Although Justice Brennan’s time on the Supreme Court came to an end in 1990 due to old age and ill health, his influence continues to be felt today, both in the courtroom and outside of it. Indeed, the length of the jurist’s service to the American people effective guaranteed that this would be the case. Despite this obituary primarily focussing on his decisive opinions concerning racial fairness, Brennan was a vocal and persuasive member of the court in many other instances. For example, in Baker v. Carr (1962), he convinced his peers to uphold the doctrine of “one man, one vote” by mandating redistricting on the basis of population rather than geographic area. Additionally, in his plurality opinion for Frontiero v. Richardson (1973), Brennan
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
Supreme Court cases can shape our national laws; it can shape an American citizen’s future. Without them, the Bill of Rights could be left up for our own interpretation. This could cause unfair laws and create havoc. In 1966, a court case named Kent vs United Sates took place. This case could create the ability to shape a juvenile's life forever.
In William Brennan’s view on the American Constitution he focused on human dignity to determine his interpretation. As he states in his essay, “But we are an aspiring people, a people with faith in progress. Our amended Constitution is the lodestar for our aspirations. Like every text worth reading, it is not crystalline.” (Brennan).
When one holds a prestigious position on the United States Supreme Court, they possess the opportunity to alternate the future of the country. However, that impulse should not be entertained in the majority of instances, as with the Dred Scott Case of 1857. Although that conflict should have dissolved after the subject dissolved, Chief Justice Roger Taney allegedly overextended his reach to determine the legality of another issue that had troubled the United States. In addition, the decision decided on the case itself negates the framework of the U.S. Constitution by infringing on an individual’s rights, regardless of who they might be. At the time of the Dred Scott Decision, the United States had become deadlocked over the controversy
Justice Hugo Black was a United States senator for 10 years and served one of the longest terms in Supreme Court history with thirty four years and one month in the court. As a senator, he was a strong supporter of President’s Roosevelt’s New Deal reformation, therefore leading to his nomination to the Supreme Court in 1937. Justice Black’s rise to the Supreme Court was met with outrage and controversy from the public and the media due to his previous affiliation with the Ku Klux Klan and consequently tainted his reputation nearly costing him his seat in the Supreme Court. However, he was also an advocate for rights of racial equality and a defender of the constitutional rights of the accused. His literal interpretation of the Constitution
Justices Alito, Thomas, Kennedy, Roberts and Scalia collectively agreed the details immersed within the 14th Amendment assisted in their adjudicating the case. “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States:…….” On the contrary, dissenting opinions of Justices Stevens, Breyer , Ginsberg and Souter failed to sway the others, leaving the majority on the side of McDonald. All things considered, justice for every U.S. citizen remains at the forefront of societal concerns. Along with the Constitution, the Supreme Court Justices are diligent in defining and conveying laws.
Hilton focuses on racial justice issues that are recurring topics in the Capitol Hill, that are becoming popular in the mouths of both parties. There are specific words that are now being used by both Democrats and Republicans like, "outsourcing," "Racial preference," and "Racism." As the word "outsourcing" has been used 71 percent by Democrats. Also, the word "racism" has been used right after 9/11 and after the word is still popular. Hilton uses logos with each description of the words, this is a way to catch your attention with the words that the Capitol Hill are using corresponding to the importance of racial justice issues.
Miranda v. Arizona: Impacting Criminal Justice Policy The role the United States court system plays in the creation and implementation of criminal justice policy is far reaching and powerful. And when the court deciding an issue is the highest in the land, the Supreme Court of the United States, the impact of the decision on the entire criminal justice system can be profound. Such is the case of Miranda v. Arizona, a landmark decision handed down by the Supreme Court in 1966 that continues to impact how justice is meted in our country today.
Affirmative Action Reader pg. 244 “ those many in our society that are darker, poorer, more identifiably foreign will continue to suffer the poverty, marginalization, immersion and incarceration.” Statistics are staggering Racial Disparities in Incarceration African Americans constitute nearly 1 million of the total 2.3 million incarcerated population, they are incarcerated at nearly six times the rate of whites, what’s shocking is that one in six black men had been incarcerated as of 2001 and if the trends continues one in three black males born today can expect to spend time in prison during his lifetime. I am for affirmative action, as I believe that when the late President John F Kennedy signed the affirmative action on March 6th 1961,
Jury Systems and Racial Injustice Juries are the way we make sure trials are fair, but when your jury is biased the result of the trial are often inequitable. Today we do our best to make sure trials have impartial jurors, but this was not always the case. In the 1930’s, and a lot of other decades too, the right for African Americans to have an unbiased jury was not fulfilled. This caused many African Americans to be sentenced to death when they otherwise would not have been.
Segregation was one of the key problems during most of the 1900s. Segregation is the enforced separation of different racial groups in a country, community, or establishment. Around the time when the the Civil War ended, slavery and segregation had been prohibited from the amendments of the U.S Constitution. Segregation was very wrong, because whites believed it was fair and equal. It was most definitely not.
John Marshall altered the Court’s position within the constitutional system and engaged a dynamic battle to sustain the federal authority over the interstate business and in dealings between the states and the federal government. This he did during the thirty-four years he was the chief justice and to date is a legacy in the Court’s history. Marbury v. Madison (1803) marked the commencing of Marshall’s record of achievement in which he justified the Court’s supremacy of judicial review - the rule to assess the constitutionality of state laws and other actions of the government - and put down the foundations of national constitutional jurisprudence. In Fletcher v. Peck (1810), Marshall alleged that a land grant was a contract that a government
More specifically whether the exclusion of black jurors violated to the defendant’s right to an impartial jury. The question was if retroactive Supreme Court decisions be implicated to selective cases. After reviewing the case, the Supreme Court held that once a new rule has been ruled upon in a case, “the integrity of judicial review requires that we apply that rule to all similar cases pending on direct review.” (Griffith v. Kentucky, n.d.). The Court ruled that applying rules to cases selectively, and not by similarity is
Nevertheless, Chief Justice John Marshall, through his genius was able bring the judicial branch on par with the legislative and executive branches with the self-imposed power of judicial review. With a masterful legal opinion in the Marbury case, Marshall created a system of common law review, which set the legal standard for future cases like Dred Scott v. Sanford and Brown v. Board of Education (O’Brien 167). The outcome of these cases has impacted the lives of Americans over the years. People’s will and desire has evolved over time, from a racially structured society in the 1800’s to the civil rights movement of the 1950’s. The moral views of Americans have changed over time, with a positive collective will.
Justice William Brennan and Attorney General Edwin Meese held different views on the interpretation of the Constitution when it came to ruling in a case. Brennan held the view that judicial review should be done constitutionally, but to keep human dignity in mind when ruling in a case. Brennan makes his opinion on the matter known saying, “The Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights solemnly committed the United States to be a country where the dignity and rights of all persons were equal before all authority.” (Brennan). Unlike Brennan, Meese believed in sticking strictly to what the constitution stated for most matters.