imprisonment without any parole.
In Brandenburg v. Ohio, in 1969, problems arose when Brandenburg, a leader of a Klu Klux Klan, held a KKK meeting in an Ohio farm. In the convention Brandenburg was filmed as he complained about the United States suppressing the white race. For the most part the film was inaudible but it was certain that Brandenburg had stated some demeaning opinions on African Americans and Jews. In the assembly some Klu Klux Klan members were holding weapons. Though Brandenburg was not, he made it clear that violence would not take place unless it was necessary.
Business Law Case Study Essay: Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, 573 U.S (2014) Facts: The Green family runs and owns Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., a national arts and skills chain that has over 500 stores and they have over 13,000 employees. Other facts of the case are that the Green family has been able to organize the business around the values of the Christian faith and has explicitly expressed the desire to run the company as told by Biblical principles, one of which is the belief that the utilization of contraception is wicked. Also, the facts show that under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), occupation -founded group health care plans must offer certain sorts of preventative care, for example, FDA-accepted contraceptive approaches.
Sullivan vs. Florida was a very high profiled case in 1989. Joe Sullivan was a 13-year-old African American boy, who was also mentally disabled. Joe was accused of sexually assaulting an elderly white woman hours after he and 2 other juveniles robbed her for her jewelry and coins. Joe was the youngest child to be sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. He was tried as an adult because he a prior felony conviction on his record (Sullivan v. Florida).
State of Georgia V. Marcus Dwayne Dixon (2003) Marcus Dixon was a highly recruited high school football player. His life suddenly took a tragic turn when he was falsely convicted of raping a 15 year old girl. The elements around his false conviction could have been avoided with some reform to the criminal justice courts system. Dixon initially had many charges against him but were narrowed down to statutory rape and aggravated child molestation. There was much racial disparity surrounding the jury on Dixon’s case, in that the county that Dixon committed his “crime” was a predominantly white population.
There is no one name for the case of Frank Abagnale. He was tried in France, Sweden, Italy, and then finally the United States. Therefore, it is reasonable to call the case The United States versus Frank Abagnale. He was accused of bank fraud, identity fraud, and professional con artist. A great criminal always starts young.
Dred Scott vs. Sanford case was the biggest mistake in U.S history, hands down. It is listed as the first case of the top ten worst Supreme Court decisions. Dred scotts case was the most significant because after his, no other case had ruined the reputation of the court quite as bad. This case was a huge deal, and is still an important subject to teach to students today. This case was said to be the case that started the civil war, although that may be an exaggeration.
The case of Bradwell v. Illinois in 1873 illustrated an injustice of discrimination based on gender. Myra Bradwell was a married woman who worked for her husband’s law office. She was wealthy and educated, as evident by her ability to run a weekly, legal newspaper. Bradwell was recommended to become a lawyer and thus applied for a license to practice law in Illinois in 1869. Despite her qualifications, the Supreme Court of Illinois denied her application on the basis that she was female.
On July 9th, 1868 the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted in order to secure the previously infringed on rights of formerly enslaved African Americans. This racially charged amendment was intended to guarantee the protection for these former slaves, yet this amendment was distorted in order to justify and deny rights for women, gay couples, men, and various other minority groups. Through examining specific cases such as, Muller v. Oregon and Bradwell v. Illinois, it becomes evident that this amendment has been used both positively and negatively to effect women’s rights and protection under the law. Especially in regarding the 19th century, the Fourteenth Amendment was used to rationalize sexist actions by employers, states, and other officials.
America’s founders created the constitution in order to create unification and order in the United States. However, there have been controversy surrounding the interpretation of the constitution, this has caused debate over many issues within the country. These issues and the lack of wartime policy within the constitution directly lead to the Civil War, which was one of the worst alterations this nation has faced. The Missouri compromise, the Dred Scott decision, and Bleeding Kansas were controversial issues surrounding the constitution that directly lead to the Civil War.
The Supreme Court of the United States explains that parents have the fundamental right to direct the education and upbringing of their children (Nicole and Garnett 2000). The Supreme Court has upheld the protection of parental rights to educate their children with literacy skills and religious doctrines within their home or community. In the case of Wisconsin v. Yoder in 1972, the Court recognized “parents’ fundamental right to freely exercise religion” (“Wisconsin v. Yoder”). Therefore, no federal law prohibits parents to give religious instruction to their children, neither a federal law that prohibits parents to give religious instruction to their children. Parents’ rights to instruct their children “constitutes as a basic norm…in a particular
The duty of any criminal prosecutor is to seek justice. A conviction is the end of justice being served prior to sentencing; however justice cannot be served if an innocent person is found guilty. Even though the prosecutor(s) are there to represent the public and has the duty to aggressively pursue offenders for violations of state and federal laws, they shall never lose sight or their own moral compass of their main purpose is to find the truth. In the pursuit of truth, the United States Supreme Court has developed or made rulings in reference to several principles of conduct which have to be followed by all prosecutors to assure that the accused person(s) are allowed the proper procedures and due process of the law granted by the 14th Amendment.
