14th Amendment Due Process Clause Case Study

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized". The 4th amendment was made based on the Founding Fathers experience with the Kings agents and the all purpose rit of assistances that they used abusively. Without the 4th amendment, we would be at the will of the police because they could come into our household, search anything and take whatever they want.

On July 4, 1776 the Declaration of Independence was signed and The United States of America declared itself a separate and independent nation. On June 21, 1788 the United States Constitution was made official, replacing the Articles of Confederation. Since its ratification, the Constitution has been amended several times in order to better apply to current times and situations the Founding Fathers could not have predicted. Despite all the changes the Constitution has gone through, its core principles remain.

In June 2008, the Supreme Court was asked in District of Columbia v. Heller to consider whether a District of Columbia provision that made it illegal to carry an unregistered firearm and prohibited the general registration of handguns was an unconstitutional violation of the Second Amendment. The petitioner, Dick Heller, was a D.C. special police office authorized to carry a handgun on duty. Heller sued the District of Columbia for violating his Second Amendment right when his one-year application to keep his handgun at home for personal use was denied. Arguably the most controversial amendment of the constitution in present-day, the Second Amendment reads, “a well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right

Chapter three does a good job pointing out that compulsory attendance laws served as an impetus for challenging schools over both their segregationist and exclusionary policies toward students of differing race and ability (Yell, 2016, p. 36). At the time our government was sending a very ambiguous message to students and their families. On one hand, the law of the land dictated that students must attend school, conversely schools continued to exclude students with disabilities. This inherent contradiction let to parent advocacy groups challenging schools for the fair and equal treatment of their children.

The items that are forfeited most be involved with the crime that the individual is being charged and used in the commission of the crime. These seized items will be held until disposition of the case and a verdict is rendered. If a guilty verdict is found then

Upon his arrival one of the officers showed Chimel the arrest warrant and asked if he could look around, Chimel objected and in the short of it said no. Even with him objecting the officers read Chimel his rights and then continued to look around the small house, garage, and workshop. In the main bedroom of Chimel home the officers found coins, medals, and tokens in the dresser drawer. Chimel was arrested and the items were placed into evidence, were he would be tried on two charges of burglary. Legal Question: When issued

Due process is the fair treatment of the judicial system by the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments. This is the constitutional guarantee that one will be given the opportunity to be heard before they are deprived of their life and (discharge from all restraints or obligations unless convicted). (Schmalleger 631-632) And also guaranteed that the law will not be unfair in anyway and that the government will not in any way deprive any person(s) of their constitutional rights.

Corliss asked the district court to interpret the facts and circumstances of the coins to either be lost, abandoned or treasure trove. Wenner and Anderson, on the other hand, argued that the property should be categorized either as embedded or mislaid property. Based on the evidence provided, the district rules that the coins wrapped in paper, does not show evidence of abandonment but more for safe keeping because the coins are carefully wrapped and place in a glass jar. There is also no sign of the coins to be lost property, as the coins are not buried through neglect, carelessness, or inadvertence.

Heading: - Strickland v. Washington 466 US 668 (1984) II. Facts & Procedural History - In September 1976, during the course of ten days, the respondent, Strickland, planned and committed three groups of crimes, including three brutal stabbing murders, torture, kidnapping, severe assaults, attempted murders, attempted extortion, and theft. His two accomplices were arrested, and the respondent surrendered to police.

Constitutional Concerns Fourth Amendment Overview The constitutional concerns that surround home visits in the United States stem from the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution (“Fourth Amendment”). The Fourth Amendment states that “[the] right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” As a result of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Fourth Amendment stretches to government action on a state level.

Peter Crumans 4th amendments were not violated when he was compelled to show his Facebook page. School officials were trying to protect the wellbeing of their students, therefore trying to get to the bottom of what this tip was about and needed to search the suspected student who after a little persistence began to cooperate.

The Fourth Amendment makes people in American feel safe and secure. David Sirota author of “Does the government actually understand the 4th Amendment?” says,"a few years after it aired the director of national Intelligence admitted illegal surveillance was still taking place"(understand)." the Government’s unverified assertion that it has halted “systemic” illegal/unconstitutional surveillance by the National Security Administration." says David Sirota author of “Does the government actually understand the 4th Amendment?”(Understand). Sirota also states "The NSA is admitting that even with an outdated 1997 supreme court ruling it knows it cannot post mass collect metadata with no warrants whatsoever.”(understand).Chairmen of the house say

Act violated the Fourth Amendment's guarantee against unreasonable search and seizure. According to NBC News. Another shocking finding from this case was that by asking [Judge Aiken] to dismiss Mayfield's lawsuit, the judge said, the U.S. attorney general's office was "asking this court to, in essence, amend the Bill of Rights, by giving it an interpretation that would deprive it of any real meaning. This court declines to do so (Aiken). This came as a big shock to the nation because if the government was willing to ask for a dismissal of the lawsuit what else could they be doing behind our backs. After this court case many conspiracy theorist began to emerge. They talked about how the government was doing many illegal things all without the

The Supreme Court ordered that such “deliberate indifference” to an inmate 's “serious medical needs” was a violation of that inmate 's Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. This case guaranteed three basic rights: the right to access to care, the right to care that is ordered, and the right to professional medical judgment.

1. State of the Law: Under the Free Exercise Clause states that Congress cannot make any laws prohibiting anyone from religious freedoms. The city council of Hialeah, Florida held a public hearing passed several ordinances that prevented religious animal sacrifice including 87-40 condemning animal cruelty , 87-52 prohibiting possession of animals which are intended for sacrifice or slaughter , 87-71 which prohibited animal sacrifice , and 87-72 which prevented the slaughter of animals in areas not zoned. The local laws prohibited Santeria sacrifices but the laws did contain exceptions for animal killings under acceptable and hygienic circumstances and for other religion-related purposes, which included kosher slaughter.