blog 5

1. A Supreme Court that demonstrates a willingness to change public policy and alter judicial precedent is said to be engaging in

a) judicial activism
b) due process
c) judicial restraint
d) ex post facto lawmaking
e) judicial review

The answer is (A) judicial restraint for it being a policy that shifts policy and changes previous decisions. 

2. A writ of certiorari from the Supreme Court indicates that the Court

a) Will review a lower decision

b) Has rendered a decision on a case

c) Has decided not to hear an appeal

d) Will recess until the end of the calendar year

e) Plans to overturn one of its previous rulings

The answer is (A) will review a lower decision, for being that a writ of certiorari being a a review of a lower court by a higher court. 

3. The Supreme Court holds original jurisdiction in all of the following types of cases EXCEPT

a) If the United States is a party in the case

b) In controversies in criminal law between a citizen and a state

c) In controversies under the Constitution, federal laws, or treaties

d) if a case is between citizens of different states

e) If cases arise under admirality and maritime laws

The answer is (B) in controversies in criminal law between a citizen and state, because the Supreme Court does not have original jurisdiction in these forms of cases. 

4. All of the following are specifically mentioned in the Constitution EXCEPT

a) judicial review

b) the national census

c) rules of impeachment

d) the State of the Union address

e) length of term if federal judgeships

The answer is (A) judicial review because it is not mentioned in the Constitution and that it is a power that allows the judiciary to evaluate constitutionality of certain statutes and cases. 

5. Which of the following correctly states the relationship between the federal and state judiciaries?

a) Federal courts are higher courts than state courts and may overturn state decisions on any grounds.

b)The two are entirely autonomous, and neither ever hears cases that originate in the other.

c) The two are generally autonomous, although federal courts may rule on the constitutionality of state court decisions.

d) State courts are trial courts; federal courts are appeals courts.

e) State courts try all cases except those that involve conflicts between two states, which are tried in federal courts.

The answer is  (E) State courts try all cases except those that involve conflicts between two states, which are tried in federal courts. This is the answer because state courts do not deal with cases involving citizens or parties of different states. 

6. The Supreme Court’s decision in Miranda v. Arizona was based mainly on the

a) Constitutional prohibition of ex post facto laws

b) Incorporation of the Fifth Amendment through the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment

c) Eighth Amendment restriction against cruel and unusual punishment

d) Abolition of slavery by the Fourteenth Amendment

e) full faith and credit clause of the Constitution

The answer  (B) Incorporation of the Fifth Amendment through the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. This is the answer because the decisions obligated law enforcement to advise criminal that he or she has the right to remain silent and to an attorney. 

7. The Supreme Court has used the practice of selective incorporation to

a) Limit the number of appeals filed by defendants in state courts

b) Extend voting rights to racial minorities and women
c) apply most Bill of Rights protections to state law

d) Hasten the integration of public schools

e) Prevent the states from calling a constitutional convention

The answer is (C) apply most Bill of Rights protections to state law because the practice involves the application of the Bill of Rights to states. 

8. Which of the following cases extended the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures to the states?

a) Gideon v. Wainwright

b) Schneck v. United States
c) Miranda v. Arizona

d) Mapp v. Ohio

e) Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States

The answer is  (D) Mapp v. Ohio for being the court case that decided that evidence in violations of the 4th amendment was not able to be used in state law criminal prosecution. 

9. Which of the following is true of court cases in which one private party is suing another?

A) They are tried in civil court

B) The federal court system has exclusive jurisdiction over them

C) They are tried in criminal court

D) The state court system has exclusive jurisdiction over them.

E) They are tried before a grand jury.

The answer is (A) they are tried in civil court because it is a civil action , so it must be brought in a civil court of law.

10. Which of the following is an accurate statement about the federal court system?

a) The creation of new federal courts requires a constitutional amendment

b) The creation of new federal courts requires the unanimous consent of all 50 states

c) The Supreme Court has the sole power to create new federal courts.

d) Congress had the power to create new federal courts

e) The number of federal courts if fixed by the Constitution and cannot be changed.

The answer is (D) Congress had the power to create new federal courts because they have many responsibilities that determines how the courts work. The judiciary does not have the power to create federal courts.

blog 4

Blog #4: Pick 3 cases from the previous list. For each case:

- Explain the holding and majority opinion (and notable dissent)

- Explain what judicial philosophy is reflected

- Evaluate the context of the decision with the framework of your own beliefs (e.g. if you select Roe v. Wade, explain your position on abortion
          

Plessy v. Ferguson (_1896______)

The supreme court case resulted in the "separate but equal" provision, which ruled it constitutional for the racial segregation in public places. The unanimous decision had a majority opinion of 7 to 1 vote where the major it opinion was written by Justice Henry Billing brown an a dissent by John Harlan. The majority opinion (6 to 3) was lead by Tom Clark and dissent by John Harlan. The judicial philosophy reflected was judicial activism due to its decision of shifting policy and going against the constitutional statement of "all men are created equal." My position on segregation is in favor having segregation illegal because there is not difference between ethnicities. Everyone is equal even when they have their physical differences.

Mapp v. Ohio (_1961______)                      

The Supreme Court case resulted in the prohibition of the use of evidence or information violating the 4th amendment, which defended  " unreasonable searches and seizures", in the state law criminal prosecutions.  The judicial philosophy reflected is judicial restraint because of the judiciary's lack of changing the ruling based on the 4th amendment. The holding is restrained due to previous decisions and laws. My position on privacy rights is in favor that individuals of society are entitled have privacy from being searched and seized by the government. It is not fair for the government to unreasonably interfere in the lives of certain individuals without sufficient known evidence.

Roe v. Wade (__1973_____)                        

The supreme court case on abortion resulted in the decision that it was considered a crime to aid a woman in receiving an abortion and a woman has the right to privacy under their due process rights.
The  court ruling was 7 to 2 , where the majority opinion was lead by Harry Blackmun and a dissent by Byron White. The judicial philosophy reflected  is judicial activism because it shifts policy and decides that it be criminal for abortion aid. My position on abortion is in favor that a woman had the right to do whatever she wants , as long as she is not influenced by other individuals. Her decision must not be pressured or influenced by others. 

          

blog 3

Refer to the cartoon posted here. Identify the point of view of the cartoonist. Do you agree or disagree with it? Explain your position, using Supreme Court cases to illustrate your argument.

"Do you ever have one of those days when everything seems unconstitutional?"

The cartoonist point of view involves the belief that the courts are not effective and that all cases seem to directly violate the constitution. One example of this idea is demonstrated in the Plessy v. Ferguson case, which ruled that blacks and whites would live under the principle of "separate but equal", which kept these individuals physically away from each other but under equal conditions. In the constitution it states that "all men created equal", but the cases ruled "separate but equal". The ruling is unconstitutional because it discriminates a certain group and and still shows inequality. In addition to unfair cases, is the case of Gregg vs. Georgia. This case advocated for the US Supreme Court's use of the death penalty, specifically, in the death sentence of a man named Tony Gregg. The case again demonstrates unconstitutionality due to the fact that it was targeted specifically to one individual and is not based of the actions of a larger group. The ruling goes against the constitution because it shows an unbalance of equality when determining the fate of an individual.

blog 2

What are the judicial powers of the US Supreme Court and where does this power come from (specific documents)? (reference Reading)

• Coming from "dual court system" section the judiciary packet (Chapter 9), the US Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in "cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a State shall be a party".
• They have the power of judicial review , which is the ability to declare a legislative and executive act in violation of the Constitution. This power came as a result of Marbury vs. Madison. (pg 338 in textbook)
• The supreme court has original jurisdiction over specific cases, such as involving suits between 2 or more states or between public ministers and ambassadors. In addition they have jurisdiction in controversies between citizens of different states or in cases in which the United States is a party. This power comes from the article 2 section 1 of the constitution.
• The supreme court has appellate jurisdiction, where the court can hear a case on an appeal.
• The supreme court can prescribe rules to be followed under lower courts.

blog 1

I have never blogged before. My only concern about blogging is about the content that goes into a blog. What are we supposed to be blogging about ?