Definition Essay: Difference Between Civil Liberties And Rights

Also, one thing that is seen common in all of those movement was people and their fight for their rights and liberties. Briefly, civil rights and liberties have always moved together, and their difference is complicated as people tend to use them in interchangeable way. However, their difference is that, civil rights is the equality that people demand for whereas, civil liberty is certain activities that government itself does not have the authority to do (Muller). For example, people should not be discriminated regarding their gender, race etc. is civil right, and the first amendment which says that government cannot establish America as any religious country is civil liberty.

In spite of this, not everyone was happy about the new Constitution. This broke people up into two groups: Anti-Federalists and Federalists. The Anti-Federalists were those in favor of strong states’ rights. They disliked the Constitution because they believed that there was a chance that Constitution would destroy the freedoms the colonies fought for. They were scared of tyranny, especially pertaining to the fact that under the new Constitution, the national government, or Congress, would be able to make decisions without even asking for the states’ permission.

STATUTORY INTERPRETATION Statutory interpretation can be defined as a process adopted by the judges or the court to interpret a statute and to apply legislation. In an interpretation there are many ambiguous terms that create a lot of uncertainty in one’s mind and this can only be resolved by judicial interpretation. Interpretation of a statute by a judiciary is important because the common people and the client’s of the lawyer need to know how the judges are interpreting the statute. Judiciary interprets the statue by using three “rules” or “canons” of interpretation. The reason we call this cannon and not “rules” is because only the judiciary need not do the interpretation and by calling them rules it can be fallacious argument.

Justinian 's Code was a set of laws set up in order to unify the empire, which was very disorganized. "Justice is the constant and perpetual wish to render every one his due ...The maxims of law are these: to live honestly, to hurt no one, to everyone his due" (The Institutes of Justinian 's Code, Document D). Justinian 's Code created the idea of laws and influenced many people such as John Locke and Thomas Jefferson. In the Declaration of Independence you can see how Justinian 's Code influenced some of the writing such as the pursuit of happiness and the idea of unalienable rights. Imagine where we would be without Justinian 's set of laws that shaped our basic idea of how laws and justice would be

People often misunderstand how the right to protest free speech, and democracy works, often thinking in an entitled mentality “free speech is important for me” , the need to protest has increasing over past few years, many people are discontent with the globalization and the government. Protesting is a right, but when used for free speech, it is not always the answer. (state posision) The right to protest is one of basic human rights; however, the right to protest does not allow anyone to destroy the property. The injustices being done by groups does not merit the need more violence. As Martin King said “So I have tried to make it clear that it is wrong to use immoral means to attain moral ends.

It is better to be punishing than kind. Machiavelli explains that cruelty can be well-thought-out if taken in one stab, the wicked deeds executed all at once, made essential for survival. Machiavelli argues, “We may add this note that when a prince takes a new state, he should calculate the sum of all the injuries he will have to do, and do them all at once, so as not to have to do new ones every day; simply by not repeating them, he will then be able to reassure people, and win them over to his side with benefits.” It is better to not make preserving them would be against one 's benefits. Leaders must avoid making themselves loathed and looked down on; the kindness of the people is a better protection than any stronghold. A leader’s job should be involved so that his reputation is boosted.

The hunger and desire for power can lead to relationships being damaged. However, bad relationships can lead to the loss of power. It is also seen that kind people make better rulers, whereas unkind rulers are easily overthrown. The Tempest does a good job of showing the effect power has on relationships, and the way it can either strengthen or ruin a bond. This is important because the way a ruler treats his subjects strongly affects how much influence he has over them.

These two aforementioned perspectives are a strongly contested issue in our country and probably the entire known civilized world which challenges the fabric of how justice is administered within the criminal justice system. It is probably the number one primary determents of the modern practices of criminal law, police practices, sentencing, and corrections (Schmalleger, 2016). Our country provides each of its citizen’s individual rights which I believe at times conflict with our public order causing problems with crime control today. Many millennial and even the baby boom generation probably view our rights as a necessity without responsibility attached to it, and this has allowed many hindrances along with abuses in the pursuit of justice. For example, I want to use from my experiences as a police officer and detective the problem many I my profession face when it comes to dealing with 4th and 5th Amendment issues concerning criminal cases involving search and seizures and witness testimony.

This function of judicial review is not meant for specific cases but more importantly to guide the other two branches and we could say that thanks to this, the Supreme Court can actually modify laws to its preferences and interests. This is one of the main features that lead people to believe it is the most powerful branch of American government and even though it may sound extreme, we could very well say that the way the Supreme Court can declare something unconstitutional is unconstitutional

In the Authoritarian style of government on the other hand, has many benefits, advantages and like any other type of government, has its own disadvantages and weaknesses. I remember in our previous discussions, we talked about Hobbes’ state of nature which states that a person is naturally selfish and that without a government, there would be total chaos so in result, man agrees to be a part of a government. In this sense, man would agree to be under that government and would agree to be served. It is not assured that there would not be chaos if one joins a government but through this form of government, war would be lessened – and it could be render void. Under this type of government, there are benefits and advantages as well as restrictions.