Many felons find it hard to reintegrate themselves back into the population if they are denied their right to vote (Sigler, 2014, p. 1738) Many felons are willing to reintegrate themselves back into society, and many are willing to do so by voting. Allowing them to vote is allowing them to feel like they are apart of society again, and not another class of people that are not allowed to speak their minds and have their voices heard. In fact, an experiment that took place showed that the voting from pre-incarceration to post-incarceration increased by four percent for previously convicted felons (Gerber et al., 2015, p. 924). This shows that convicts are willing to vote, wanting to vote, and feel the need to have their voting rights restored to fully reintegrate themselves back into society like many want them
First, The Second Amendment protects your rights. The amendment states, "A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. " This amendment states your undeniable right to have a gun. So, if stricter Gun control law were to be enforced, not only does it go against the constitution, but it also obstructs your ability to protect yourself. In District of Columbia et al.
A constitution is the fundamental law by which a nation or a state is governed and organized. It establishes the framework of government, delegates the powers and duties of governmental bodies, and defines the relationship between the government and their citizens. Texas current constitution was adopted in 1876, and since then Texas voters have approved more than 467 amendments to this document. The word “amendment” is defined as the act or process of changing the words or the meaning of a law or document (constitution). Throughout this essay I will explain the rules for amending the Texas Constitution, the attempts made at constitutional reforms during the 1970s, explain why constitutional reforms were attempted and why it ultimately failed.
The Oklahoma Constitution and the United States Constitution have a variety of similarities and differences, thus creating an array of topics of discussion. The very structure of the state 's constitution holds close similarities to the U.S. Constitution, given the fact that it was ratified over a century later. At the time of the making of the Oklahoma Constitution, there were arguments between the left and right areas of the state. These arguments were based on the fact that the people involved in the making of the state 's constitution wanted to have the area that was labeled "Indian territory" and make it a secure part of the state of Oklahoma. After doing so, the two areas merged and created the document that the state still uses to this day.
Shelby County V. Holder: A critical analysis Introduction Along the time human beings have been able to evolve and modify its surroundings despite the environmental challenges. As a result, society has been creating laws in order to regulate different aspects of life. Shelby County V. Holder has a variety of components that made this case relevant.
Its basic goals are set out to establish an equal justice for every American; to safeguard tranquility; to provide a common defense system; to protect citizens from foreign attacks; to promote the well-being of all its citizens and to secure liberty and freedom to all Americans. It declares that not one person is above the law and everyone has certain natural rights to life, liberty and property. This is referred to as the Bill of
King believed in a nonviolent approach to the Civil Rights movement, Malcolm X demonstrated a different means to addressing the movement. Malcolm X proclaim that the best way to understand and in order to obtain the same overall goal (in this case equality) one has to speak the same language as the other person in context. He proclaims this through the example of guns within the document and that if a person speaks this way, then this is the best way to answer their statement. The same aspects occurred within a duel in the old west. If a person was called out they would answer accordingly or be branded a coward for the rest of their life.
The purpose of the Second Amendment The way in which we conceive our laws regarding guns is based solely on one important document: The Bill of Rights. The focus of this paper shall be mainly on the second amendment and how it shapes gun laws. This document will become a very important issue of the argument for less gun-controlling laws and to prove how the government is straying away from the original amendment set forth by the founding fathers of the United States.
More people get incarcerated for non-violent crimes and crimes caused by mental illnesses or drug abuse (Webb, 2009) and because these people get put in regular prisons, instead of in mental health facilities or facilities to help against drug addiction, where they could be treated to further prevent crimes driven by their illness (Webb, 2009), the prisons get overfilled and cannot hold the more ‘important’ prisoners that needed to be locked away from the public. A strong link of the criminal justice process is that the system tries to keep it fair for everyone. Every defendant has the right to an attorney so they can be defended properly and fairly and “Only judges who are adequately informed about a case can effectively control the proceedings and examine evidence” (Tochilovsky, 2002) It is also important for the criminal justice system that those involved show discretion and although this is not always the case, discretion by the judges, police, etc.
According to Time it said, “25% of prisoners (364,000 people), almost all non-violent, lower level offenders would be better served by alternatives to incarceration such as treatment, community service or probation.” Yes, it is true that they would be better off somewhere else because jail won’t be any help. Those who believes that the prisoners should not be released might claim that releasing prisoners is a very dangerous idea. Some prisoners might just end up repeating their actions, and this time someone could get hurt. They are in prison for a reason.
The Texas Constitution is similar to the U.S. Constitution in many ways. One of the many ways is that both have a Bill of Rights, and the Texas constitution embodies certain ideas from the U.S. Bill of Rights, which are that all free men are declared to have free and equal rights that cannot be taken away because of sex, race, color, creed, or national origin. Another way they are related is because they both have a constitutional law for the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial department. The U.S. Constitution has two virtues; brevity and flexibility. The Texas Constitution in the other hand, does not, the U.S. Constitution is limited to 7 short articles and 27 amendments.
Fisher v. University of Texas The Fourteenth Amendment has 4 sections and includes multiple clause in each. The first section of the fourteenth amendment includes the equal protection clause, the citizenship clause, the privileges and immunities clause, and the due process clause. The equal protection clause requires the state to provide equal protection to all people under the law in their jurisdiction. The citizenship clause provides a broad definition of citizenship to all people, in which a previous case the supreme court had ruled descendants of african slaves could not be citizens. The privileges and immunities clause protects the out-of-state citizens from getting discriminated against by the states, but only applies to the fundamental
Latino boys also face high levels of incarceration, particularly in states with large Latino populations and why California and Texas alone imprison the majority of incarcerated Latino youth in the United States. By putting a stop to the mis labeling of Latinos in our country; there wouldn’t be such a heavy imbalance among different races and their incarnation rates. Our society and criminal justice system would function better as
I Agree… “The Federalist No. 84” and “The Anti-Federalist No.84”, both have their views on what should happen to our government. Whether it is to add a bill of rights or not, but I agree with the writer of “The Federalist No.84” because if the Constitution is adopted, then it will be our Bill of Rights, also based on other countries’ bill of rights then it may argue with a semblance of reason. Because I have read both sides of the discussion, I can see who is wrong and why.