Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
Fourth amendment research paper
Fourth amendment research paper
Research question on the 4th amendment
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Fourth amendment research paper
Fourth amendment research paper
Research question on the 4th amendment
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The quality of judges would without a doubt increase if they were appointed. However, I do not agree with the idea of judges being appointed. When looking at the partisan aspect you notice several possible issues with one issue being, is that individual the right person to do the job. Partisan election of judges allows for an individual that may not be as qualified for the job to be elected into the position. Nevertheless the partisan election of judges gives the voters what they want based on party affiliation along with qualifications.
Ideally, being able to elect judges seems like a fair concept. Both parties present a field candidate and the voters decide which to choose; however, this system is flawed. Not only is it difficult for the people to obtain any real information about their candidates, there is also the issue of “…Texas justice being sold to the highest bidder.” As a result, many cases have been influenced because of these generous contributions to the candidates. Rather than electing judicial officials, Texas should adopt a system of having a governor, or the Senate, appoint its judges, then every few years, voters sustain the right to retain those judges if they so desire.
Offenders don’t realize the reality when reentering society because they aren’t giving the necessaries resources. The reality is how the criminal justice system have label them. When an offender is release from prison their life is over due to the way the criminal justice have develop. Many would concur that there is a problem with strength based. As clearly demonstrated there will always be pros and cons towards an issue.
I disagree that U.S courts should follow a "hands-off" approach because inmates would have the most disadvantages. Correctional administrators and correctional officers have a common ground and would most likely to stick up to each other if an inmate gets into the bad side of officers and disciplining them inappriopriate ways such as the incident involving the nutraloaf. U.S courts could come up in way that is fair for the inmates and according to their offenses. In the context, the “deliberate indifference” would mean that the prison officials did not violated the Eighth Amendment rights and, therefore, did not put an inmate in harm by wthe continuous serving of nutraloafs. In my definition, deliberate indifference would favor an inmate's
When people think of a good judge they typically think of somebody who is fair, not bias and has some sort of experience. However, in today’s society, particularly in the United States, our judicial selection methods are not made to select judges on their ability to reason well and rule impartially (Carter and Burke, 6). On top of that, judges have no actual training before they become part of the judiciary. The only training they receive is in school when they are studying the law. Sometimes when they pursue an apprenticeship with a judge they also get a little bit more experience or insight into a judge’s job.
Folks – we need to be sturdy enough to call for referendum to amendment that thoughtless law enshrined in the constitution giving the Supreme Court the ardent dead-on without any form of limitation to summons, prosecute, and indict the citizenry for exercising their first amendment right. What the Supreme Court is doing is scapegoating citizenry who spontaneously express their view of the Supreme Court rulings they felt is antithetical to their fundamental right. Colleague this is not democracy is rather a tyranny at best. The point worth making exceedingly flawless that Supreme Court is not an infallible or foolproof institution.
INTRODUCTION Given what I have learned about the functions and characteristics of the Supreme Court of the United States and the Conseil Constitutionnel of France – in the context of their respective systems of civil, criminal, administrative and constitutional adjudication – I will discuss the relative strengths and weaknesses of each system in offering meaningful remedies for possible violations of constitutionally protected individual rights from the frame of reference of a United States law student. As a Founding Father, I plan to adopt a body of law founded upon the strengths of both bodies of law. In doing so, I will consider, in order, what characteristics of each body of law is best suited to rule on issues of constitutionality, taking
“Good Morning dear classmates and teacher, I will be delivering a speech explaining why the US Judicial Branch is Good but Far from Perfect…” Thanks to the principle of Separation of Powers, the U.S. government is divided into three branches, each responsible for accomplishing specific tasks. “The judicial branch is in charge of deciding the meaning of laws, how to apply them to real situations, and whether a law breaks the rules of the Constitution or not. It is said that The Constitution of the United States is the highest law of our Nation. The U.S. Supreme Court, the highest court in the United States, is part of the Judicial Branch.
Name: Roger Gradler Hour: 5 Date: 12/20/17 “Is the American Jury System Still a Good Idea?” Is the American Jury System Still a good idea? That is a long and complicated questions that could take years to answer. Many people say that it is good because it give the people the right to choose and the right to self government. Another reason I don’t like a jury is because
Continuing on, legislators/magistrates and council people should be elected according to merit. Such officers should have worth in character; otherwise they can do great damage to the community. Governments are divided them into three true forms: kingly rule, aristocracy, and constitutional government, and three corresponding perversions- tyranny, oligarchy, and democracy. Again we see the combining of two forms of government as Aristotle’s preferred route as he praises a third form combining aristocracy and oligarchy used by the Carthaginians to choose particularly their highest level magistrates placing weight both on merit and wealth with merit being the wisdom and knowledge to govern and wealth being the freedom from easy corruption and
Procedural justice emphasizes the fairness of methods used to achieve outcomes (Thibaut & Walker, 1975). In interactions with authorities, the fairness of the process by which outcomes are achieved may be more important than the favorability of the outcomes themselves (Lind & Tyler, 1988). A relational model of authority (Tyler & Lind, 1992) attributes these effects of procedural justice to individuals' perceptions of fair treatment as an indication of their value and status in society. A substantial body of empirical research has supported many predictions based on a relational model of authority (Hinds & Murphy, 2007; Murphy, 2009; Sunshine & Tyler, 2003a; Sunshine & Tyler, 2003b; Tyler, 2001, 2005, 2006; Tyler & Huo, 2002; Tyler & Wakslak, 2004). For example, research suggests that public support for and satisfaction with the police are based more on how the police exercise their authority than whether the police are effective in controlling crime (Tyler, 2001).
Specialized Courts Specialized courts are commonly known as the problem-solving courts that promote positive reinforcement, support behavior modification, decrease victimization, and reduce recidivism. Examples of specialized courts include drug court and mental health courts. A community might benefit from establishing a specialized court such as a drug court because it follows a comprehensive model that concentrates on reducing criminal actions through treatment and rehabilitation services with the focus being on substance abuse addiction and identifying the cause without jeopardizing public safety and due process (Specialized Courts, 2013).
LAW1600 Legal Research & Writing Tutorial 1 1. Discuss the potential ramifications of not having a system of courts. The law is required to protect finances, assets, the environments, businesses and personal safety. Without a system of courts and a government people are not held accountable for actions that negatively affect others in the community.
This week’s reading was on “The Courts” right offed the bat I questioned, what about the courts will I learn about? At the beginning of the reading it gave a short little story which was about assault I questioned in what cased does a person present themselves and to whom do they do it too? Then shortly after asking that question to myself I found my answer in the reading which said, “In a felony case a defendant has the option of having a case tried by a judge or jury”. This was helpful because I were never sure how exactly some cases worked. In the chapter it broke down and explained what, Prosecution, defense, judge, and jury was, it went through and gave exampled on what each thing was which was nice to have a definition of what each thing was along with having an example.
The Introduction The precedent is a decided legal case, which is used as a basis for deciding later similar cases. The English Law system is a legal system where the precedent has a great weight. This law system can be subdivided into two main interrelated branches: statute (or statutory) law and common law. Statute is an Act of Parliament, which starts its life as a bill, goes through the parliament, receives royal assent and becomes law.